Why Russians Are Anti-Semites

Repost from the old site. You antisemites should love this one too. Damn, red meat today or what? Nowadays, anyway. The Russian Mafia. The Oligarchs. Names like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Boris Berezovsky, Mikhail Chernoy, Vladimir Gusinsky, Roman Abramovich, Alex Goldfarb, Mikhail Brudno and Vladimir Dubov, Leonid Nevzlin, Read it and weep. All they did was bleed the country dry, steal every nickel of wealth Russia had, then send all the money to their Jewish friends and partners in crime in Israel and the US. In other words, there was a concerted effort on the part of a small group of Russian Jews to bleed the country dry and steal from the anti-Semitic Russians that they hated so much. A plot steal the money for the Jews and keep it for themselves, or, when some patriot tried to get a hold of it, to ship it to some other rich Jews in Israel, New York or London – at any rate, to keep the money in the hands of the Jews. At one time, there were said to be seven oligarchs in Russia, and six of them were Jews – these seven were said to own 7 This is age-old Jewish economic warfare, but we don’t see it so often in the US anymore. It was really bad at the turn of the century and until 1925 or so. Henry Ford, an unduly criticized man, wrote, in The International Jew (an unduly criticized book) about Jewish economic warfare in the US during this period. He documented it in this book and in a column in the Dearborn Independent. He uncovered a Jewish plot to take control over the New York Stock Exchange. Gentiles would sell their seats to anyone with the cash, but the Jews would either hold onto their seats, or, if they sold them, only sell them to other Jews. Thus, gradually, the Jewish percentage of the NYSE rose and rose. Ford, a US patriot, blew the whistle on this ethnic warfare, and Gentiles on the NYSE started to refuse to sell their seats to Jews. This was the right and proper thing for them to do. He also uncovered a similar Jewish plot to take over US investment banking. They pretty much got control over it, but I’m not sure if that is still the case. Anyway, he blew the whistle a little late on that one. Then he noticed a similar plot underway to seize the nation’s commercial banks. He blew the whistle on that one just in time, and the banks just quit selling to Jews altogether. In this way, the NYSE and our nation’s commercial banks were saved from being controlled by a tiny minority that often does not have our national interests in mind. Around the same time, similar Jewish plots were hatched to take control over the nation’s largest papers. This was mostly because these papers were being run by racist White Americans (most US Whites were racists back in those days). The papers were anti-Black and anti-Semitic at the very least. So a number of wealthy Jews held some meetings with businesspeople and plotted to buy out the papers. This is how Jewish control over the New York Times was established, and it remains under Jewish control to this day. Do you think the Sulzbergers will ever let it slip into the hands of the Gentiles? Don’t bet on it. At the same time, these same Jews noticed that the budding Hollywood film industry was also under the control of White racists hostile to Blacks and Jews. Birth of a Nation was a real wake-up call for these Jews. The same thing happened. Some big money Jews met with Jews who were interested in film. Within 10-20 years, Hollywood was in the hands of the Jews, mainly about four or five Jews who all grew up in Galicia about 100 miles from one another. Hollywood is much more Gentile now, especially at the lower levels, and the Gentiles have been breaking into even directing and production for some time now. But a select group of Jews still has some pretty significant control over the place, especially at the upper levels. It’s so bad that Gentile aspiring actors actually wear Jewish stars of David to interviews in order to pretend to be Jewish to increase their chances of getting hired. I wonder if these Jews will ever give up the highest reins of this industry? That’s the problem when an ethnocentric group like this grabs an industry – they want to keep it in the hands of the tribe, and they often refuse to sell out to non-tribals. Jewish apologists like to say that this is all normal and ok in capitalism. I don’t like any kind of ethnic warfare. On what legal basis to Jews have a right to practice – let’s face it – discrimination, in order to hire their own, promote their own, and keep their property in the hands of their own? Whites did this for decades in this country, and all of this discriminatory crap has been made illegal. Further, it’s a downright obsession of the heavily-Jewish media. But if it’s wrong for Whites to discriminate to hire, promote and even hold onto their wealth, surely it is for Jews too. It’s well-known in Hollywood that many Jews hire and promote their own. To this day, not one soul has ever called them on it. Ford’s writings make another disturbing fact clear. When you are dealing with an ethnic group that is waging ethnic warfare against you, the only way to fight them is to become racist yourselves. The only way to fight Jewish ethnic warfare was for Gentiles to be anti-Semites. If they had not given in to racism, they would have been steamrolled. This is disturbing because if one chooses anti-racism in this circumstance, you will be destroyed. Becoming racist is the only sane and logical thing to do. What would happen if something similar happened in today’s America, where Whites at least have been stripped of all ethnic identity, shamed of racism, and for the most part had their capacities for racism stripped right out of them? While at the same time, Blacks and Hispanics at least seem to have retained the capacity for racism (see the Black-Hispanic gang warfare in Los Angeles these days)? It is true that Catholics in New York still retain the potential for waging ethnic warfare, in this case against New York Jews, who retain ferocious ethnic warfare to this very day. This is why the New York mayorship shifts from Catholic to Jew from time to time. These Catholics are often Italian and Irish, but they now have some allies in Dominicans at least. If these Catholics did not wage anti-Semitic warfare against ethnic warfare-engaging New York Jews, they would be creamed, and the Jews would hold all the power and much of the money in New York. Because these Catholics are still capable of being just a ruthlessly racist as New York Jews, they are able to hold onto a semblance of power. I used to know this Dominican fellow on the Net. You can ridicule this relationship all you want, but he and I spent many hours talking together, sometimes hours a night. How many married couples even do that? He used to be a teenage criminal, roaming the streets with a Dominican gang and even sticking people up. Along the way, he had smoked a lot of PCP. Now he lived, I think alone, in a building with Orthodox Jewish landlords whom he despised. He had spent a long time, maybe years, carefully researching the New York real estate market. It appears that there are city-owned properties that are leased out to private landlords for a period of years, and then taken back by the city. There is a vast amount of real estate involved here, and there are fortunes to be made. This guy determined that whenever there was a Jewish mayor in office, about 7 These were also the best properties to own. The research was difficult because most of the evidence was covered up by massive lying on the part of the Jews involved. The bids themselves were closed and the records were sealed. This guy was not really an anti-Semitic nut, and he think he didn’t really have that much against Jews, and I don’t think he was making all this stuff up. In fact, we used to sit around at night trying to figure Jews out. We finally decided that they were running sort of a Masonic-style private club for wealth. We decided that even though it was evil, the best way to make a bundle in this world was to form our own little Jewish-Masonic secret wealth society, keep all the money in our hands, hire and promote our own, and shut everyone else the fuck out. So in a way, we both really wanted to ape the Jews and emulate them. We used to laugh like mad over the cleverness of Jews. Our plan was totally evil and probably even racist. For sure it was discriminatory. But it never came to fruition, and I still live barely above the poverty line. The guy vanished and I never heard from him again. He had found me through my legendary posts on Usenet in the Israeli and Middle East group. I was posting under a pro-Palestine name and making tons of deadly enemies and a few devoted fans. We started dwelling more and more on evil cabal stuff in our conversations, and then we started talking about spying. I don’t know what got that started, maybe because the Usenet Jews had these really creepy and evil Jewish Spy Networks they were operating on us pro-Palestinians. They had weird dossiers on us and were always threatening to uncover who we really were and make it sure that we never held a good job in America again. Oh, how these powerless Jews loved to toss their weight around! Anyway, after a while, I started implying to the guy that maybe I was a spy who worked for the CIA or the Mossad, or maybe I was a double agent. Plus at the time, I was communicating with these weird Palestinians who were actually undercover members of the PFLP and were living these creepy, is-it-illegal-or-what type lives in the US. We only knew each other according to code names, and if anyone tried to ask for anyone’s number, or try to find out where anyone lived, there could be Hell to pay. Everyone suspected everyone else of being an agent (especially they suspected me) and there were always rumors that so and so was a spy. So it was really a barrel of fun and laughs. This Palestinian dude would just take off for weeks at a time and tell no one. He would come back and say he had been in the Middle East. He had a PhD, spoke fluent Russian from his time in the USSR, and was definitely a member of the PFLP, which is an officially designated US terrorist organization. Eventually I got tossed out of their PFLP circle on grounds of being a Zionist agent. Oh well. Well, with all this weird drama around, I started telling the guy I was really a spy, or maybe I wasn’t, and all these agencies maybe I did or did not work for. And I implied that he was probably a spy too. Then I would laugh and say it’s all joke, or was it really? Eventually the guy started totally spinning and saying he couldn’t handle talking to me anymore because I was freaking him the Hell out. Anyway, if you ever want to destroy a friendship just for the sheer Hell of it, this is a great way to do it. He also told me another interesting story. As soon as Catholic mayor came in (in this case, it was Italian Catholic Giuliani), the city called back its RE properties, and then the process was taken over by an evil Catholic cabal, who promptly sold about 7 Now, a lot of people reading this think I am making this up. I say I’m not, but I don’t have any real proof of this one way or another. But if it is true, it points up some of the difficult questions above. In order to deal with Jewish ethnic warfare, Catholics had to engage in some of their own. They had to become anti-Semites. And Jews can’t wage Jewish ethnic warfare of their own without being racists too. The guy also said that Jews were rude, tight, and treated non-Jews like crap. He said this held true for Orthodox Jews in New York, in particular his Jewish landlords, who were little more than slumlords. Getting back to our Russian oligarchs, there’s a long history of hatred between Russians and Jews. We hear a lot about Russians being horrible anti-Semites, but we don’t hear much about Russian Jews being horrible Russian-haters. Who started it? Who the Hell knows? Who cares? That’s like two 6-year old boys fighting and screaming, “He started it!” after being pulled apart. From the Internet, we find some confessions of Russian Jews, this one named “Alexandr Ukrainsky”. He notes that Russian Jews have a habit of making a Bloody Mary and claim to be drinking Christian blood. Just like the blood libel! Great, way to perpetuate a stereotype! Furthermore, they have some of the worst anti-Jewish stereotypical behaviors of any group. Cheapness, greediness, you name it, these are some of the “Jewiest” Jews out there outside of Israel. Or, to put it more politely, as my brilliant Mom would deftly put it, they are really, really Jewish. These behaviors are tied in with them seeing themselves as the most Zionist, proudest Jews out there. Here again we see the tie-in with the worst anti-Semitic stereotypes of Jews (the Jewiest Jews of them all) and Zionism. Zionism is nothing more than the European ghetto, reconstructed in the minds of Jews everywhere, and on the ground in a large piece of real estate in Palestine. Zionists are the worst Jews of them all, the ones who gave and give Jews a bad name. They really are against everything secular, liberating, and assimilating about the Jewish project, because Israel is the biggest damn ghetto that’s ever existed. The Orthodox Jews themselves recreate mental ghettos the world over, and physical ones in upstate New York. Zionism gives their tribal way a home made of Earth in the Mediterranean if they ever need to escape from their crimes. As long as Orthodoxy and Zionism exist, the Jew will never achieve liberation. By the way, Marx makes a very similar point in his famous On The Jewish Question. Quite hard to read but you may want to check it out. If you can figure it out, pat yourself on the back. With the return of capitalism to Russia, Organized Crime, including many Russian Jews and Jews in the US, Israel and the UK, bled the country dry and stole just about everything that wasn’t locked down. Russia was turned into a complete sewer, and is now one of the Organized Crime capitals of the world. Russian law enforcement did used to crack down on Russian oligarchs sometimes, but the criminals were very powerful and often used to kill cops (and the existing ones still do). In the case of the Jewish criminals (the so-called oligarchs) they had the entire weight of World Organized Jewry behind them. For instance, when Putin tossed Jewish super-criminal Mikhail Khodorkovsky behind bars, Richard Perle and other top US Jewish neocons virtually threatened to declare war on Russia. No wonder Russians are so anti-Semitic.

Notes

I am indebted to a conversation I had with Kevin MacDonald in formulating some of the ideas that I developed in this piece. I do not necessarily subscribe to MacDonald’s views on the Jews in toto, but I think he is unjustly maligned. In my conversation with him, I did not get the impression that MacDonald was anti-Semitic at all; in fact, I felt that he admired Jews and wished that Gentile Whites acted more like them.

