← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Madrid burns
Thread ID: 7141 | Posts: 28 | Started: 2003-06-05
2003-06-05 08:14 | User Profile
[url=http://www.legioneuropa.org/Front/jinf.htm]http://www.legioneuropa.org/Front/jinf.htm[/url]
Deadly Contributions: The Jewish Infestation of the White Racial-Nationalist "Movement"
MX Rienzi
Should Jews participate in the so-called pro-White "movement?" This is a question that has been examined before . Certainly it makes no more sense to accept Jews than it would to accept Arabs or Hindus. However, some may argue that perhaps we need to take a more practical approach. One can argue that if some members of a non-European Caucasian group can assist in a "pan-Caucasian" endeavor, and if these members are relatively "assimilable", then it would not hurt us to accept some of them. Regardless of what one thinks about that premise, we can ask: are Jews helping the "movement?" What are their contributions up to this point? This is not meant to be an exhaustive look at all Jewish influences, but rather an examination of some prominent examples of Jewish influences in the "movement", especially by individuals overtly Jewish.
To begin with, we need to review two of the major destructive impulses of Jews in Western Civilization, so we can compare these to Jewish persons active in some "movement" circles and ask if these Jews tend to eschew or embrace (overtly or covertly) these impulses.
Jews have a strong tendency to promote ethnic, racial, and cultural diversity in Western societies, and to oppose any Western trends toward biological and cultural homogeneity. The Jews view relatively homogenous Western societies in which they still reside as potentially dangerous, because in such societies the Jews stand out as the prominent unassimilated minority; in addition, the more homogenous the society, the easier it is for the majority members to come together as a cohesive group (see #2 below) and fight against Jewish influences. Indeed, Jews can argue that homogenous Western societies have historically been hostile to Jewish interests. Thus, Jews tend to support all endeavors and trends that disrupt Western biocultural homogeneity; they support non-Western immigration, "multiculturalism", miscegenation (for others, not themselves!), etc. Jewish spokesmen are not shy about discussing this. For example Earl Raab, a Jewish activist, wrote the following:
"The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.
We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible - and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever." (Jewish Bulletin, Feb. 19, 1993)
Please note the phrase:
"ââ¬Â¦..our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever."
Goodbye, free speech!
Indeed, Jews have been instrumental in both changing immigration law so as to flood America (and other Western nations) with colored immigrants, and in altering the culture to be more "tolerant." And Raab suggests that various "constraints" may be put into place to further inhibit White interests.
Another interesting Jewish quote is by Charles Silberman:
"American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief - one firmly rooted in history - that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of U.S. Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called 'social' issues." (Silberman, C.E. 1985. A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today. New York: Summit Books).
Finally, a quote by Miriam Faine of the Australian Jewish Democrat:
"The strengthening of multicultural or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian." (in: McCormack, D. 1994 Immigration and multiculturalism. In Censorship Immigration and Multiculturalism, ed. J. Bennett. Australian Civil Liberties Union).
Of courseââ¬Â¦who cares what the White gentile Australians think, right?
Jews are also threatened by authoritarian, collectivist gentile groups or movements, which historically have excluded Jews and fought against Jewish influence; for example, the National Socialist movement in Germany. Jews themselves are highly collectivist and tend toward cohesive, authoritarian groups (here), yet they vehemently oppose and "pathologize" the very same structures for White gentiles, even though such "cohesive, group-serving" structures are now absolutely required for our survival (here ... and here). As Dr. Kevin MacDonald has written, collectivist groups always can outcompete individualist strategies, and "behavior that is critical to Judaism as a successful group evolutionary strategy is conceptualized as pathological in gentiles" ("The Culture of Critique" 1998 Westport, CT: Praeger). Jews, as a collectivist cooperating group, thrive in societies in which the non-Jewish majority are atomized individualists, individualists who can easily be outcompeted by the cohesive Jewish minority. These atomized individualists, who, unlike the Jews, only think of themselves and not their ethnie or race will not put up any organized resistance to Jewish power and influence. Indeed, such "organization" - "pathologized" (for gentiles) by the Jews - would be considered anathema by such gentile individualists. On the other hand, any sort of cohesive, collectivist gentile group poses a serious danger to Jewish interests. Thus, the strong Jewish tendency of promoting individualist ideals for gentiles, while pursuing cooperative strategies for themselves.
Given points 1 and 2, we can now take a brief look at Jews in the "movement." Note: the following is not meant as a critique of any specific pro-White group, journal, or (gentile) individual. The major point of this essay is to critique a point of view which we at Legion Europa view as profoundly destructive - the idea that Jews can and should be part of the pro-White "movement."
The pro-Jewish point of view can be represented by the following quote, taken from a review of "The Culture of Critique", in the March 1999 edition of American Renaissance. This review entitled "Cherchez le Juif" by "Stanley Hornbeck" can be found here:
[url=http://www.amren.com/993issue/993issue.html]http://www.amren.com/993issue/993issue.html[/url]
At the end of this review we read:
"Jews are present in the foremost ranks of those who would reintegrate biology into the social sciences, stop Third-World immigration, and halt government interference in race relations. If Jews have undermined the traditions on which Western Civilization depends, so are they now undermining the liberal orthodoxy that continues to threaten those traditions.
There can be no doubting the energy and influence of this remarkable people. It would be foolish and ungrateful not to recognize that this energy and influence can help save what is left of a beleaguered civilization."
Well, then, what are some of the things this remarkable people are doing to help save our beleaguered civilization?
The cover story of that same issue of American Renaissance is an essay by the Jew Robert Weissberg, who not only has written this, but has attended pro-White (American Renaissance) conferences and has even spoken at one.
Weissberg's article is entitled "In Defense of the Racial Spoils System." You can read it for yourself (at the same link as the Hornbeck review), but I'd like to briefly quote from it to give the reader a flavor of how Weissberg is attempting to "save" (sic!) us and our civilization.
Weissberg describes his objective in this essay as attempting to prove:
"ââ¬Â¦that the existing racial spoils system (affirmative action, the double standard in crime, "sensitivity" towards black deficiencies, and everything else) is the best possible deal we can get under today's deplorable circumstances."
Now, while Weissberg sugar-coats his poison by saying that he finds this "reality" "loathsome" and these circumstances "deplorable", he then very eagerly proceeds to shed much ink telling the reader that we just have to accept the racial status quo. After all, he says, there is no real alternative, and if we try and do anything, the Blacks and other coloreds may get angry at us - what Weissberg calls "disruptive domestic upheaval." Weissberg's view is that the answer for Whites is "cowardly appeasement", which is "not as un-American as it may appear." Weissberg assures us that we'll all get used to it: "With time the spoils system grows more bearable." Indeed, I guess when a prisoner is killed by a lethal injection, it gets "more bearable" as he passes out and dies. Weissberg tells us to be realistic; after all, what's all the fuss about - it's not like those nasty Nazis killing Jews:
"..but to be realistic, there are limits to moral outrage and consequent behavior. This is not a nascent Holocaust."
However, as is clear, the racial situation in America and abroad (here....and here) is indeed a "nascent Holocaust." But, hey, it's for White gentiles, so who cares, right? Let's dish out some more "cowardly appeasement", that'll help make everything better, no?
Indeed, Weissberg tells us that:
"Let us not lose sight of the proportions: a grand crusade is not obligatory."
No, if you are content to see your race die, it certainly is not "obligatory."
Weissberg than challenges us: "..what superior political alternatives are there?" (emphasis in original).
He states:
"ââ¬Â¦.undoing the racial spoils system is like putting the toothpaste back in the tube."
In other words, he says that fixing the problem is impossible, it is too late - so don't even bother trying. He distracts the reader from considering real alternatives by suggesting that no practical ones exist. Again, his mantra: give up, it's too late, and it's not too bad anyway. Do nothing, Whitey, don't resist. Be a cowardly appeaser.
Thus, we can summarize Weissberg's advice for White Americans as follows:
Give up. There is really nothing you can do except to accept the current system, and engage in "cowardly appeasement" towards non-Whites. You must learn to accept diversity, multiracialism, multiculturalism, colored crime, affirmative action, etc. Over time, you'll get used to it, so it'll be more bearable, albeit "loathsome" and "deplorable." There is no real alternative to this. Any attempts to fix the situation will only make it worse, indeed Weissberg says "worse is possible." We certainly can't get the coloreds mad, we may have riots and so forth. So, Whitey, sit back, do nothing except appease and accept your dispossession, humiliation, and eventual racial extinction. Of course Weissberg really doesn't say that last bit, because he assures us that there is no "nascent Holocaust." That's right, Weissberg, lull us to sleep - a sleep that is a "loathsome, deplorable" nightmare via the "racial spoils system" you wish us to accept.
Of course, the separatist alternative (see also here) is ignored by Weissberg - can't give those pesky White folks any hope now, can we? (But as we shall see, even when they do propose separation, Jews can cause serious problems).
In his reply to Weissberg (which can be read right after the Weissberg article itself), American Renaissance editor Jared Taylor rightfully describes Weissberg's advice:
"..defeatist in the short term and suicidal in the long term."
Indeed it is. Who would benefit from Weissberg's advice; who would benefit if Whites accepted the status quo (and its eventual degradation to even worse horrors)? Coloreds certainly. But, also - Jews as well! Remember point #1 above? Jews revel in a diverse America, they feel safest when there is a great number of ethnic groups, when the Jews are just "one minority among many", rather than as the single identifiable minority group. Jews are not threatened by a weak, "cowardly", "appeasing" White majority, they are not upset by a White America that refuses to defend its interests, they are not scared of a majority that has taken Weissberg's advice and given up. The Jews are in large part responsible for creating the current racial situation, as it suits their purposes (points 1 and 2); thus it is in their interests to maintain it, and to deflect attempts to change it. Certainly, they would be horrified by attempts to "make things worse" by trying to "put the toothpaste back in the tube", via some sort of "grand crusade" - a crusade that may indeed involve the sort of collectivist gentile groups that the Jews abhor. Is that what Weissberg fears? In his response Mr. Taylor says:
"No nation was ever built by atomized individuals and no nation can long survive if its citizens cease to see any further than the boundaries of their own restricted lives."