"Jewish Bolshevism"

Repost from the old site. I’m sure you antisemites are going to eat this post for breakfast, lunch and dinner. An excellent article by well-known Israeli Jewish columnist Sever Plocker (also known as Sever Plotzker), chief economics editor and deputy editor-in chief of the Israeli paper Yedioth Abaronot, recently appeared in the Israeli internet publication Ynet. Ynet is the website of the Yedioth Abaronot newspaper. The piece, Stalin’s Jews, is one of the best things ever written on the subject of the relationship between Jews and (European) Communism, particularly the Bolshevik and Stalinist variety practiced in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. The subject is tendentious and very difficult for a sane progressive, let alone anyone else, to analyze and dissect. It is not commonly known that Hitler’s main beef against European Jews was that they were Communists. In fact, European Communism itself (Bolshevism) was regarded as merely a Jewish plot. There was a certain amount of evidence in favor of this theory, as is often the case, but the Jewish = Communist equation has always been problematic. Let it be known that this was Hitler’s (and his allies, including rightwingers in the US) principal beef against European Jews. Bolshevism was seen as a Jewish plot to conquer Europe in the service of the Jewish-controlled Soviet Union. Hitler was seen as a hero by many anti-Communists for his role in WW2. This is glossed as Hitler trying to save Europe from imminent Bolshevik takeover via the Soviet Union. The fact that Nazism (and all fascist movements) was first and foremost a ferociously anti-Communist (and by extension, anti-socialist, anti-liberal and anti-trade unionist) movement makes the sickening rightwing claim that Nazism was a leftwing socialist movement all the more painful, insulting and dishonest. The entirety of the World Left (with the shameful exception of Trotsky, who held that fascists were just as bad as any other capitalists and that Communists should be neutral in the war) mobilized against what they called The Great War Against Fascism. The Spanish Civil War, pitting Leftists, Communists and anarchists against fascists, was an early version of World War 2, and Hitler supported the fascists. All, or almost all, anti-Nazi and anti-fascist resistance movements in Occupied Europe during wartime were either led by Communists, or Communists played a major role. The Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939, ignorantly portrayed by anti-Communists as a marriage of ideological allies, was nothing of the kind. Stalin knew that Hitler was going to attack the Soviet Union, and Stalin was simply trying to gain time and obtain a buffer zone. The fact that, as Eric Hoffer noted in The True Believer, in Germany in the 1920’s and 1930’s, various folks moved between the Nazis and Communists, is misleading. Anti-Communists use this anecdote to say that Communism and fascism are both forms of political fanaticism, and Communism and fascism are really just different forms of the same thing. This analysis ignores that for a long time before the Nazi Left purge with the Night of the Long Knives, the Nazis attempted to portray themselves as a left wing, or even socialist, movement, in order to divide and co-opt the Left. Hitler himself later admitted that this was all a cynical ploy in order to con workers into voting for the Nazi Party, which had no interest in them at all. To this day, if you spend much time around anti-Semites, the “Jewish Bolshevism” meme continues to ring very loud amongst a particular type of anti-Semite, especially those in the US and Europe. In Russia and Eastern Europe this is one of the principal forms of modern anti-Semitism. Since the “Jewish Bolshevism” theory has caused so much tragedy in our world, it is essential that we analyze it with clear minds. Truth is, many Jews were associated with Bolshevism and Stalinism in the Soviet Union. Centuries of 3rd class citizenship, pogroms and Czarist anti-Semitism caused many Russian Jews to be enthusiastic about the revolution that overthrew Czarism. The evidence of a significant Jewish role during one phase of the early Stalinist regime and in certain areas of government, is available in Plocker’s piece. In particular, during some of Stalin’s murderous purges in the 1930’s, Jews played a very large role, though they were mostly absent from the worst of the killing in 1937-38. It is true that the three heads of the NKVD, or Stalinist secret police, were Jewish. Under Genrikh Yagodha , who served from 1934-1936, Jews became briefly dominant in the NKVD, when 3 It was during the reign of Yezhov that the Stalinist purges entered their most deadly period. Any analysis that attempts to place Soviet Jews as predominant during Stalin’s Great Terror is simply false. Stalin, himself denounced as an anti-Semite by Trotskyites and militant Jews (Stalin’s so-called anti-Semitism was a major reason for the Stalin-Trotsky split in 1927, yet whether or not Stalin became anti-Semitic later is much more controversial) was surrounded by Jewish women during this period, yet he still purged many Jews from the party, mostly because so many of them were aligned with Trotsky. Jews were wildly overrepresented amongst Stalin’s worst executioners during a certain period in the 1930’s, even while they were not extremely overrepresented among Stalin’s regime in general. But after that period, Jews were only Initially, the Bolshevik Revolution was heavily Jewish. Here are some facts (keep in mind that Jews were The Bolshevik Party Central Committee had 9 members in 1917, of which 3 were Jews (3 In 1922, of the 44,148 members of the Bolshevik Party that had joined before 1917 (the Old Guard, as Lenin referred to them), 7. As you can see in the example above, non-Jews made up 6 In spite of the fact that many of Stalin’s top killers were Jewish, the role of Jews in the party began to decline dramatically after 1927-28. Some authors have termed 1917-1927 as the “Jewish era” of the party, since Jewish ideologues played a major role in the party’s thinking, and the party was involved in wild experiments in the areas of sexuality, the family, etc. For instance, divorce was made ridiculously easy. Attempts were made to get rid of the family unit via communal housing, child care (the communalization of child-raising) and dining halls, since the family unit was seen as bourgeois and the source of capitalism itself. Children’s rights were elevated to the point where kids were encouraged to rebel against and even to defy their parents. Homosexuality was legalized, and for a while, there was a freewheeling free love scene amongst party members, predictably abused by male party members as such scenes usually are. The Afghan Communist regime saw a similar and little-known freewheeling sex scene amongst party members, an amazing feature in such a deeply conservative society. Many of the conservative peasantry, many of whom hated the Russian Czarist ruling class for its abuse of them and were therefore attracted to the Communists, were appalled by the free love and anti-family features of the early Bolshevik Party. Stalin, though an atheist, came from a conservative Russian Orthodox background. As soon as he came into power, he started reversing the radical (“Jewish”) experiments in marriage and family life. Within a few years, all of that was all reverted and socially regressive legislation was in its place. Concomitantly, the role of Jews in the Communist Party began to decline. In the 1930’s, even where in one period, many of the leading killers were Jews, many of the victims were also Jewish. As noted above, many of those accused in Stalin’s show trials were Jewish and by the end of the 1930’s, Jews had been almost totally purged from the party. Only notorious Politburo member Lazar Kaganovich (a favorite bogeyman of anti-Semites) remained. Some Jews have noted that saying that Stalinism was good for the Jews is about as honest as Stalinist propaganda in general. These Jews say that Stalinism was only a little bit better for the Jews than the Holocaust, though that is surely an exaggeration. It is important to note that the Jews who committed terrible crimes under Stalinism had left the Jewish religion and were operating first and foremost as Communists, not as Jews. This is an essential point, because anti-Semites say that Communist Jews were killers because Jewish religion, culture or genes contains inherent and unchangeable murderous tendencies. We can rule out Jewish genes being murderous for now since we there is no evidence for this. Further, for centuries, Jewish culture has been represented more by murder victims than murderers. Likewise with Judaism. Granted, Judaism was associated with a lot of killing 2000-3000 years ago and at the moment, but in the interim, once again, it more a religion of the killed than a religion of killers. Further, almost all Communist Jews renounced both Jewish culture and surely Judaism in favor of Communist culture and Communism as a belief system. In fact, many agitated against “Jewish particularism” (Jewish cultural chauvinism) and there is no evidence that temples fared any better than churches. Leon Trotsky, asked if he were Jewish, said he was a citizen of the Soviet citizen and an internationalist – i.e., he refused to identify as Jewish. This was a typical mindset of Soviet Jewish Communists. Critics say that these Jews nevertheless retained a strong Jewish identity that informed their behavior but this is hard to prove. This makes the anti-Semitic rant that “Jewish Communists killed 20 million Russian Christians” particularly vicious. Considering that so many of the killers’ victims were Jews themselves, it is dubious how much, if any, killing was being deliberately targeted at “Christians” merely for the fact that they were Christians. In the Ukraine famine of the early 1932-33, about 110 million Soviet peasants were pitted against 10 million wealthy kulaks with a lot of peasant blood on their hands, who had been viciously and murderously exploiting feudal peasants for centuries. Land was collectivized, to the benefit of long-suffering peasants just released from feudal bondage. Kulaks reacted with violent, “Contra”-like attacks on the collective farms, killing peasants and farm animals, raping women and burning crops. The attempt here was to destroy Russia’s breadbasket and starve the peasants and by extension the nation. In this conflict, Soviet Jews lined up with 110 million peasants versus 10 million kulaks, one group being as “Christian” as the other. The Ukrainian famine in 1932-33 was a tragedy, to be sure. 1.5 million people died. But the kulaks, deliriously supported by the West, were trying to starve 120 million Soviet citizens. Would that have been better? A principal cause of the famine was Ukrainian peasants hoarding, withholding and possibly destroying the grain harvest from the state. In the years in question, ⅔ of Soviet grain production was not making it into national coffers, a prospect that harbored serious consequences for feeding the nation. It is only fair to note that there were also terrible weather conditions in 1932-33 in the Ukraine, and similar weather conditions had caused previous famines in the area. The number of Stalin’s victims has been grossly exaggerated by anti-Semites and anti-Communists. A mountain of lies, starting with William Randolph Hearst and the White Army, going to Hitler, Robert Conquest and Alexander Solzhenitsyn, extends in a logical line. Wild figures such as 20-110 million are tossed around. Even more outrageously, the Right argues that Stalin, and Communism in general, killed more people than fascism! Hard figures are tough to come by, but possibly 225,000 political prisoners died in labor camps from 1921-1953, another 900,000 were executed in the same period (an incredible 700,000 of those were in the purges of 1937-38) and 389,000 died in the resettlement of the Kulaks. That leaves about 1.5 million. A summary of those figures is here. All of those numbers are quite controversial, with a number of researchers, especially those associated with Robert Conquest, vociferously arguing that the real numbers are much larger. This historical debate may or may not be settled in my lifetime. Adding in the 1.5 million who died in the Ukrainian famine of 1932-33 gives us a figure of 3 million. This includes most of the Leninist period in addition to almost all of Stalin’s reign. The purges in 1937-38 were not 10 As the conspiracy progressed, Trotsky’s clique negotiated with Nazi Germany in order to get their support for the counterrevolutionary coup that the Trotskyites were planning – a plan to kill the entire leadership of the party. In order to gain the Nazis’ support for the coup, the Trotskyites offered up the large parts of the USSR, including the Ukraine, which is what the Germans demanded for their support. What would have awaited the Ukrainians after they were handed over to the Nazis as part of the Nazi Lebensraum? The picture is here, and it is not pretty. The Ukrainians were better off under Stalin. The regime uncovered the plot in 1937-38 and at least some of those executed were involved in the plot. So the Western line that the purges were just a wild murder spree by Stalin “to consolidate power” is at least partly false. Based on what we know know, Stalin’s assassination of Trotsky in Mexico City in 1940 (now condemned around the world as an act of insane cruelty) was a completely reasonable act. Those figures are summarized here, from a report based on 9,000 pages of Soviet archives published by a large team of US and Russian authors between 1990-1993. The best-known of the authors were the Russian historians V.N. Zemskov, A.N. Dougin and O.V. Xlevnjuk. This groundbreaking report was subsequently met with an avalanche of refutations in published books, articles and reports from the anti-Communist Western media machine, all of which recycled the same piles of lies written previously. About 1.5 million died of famine in the Ukraine, a description of which is provided above. The 1.5 million figure is based on USSR archives. A higher figure of 4.5 million is arrived at by outrageously including as “deaths” people who were never even born. ½ of those who died in labor camps died during WW2, when there were mass shortages of food and medicine throughout the country, in a period where 24 million Soviet citizens died outside of labor camps in the War itself and ½ the country was in flames. At minimum, 1.6 million people died via political repression under Stalinism. 1.6 million dead is an awful lot of people, but it is not 110 million. Furthermore, under Czarist feudalism, so loved by the West that we actually poured money into the White Army to maintain this insane killing system, fully 3 times as many Russians died per year per capita, year in and year out, as died under Stalinism, even in its worst years. So Czarism was three times deadlier than Stalinism at its worst. Yet we hear not one word of Czarist killers or feudalist killers – all we hear is of Stalinist and Communist killers. By a reasonable accounting, even with all the Stalinist deaths, Stalin was still saving 1.5 million lives a year, or about 35 million lives by the time he died (the figure needs work, and any progressive who wants to work on it can email me). This was done by doubling life expectancy in the Soviet Union, which set a world record for a nation doubling life expectancy in the shortest period of time, a record broken only by Mao in 1976 with the doubling of life expectancy in China, who did the same for China with a much larger population. Both Stalin and Mao saved far more people than they killed. The present discourse about the Soviet Union under Stalin is simply insane. It’s true he killed many people, and there is no excuse for that. With Mao, the number of lives saved must be much greater than 35 million, even counting the disastrous famine of the Great Leap Forward that killed 15 million people. Anti-Communist pathological liars who reduce Soviet and Chinese rule to mass deaths are mass liars. Capitalism killed, and kills, far more than Stalin and Mao combined. Both rulers saved vastly more lives than they took. There is a reason for this distortion. 35 million lives saved, net, under Stalin should properly be contrasted with 15 million dead, net, by 2004 alone, in the transition to capitalism in Russia since in 1991. 13 years of transition to capitalism was far deadlier than 28 years of than Stalinism. Yet we hear not one word of capitalist killers, only of Communist killers. The dead person does not really care how he dies, whether of starvation, disease or a bullet. One thing that is clear is the outrageous injustice of anti-Semites continuing to bash present-day Jews with the “Commie killer Jew” label, a label with deep origins in Nazism. A look at the comments following Plocker’s article shows that the vast majority of Jews today reject and condemn the Jews who killed in Stalin’s name.

Capitalism Starves 9 Million People Every Year

Every day in this world, capitalism kills 25,000 people either from hunger or diseases related to hunger. In other words, capitalism starves to death 25,000 people every day. In a year, capitalism kills 9.125 million people from hunger and hunger-related diseases alone. Capitalism starves to death one kid every five seconds. But when it comes to killing kids, capitalism doesn’t just use starvation. Like a murderous Felix the Cat, Killer Capitalism has plenty more deadly tools in its Bag of Tricks. All in all, capitalism kills 10 million kids every year. Eat that, market fetishists. Wow, if this is the successful system, I almost want to say, let me check out the failed system. instead. Or this failed system. Compared to being starved to death by the successful system, I think I’ll go with the failed systems and see if I can get enough to eat at least? It’s clear that Communism and to a lesser extent socialism has some problems with production and running a rational and functioning economy. But what’s more important, some macro economic growth bullshit or the question of life and death?

Capitalism Kills 10 Million Kids a Year

Repost from the old site: I’ve had it up to here with this “100 million killed by Communism”, “Stalin and Mao, the biggest murderers of all time”. No Communist except Pol Pot ever held a candle to what capitalist serial killers and mass murderers do year in and out without fail. As you can see, 200 million kids around the world don’t have access to any kind of basic health care (I would argue that that figure is way too low), which kills 10 million of them ( And if you are going to start bitching about overpopulation? Number 1, why are you are capitalist? Capitalism mandates and demands an endlessly expanding population. Capitalism says a declining or even steady population is going to be a catastrophe for the capitalist economy. Number 2, if the world is overpopulated and 10 million dead kids is great news, maybe it’s time to shut up about “Commie mass murderers”. Can’t have it both ways. I would like to point out that capitalism has absolutely no project whatsoever to do anything about this situation, a tragedy that has been ongoing for decades. Anyone in the Third World who comes into power and tries to do something about this mass murder gets called a Communist and the CIA tries to take them out, or they get country-destroying sanctions put them, or the US invades their country, or the IMF – World Bank – Wall Street declare war on them, or the US starts up a reactionary Contra terrorist army to go around burning schools and health clinics to the ground and murdering the doctors and teachers. Further, the entire world media – at least the US branch – including TV, radio, newspaper and newsmagazines, is 10 Anyone trying to remedy this situation is said be implementing a “failed solution” = socialism. Well, if trying to save 10 million kids a year ends up saving even a few of them, I don’t care what the model is, it doesn’t sound like a failure to me. I would like to point out that just about every corporation on Earth and every national business sector would fight to the teeth anyone trying to save these kids’ lives. Some might say that 10 million dead kids means that there is not enough capitalism in some places, or there is too much cronyism, or we need different ways of doing capitalism, or “it’s not capitalism – it’s greed”, or this or that dodge. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Capitalism is working perfectly as designed. 10 million dead kids a year is the way capitalism unrestrained by socialism is supposed to work. This is where I’m actually with the Maoists sometimes. For instance, capitalism is killing a good 4 million people a year in India minimum. Well, that’s a five-alarm fire right there, say the Maoists, and we don’t care if it’s a democracy or dictatorship killing all those people. We need to take up arms right now to stop the killing, they say. In some places, they’ve actually got a point, sorry to say. You guys wonder why I hate capitalism so much. Read my lips. 10 million dead kids, no end in sight. Update: This post actually got linked with positive feedback by the Democratic Underground. Unbelievable!

They Were Committing Crimes

Repost from the old site. This literary exercise has been praised by a publisher of short literary works and compared to a Peter Sotos novel, Special. Sotos is a notorious transgressive fiction writer who got arrested for child pornography for putting a kiddie porn picture on the cover of one of his novels as an artistic statement. Special is out of print but has been republished in an anthology called Pornography 1991-2000. Funny overview here. Yes, I have published fiction before, and it was praised by Avram Davidson, a famous novelist and personal friend, and Gary Snyder, a famous beatnik author. Some of it is available in a literary anthology. I am just wondering, who are these Thrillseekerman and Internetman guys anyway? What are their initials? They were committing crimes. And no one ever caught. Thrillseekerman sold dope for 14 years, and the cops never caught on. He finally quit, or did he? And now he’s scared to do it again, or is he? But the temptation is always there, because he so loved the outlaw dealer life where you never get caught and outsmart the law. He also loved being a dealer because he loved being a criminal. As a dealer, you can be a criminal without hurting anyone else, so if you have a shred of guilt left, and Thrillseekerman does, it’s a great Catholic profession. I mean, a few months ago, or earlier today, or 10 years ago, Internetman met 15-year-old girls on the Net, and they sent him nude pics without him even asking, and said they wanted to have sex with him right now, but they were too far away. So what did he do with the pics? Delete them, call the cops and turn himself in, or keep them in an evil secret file to show it to his most evil friends? I bet they are gone now. Internetman is paranoid. Were they illegal? Internetman is thinking about it, and trembling. Internetman went into a chatroom the other night, or was it five years ago? There was a teenage girl in there masturbating on cam, and everyone in the room was watching the fun. Well, she was 13, but she looked like a full-grown to him. The chat room was full, mostly kids but some adults too, both sexes. Was it illegal? Internetman is remembering it, and shaking. With terror, and excitement. It was seven years ago, or seven weeks ago, or seven months ago, or seven days ago, and 14-year-old girls came to talk to Internetman in the chatrooms and ask for cybersex. What’s a man to do? It was a while back, or the other day, or some time ago, or 4-7 years ago, and Internetman did the cybersex thing with them, the 14-yr-olds, the 15-yr-olds, and the 16-yr-olds, and of course the droves of legal-aged women as well, and it was all in good fun. One of them begged and begged for him to send her porn, so he broke down and sent porn to a 14-yr-old girl. Was that illegal? Now he’s paranoid, and he’ll never do it again. Or will he? Maybe he better not. In a chatroom, five days ago, or last year, or five years back, the 17-year-old girl saw he had a cam and asked him to turn it on. Internetman did so. She started whining for him to take his pants off so she could see his stuff, because she had never seen one before. “But I’ve never seeeeen one before,” she whined into Internetman’s headphones, but he chickened out again. Internetman went into these really evil chatrooms, just on a wild dare, and people were all trying to do horrible and illegal stuff in there, men and women of all ages, normal folks and weird. Internetman tried not to do anything illegal. Did he succeed? Will he go there again? He doubts it. Internetman went to this chatroom last year, or eight years ago, or yesterday, and met this guy in Kentucky, a psychopath I guess, who wanted someone to rape his wife. You had to break in, tie her up, rape her, and get away with it. He described the sex acts he wanted Internetman to engage in with his wife. He said you could not hurt her in any way, and that she would secretly love it. Getting away with it was Internetman’s business, and the guy would not call the cops and report the rape. So Internetman sat there and wondered whether or not he could be a criminal rapist and try to get get away with it, under special circumstances of course in which at least the victim’s husband consented, but he chickened out at the end. Internetman met a girl once on the Net a few weeks ago, or was it seven years ago? She was 17 years and seven months old, lived close by, and wanted sex right now. She kept demanding and demanding, and she would not knock it off. She was a lesbian, but she wanted to try it with a guy to see what it felt like. Internetman figured it was an evil plot by one of his enemies trying to get him arrested for child molesting. Good thing he was paranoid, so he never took her up. The Internet is the most evil place Internetman knows. You can do just about anything on here, and who knows if it’s even legal or what. Where are the cops? What’s a cop? There are bulletin boards right now where people are asking for child porn and bragging about their antisocial acts, and Internetman knows where they are. He’s been to them, lurking, but he didn’t do anything illegal. Or did he? Internetman went to chatrooms where sex perverts traded porn pics. Mostly it was fun, but some people sent Internetman really illegal pics without him even asking, and he freaked out and deleted them about as quick as they hit the screen. Was that illegal? Did Internetman commit a crime? One of his drug addict friends, Killerdude, came over the other day, or was it 22 years ago? He asked Thrillseekerman to be the getaway driver for an armed robbery, and Thrillseekerman considered it, but thank God he didn’t do it. A few months back, or 18 years ago, one of Thrillseekerman’s doper friends drove the getaway car for an armed robbery and he told Thrillseekerman all about it. Then the armed robber himself came over to Thrillseekerman’s house with his girlfriend and they sat around and took drugs. He seemed like a smiling psychopath, and those guys are always charming in a way. Later Thrillseekerman called the cops and told them the guy’s name, but there was not much they could do. Last week, or 21 years ago, Thrillseekerman called the cops on his friends and tried to get them busted. Once for selling heroin, because Thrillseekerman thought that was shitty. The other time because Thrillseekerman was mad at his friend who sold pot and wanted to burn the guy. Dopers work with narcs all the time, mostly for revenge reasons. Most people don’t know that. Without dopers to work alongside them, every narc in America would be unemployed. Once, 11 years ago, or a few weeks back, Thrillseekerman stole Killerdude’s car, not to be a criminal or anything, but just because he was furious at him, but he brought it back when the cop’s son across the street was going to have him arrested. One time, it was last month, last year, or it was 20 years ago, and Thrillseekerman drove by a business at 5 AM with a slingshot and blew out a window in a business that because he hated it and it was evil. Committing street crimes like that, which was actually a revolutionary act in favor of people’s power and against the crooked businesses that rip off the people, is one of the biggest rushes that Thrillseekerman knows. You will shake like a leaf. You will shake so hard it will be hard to steer the car after you do it. You will be terrified and thrilled all at the same time, and when you get away with it, there will be no better feeling. Killerdude came over a while back, or 25 years ago, or the other day, and said he was considering taking an offer to kill some guy, from a woman who was offering big money to have her husband knocked off. So they, Thrillseekerman and Killerdude, sat around for hours blasted out of their minds on dope and talked about whether or not you should murder someone for the money. They discussed Christianity, as in whether or not a Christian should kill, and whether or not the would-be murder victim deserved it since he was a wife-beater, and Thrillseekerman tried to spy on Killerdude for the cops, but it did not work. Thrillseekerman didn’t like the idea of killing for money (even Thrillseekerman had some basic values) and thought his friend was degenerating morally. They took lots of drugs, Thrillseekerman and Killerdude, while they talked about all this insane and evil stuff. It was last month, or was it 15 years ago? They sat around for hours at night stoned out of their minds on chemicals, saying, “Yeah! I could play the role of the insane serial killer! I could play that role! I could play any role! I could play as many roles as you could! And that’s a lot of roles,” as they shook their heads and laughed demoniacally but didn’t really consider it, just fantasized about it. About what? Being a serial killer? How many people do that? It was really weird back in those days, or the other day, or whenever it was, but not too many crimes happened. Once they got loaded and made some bombs. It was a few months ago, or 13 years ago, or back in the 80’s. Thrillseekerman had these antisocial maniac friends, some of whom seemed like they might snap, but Thrillseekerman wasn’t worried, and they liked to make bombs, like all maniacs do. It’s so fun making illegal bombs. The psycho dudes showed Thrillseekerman how to make bombs, which is so easy it’s scary. Then they took the bombs and blew up this dude’s windshield (who deserved it) with a fused time bomb, and they slashed his tires, then they took another bomb, this time sort of a firebomb that shoots up a flame, and threw it on some other guy’s lawn (who deserved it), and it burned a hole in the lawn. Making little bombs is the easiest thing in whole world to do, and every revolutionary and maniac of any age might want to make them and set off them in the street at least, that is if you have the nerve, just to see what an explosion looks like and to piss off the neighbors. They called themselves a gang and sat on the front porch of Thrillseekerman’s house and shot BB pellets and rocks and dirt clods at the neighbors’ house (who deserved it) and dared them to call the cops. The people did call the cops, but the cops hardly cared because they thought Thrillseekerman was doing a civic duty by getting rid of the real criminal (the neighbor) he was attacking. In other words, Thrillseekerman was a public service vigilante ridding the neighborhood of scum as he saw fit. The cops paid him a visit on the phone, told him to watch it, and told him to spend $10 to repair the door Thrillseekerman had smashed in with a baseball bat after laughing maniacally and running across the street in broad daylight as a joke just so the whole world could see it and to dare them to call the cops. If you’re doing a public service crime, do it in broad daylight. It was just the other day, or long, long ago. Another time Thrillseekerman sneaked into the ladies room to take a crap because the criminal, feral, 13 year old Black youths were in the men’s room threatening with their eyes to attack anyone who came in. A woman called the cops, and the detectives threatened to kick Thrillseekerman’s ass if he did not confess to a perverted crime he did not commit. He only wanted to confess to taking a crap, which was the only crime he did. Well, he was also trying to see if he could get away with it, so there was a thrillseeker aspect. The detectives quickly figured out he was not a pervert, but they kept on torturing him anyway and trying to get him to confess. Don’t you just love detectives? How many people in the US just confess unless the cops beat the shit out of them? He was 20 again, or was he 50, or was he 35? He was jogging in the park, and Thrillseekerman met a 12 year old girl he had known from an old job for a long time, and they chatted a bit and smiled and laughed, and then she flat out asked Thrillseekerman to have sex with her, and smiled when she said it, just like that. Not only that, but she was beautiful, brilliant, wise and athletic. And Thrillseekerman considered being the ultimate criminal that you can be, a child molesting sick evil scumbag piece of dirt, but then he decided against it. There are Lolitas and teenage girls that want it, 12 and up, with adult men, 18-45. And if you do it and get caught, you are going down in the worst way. It was yesterday, or long ago in another lifetime. A whole crowd of gangsters came in the door. There had just been a gang fight, and people were hurt. The gangsters were underage, some of them, but they used an 18 year old girl to get in the door because they knew Thrillseekerman’s fatal weaknesses. Later there were shots fired 50 yards from his door, and the cops didn’t even want to take any witnesses. They never do in gang crimes, and besides, in Greater Tijuana, here in California, there are pro-gang Hispanic spies everywhere. Thrillseekerman’s White, and he claims Norteno, or does he? Or does the whole neighborhood? After all, he lives in a Norteno hood, so everyone more or less claims in a way. Thrillseekerman wears jogging shoes with N on them for a reason, or does he? Three weeks ago, or nine months ago, or 12 years ago, someone came by and flashed a United Farm Workers shirt (Do you get it?) at Thrillseekerman and asked him to go out with a shotgun and kill some Surenos. Thrillseekerman had to think about it for a bit, because nothing would be so thrilling and dangerous, and Surenos probably deserved it anyway, but thank God he declined. There were criminal opportunities all over the place for decades, right under your nose, people enticing him here and there to break the law and commit serious crimes, some of them felonies, if only one was psycho enough, and they seemed to dare you and egg you on. In the barrio anyway, no snitching was the rule, so you might even get away with it, but you could still get caught.