Indeed. And, see point #2 - such atomization of gentiles is what the Jews want. Certainly, Weissberg in his essay argues that it is still possible for some Whites - as individuals of course - to save themselves from the hardships of the current system. He states that "ââ¬Â¦we must exercise ample consumer choice and prudence." That's it - be a "prudent" (and "cowardly" and "appeasing") consumer, an individual consumer, making individual choices. Hey, now, one gentile acting alone is OK, two acting together is, well, a problem, and three acting together - oy vey, it's a Holocaust!
Then we have the Jew Michael Hart, who publicly spoke about his plan for racial separation in America. The text can be found in: Michael Hart, "Racial Partition of the United States", pgs. 107-118 1998 In The Real American Dilemma ed. Jared Taylor Oakton, VA: New Century Books).
Hart envisions a three-way partition of America, between a "White separatist state (WSS)", a "Black separatist state (BSS)", and a multiracial diversity state. Since Hart presumably views Jews like himself as "White", they would have the option of going into the WSS. Well, we can't be surprised by that, or really blame Hart for that, regardless of whether we agree or disagree. But we can ask - what about groups other than "Whites" and Blacks? What about Asians and Hispanics for example? Do they go by default into the "diversity" state? What if they do not want to live with the Blacks which may remain in that state? OK, here comes the "kicker." In describing his putative WSS, Hart states that it "...might include some Asians and others." Incredible! And since Jews are presumably in the "White" category, who are the "others?" Hispanics? People of mixed race? What he is describing here is the possibility of a multiracial, "diverse" White "separatist" (sic!!!) state!!!!! "Asians and others", indeed! Don't you think that a huge fraction of the Asians would want to live in a "White" state if given the chance, and that many of the "others" would as well? They can't go to the BSS, and why not go to a "White" state than some sort of "diverse" dump that includes some Negroes as well? So, it would seem that, in the absence of any sort of concrete statement that provides for alternative arrangements for "Asians and others", most or all would be in the WSS. Once again, the WSS would be a multiracial "White" state that would just specifically exclude Blacks - who "just happen to be" the most anti-Semitic of all ethnoracial groups living in America today. Well then, who benefits? Do White nationalists - who desire racial homogeneity and full separatism - benefit? No. Do the "White masses" benefit. No . Of course Jews would benefit - they would avoid the danger of being the only minority in the WSS; instead, they would be "lost" in the stew of "Asians and others." Indeed, in comparison with the "Asians and others", the Jews would seem to Euro-Americans to be "White like us", and in this sense the Jews would be able to blend even better into the so-called WSS. The amazing thing is that White homogeneity is so intrinsically "problematic" for Jews that they advance "diversity" even in the midst of proposing racial separatism! Well, given point #1, that can be no surprise.
Hart also suggests that the WSS, containing Jews and Asians, would most likely be a "ââ¬Â¦comparatively laisser-faire capitalist stateââ¬Â¦"; in other words, a state driven by an individualist sociopolitical/economic structure. Hmmmm. See point #2. Also note that in the last chapter of The Culture of Critique, Dr. MacDonald warns that the United States will likely be "..dominated by an Asian technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite." And "lower-middle-class Caucasians" (i.e., Euro-Americans) will "lose out."
Hart's state looks like it'll be ripe for such Jewish-Asian domination of the European-derived population, a population lulled into acceptance of the results of "fair" (sic!) "laisser-faire" competition of collectivist groups against individualistic Euro-Americans.
Then there is the example of a certain pro-White online discussion list that welcomes Jews. Here the Jewish "contribution" is to promote the idea that America should welcome ("high-IQ", hey, more competition, Whitey) colored immigrants from East Asia and South Asia, and that White Americans should intermarry with these aliens. Hey, surprise! Promoting colored immigration and White-colored miscegenation on a "pro-White" list! Fits in very well with points 1 and 2 above, no? Get America nice and diverse and miscegenated, destroy any sense of Euro-American racial group solidarity and homogeneity. In fact, it was suggested that we just have to accept this diversity and mixing, if we do not, if we remain closed, we risk conquest by the Chinese and Japanese - Asian groups which themselves are racially homogenous and xenophobic. In other words, in order to save ourselves from racially homogenous, xenophobic and ethnocentric Orientals, who eschew immigrants (and pursue eugenics in a "racially pure" manner), we need to embrace diversity, colored immigration (including the Orientals who may want to conquer us!), and miscegenation! What? Doesn't make sense to you? Re-read points 1 and 2 above, and then it will make sense. It'll make much sense indeed! After all, it is all the same principle, no? Advocate colored immigration and miscegenation on a "pro-White" list. Promote a multiracial "White separatist state." Try and convince White folks that the current multiracial system is the best they can do. Promote diversity, even in "pro-White" environments, promote atomistic individualism , promote everything and anything that prevents a White "grand crusade" which may exclude Jews and promote White collectivism and White biocultural homogeneity.