Secular Rise in Black IQ and Head Size: Evidence For a Eugenic Effect

Repost from the old site, with additions. It is common refrain among race realists, and in particular White racists, who make a fetish out of the number, that the US Black IQ is 85. Broadly speaking, that used to be the case, but IQ’s of Black children have always been higher. Blacks having high IQ’s as young children that gradually decline towards adulthood unfortunately has been noted by researchers and observers for a long time. There are descriptions of this phenomenon going back to 1850. So there is no need for White nationalists to get all freaked out when someone says that Black elementary school kids are pretty smart.

More charming Black thugs, throwing gang signs and looking menacing. The young woman is a mulatto or very light-skinned Black girl. I used to see kids like her a lot when I taught school. Although the people above are acting like complete idiots, Blacks this age have average IQ's of 90. I've dealt with quite a few Black gangbanger kids like this as a teacher, and most of them aren't stupid at all. They're just assholes. No excuses.
More charming Black thugs, throwing gang signs and looking menacing. The young woman is a mulatto or very light-skinned Black girl. I used to see kids like her a lot when I taught school. Although the people above are acting like complete idiots, Blacks this age have average IQ’s of 90. I’ve dealt with quite a few Black gangbanger kids like this as a teacher, and most of them aren’t stupid at all. They’re just assholes. No excuses.

I believe that Black adult IQ has been bumped up to 89 now and Black child IQ to 92 due to changes in IQ norming in the US. IQ tests were formerly normed on a scale of US Whites = 100. A couple years ago, I think they changed it to US population = 100. That’s the only explanation I can come up with for the scores in the table below. So now the US White adult IQ is 103 and White kids are the same (actually White adult IQ = 102.5; White Child IQ = 103.5), and the US Black adult IQ is 89, and child IQ is 92. So there is an 10.5 pt gap between B-W kids and a 13.5 pt gap between B-W adults. But even Charles Murray and Philippe Rushton, two White racist scientists working in this field, concede that the B-W gap has shrunk about 3 points in the last 30 years. I believe that the US Asian score has now been bumped up to 107. We would also estimate that the IQ’s of US Hispanics to be about 92-93 now and US Amerindian IQ’s should be about 91 or so, all with the renorming. Things haven’t really changed much, just the whole scale has been bumped up. It’s important to understand that.

These scores are taken from this paper, and indicate varying scores for IQ tests and semi-IQ tests taken over about 30 years. As you move down in each individual row, you move into revised versions of the tests in more recent years.As you can see, White adult IQ (age 25+) in the US is now 102.6, or 103 rounded off. Black adult IQ (age 25+) has increased in recent years to 89.1 or 89 rounded off. There remains a 13.5 point gap between Blacks and Whites. It is no longer appropriate to say that Blacks have an IQ of 85. The B-W child gap is about 11 points. On the Stanford-Binet test, which can be given to both children and adults, there is a 10.8 point gap, but it would be nice to see who the S-B was given to, kids or adults.
These scores are taken from this paper, and indicate varying scores for IQ tests and semi-IQ tests taken over about 30 years. As you move down in each individual row, you move into revised versions of the tests in more recent years.As you can see, White adult IQ (age 25+) in the US is now 102.6, or 103 rounded off. Black adult IQ (age 25+) has increased in recent years to 89.1 or 89 rounded off. There remains a 13.5 point gap between Blacks and Whites. It is no longer appropriate to say that Blacks have an IQ of 85. The B-W child gap is about 11 points. On the Stanford-Binet test, which can be given to both children and adults, there is a 10.8 point gap, but it would be nice to see who the S-B was given to, kids or adults.
It is correct that with a 10-14 pt B-W IQ gap at the moment, “leveling the playing field”, which really boils down to equality of outcome, is not possible without much magic, fakery and nonsense. It would be ideal if racial IQ differences, while changing, would at least enter into this debate, but that’s not possible right now. Keep in mind that Black IQ declines as Blacks age. James Flynn, a world-recognized expert in the field, said a while back that Black 5-yr-olds may have IQ’s of 95. Traditionally, they suffered a 10 pt drop down to 85 at age 25. With renorming, Black 5 year olds may have IQ’s as high as 98. That’s going to drop to 89 by age 25. There have been articles recently remarking on how Black school performance is worse in Black high schoolers than in Black elementary schoolers. Black high schoolers have lower IQ’s than Black elementary students, and this will reflect in scores.

He may have been a thug, but Mychal Bell, famous stereotypical Black thug of Jena Six fame, was also said to be a pretty smart kid. There were reports that he was an A student, but in my discussions with prominent Jena, Louisiana citizens who knew some of his teachers, they said that he was intelligent, but he did not get good grades. I used to see this all the time as a teacher. US Blacks can no longer be said to be stupid. I think that high school failure rates are due to either culture, socioeconomics, or else genetic Black personality, or some combination of one or more of those. Even White highly extroverted persons don't like to be chained to a seat all day, and most of them hate school and studying. They want excitement, good times and adventure. Ditto with Black thrill-seekers like Mr. Bell.
He may have been a thug, but Mychal Bell, famous stereotypical Black thug of Jena Six fame, was also said to be a pretty smart kid. There were reports that he was an A student, but in my discussions with prominent Jena, Louisiana citizens who knew some of his teachers, they said that he was intelligent, but he did not get good grades. I used to see this all the time as a teacher. US Blacks can no longer be said to be stupid. I think that high school failure rates are due to either culture, socioeconomics, or else genetic Black personality, or some combination of one or more of those. Even White highly extroverted persons don’t like to be chained to a seat all day, and most of them hate school and studying. They want excitement, good times and adventure. Ditto with Black thrill-seekers like Mr. Bell.

White racists like to rant about “no progress” in the Black IQ of 85 over 100 years. That “no progress” claim does not include Flynn Effect Black IQ rise of 22 pts since 1930, much of which have been washed out because White IQ has been rising concomitantly with the Black rise. These same racists usually say that the Flynn Effect is not a real intelligence rise, but Black skulls have gotten dramatically larger since 1900 to the point where they are dramatically different from African skulls. It would stand to reason that a dramatic increase in Black skull size combined with a dramatic increase in Black IQ would represent a real intelligence increase – the Flynn Effect. US White and US Black skulls now look more alike than either skull does to its ancestors 150 yrs ago.

We are creating a new race here in the US - the Negro. A study looking at head sizes from the colonial era to today found that Whites and Black skulls now resemble each other more than either one resembles their grandparents. Both Black and White skulls have gotten larger, taller and narrower, the lower half of the face and jaw have receded, and the chin has become more prominent. Both changes are in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features.That means that modern Whites have skulls that look more like modern Blacks than our White ancestors of 250 years ago. And modern Blacks have skulls that look more like modern Whites than their African slave ancestors of 250 years. I do not feel that it is appropriate to constantly compare US Negroes with Black Africans. Not only are they completely different groups of people living on different continents for centuries, but at the moment, they're not even equivalent racially in many ways. US Negro skulls do not look much like Black African skulls anymore. The change in general is that US Black skulls have moved to an intermediate position between Africans and Europeans, in part due to interbreeding with Whites, but also due to improvements in environment, especially nutrition. Researchers also suggest genetic changes in skull size for both US Blacks and Whites.
We are creating a new race here in the US – the Negro. A study looking at head sizes from the colonial era to today found that Whites and Black skulls now resemble each other more than either one resembles their grandparents. Both Black and White skulls have gotten larger, taller and narrower, the lower half of the face and jaw have receded, and the chin has become more prominent. Both changes are in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features.That means that modern Whites have skulls that look more like modern Blacks than our White ancestors of 250 years ago. And modern Blacks have skulls that look more like modern Whites than their African slave ancestors of 250 years. I do not feel that it is appropriate to constantly compare US Negroes with Black Africans. Not only are they completely different groups of people living on different continents for centuries, but at the moment, they’re not even equivalent racially in many ways. US Negro skulls do not look much like Black African skulls anymore. The change in general is that US Black skulls have moved to an intermediate position between Africans and Europeans, in part due to interbreeding with Whites, but also due to improvements in environment, especially nutrition. Researchers also suggest genetic changes in skull size for both US Blacks and Whites.

We really are smarter than our grandparents. The implications of this are interesting. Truesdell notes that the changes in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features in both Black and White skulls were “in part genetic.” What this means is that both Blacks and Whites have been preferentially (eugenically) selecting for more progressive facial features and against more archaic features. As progressive facial features tend to have higher IQ’s and archaic features tend to have lower IQ’s, the result was eugenic selection towards more attractive features and higher intelligence. In Blacks, these changes have occurred since 1900, while in Whites, they have been going on since colonial times. In slave society, there probably was not a lot of progressive selection going on. With liberation, Blacks were freer to choose partners who could make more money. Since 1900, Blacks have been practicing eugenic selection towards Blacks who look “Whiter” and are more intelligent. In earlier times, Whiter Blacks could probably negotiate better in White society and could possibly make more money. But Black positive selection for Whiter features continues to this day. All of the race realist ranting about dysgenics grows very tiresome. Humans are intelligent creatures. It’s only logical that the evolution that drove us to this point is ongoing. Selection for better looking and more intelligent partners is a wise choice for any intelligent mammal, and we are the smartest of them all. Another White racist lie is that the Black-White achievement gap has not moved in the past 40 years, since we noticed it and declared war on it. In fact, the B-W achievement gap has shrunk by 1/3 over the past 30 yrs and there is evidence the decline was related to spending on education. Obviously, given IQ realities, there is going to be a point of diminishing returns here.

References

Dickens, William T. & Flynn, James R. October 2006. Black Americans Reduce the Racial IQ Gap: Evidence from Standardization Samples. Psychological Science. Jantz, RL. July 2001. Cranial change in Americans: 1850-1975. J Forensic Sci. 46(4):784-7. Truesdell, Nicole D. May 2005. Secular Change In The Skull Between American Blacks And Whites. MA Thesis. Baton Rogue, LA: Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Department of Geography and Anthropology.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Gilad Atzmon, Jewish Assimilation and the Roots of Jewish Hatred

Gilad Atzmon continues to post in the comments section. The following is the most recent exchange:

Lafayette: So, Gilad is not an anti-Semite, and is not against Jews or Judaism, but is against Jewishness? That’s a bit of a mouthful already – we’ll be tying ourselves in more knots with that one. Why not be an antisemite until Jews join ‘ Jews against Zionism’ or ‘Jews against Jewishness’ organisations in their millions, i.e. make some effort to dissociate themselves from the Zionists and the elite financial mafia Gilad: 2 reasons I can think of a. to expect Jews to operate politically and collectively is to assume that Jews are a ‘collective’ after all and this in itself is an approval of the Zionist philosophy. b. Jews against, X , Y or Z is in itself a tribal and racially orientated mind set, thus it must be opposed. The bottom line is very simple. There is no collective or a national solution to the Jewish problem. The only possible solution is personal and individual, joining humanity for real rather than imposing yourself on humanity.