Some "contributions", eh?
On that same list, further Jewish "contributions" include the following statement, made in the context of whining about the "Holocaust":
"Put simply, the world my mother's family came from no longer exists. This was not a natural event but the result of the predations of Stalin but especially Hitler. Now, you may think this is a good thing. In fact I'm sure you and the other two-bit, low-rent Roman Catholic Nazi pieces of walking excrement are utterly thrilled."
That Talmudic-style invective is utterly disgusting and absolutely atrocious, especially given where it was said. A "pro-White" discussion list where genuine persons of European descent are called "two-bit, low-rent Roman Catholic Nazi pieces of walking excrement", by a person of Middle-Eastern (Jewish) racial extraction; but, hey, let's not insult Jews there - that'll be "anti-Semitic."
As regards this Jew's whining about the "Holocaust", I can say:
"hey Jew, your people are committing a genocidal HOLOCAUST against my people right now (see this...and this) - and don't you think the Germans saw what the Jews did to the Slavs in the Soviet Union ? Because of the Jews the old world of the West no longer exists, just as the world of the Eastern European peoples ceased to exist after decades of destructive and genocidal Jewish communism."
But, I have never heard on a list any White nationalist refer to Jews with the vile invective quoted above. That the list in question has seen that is proof positive of what happens when Jews are allowed to participate, and tells us what those Jews really think of us.
Then we have Rabbi Schiller, see:
[url=http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.04.13/news5.html]http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.04.13/news5.html[/url]
I wonder if the British National Front appreciated Schiller's "contributions." And since Schiller was teaching in a separatist Yeshiva (Jewish school), and since he had some association with the separatist New Square community ), one wonders what he thinks the role of Jews should be in a White nationalist state? To live as an unassimilated minority, separate from the majority - starting the whole cycle of Gentile-Jewish conflict all over again?
Now, there are those who will say that I've been selectively negative on this topic, and that they know "good Jews" who are "different", and that we should not generalize. Perhaps. Or are they being selectively positive? Are they over-looking some evidence that their Jewish friends may have an agenda quite different than what it may seem on the surface? What are the opinions of these "good Jews" on the subjects raised here? What are their opinions on other issues, like the Middle East, for example, and the role of the U.S. there? What do they think the long-term role of Jews in a "White state" should be? Do they accept the need for White biocultural homogeneity and collectivism?
Are their interests really the same as ours?
And if they are not, what are they doing in the "movement?"
Just like "conservatives" refuse to face the facts about the Jews and Jewish involvement in "conservatism" , so too do some in the "movement" refuse to face the facts about the Jews, and refuse to face the fact that Euro-gentile and Jewish interests are different and incompatible.
The longer Jews are allowed to fester in some precincts of "the movement" the more damage they will do. To allow those who view us as "excrement" to sit alongside our own people is a serious mistake. To ignore the warning inherent in this essay is a grave error. To allow Jewish "White nationalists" to continue to make their very "interesting" "contributions" is "defeatist in the short term and suicidal in the long term."
Only our own people care about our own people - it is as simple as that. It is high time that Euro-Western White nationalism be for Euro-Western peoples. This does not imply that we have to be hostile to Jews or any other people.
It does mean that we must choose to survive, and not let fast-talking "others" mislead us in our "grand crusade."
2003-06-05 12:00 | User Profile
Originally posted by Madrid burns@Jun 5 2003, 02:14 ** [url=http://www.legioneuropa.org/Front/jinf.htm]http://www.legioneuropa.org/Front/jinf.htm[/url]
Deadly Contributions: The Jewish Infestation of the White Racial-Nationalist "Movement"
MX Rienzi
Should Jews participate in the so-called pro-White "movement?" This is a question that has been examined before . Certainly it makes no more sense to accept Jews than it would to accept Arabs or Hindus. However, some may argue that perhaps we need to take a more practical approach. One can argue that if some members of a non-European Caucasian group can assist in a "pan-Caucasian" endeavor, and if these members are relatively "assimilable", then it would not hurt us to accept some of them. **
I've always found Rienzi's hatred of Arabs to be quite amusing, since he is one of the most likely Europeans to have Arabic ancestry. Its quite funny how he tries to draw a racial (I'd understand cultural) chasm between Middle Easterners and himself when none exists. Apart from that, he is an idiot; he is simply recycling common knowledge. The only WN group that I am aware of which allows Jews to join is Amren, and most people aren't too happy about this policy.
2003-06-05 15:17 | User Profile
White Nationalist Groups & Jewz
PS said: > "The only WN group that I am aware of which allows Jews to join is Amren, and most people aren't too happy about this policy."