When Gilad Atzmon says Jews need to join humanity, he only reiterates the progressive project vis a vis the Jews since the Jews left the ghettos. The need for the Jews to assimilate and that the progressive solution to the Jewish Question is the assimilation of the Jews. That this is still a problem today is highlighted by Gilad’s call. Let us recall that when the Jews first came out of the ghettos 200 years ago when they were liberated by Napoleon (all Jews today are Napoleon’s children as much as Abraham’s – most people do not recognize this), progressive European opinion felt that they were a mess. They were backwards, tribal, inward-looking, given to superstition and stupidity, and consumed with fear, suspicion and hatred for non-Jews. Centuries in ghettos had not been kind to them. Progressive, anti-racist forces felt that the best remedy for these messed-up people and advocated the progressive solution of the assimilation of the Jews. This is really what Marx’s “On the Jewish Question” (a very difficult read) is in part about. It is really not an anti-Semitic document, though the anti-Semites love to claim it as their own. In truth, it is allegorical, whereby “Judaism” stands for “capitalism.” Over 200 years, the debate about Jewish assimilation has raged in the Jewish press, but most of the rest of us know nothing of it. Out of this debate came Reform Judaism. A reaction to it, Modern Orthodox Judaism, actually only began in the late 1800’s in an attempt to revive the old ghetto religion. The resurrection of Orthodox Judaism was in more ways than one a return to the ghetto. So, in a similar way, was Zionism, the ultimate Jewish rejection of assimilation. To this day, the least assimilated Jews, and those who behave in the most unpleasant Jewish stereotypes, are in Israel and the Orthodox community. Antisemites make much of Jewish hatred. There is nothing new here. It’s just human tribalism. An allegory would be the racial hatred of the White nationalists. Yes, the Super Jews and the White nationalists are mirrored reflections of one and the same. The Jews were not stupid. As a minority tribe living surrounded by a majority, they were determined to prevent the extinction of their tribe. They probably learned what the WN’s are figuring out. Mere exhortations to not marry with the Other are futile. In order to truly maintain your line and prevent extinction, separation is probably necessary. In some cases, the Jews built those damned ghettos themselves to prevent assimilation. To prevent intermarriage, strong rules were set up to prevent Jewish women from marrying out. In Spain, a Jewish woman who had sex with a Gentile was sentenced to having her nose cut off. The solution for wandering males was that their offspring were lost to the tribe. Hence, the Jews were able to maintain their genetic line and tribal existence for centuries in a hostile Europe. But nasty laws could not always be enforced. Telling your people to only marry another Jew was not good enough. Children are rebellious and especially young women like to defy their fathers by marrying the Other. To prevent sex with Gentiles, it was necessary to prevent friendship with Gentiles. You can’t say you can be friends with the Gentiles but you can’t have sex with them. We are mammals. Friendship leads to sex, there is no stopping it. In the 1800’s and certainly before, an Orthodox Jew would not eat with, nor drink tea with, a Gentile under any circumstances. To this day the Yemeni Jews refuse to eat with their Gentile neighbors and have little to do with them. Eating together leads to friendship, friendship leads to sex, sex leads to tribal extinction. It’s all so rational. But you can’t just forbid people to make friends. Kids and others are rebellious. You have to give people a good reason not to befriend the Other, or they will do just that. So Jewish Hatred was cultivated. The Jews promoted hatred of Gentiles in their customs and religion in order to keep their people apart from them, in order to prevent tribal extinction. Along with hatred comes fear, as usual. If the Gentiles were portrayed as genocidally murderous, rising up to Final Solution the Jews with every generation, as the idiot Jewish religious saying goes (“Every generation they rise up against us…”), you don’t want to associate with them anyway, even if you are a rebellious adolescent. This is the unalterable reality that the WN’s are discovering. Just telling Whites to mate with and befriend their own kind doesn’t work. White people are doing it anyway and you can’t stop them. In order to keep Whites from befriending non-Whites, which leads to having sex with them, which leads to White extinction, the WN’s cultivate incessant hate propaganda against any and all non-Whites. Just check their websites. That’s the reason for all the hatred. The hatred is all about prevention of extinction. In this way also we see that Jewish hatred is not unique at all, but corollaries of it can be found in tribes all over the world. Jews are evil only in that human tribes are evil.

Gilad Atzmon is Continuing to Post Here

A celebrity, Gilad Atzmon, is continuing to post on this humble blog abode, on the Fuck Off Israel thread. He may be here for some time, at least on that thread. Background on Atzmon is in this post. I never thought this silly little blog would attract real live famous people. If you are interested in what he has to say, you can head on over there.

Never Tell Anyone Your IQ Score!

It’s quite strange, and probably peculiarly American. In the US, one is never supposed to reveal one’s IQ. I guess therefore you are never even supposed to get tested. Supposedly, it’s rude to mention it, but this has always been a fake argument, as Americans gleefully adhere, leech-like, to all sorts of unseemly self-promotion. Just not about brains, please! Americans get to toot their own horns, fish for compliments, brag, whatever you call it, and as long as it is done tastefully, no one minds. If it’s about money, athletics, chicks, fame or power, the horrors that ensue from such narcissist indulgence include women rushing to your bedside and appearances on the cover of major newsmagazines. Maybe you even get your own TV show. “The Apprentice” comes to mind. Narcissist epidemics rage across the land, but as long as the sociopaths get money, popularity, chicks, fame, power, fancy cars, mansionettes and whatnot not a single American soul rests uneasy. But alas! Let one irreverent soul let slip the facts of his mental endowment (an accident of birth no less) and the whole of US society erupts. Your IQ score is as innocent as your height -it’s a physical fact about your brain. What’s the problem? Jealousy? Surely it is not. Repugnance of the boastful? In ultra-narcissist 21st Century America, hardly, since those boasting of prowess or endowment in athletics, sexual conquests, bank accounts, possessions, positions attained or power wielded are tolerated and frankly rewarded. But the hatestorm that rains down on one who dares to commit the transgression of repeating the scientific fact of his IQ score needs an umbrella to fend it off. There can only be one reason why American society reacts so violently to an innocent revelation of the material fact of one’s IQ, as relevant to one’s physical being, one would think, as one’s heart rate, blood pressure, height or weight. That is the ferocious and dead ignorant hatred of the intellectual that gallops across the cowboy landscape of Perennial Frontier America. To be an American is to be a dummy, or at least to act like one. Look at George Bush. We’ve always hated intellectuals, and we probably always will. It’s the American Dumbfuck Way. Check out de Tocqueville or Hofstadter. In 127 years, from 1835 to 1962, the Idiot Adulation and Brainiac Hatred didn’t budge an inch. Some things never change.

A Reclassification of the Occitan Language

Updated May 29, 2015. Long, runs to 65 pages.