You are correct about American Renaissance - they not only permit Jews to join their outfit - some of their more noted contributors and speakers are of the Jewish persuasion.
However, several other groups (you decide if they're to be considered "white nationalist" or not) do permit Jews to join. Among them are:
NAAWP - National Association for the Advancement of White People - permits Jews, negroes, mestizos, and mongoloids to join their ranks. This is not to say that many have, but only that they permit it.
EURO- David Duke's organization - also permits Jews, negroes, and other assorted pigment-enriched individuals to join. Now, isn't that "special"!
EAIF - European American Issues Forum - not only permits Jews to join, but actually got upset once when a newspaper columnist dared suggest their group was "anti-Semitic".
It should also be added that the late Dr. William Pierce, though extremely anti-Jewish in his public persona, apparently had no qualms whatsoever about letting a Jew publisher print and distribute "The Turner Diaries", as well as profit from said book.
Oh, it's a wonderful day in the neighborhood....
[img]http://www.cpbi.org/images/corp/mr-rogers.jpg[/img]
2003-06-05 15:21 | User Profile
Originally posted by Tom Rennick@Jun 5 2003, 09:17 ** White Nationalist Groups & Jewz
PS said: > "The only WN group that I am aware of which allows Jews to join is Amren, and most people aren't too happy about this policy."
You are correct about American Renaissance - they not only permit Jews to join their outfit - some of their more noted contributors and speakers are of the Jewish persuasion.
However, several other groups (you decide if they're to be considered "white nationalist" or not) do permit Jews to join. Among them are:
NAAWP - National Association for the Advancement of White People - permits Jews, negroes, mestizos, and mongoloids to join their ranks. This is not to say that many have, but only that they permit it.
EURO- David Duke's organization - also permits Jews, negroes, and other assorted pigment-enriched individuals to join. Now, isn't that "special"!
EAIF - European American Issues Forum - not only permits Jews to join, but actually got upset once when a newspaper columnist dared suggest their group was "anti-Semitic".
It should also be added that the late Dr. William Pierce, though extremely anti-Jewish in his public persona, apparently had no qualms whatsoever about letting a Jew publisher print and distribute "The Turner Diaries", as well as profit from said book.
Oh, it's a wonderful day in the neighborhood....
[img]http://www.cpbi.org/images/corp/mr-rogers.jpg[/img] **
Well, I was not aware of this (I hear somehting about the NAAWP's president being an Egyptian with a Filipino wife, but i dismissed it as a silly rumor). Good to know. I am glad I am not affiliated with any organization.
2003-06-05 18:32 | User Profile
I don't see how Rienzi is an "idiot." This piece picks up on some important themes and provides a good response to the AmRen "Jews are White" philosophy. To wit, "if Jews are 'White' and are helping White nationalism, how so? What are they doing? How does it benefit us?"
Jew Michael Hart and Jew Michael Levin have written good stuff and proposed good ideas, but both declare Jews to be White. I refer you back to K. McD: Jews work for Jews. If Jews can be made 'White,' they'll work for that. Question then becomes, could it be mutually beneficial? Is it possible for Jews to maximize their own interests while maximizing ours? I'm open to the possibility, but it just doesn't seem likely. How would the Jewish-Gentile White Nationalist alliance play out?
I'm uncomfortable with the whole business of flinging our arms open to Jews, even if strategically defensible. Their record is abysmal. And in any event, how can we possibly overlook those past crimes? Jews have come damn near genociding Whites. If we can't punish them for that, can we at least keep them out? Why reward these dirty creeps for what they've done by annointing them into our church? Seems nuts.
Taylor must have Jewish friends he can't get over.
2003-06-05 19:12 | User Profile
Jews are not White. Plain and simple. We have to draw a line somewhere on who we do or do not include.
If we have the same goals, we can both work toward those goals without actually working together.
2003-06-05 19:16 | User Profile
Originally posted by Hugh Lincoln@Jun 5 2003, 12:32 ** I don't see how Rienzi is an "idiot." **
Ahh, this is simply my individual assessment of him after observing his arguments with Richard McCulloch, reading his articles, and reading his posts on the Legion Europa newsgroup (as well as Legion Europa material, which especially on matters of genetics and anthropology is often quite comical). This article is actually pretty good-can't argue with any point raise therein, but I must reiterate the fact that most of the information in it is hardly a new relevation.
2003-06-06 02:16 | User Profile
Originally posted by Prodigal Son@ Jun 5 2003 ** Ahh, this is simply my individual assessment of him after observing his arguments with Richard McCulloch, reading his articles, and reading his posts on the Legion Europa newsgroup (as well as Legion Europa material, which especially on matters of genetics and anthropology is often quite comical). **
It is ironic that you say that, when your guru Mr. McCulloch often dismissed the genetic studies (because those studies show little genetic variation between european populations and that destroys his agenda), don't forget that he is based mainly on old physical anthropology (which is important way to infer the racial type of a individual or an group, but sometimes it doesn't tell us the whole history. For example, the Negroids and the Australoids from New Papua Guinea are very similar in cranial features but very different genetically, in fact they are two of the groups more dissimilar in the world).
2003-06-06 02:41 | User Profile
Joos are our fwends....Jews, fwends, fwends, Jews....say it, over and over....Jooos are our fw....you are getting very sleepy.....say it....Jooos are our.... :y :y :y
2003-06-06 02:57 | User Profile
On this, I side with Franco and the others regarding jews in any WN movement. No way. While M. Levin made some great points in his book and in an article that took on the question of whether or not " ... there is a superior race?" (Levin said yes, and left no doubt that he thought Caucasians with their combination of intelligence and ingenuity were at the top of the pyramid) I feel that if you let one in ... then the wholesale destructive infiltration has begun. Jewish goals, most likely hidden jewish goals, will end up being the thrust of any organization infested by the chosen - as they will seek each other out, and work as a group, a phalanx, a battering ram to put themselves first. Whites need to develop that cohesiveness, and even if they attain it, still keep the jews out. As was earlier posted, it's not inconceivable that both whites and jews could have some of the same goals, the way things are going (as most non-whites see jews as whites), but they can stick to their own organizations, we can stick to our guns, and they can eventually go somewhere else and "ply their trade".
2003-06-06 19:24 | User Profile
Originally posted by Madrid burns@Jun 5 2003, 20:16 **
It is ironic that you say that, when your guru Mr. McCulloch**
McCulloch my guru? LOL! Actually, I got banned from the nordish_com mailing list for calling him a liar and exposing his ignorance
** often dismissed the genetic studies (because those studies show little genetic variation between european populations and that destroys his agenda), don't forget that he is based mainly on old physical anthropology (which is important way to infer the racial type of a individual or an group, but sometimes it doesn't tell us the whole history. For example, the Negroids and the Australoids from New Papua Guinea are very similar in cranial features but very different genetically, in fact they are two of the groups more dissimilar in the world).**
Yes, I agree McCulloch knows little of genetics, neither is he particularly knowledgeable in physical anthropology. However, he is much better at arguing his position than Rienzi.
2003-06-07 19:26 | User Profile
Originally posted by Franco@Jun 5 2003, 20:41 ** Joos are our fwends....Jews, fwends, fwends, Jews....say it, over and over....Jooos are our fw....you are getting very sleepy.....say it....Jooos are our.... :y :y :y **
Oy Veh, I have seen the light.
Pass the matzoh!
2003-06-09 16:47 | User Profile
It is these realizations that cause me to be more and more skeptical of the Jewish involvement with American Renaissance and Jared Taylor. I've gone from thinking, "what's the big deal?" to being genuinely troubled. It's pretty incredible, if you think about it. Jews don't hesitate to elbow their way into ANYTHING. Even, of all things, White nationalism. What's Taylor's deal? It's one thing to keep mum on the Jews, but seemingly quite another to EMBRACE them, for God's sake.
2003-06-09 16:59 | User Profile
Originally posted by Hugh Lincoln@Jun 9 2003, 10:47 ** It is these realizations that cause me to be more and more skeptical of the Jewish involvement with American Renaissance and Jared Taylor. I've gone from thinking, "what's the big deal?" to being genuinely troubled. It's pretty incredible, if you think about it. Jews don't hesitate to elbow their way into ANYTHING. Even, of all things, White nationalism. What's Taylor's deal? It's one thing to keep mum on the Jews, but seemingly quite another to EMBRACE them, for God's sake. **
I agree 100%. In my opinion, it makes more sense to accept quadroons into the WN movement than Jews. Some people of partially Negroid ancestry are decent folks who act and self-identify as whites. I doubt there is a single Jew out there, even the most secular one, who identifies as white before Jewish. The Jews have been attempting to destroy whites culturally and genetically for hundreds of years. As long as someone identifies as a Jew, he or she is ineligible to join any nationalist movement other than Zionism. Of course, people of only partially Jewish ancestry, who self-identify as whites (few in numbers as they are) are another matter...
2003-06-09 18:47 | User Profile
Of course I don't advocate allowing quadroons into our midst, I am simply pointing out that it makes more sense to do so than to allow Jews to do the same.
2003-06-09 19:24 | User Profile
Ha! I was thinking roughly the same thing on the way to work this morning. A society with a few stray blacks wouldn't be all that bad, in my view, so long as Jews were knocked out of power.