Map of Occitania showing the major dialect divisions including Vivaro-Alpine.
Map of Occitania showing the major dialect divisions including Vivaro-Alpine.
According to Ethnologue, Occitan is currently 1 language. This reanalysis will expand Occitan from 1 language to 22 languages. Occitan, or Langue d’Oc, is spoken in general in a swath across the south of France. It goes a bit into Spain in the Pyrenees and into far northwestern Italy. There is Occitan an outlier in Italy. There are various classification methods for Occitan. One is to differentiate between Langue d’Oil (French) and Langue d’Oc (Occitan). I do not agree that Occitan is particularly close to French. Occitan is about as far from French as Spanish and Italian are. I would put the Oil languages (including French) in a Northern Gallo-Romance and Rhaetian and Italian Gallo-Romance into a Southern Gallo-Romance with Arpitan as transitional between the two.
Another view of Occitan.
Ibero-Romance is a different split altogether. Occitan is better placed into a separate Romance category that I would call Catalan-Occitan. This analysis sees Occitan and Catalan as a singular branch of Romance. Catalan-Occitan is then properly put into Ibero-Romance. It also recognizes that Occitan and Catalan were once a single language stretching across the south of France and into northwestern Spain. This language was very widely spoken, and at one time in the Middle Ages it was very widely used. It is “the language of the troubadours,” the wandering minstrels who plied their trade across Southern Europe in the Middle Ages, though in truth, the troubadours mostly came from Limousin and wrote their songs in a sort of Poitou-Limousin dialect that no longer exists.
Another map of Occitania. This one is a bit harder to read as it is largely in dialect, but if you study it a bit, it makes more sense.
Another map of Occitania. This one is a bit harder to read as it is largely in dialect, but if you study it a bit, it makes more sense.
From 500-1200, there was really only one language – Catalan-Occitan. Occitan only started distinguishing itself after 1200. At the moment, Southern Languedocien has the closest relationship of all to Catalan – in fact, they are intelligible. Gascon is then the next closest to Catalan, but intelligibility data is lacking. The rest of Occitan is more distant from Catalan. Catalan speakers have a hard time understanding Auvergnat, Limousin, standard Languedocien and Provencal. It is not the case, as often stated, that Catalan and Occitan are intelligible, but they are close. Catalan and Occitan probably have about 5
A Third Map of Occitania. This is the best-laid out of all, and it is the easiest to read and make sense of.
A Third Map of Occitania. This is the best-laid out of all, and it is the easiest to read and make sense of.
Occitan has been on decline for a long time, as the Langue d’Oil has been been supplanting it for centuries. The decline began in 1539 when a French king ordered that langue d’oil be the official language of all of France. Despite a brief revival in the 1800’s, it’s been downhill ever since. Occitan speakers did not start speaking French in large numbers until 1885. Before that, there was only minor French influence on spoken Occitan. Since 1885, French influence on spoken Occitan has increased, in some cases dramatically. The codification of the Parisien Langue d’Oil language as Standard French with the victory of the French Revolution and the corresponding fascist Jacobin war on all other languages caused Occitan to recede further into the background. The French government is reactionary/fascist on the subject of language. The Jacobin Constitution baldly states that “French is the language of the state” and allows for no other languages. Hence, Occitan receives no state support in any way. Occitan still has about 8 million people who can understand it and 3 million who can speak it to one degree or another. Estimates of the true number of speakers range from 1-3.7 million. Occitan is surely a modern language and does not lack for vocabulary – it has between 250,000 and 1 million words, though many say that this is an exaggeration. Occitanists like to say that Occitan is all one language, but this is a political statement. They say this in order to unite the dying language and prevent it from splintering. The Occitanist position is increasingly popular. For instance, Wikipedia is calling all of the Occitan languages “dialects.” There are two centralized ways of writing all Occitan dialects, one based curiously enough on a Medieval standard. Around 1850, an Occitanist poet named Frederic Mistral invented a standard based on his own Provencal language, but this solution has not caught on well. The second is neo-Occitan, a new koine language created more recently. Occitan is spoken most often by those over 50, except in Italy and Spain. Occitan is only protected in Spain and Italy, where the respective forms of Aranese and Transalpine Provencal are spoken. If you hear Occitan, it sounds like some curious cross between Spanish and French, sort of the way that Catalan sounds. It’s not true that Occitan is one language as the Occitanists centered in the south of the region insist. The intelligibility among Occitan lects seems to be as I suspected. People with exposure to the other lects can pick them up pretty quickly, but someone who has never heard the other varieties has a hard time understanding them. This is called learned bilingualism. If learned bilingualism is the rationale for saying that Occitan is a single language, it stands on precarious scientific grounds. Nevertheless, intelligibility in Occitan remains a very controversial subject. On the one hand, speakers say they can’t understand speakers of the same lect a few miles away; on the other hand, Occitan speakers say they can understand totally different varieties from far away very well. At this point, it is time for some scientific intelligibility testing to sort all of this contradictory information out. Intelligibility testing has already been done with Occitan. It did find high, but by no means complete, intelligibility between major Occitan lects (Bec 1982). This suggests that intelligibility among Occitan lects is marginal, possibly on the order of 8 Others have put the figure about where I did – at 70-8 It is often said that French and Occitan speakers can communicate well enough. This is not the case. There are many French speakers living in Occitania who say that they cannot understand a word of Occitan. A good overview of Occitan is here. Method: Literature and reports were examined to determine the intelligibility of the various dialects of Occitan. >9 Results: This treatment expands Ethnologue’s 1 Occitan language to 22 Occitan languages.
A great map of all of the languages and dialects of SW Europe. It's in Spanish, but you should be able to understand it anyway. The Occitan languages are the light green stretching across all of southern France.
A great map of all of the languages and dialects of SW Europe. It’s in Basque, but you should be able to understand it anyway. Occitan dialects are listed in light green in the area around Southern France.
Gascon is a Southern Occitan macrolanguage spoken in southwestern France and barely over the border into Spain. It has 256,000 speakers, 250,000 in France, but other figures put the number at 500,000. Gascon has some affinities to Basque – it is said to have a Basque substrate – but it is not close to Basque at all. Gascon is probably closer to Catalan than anything else (even closer than it is to Aragonese), however, there is resent both being referred to as speakers of a dialect of Occitan and what they see as the cultural imperialism of Occitan politics centered in Toulouse. In France, Gascon is spoken in the departments of Landes, Gers, Hautes-Pyrénées, the eastern parts of Pyrénées-Atlantiques and the western parts of Haute-Garonne and Ariège, and it is still used actively by many people. 50 years ago, near La Réole, France, there were still monolingual Gascon speakers among the older people. People were still being brought up speaking Gascon as recently as the early 1980’s. However, in France, it is not being taught much to children. Gascon speakers have a hard time understanding Limousin, and Languedocien speakers say it’s hard to understand Gascon and vice versa. However, it is easier for Gascon speakers to understand Languedocien (though intelligibility is still difficult) than vice versa due to the French-like regularity of Languedocien. For example, “How are you?” is “Quin hes?” and “Cossi fas?” respectively in Gascony and Languedoc. It goes on like that through the Gascon-Languedocien lexicon. It’s clear we have two completely separate languages here. Around Agen, there is a transition between Guyennais, Gascon and Languedocien. One village can understand the next, but once you get 10-15 miles away, things get difficult. Provencal speakers say Gascon is a foreign language. Gascon speakers can’t understand a word of Auvergnat. It makes sense to split Gascon into a West and East Gascon. The border would run from Artix-Pau in the south to Marmande-Agen in the north. East Gascon would then start at around Pau and Agen and West Gascon at Artix and Marmande. These distinctions represent the variant influences of Bordeaux in the west and Toulouse in the east. West Gascon is spoken from Bordeaux in the north to the Basque country in the south. In the east, it runs to Artix in the south and to Marmande in the north. Its differences with East Gascon revolve around the influence of the large city of Bordeaux on the language. Dialects include Bazadais, Marmandais, Bordalés and Médoc. Bazadais is spoken around the town of Bazas, famous for its cows. Marmandais is spoken around the town of Marmande. Bordalés is spoken around Bordeaux. It is probably in very bad shape. It was declining badly even 50 years ago. There is actually a transitional Occitan-langue d’oil (Saintongeais) region around Bordeaux. The region around Bordeaux is notorious for its sharp linguistic breaks. One early chronicler estimated that the distance between West Gascon Limonde and Saintongeais-speaking Pays Gabay north of Limonde to the Saintonge border was 5 There is evidence of a Landes is a West Gascon language spoken in southwestern maritime France in the Aquitaine region. As it is not even intelligible within itself (it differs so much that it is hardly intelligible even from village to village), it must be a separate language. Some say that Landes is nearly a dead language, but others say that it is still spoken in the villages. The coast near Biscarosse gave up Landes long ago, but now even in the inland villages like Rion de Landes and Parentis en Born it is hard to find a speaker. The real Landes died around 1950. The current dialect is very Frenchified. East Gascon is spoken from Pau to the Ariege River in the south and from Agen to Toulouse in the north. It represents the influence of the large city of Toulouse. Even between the cities and Pau (East Gascon) and Artix (West Gascon), which are very close together, communication is nearly impossible. This language is probably in very bad shape. It is probably extinct in the Rivière-Basse region around the towns of Marciac, Plaisance and Maubourguet and in the Vic-Bihl region just to the west around Riscle. In Tarbes, Lannemezan and Lourdes, speakers are almost impossible to find. The eastern border with Languedocien is in the Ariege. Neraqués and Lomagne Gascon are two East Gascon dialects. Neraques is spoken in Nerac, just southwest of Agen in the Lot et Garonne. Lomagne Gascon is spoken to the far northeast of the Gascon language, southeast of Agen down towards Toulouse. Pyrenean Gascon is a macrolanguage that is unintelligible with the Gascon of the plains. This language is the most divergent member of Occitan, probably due to very strong Basque influence. Some would put it outside of Occitan proper altogether. The borders of Pyrenean Gascon run from the Ariege in the east to Bearn in the west and to the Spanish border (except in the Aran Valley). Pyrenean Gascon is nearly a dead language in France, only spoken by In Bearn, Pyrenean Gascon is still heavily used. In 1994, fully 2 It makes sense to split Pyrenean Gascon into three separate languages. Gascon speakers in the east of Bearnais have a hard time understanding the speakers in the west of Bearnais. They also have a hard time understanding the Couserans spoken in the Upper Ariege near the Foix and Andorra. Although it makes no linguistic sense, Bearnese is often split off a separate dialect of Pyrenean Gascon. Dialects of Bearnese include Aspés, Ossau Bearnese, and Palois. Bearnese is spoken in Bearn. West Pyrenean Gascon covers the western part of Bearn. It is here that there is the heaviest Basque influence of all. Speakers in the east of Bearn can understand speakers just to the east in Bigorre and Lourdes better than they can the speakers of western Bearn. Oloronais (Aspois) is a dialect of Béarnais spoken in Oloron that borders on Souletin Basque. The actual linguistic border between Béarnais and Basque is in between Aramits and Tardets. Central Pyrenean Gascon covers most of the Pyrenean Gascon region from eastern Bearn all the way to Ariege. Intelligibility is poor with both western Bearn and Couserans in the Ariege. Bigourdan is a dialect of Central Pyrenean Gascon spoken in Bagneres de Bigorre region. Subdialects are Argelès, Aure, Bagnères, and Tarbais. Bagnères is spoken around the city of Bigorre itself, and Tarbais is spoken around the town of Tarbes. Eastern Pyrenean Gascon is spoken in the far east of the Pyrenean Gascon region by the border with Languedocien and Catalan and over the border into the Aran Valley. Central Pyrenean Gascon speakers have a hard time understanding those in the Couserans in the Upper Ariege by Foix, Rousillon and Andorra. Dialects include Aranese, Ariegois, Commingese, Couseranais, Sauratois, and Contadels. Aranese is an Eastern Pyrenean Gascon dialect spoken by most of the 6,000 people living in the Aran Valley in the Spanish Pyrenees, where it has official status. It has Spanish, Aragonese and old Catalan influences, but at the moment it is under very heavy Catalan influence such that many Occitanists regard it as an outrageously degenerated dialect. Aranese is intelligible with Commingese across the border in France. Aranese is not intelligible with Spanish, French, Catalan or the rest of Occitan. Pujolo and Canejan are Aranese dialects. Ariegois is a Pyrenean Gascon dialect spoken in the Upper Ariege. Sauratois is an Ariegois dialect spoken in the Saurat region northeast of Tarascon on the Ariege River. Couseranais is an Ariegois dialect spoken in the Couserans northwest of Andorra. It still has a few speakers. Contadels is an Ariegois dialect spoken in Vicdessos north of Andorra. There is a very heavy Languedocien and Catalan influence on this dialect. This is actually a Gascon-Catalan transitional dialect. Southern Occitan is a branch of Occitan that stretches across Southern France near the ocean. It includes Languedocien, Maritime Provencal, Nissart, and Rhodanian Provencal. This branch has more Iberian influence in the west and more Ligurian Southern Gallo-Romance influence in the east. Languedocien is a Southern Occitan macrolanguage that has 1 million speakers in an area in a line going from north of Andorra – Aude – Fenoullens – Leucate in the south (border with Catalan), from Toulouse to Oust in the west (border with Gascon), in a line running from Toulouse – Albi – Agde in the north (border with Guyennais) and at Bassin de Thau in the east (border with Provencal). Languedocien sounds like a mixture of Spanish and French in the north or Spanish and Catalan in the south. Languedocien speakers have a hard time understanding Limousin, Auvergnat and Gascon. Languedocien speakers have a hard time being understood by the Provencal speakers in Toulouse. Along with Provencal, this language is more conservative and closer to the Medieval Occitan. If you try to learn Occitan now as a second language, you will learn Languedocien. Attempts to standardize writing of Languedocien have not been successful. An Occitan koine is being promoted out of the University of Montpellier that some Occitan speakers have referred to as an Occitan Esperanto. All across Languedoc, most of the older people and many young people still speak Languedocien. In Carcassone, all street signs are bilingual in Occitan, Occitan is an obligatory subject for primary school students, and there are 22,000 speakers in the city. Nevertheless, it is not being learned much by children in general in the region as a whole. It makes sense to split Languedocien into a Ibero-Languedocien and a North Languedocien (or Franco-Languedocien), the first more like Catalan, Spanish, Gascon and Aragonese and the second more like French and the rest of Occitan. North Languedocien is a Languedocien language with borders running from Toulouse – Albi – Bassin de Thau in the north and east and around the Bages-Sigues Lagoon in the south. This language lacks the strong Catalan influence of Ibero-Languedocien. Instead, it has more French influence. There are various dialects within North Languedocien that are quite divergent. Dialects include Besierenc, Narbonés, Carcassés, and Pezenas. These are spoken around the cities that they are named after and are said to be unrecognizable from one region to the next, but until we get specific intelligibility data, we can’t split them. Ibero-Languedocien is spoken in the south from Toulouse and Albi down through the Ariege, the Foix, the Aude, the Fenouillines and over to the coast at Leucate, possibly extending north to Carcassonne and Narbonne. This language is rooted in Iberian phonetics. Ibero-Languedocien speakers feel that they have excellent communication only with Catalan. With the rest of Occitan, they feel that they are speaking another language, and there are communication problems. Ibero-Languedocien is intelligible with Catalan. This dialect is the closest of all Occitan lects to literary Catalan and is spoken in the part of southwestern France right next to Catalonia. Ibero-Languedocien speakers can understand Catalan easier than they can understand Gascon. The border between Ibero-Languedocien and Catalan proper begins in the Languedocien-speaking Fenouillèdes along the Agly River. To the south, Catalan is spoken – to the north, it is Languedocien. But that boundary is fairly sharp. On the coast, the transition zone occurs from Leucate to Le Barcares and Salces. The true transition zone occurs in the area north of Andorra. The Catalan of Formigueres is basically the same language as the Languedocien of Usson just to the north. Tolosenc is a dialect of this language spoken around the city of Toulouse. It has Gascon influences. In the rural areas around Toulouse, almost everyone over 25 understands Tolosenc. In this area, many people over 40 were raised speaking Tolosenc as a first language, but most have forgotten it by now. However, in Toulouse proper, Occitan speakers have gone from 5 Agathois is a divergent Languedocien lect spoken on the coast town of Agde. It is very different from the Besierenc dialect spoken in Beziers and Vias, which were wine-growing regions. Beziers and Vias received many Spanish immigrants to pick grapes in the vineyards and received many more during the Spanish Civil War. As a result, Besierenc now has heavy Spanish admixture. But Agde, on the coast, received no Spanish influx, and now communication is sometimes difficult between Agathois and Besierenc speakers. Provencal is a very famous Southern Occitan macrolanguage that is spoken further east than Languedocien all the way to the Italian border. It has 200,000 speakers. Provencal is cannot understand the Mompelhierenc spoken in Montpellier, and there is marginal intelligibility with Nimes and Sète. People with one parent who spoke South Auvergnat and another who spoke Provencal were not taught Occitan because the lects were too different. This implies that even South Auvergnat has poor intelligibility with Provencal. Limousin speakers who move to the Provencal region say that the two feel very much like separate languages. Provencal speakers say that Gascon is a foreign language, they cannot understand Vivaroalpine and they even have a hard time with Languedocien. Provencal, along with Languedocien, is closer to the Medieval Occitan language and is more conservative. Dialects include Cévenol, Maritime Provencal, Marsillargues, Mompelhierenc, Bas-vivarois, Lunellois, Aptois, Bagnoulen, Barjoulen-Draguignanen, Canenc, Coumtadin, Foursquare-Manousquin, Grassenc, Marsihés, Maures, Castellane Provençal, and Sestian. Cévenol is spoken in the Cevennes Mountains north and northwest of Nîmes and is doing well. Maritime Provencal is spoken around the Cote d’Azur, is doing well and is widely spoken, especially as Marsillargues in Marseilles. Mompelhierenc, spoken in Montpellier, has heavy Languedocien influence. Bas Vivarois is spoken in the lower half of the Ardeche region. Lunellois is spoken in Lunel between Montpellier and Nimes and still has speakers. Aptois is spoken around the town of Apt north of Marseilles. Barjoulen-Draguignanen is spoken around the towns of Barjemon and Draguignan in the hills north of the French Riviera. Canenc is spoken around the Cannes. Grassenc is spoken on the French Riviera. Rhodanian is spoken around Arles, Avignon and Nîmes, is apparently not intelligible with the rest of Provencal and may be more than one language. Rhodanian speakers from around Nîmes say that they