2003-06-09 22:05 | User Profile
Originally posted by AntiYuppie@Jun 9 2003, 15:19 **
Another possibility, of course, is that Taylor was never really a White Nationalist to begin with, but would present himself as such because some aspects of his agenda were congruent with White Nationalism. Notice that almost all of Taylor's arguments against negroes and colored immigrants are based on their lower IQ, not on the fact that they are culturally alien. If IQ is his only criterion for who belongs and who doesn't, perhaps he welcomes high IQ orientals and Jews. This seems to be the attitude of many others affiliated with AmRen, such as Phil Rushton, etc. If IQ is all that really matters, Taylor has more in common with the attitude of Bell Curve WSJ types than with any authentic nationalism, and is simply using the support of WN's for his real agenda.**
This seems to be the most likely explanation. Many of the new "white nationalists" believe that average IQ is the only important characteristic of an ethnic group. There is currently an interesting thread on the amren list about how whites "should" interbreed with Japanese to raise their IQ and ethnocentrism (nevermind the logistical and temporal problems of artificially hybridizing two populations that each number over 100 million, nevermind the fact that the IQ gain from such hybridization would be minscule, nevermind the fact that this would effectively destroy European phenotypes, and nevermind the fact that mongrels, at least the ones aware of their mongrelized heritage, cannot be ethnocentric).
2003-06-09 22:44 | User Profile
I've long since tired of the "IQ defines a society" angle. It's one small plateau in the racial awakening, not to be lingered upon for too long. Especially since ours is, while pretty damn good, not the world's best. Even Hitler saw that.
2003-06-09 23:23 | User Profile
Originally posted by AntiYuppie@Jun 9 2003, 17:09 ** Eastasians with their high performance IQ make for good technicians. Neither is capable of the vast creative power that characterizes the best of White society, which the Taylor-Murray-Herrnstein-Rushton types conveniently ignore. **
Two more things that Rushton/Taylor types often ignore are:
East Asian cultures are [u]extremely[/u] field-directed, meaning that they are extremely collectivist. This results in high ethnocentrism and underachievement in science and technology, two areas that require a field-independent mentality.
East Asian IQ Bell Curves have a smaller standard deviation (12.5 points, vs. 15 for whites).
These two factors together assure that groundbreaking technological and scientific innovation comes, almost wthout exception, from Europe.
2003-06-10 01:19 | User Profile
Prodigal, the SD for East Asian populations is 8.9, not 12.5. The E. Asians tried to claim it was about 12 points, but all testing shows it's less than 9 points. Apparently the same is true for jews, but they try to keep that subject from coming up. Both groups have high numbers around their mean, but much narrower spreads. This is why you see so many more whites at the true genuis levels. Well, supposed genius levels. Some people with an IQ of 120 are more inventive and insightful than Phd.'s with IQ's of 175. But, going strictly by IQ, those hated whites sure have a wide spread.
IQ tests don't measure true divergent thinking or lateral thinking abilities or skills, of course. Asians do well (on average) on the visuospatial tests, but (on average) poorly on the verbal portions of the tests (and on analytical tests). Jews do well on the verbal, on average, but on the visuospatial, are poor to just below average, and also tend to score below whites on analytical tests (on average). Whites tend to score evenly on both halves of the tests, so this may something that is an aid in creativity. Whites also tend to average on higher on analytical tests, like the analytical portion of the GRE, than jews or E. Asians. But no one likes to talk about it, because, well, whites do better on these tests. If whites are the best at something, it isn't easily mentioned. It can be mentioned that they are better than say blacks, but always has to be quantified with "... but jews or Asians blah blah ...".
2003-06-10 09:49 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 15:34 ** Actually, what turns off mainstream support is not "naming the Jew" in an intelligent fashion ala David Duke. Duke has always been open about the Jewish question, and received the majority of White votes in Louisiana. OTOH, naming the Jew every six seconds and without any intelligent content can be a turn-off for most people. **
That's why we need to use something loke Duke's approach. We MUST name the jew and point out where the jew is pulling the strings. We can't afford not to. While I agree that we aren't going to win as many people over by always going on about jew this and jew that, it is something that we are going to have to do eventually.
It gets back to another thread - we can't change our message itself, but we do need to take a good hard look at how we are presenting that message.
2003-06-10 16:54 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 16:34 ** Actually, what turns off mainstream support is not "naming the Jew" in an intelligent fashion ala David Duke. Duke has always been open about the Jewish question, and received the majority of White votes in Louisiana. OTOH, naming the Jew every six seconds and without any intelligent content can be a turn-off for most people. **
Please don't get me wrong, I like Duke. But I'm not sure you can look at his style for success in Louisiana as a model for the rest of the nation. Louisiana, especially Alexandria on up, is quite unique in its perspective on things. If there's anywhere in the South where more Confed. battle flags are still flown per capita, then I haven't been there and seen it. Deep East Texas is of the same mindset generally, but you don't see the colors flying like in north LA.
2003-06-10 17:32 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 10 2003, 12:25 ** Centered in the Midwest, such a party will answer the long-repressed dissatisfaction of Middle American Radicals with an effective political program. **
[url=http://www.americafirstparty.org/]The America First Party[/url]?
2003-06-10 18:00 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 10 2003, 12:48 ** From what I know, the AFP does not appear to meet the parameters that I proposed. **
While I certainly don't think that the AFP will ever meet the exacting standards of the strident racialist/white nationalist, most all of America doesn't, there are signs that it could be influenced into a less conventional platform in certain areas of the country. And don't forget, they did endorse Jim Giles in Mississippi.