cannot understand other speakers from villages only 12 miles away. This is actually a Languedocien language that underwent Provencal phonetic changes in the late 1700’s, resulting in a Provencal tongue. This probably accounts for its diversity. Dialects include Arlaten, Bagnoulen, Camarguen and Nimoues. Arlaten is spoken around Arles. Bagnoulen is spoken around the town of Bagnols sur Centre. Camarguen is spoken around Camargue Bay. Nimoués is spoken in Nimes. Nissart is a Southern Occitan dialect spoken in Nice. It has very limited. Nissart is in very bad shape; it is a dying language mostly spoken by older people, when it is spoken at all. Dialects include Esteron, High Vésubie, and Northern Nissart. Mentonasq is a curious Gavot Alpine Provencal dialect related to Nissart spoken near Monaco in and near the town of Menton. It has a lot of Ligurian influences like Nissart. This is intelligible with Nissart and is apparently a Nissart dialect. This is best seen as transitional between Nissart and Intermelio to the east, a Ligurian dialect with strong Occitan influence. Studies have shown that Mentonasq is between Gavot Alpine Provencal (Nissart) and Royasque (Brigasc)-Pignasque (Ventimiglian) Ligurian (spoken in the Roya Valley in France and Pigna in Italy on the border), with an emphasis on the Occitan. About 2/3 of the words are Provencal. There are still those who insist that this language is basically Ligurian with strong over layer of Provencal. Intelligibility between Mentonasq and Ligurian Royasque is better than between Nissart and Royasque but is still somewhat marginal. Although it is close to Nissart, Mentonasq is also quite different from it. Monegasque is quite different from Mentonasq. It is mostly spoken by older people, fisherman and rural types. There is bilingual signage. But the language is in bad shape as the young do not speak it, and there are many tourists. Roquebrunasq is a dialect of Mentonasque, spoken on the Roquebrun-Cap Martin just to the west of Menton. It is somewhat different from Mentonasque. It is dying out. The similar dialects Gorbarin and Castellarois are spoken in Gorbio and Castellar. Gorbarin is particularly close to Mentonasc. Like Nissart, these are Gavot dialects transitional to Ligurian. Northern Occitan is a branch of Occitan that is spoken in the north of the Occitan region and also over by the Italian border. There are great differences between Northern and Southern Occitan. For instance, 3 One way to look at this is to say that the languages in this region – Limousin, Auvergnat and Vivaro-Alpin, are part of something called Medio Gallo-Roman, which is really in between the langue d’oc proper of the south – Gascon, Languedoc and Provencal – and the langues d’oil to the north and Arpitan to the east. Another way to look at it is to say that Northern Occitan is closer to Arpitan than to the rest of Iberian-dominated Southern Occitan. Limousin is a Northern Occitan macrolanguage spoken in France and has over 100,000 speakers. It is spoken in Limousin Province and over the western border into the far eastern part of Saintonge and the Perigord in North Acquitaine. North Perigord in Acquitaine has Saintongeais influences. South Perigord speaks Guyennais. Limousin is still widely spoken in the Limousin region and in northern Dordogne in Acquitaine. Limousin may have once been many separate languages, at least in the Dordogne department. Older residents in the Périgord Vert near Nontron report that from 1930-1970, it was not unusual for different villages to have Limousin dialects so different that one village could not understand the next, and they had to resort to the use of a koine. Gascon, Provencal, Languedocien and Auvergnat speakers say they cannot understand speakers of Limousin. Charente Limousin is a Limousin dialect that is very hard to classify. It extends from Confolens south to Aubeterre. This is an Occitan-Oil transition zone with an emphasis on the Occitan. So these are Limousin dialects transitioning to Charentais langue d’oil. Between Confolens and Ruffec around Chatain, there is a transitional dialect between langue d’oc and langue d’oil that is nevertheless intelligible with the Charentais spoken in Ruffec. This is probably a Charentais dialect transitional to Limousin. This province is generally langue d’oil speaking and has been so since the original Limousin speakers were eliminated by the Black Plague in the 1300’s and replaced by langue d’oil speakers, but the area around the Charente River in the far east of the province has long spoke Occitan and never underwent replacement. Saint-Eutrope and Montberonés are Charente Limousin dialects. Montberones is spoken in Montbron, and Saint-Eutrope is spoken in the town of the same name. South Limousin is a separate language spoken south of Haute Vienne in Limousin south to the Limousin border. It is closer to Auvergnat and Languedocien. Haute Vienne North Limousin speakers understand no more than 6 Corrèzese is a dialect of South Limousin spoken around the city of Correze. Correzese speakers can understand Auvergnat and vice versa. Corrèzese is best seen as a Limousin dialect transitional to Auvergnat. Sarladais is a South Limousin dialect spoken in Sarlat in Aquitaine just southeast of Limousin. It has strong Guyennais influences. Monédières Limousin, a variety of South Limousin spoken in the Monédières Hills near Correze, is a separate language. For one thing, it does not even appear to be intelligible within itself. Some varieties of Bas Limousin in the Monédières Hills near Correze have a hard time understanding each other. For another, Limousin speakers say they have a harder time understanding Monédières Limousin than they do Auvergnat as a whole. This is more than one language. Guyennais is a highly divergent lect, possibly a separate language, spoken in a swath across central Acquitaine, northern Languedocien and southwest Auvergnat. It is transitional between Gascon, Languedocien, Limousin and Auvergnat. In the South Perigord, the influences are Saintongeais, Gascon and Languedocien. To the east, the influences are Languedocien, Dauphinois Provencal and Auvergnat. In the north, the boundary with Limousin and Auvergnat is a line from Bordeaux – Bergerac – Carlux – S. Cerre – Latronquiere – southern border of Auvergne to the Ardeche border. To the south, Guyennais borders Languedoc along a line running from Castelsarrasin – Montalban – Cordes – Albi to the border of Languedoc at Millau and the Cevannes. Guyennais is still widely spoken. In Saint Cirq in Dordogne Department, all of the elderly speak Guyennais as a first language and continue to use it amongst themselves at all times. Although Guyennais is typically lumped under the rubric of Languedocien, others lump Guyennais in with Limousin, saying that there is no way that Guyennais-Limousin is the same language as Languedocien-Gascon. The best view is that Guyennais was close to Limousin and Auvergnat, but it underwent extensive Languedocienization caused by the expansion of Toulouse to the north from the 800’s to the the 1200’s. At the moment, it is probably closest to Limousin and possibly secondarily with Auvergnat. There is difficult intelligibility on the border of Guyennais and Gascon. Quercynois, Rouergat and Carladezien are not intelligible with Languedocien. Guyennais is very similar to the South Limousin spoken in Brive and South Auvergnat. Specific intelligibility data between Guyennais and Limousin and Auvergnat in general is not available. There is a strong tendency to want to split this off as a separate high level language within Occitan, but there’s no legitimacy to do so yet based on the available intelligibility information. Haut Quercinois, Bas Quercinois, Rouergat, Carladézien, Bergeracois, Agenais, Gevaudan, and Aurillacois are dialects of Guyennais. Quercynois (Carcinòl) is spoken in the Quercy in Midi-Pyrenees. Rouergat is spoken around the city of Rouerge. Carladézien is spoken in Auvergne and is still doing very well. It is transitional to Auvergnat. Bergeracois is spoken around Bergerac. Agenais is spoken in Agen and has Gascon influences. Gévaudan is spoken in the southern part of Lozère, and Aurillacois is spoken in the Aurillac. Both have Auvergnat influences. North Limousin, spoken north of Correze in Haut Vienne to the Marche and over to Nontron in the west, is a separate language. North Limousin speakers only have 6 Millevaches is spoken on the Millevaches Plateau south of Limoges. Lemojaud is spoken in Limoges. Monts de Blond Limousin is a North Limousin lect said to be so different from all other Limousin types that it must be a separate language. It is spoken in the Haut Vienne in the Monts de Blond region around Blond between Nantiat and Confolens near the Charente border. There is heavy influence from Charentais langue d’oil and Creusois. Nontronnais is a North Limousin dialect that is so unusual that it must be a separate language. It is spoken in the North Perigord region around the town of Nontron near the Saintonge border. It has heavy Saintongeais langue d’oil influences. Creusois (Marchois) is a language spoken in La Marche or the Croissant in north Limousin and over into Auvergne. It extends roughly from La Rochefoucauld in Charente to Saint-Priest-Laprugne just over the Auvergne border in Loire in the south and from Bellac in Limousin over to Montlucon and Moulins in Auvergne to the north. The eastern portion in Auvergnat underwent much more extreme changes than the western portion. It borders on and is influenced by the oil languages Berrichon and Bourbonnais in the north and east and Poitou and Charentais in the west but is intelligible with none of them. In the northeast, there is a 50 mile wide Creusois zone between Limousin and Berrichon. Some say it is a langue d’oil with heavy Occitan influence, but a better analysis is of a langue d’oc with heavy oil influence. To the southeast around Vichy, there is some Arpitan influence. This language is still widely spoken in places. 15 years ago, the dialect of Saint-Priest-la-Feuille in northern Limousin was still spoken by everyone over 40. A bit to the west, 15 years ago, Gartempaud, spoken in the village Gartempe, was still spoken by most residents over the age of 50. Dialects include Western Creusois, Eastern Creusois, Central Creusois and Montluçonnais. Montuluconnais is spoken around the town of Montlucon in Auvergnat. It is often thought to be a part of Limousin, but Creusois speakers have a hard time understanding Limousin. Auvergnat speakers cannot understand Creusois. There is poor intelligibility with Berrichon, a langue d’oil. This is basically an Occitan-Oil transitional dialect with an emphasis on Occitan.
Map of the Bourbonnais region in north Auvergne and southeast Berry showing Bourbonnais langue d’ oil, Auvergnat Occitan and Forez Arpitan.
Auvergnat is a North Occitan macrolanguage that has 1.35-1.5 million speakers. Auvergnat is spoken in reports indicate that nearly everyone over age 35 can speak Occitan, and perhaps 5 A neo-language called Aleppo (Literary and Pedagogical Auvergnat) has been created. It is used to teach students who come from a variety of educational backgrounds and by writers who wish to enrich their prose by using loans from other dialects. Every village has its own dialect, and there is often problematic intelligibility even from one village to the next. People who learn standardized Occitan fairly well are completely lost listening to Auvergnat. Auvergnat in general cannot understand Limousin, with the exception of the dialect spoken in Corrèze. The reason is that the phonetics, inflections and vocabulary of Limousin are completely different than in Auvergnat. Auvergnat speakers are completely lost with the Languedocien speech of Toulouse and Carcassone. Auvergnat speakers cannot understand Creusois. Auvergnat is utterly unintelligible to Gascon speakers. Auvergnat speakers cannot understand the Provencal spoken in Montpellier, and there is marginal intelligibility with Nimes and Sète. The Languedocien influence on these Provencal dialects is what makes them hard to understand for Auvergnat speakers. People with one parent who spoke South Auvergnat and another who spoke Provencal were not taught Occitan because the lects were too different, implying that South Auvergnat has poor intelligibility with Provencal. Auvergnat is closer to French than the rest of Occitan, and it has the strongest Arpitan influences of any Occitan language. There area two major splits – South Auvergnat or Upper Auvergnat in the south of the region and North Auvergnat or Lower Auvergnat in the north of the region, which are separate languages. The names upper and lower do not correspond with north and south here, which is curious. South Auvergnat is spoken from Mauriac in the west through Brioude in the center to Crappone sur Arzon south to the border of Auvergne. It has difficult intelligibility with the North Auvergnat spoken in Allier and Puy de Dôme. South Auvergnat is still in good shape, with 6 Dialects include Brivadois, Mauriacois, Yssingelais, and Sanfloran. Brivadois is spoken around Brioude and Sanfloran around Saint Flour. Brivadois cannot understand the North Auvergnat spoken in Allier and Puy de Dome. It is in between North and South Auvergnat but is best characterized as South Auvergnat. Mauriacois is spoken in the southwest in Mauriac, but it is very different from Aurillacois. It has some old influences from San Floran and Gevaudan. Yssingelais is spoken in Yssingeaux in far southeast Auvergne. It has strong Arpitan and Alpine Provencal influences. Some have classed this as an Alpine Provencal dialect, but this seems uncertain. Intelligibility data is lacking. San Floran is spoken in St. Flour. This is a very influential dialect, having influenced many nearby dialects. North Auvergnat is a macrolanguage spoken in Allier and Puy de Dome. It is close to the langues d’oil, especially Bourbonnais but is probably not intelligible with them. North Auvergnat is not doing well. Speakers of Brivadois, a South Auvergnat dialect transitional to North Auvergnat, have a hard time understanding the North Auvergnat of Allier and Puy de Dome, so it is separate from South Auvergnat. North Auvergnat, especially in the east, is possibly the most divergent lect in Occitan after of Gascon due to very heavy Bourbonnais and Arpitan influence. Some even think it is outside of Occitan proper altogether. North Auvergnat can be divided into two separate languages – Northwest Auvergnat and Northeast Auvergnat. The differences are so dramatic that they must be separate languages. Northeast Auvergnat is spoken in the eastern part of the North Auvergnat from Jumeaux and Arlanc north to the west bank of the Allier River near Vichy and Cusset. From Vichy-Cusset to the Loire border, Forez Arpitan was formerly spoken. North of Vichy-Cusset to the Champagne-Ardennes border, langue d’oil Bourbonnais used to be spoken. Northeast Auvergnat has very heavy Arpitan influences that make it so different from Northwest Auvergnat that it must be a separate language. In fact, Livradois speakers cannot understand Besse-en-Chandesse speakers. Livradois is a Northeast Auvergnat dialect spoken on the broad Lemange Plain in the east-central part of Auvergne bordering on Loire. In the southern part of Livradois around St. Antheme, there are strong Forez Arpitan influences. Northwest Auvergnat is spoken from about Champes sur Tarentaine to Lempdes north to Pionsat and Gannat. The heavy Arpitan influence on Northeast Auvergnat makes it so different that it must be separate from Northwest Auvergnat. And it is true that Besse-en-Chandesse Northwest Auvergnat speakers cannot understand Livradois Northeast Auvergnat speakers. Alpine Provencal (Vivaro-Alpine) is a macrolanguage, part of the Provencal macrolanguage, and is often considered to be a separate branch of Northern Occitan. An ocannot understand Vivaroalpine, so it is a separate entity. Dauphine Provencal (Vivaro-Dauphine) is a separate language within Alpine Provencal. It is spoken in the departments of Ardèche (except the north and the western border areas), Drôme (except the north) and the southernmost parts of Isère. Dialects include Ardechois (Mid Vivarois), spoken in the center of the Ardeche and Dauphinois or Drômois, spoken in the Drôme River area. Gerbier de Jonc is an Ardechois dialect spoken in the Ardeche region of that name. It differs greatly from the north to the south, with words changing from village to village. Other dialects are Albenassien, Albonnais, Annonéen, Southeast Ardèchois, Boutierot, Northeast Drômois, Southeast Drômois, Montilien, Privadois, Valentinois, and Vernoux-Doux. Privadois is spoken in Privas in the Ardeche. Montilien is spoken in Montelimier in the Drome. Albonnais, spoken in the village of Albon in the commune of St. Pierreville in the central Ardeche, was still resembles South Auvergnat. It is apparently not intelligible with Rhodanian or Maritime Provencal. Gavot Provencal is a divergent Northern Occitan language within Alpine Provencal in France. There are intelligibility problems between this and the Dauphine Provencal spoken in the Drome and the Ardeche such that the others say that Gavot is a mutually intelligible. Dialects include Molliérois, Embrunais, and Seynois. Molliérois is a dialect of Gavot spoken north of St. Martin Vesubie and Beaui near the Italian border. It differs significantly from the dialects of St. Martin Vesubie and Isola very close by. Embrunais is spoken in Embrun. Embrunais has problematic intelligibility with the Transalpin Provencal spoken in Briançon. Seynois is spoken in the town of Seyne and in the surrounding towns of Auzet Barle, Montclar, Selonnet, and Le Vernet. Transalpin Provencal is a Northern Occitan language, the Italian group of the eastern section of Alpine Provencal, spoken in the Piedmontese Valleys in the Alps along the northwestern Italian border with France and just over the border with France in the Briançon region. There are about 100,000 speakers in Italy, about 5 It is spoken in 14 Piedmontese valleys in the Alps (in the provinces of Cuneo and Torino) and in one community (Olivetta San Michele) and a few hamlets in the Liguria region (in the province of Imperia). A lot of parents in this region still pass Transalpin Provencal on to their children, but the language is declining, being replaced with Piedmontese or Italian. It is spoken in the highest valleys only, having been replaced in the lowest valleys first and then the middle valleys. The highest valleys often lack schools, courts, post offices, etc. The people live in homes that often lack heating and bathrooms and sometimes lack electricity. Of the young people under age 20, 40-5 In Italy, it is spoken in the upper valleys of Piedmont (Val Maira, Val Varacho, Val d’Esturo, Entraigas, Limoun, Vinai, Pignerol, and Sestriero) by speakers of all ages, but younger people are reportedly shifting to Italian. Nevertheless, there are reports that the number of speakers of this language has actually risen in recent years, and it is now recognized as an official language by the state of Italy. In the Estura Valley, Piedmontese (with heavy Transalpin Provencal influence) is spoken in the lower valley from Demonde up the valley to Aisone, and Transalpin Provencal is spoken from Aisone to the top of the valley. In this area, 10 Transalpin Provencal is not intelligible outside of the region. Escarton is a dialect of Transalpin Provencal that is spoken in France and Italy near the town of Briançon on the border of France and Italy where the Gavot Provencal, Piedmontese and Savoyard Arpitan languages all come together. All three languages influence this dialect, especially Savoyard, but at base it remains an Occitan dialect. It is spoken in the Cottian Alps. There are many different dialects included under the Escarton rubric. Briançon dialects include Viaran and Montegenevre. Escarton also includes Queyras, spoken around Abries and Aigilles in France to the southeast. In Italy, it includes Oulx in Oulx, Bardonecchia in Val Susa and Val Chisone in the town of Sestriere in Val Chisone. Escarton has difficult intelligibility with the rest of Occitan. It has better intelligibility with the Transalpin Provencal across the border in Italy than with the Embrunais Gavot of the lower valley in France. Gardiol is a diaspora Alpine Provencal language spoken in Guardia Piedmontese, an Occitan-speaking town in southern Italy. The town, located in the Cantabria region in Cosenza Province, was established in the 1300’s by people from the Waldensian or Vaudois Protestant movements who were fleeing Catholic religious persecution. They were thought to be heretics and were massacred in the 1300’s. The language is a Vivaroalpenc dialect formerly spoken in Briançon and in the Varaita and Pellice valleys of France. It is still taught from K-12 in school and has 340 speakers. Gardiol is under strong southern Italian influence. Gardiol is said to be incomprehensible to French Occitan speakers due to the fact that it has been diverging for over 700 years in isolation in Italy.
The outlandish costumes of the women of Guardia Piedmontese, Italy, based on clothing from the 1300's in southeastern France.
The outlandish costumes of the women of Guardia Piedmontese, Italy, based on clothing from the 1300’s in southeastern France.
There are more Gardiol speakers in Germany’s Württemberg, in the US (especially in North Carolina in the town of Valdese), in the Argentinian town of Pigüé, and in Canada’s province of Quebec. Intelligibility of these diaspora lects with the language in Italy is not known. References