If anyone has any better prospects, by all means pipe up. Right now I don't see anything else on the horizon.
2003-06-10 18:32 | User Profile
I certainly don't disagree with you, Octopod. Of course we have to keep in mind that forcefully articulating the beliefs of the men who founded this country would more than likely cause today's media softened men and women to run hysterically away to suck their thumbs and cry for momma Hillary to make all the bad people go away. ;)
These are pertinent questions though that I think we need to begin to explore. Perhaps I need to start a topic up in Politics where we can formally hash it out.
2003-06-11 18:57 | User Profile
Originally posted by Roy Batty@Jun 9 2003, 19:19 Prodigal, the SD for East Asian populations is 8.9, not 12.5. The E. Asians tried to claim it was about 12 points, but all testing shows it's less than 9 points.
I am basing my claim for the 12.5 point East Asian SD on the latest research that I am aware of. Could ypu please post your sources on the SD of East Asian populations? It could come handy in an argument.
Apparently the same is true for jews, but they try to keep that subject from coming up.
I have a harder time swallowing this. The Jews are so overrepresented in science and mathematics that it seems beyond question that they have a high SD.
2003-06-11 19:02 | User Profile
I must say that in a certain sense, I am an IQ elitist myself. However, the programs that many modern-day IQ elitists, who style themselves as "white nationalists" propose to remedy certain social ills, border on downright raving mad. For exmaple, Matt Nuenke (a self proclaimed white nationalist, no less) advocates "tapping into the vast pool of intellect" in China, and importing hundreds of millions of Chinese into the United States. The fact that Chinese immigrants may amalgamate themselves into ghettoes, or increase the already taut level of racial tension in the United States never seems to cross his mind. What he believes is that hundreds of millions of whites and hundreds of millions of Chinese will quickly mongrelize themselves into a "new American" who will be more intelligent (3 point IQ gain, yay!), Anglo-Saxon by culture (the Chinese immigrants will naturally assimilate American culture and give up every vestige of their own, thinks Nuenke) and ethnocentric (I don't see how half-and-half mongrels can be ethnocentric). Its this kind of IQ elitists, who believe that IQ is the only relevant trait of any individual or group that I wish to have nothing to do with.
2003-06-11 22:42 | User Profile
Prodigal, I'll pull out the exact papers/books later. No, jews and Asians are overrepresented in science etc. at levels beyond what IQ could explain. Even the Bell Curve alluded to the fact that 115 is pretty much what you need to get through science, engineering, medicine, etc. at the University level. You don't have to be a genius at all, although a lot of people in medicine, IT (I know, I worked there for years), engineering, etc. would like you to think they are waaaay smarter than everyone else. For all the jewish scientists, doctors, etc. you can point out, the fact is that most of them are considered average or hacks. They and Asians have standout individuals at a decent rate, but some of that is due to cultural influences; these groups make their kids study and work hard, make them reach their "potential". I know, I was in school with droves of them. Whites certainly don't so this in large numbers, and are being brainwashed into joining the hip hop mess of the blacks and browns. The cultural element has been mentioned by many psychometrists and academics as well, with the exeption of people like Rushton, for some reason. Whites, for the most part, do not "challenge" themselves the way E. Asians and jews do. Jenson did a lot of work with E. Asians in CA and compared data with Lynn, Flynn, etc. Seligman's book also mentioned the narrow SD for E. Asians and jews in a chapter comparing the two groups. For the jews, it was alluded to "inbreeding" in a fashion that resulted in a narrower SD. For the E. Asians, it seemed there was just less variation between individuals (I can anticipate the jokes already). It's interesting you cite 12.5 for E. Asians, I've never seen anything higher than 8.9 (and as narrow as 8.6). If the info comes from the Japanese or Chinese, take it with a grain of salt, as they fudge their numbers if there are no "outsiders" involved with the studies.
The difference between Asians and Caucasians is more a difference of structure, something even Rushton admits. The tests are graded in such a way as to put more weight on the visual spatial portion. When the tests were weighted toward the verbal/analytical, whites had a 7 - 10 point margin on E. Asians.
What it boils down to in many cases, is that you can have an individual with an IQ of 130, but he might not necessarily be "smarter" than another individual with an IQ of 120. It's how the different areas of the test are weighted. Jews do awful, compared to whites and Asians on the visuospatial portion of IQ tests, and visuospatial is supposedly important in mathematics. Yet they do better, on average, than whites and Asians on math tests. Their verbal average is high, so they are using verbal reasoning in their problem solving.
Of course people will argue this all day long, but look at the very top people in most fields. Not the people the media say are the best, the people who make the breathroughs, etc. Sure are a lot of white guys.
The tests do a great job of measuring what they measure. The scores do measure intelligence, or more correctly, factors involved in intelligence, and the numbers can be applied to other areas. The people who do poorly, tend to end up "social problems" much of the time. They are a valid predictor of some areas of success or failure.