Bec, Pierre. 1982. “Occitan”, in Posner, Rebecca and Green, John N. Trends in Romance Linguistics and Philology, Volume 3. La Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Gilad Atzmon On Robert Lindsay

It’s not very often that we get celebrity commenters on the blog, but Gilad Atzmon stopped by the other day to comment on the Fuck Off Israel thread, which seems to be breaking all records with 182 comments so far. If you do not know who Atzmon is, he is an author and a jazz musician. This Wikipedia article should sum him up well. He is Jewish and is a former resident of Israel, now an expat living in the UK. He is quite controversial, and there has been a big fight about him on the British Left concerning whether or not he is a Jewish anti-Semite. It’s clear that he is not an anti-Semite at all on a personal level as he has Jewish members in his band. This alone sets him apart from most anti-Semites, most of whom simply dislike most to all Jews period on a personal level. This is one of the lies of the Super Jews – that there are all these horrible anti-Semitic neo-Nazis running around saying, “Some of my best friends are…” Forget it. I know these people. They don’t like Jews – any Jews. I think that primarily Atzmon is just an anti-Zionist Jew who is trying to figure out why Jewish Zionists act like they do, and his analysis has taken him into some funny places. I would suggest that if Atzmon wants to find out what motivates his fellow Israelis, he should consult anthropology texts. There is nothing unique about Zionist behavior. It’s simply normal tribal behavior for human beings. This is the way that human tribes act, the way they have acted for thousands of years and the way they will continue to act until we detribalize mankind. The more ethnocentric the tribe, the more likely it will display these typical tribal behaviors. There is nothing uniquely evil about the Jews only in that there is something uniquely evil about mankind. This is a major flaw of anti-Semitic critique. For those unfamiliar, the Bund was one of the original Jewish trade union political formations in Russia. It was very leftwing. I always liked them, but I knew an Arab Communist member of the PFLP who really hated the Bund.

Terminology wise, ….Rather than being an anti Semite, which is a very misleading title, I am anti Jewish (ness), I oppose Jewish ideology right left and centre.I do not have a problem with Jewish people and I tend to agree that a Jewish cab driver or my Jewish band members have nothing to do with the crime committed in the name of the Jews. I refrain from criticising Judaism, though I expose some inhuman narratives within the biblical context. It is actually the current implementation of these thoughts that is so devastating. It is the transformation of the Bible from a spiritual text into a land registry which I oppose. Jewish nationalists in the Left and in the Right are complicit in a similar racially orientated tribal activism. This applies to Zionists and to the Bund!!! The crime of Zionism is well established. The problem with the Bund had been explored by Lenin in 1903. The relevant text are available on line. I am actually far from being an opponent of Marxism or Bolshevism. I do differentiate between ideology and praxis. I can live in peace with Marxism as long as it promotes brotherhood and universal thought. I believe that materialism and class politics are far too restricting. Both are failing to explore the complexity of humanity and human landscape. The danger with left ideology is the product of some dogmatic tendencies. I believe in humanity, I believe in the spirit of freedom, I believe in philosophy as in love of wisdom. I do not find much of it in the institutional left discourse. Thus, I operate alone, and I am rather happy.

Israel Has No Right To Exist

This is an interesting comment about Israel from a recent post. The commenter is a Macedonian.

We had a fundraising meal for Gaza last night in my home city in Macedonia…I brought a very big dish of onion bhajis containing Jordanian spices as well as the usual cumin, fresh root ginger and fresh chillies, but most of the food was done by local Muslim women…and we raised many thousands of denars, maybe over ten thousand. Betty Hunter of the PSC (she sounds like a Geordie) was down to give the keynote speech. She’d made the trip specially by air to see us, and we provided an interpreter. Good speech, but personally (although I do it myself at times) I don’t think we should fuck around anymore calling for a Palestinian state as she did, since that is clearly not going to happen in the country of the blind. At least the first generation of Zionists were brutally honest. Israel was all about conquest. Now Lieberman is here and expressing the inner essence of Zionism once more: no compromise with the Palestinians, making a Hiroshima of Gaza is conceivable (Betty alluded to it last night), and a Palestinian state is absolutely out of the question. We should really thank Lieberman for being so clear. A Palestinian state is a nemesis for Israel, since it represents an end to expansionism and the expropriation of Palestinian land. It would be more realistic in these circumstances to make no bones about calling for the fall of the Israeli state, since it is clear, to me at least, that that way lies the only hope of justice for the Palestinians. This view comes up against “Israel’s right to exist” and fear of offending Jews. It is up to Jews if they want to support the genocide their Torah so clearly advocates. I think it would be more honest, rather than cowardly and politically expedient, to say that Israel does not have a right to exist. Not only does it not have the right, but demography, the lack of enthusiasm of Israeli Jews themselves for their Mediterranean stetl, and the world awakening in favour of the Palestinians do not make its survival longer than a generation likely or tenable…

I have always thought that the 2 state solution was pretty ridiculous. It made about as much sense as giving the South African Whites 8 No state anywhere has any kind of permanent right to exist. Maybe nations have a right to exist, but states? Why? Did Nazi Germany have a right to exist, Tojo’s Japan, Mussolini’s Italy? I say no. Israel has about as much right to exist as Apartheid South Africa, and we all know what happened to that place. The whole argument about “right to exist” is a fake argument. Why does any crappy, apartheid, racist state anywhere on Earth have some permanent right to exist? I’d be happy to see every one of them toppled. His points about the early Zionists at least being honest hit right on the head. Of course they were. There is something to be said about clearing the air, getting all the crap out of the way and being honest about one’s position. The current generations of serial liars, obfuscators and prevaricators is particularly disturbing, but it’s a good scam, because they’re fooled millions all over the world. The Palestinians and other Arabs have seen through this bullshit ideological saran wrap from Day One. In that sense, the Lieberman’s et al are a breath of fresh air. They’re merely exposing the true (and logical) face of Zionism for all to see. Hear hear.

Is Intelligence Important to Humans?

In the comments section, Patrick comments:

The notion that there is an evolutionary ladder is incorrect. There is no superior or inferior life-form. It is impossible for any particular race to be more evolved than any other race because there is no degree which to measure evolution and any measuring system someone could invent would be flawed.

And Lafayette Sennacherib responds:

I wonder if Patrick is making the point Noam Chomsky made in the opening pages of ‘ Hegemony or Survival’: that there is little evidence that ‘intelligence’ is an advantage by the evolutionary criteria of survival and increase of the species. Chomsky points out that, by these criteria, the cockroach is the most successful product of evolution.

Well, I would certainly agree with that, but that argument strikes me as senseless. Having dealt with smart humans and idiots and lots of humans in between, I am absolutely certain that intelligence is very important for humans. I don’t even like to hang around with people who have fairly low IQ’s very much. I often do it and I’ve been doing it all my life, but I usually regret it and it has not been very satisfying over a lifetime. Not only are they boring, but the dumber someone is, typically the lower their morals are. Dumb people cheat you, use you, rip you off, get you in trouble, start fights with you, vandalize your property, go through your stuff, damage your property, involve you in crimes, go to jail, beat their SO’s, drink and take dope to excess, eat worse than any wild mammal alive, refuse to exercise, and just generally act like retarded barn animals. When you challenge them on the damage or ripoffs they are doing to you and your stuff, they refuse to clean up their messes, pay you back, or even learn. This last is so important. Dumb people just seem to be unable to learn too many things. I think it is probably because they do not want to, because they can definitely learn stuff they think is important. On the moral level, as far as I am concerned, way too many dumb people are just scumbags. Smarter people are generally way more morally evolved, at least in terms of having a personal relationship with them. When you have whole neighborhoods full of dumbasses like this, there is a noticeable decline in many areas. Not only in the finer areas of life such as love of learning, art, culture, and whatnot, but in other areas. Dumb people are ill-mannered and rude. They don’t keep promises. They borrow money and never pay it back. They have poor emotional control, scream and yell, fight, throw property around and get the cops called on them. They are always getting involved in retarded physical accidents due to their heedlessness. Whole communities of dummies show a decline that is clear to anyone with open eyes to see. Prostitution, pimping, petty crime, gangs, graffiti, drugs, drug dealing, alcoholism and drug addiction, domestic violence, trash, trashed-out cars, homes and neighborhoods, wrecked schools, these are just some of the obvious evidences of decline. If you could gauge the mean IQ of a city and watch its IQ decline, you would see all of these negative things increase. If you could raise the IQ of the city, you would see all of these things decrease and the more refined and civilized aspects of existence increase in tandem. The notion that intelligence is irrelevant to the human species, either in micro or macro form, is seriously absurd. In contrast to the racialists, I do not believe that IQ is fixed by our genes. Otherwise, our IQ’s would not have increased 22 points since 1930. Because IQ can be increased, I have hope that the ill effects on civilizational style of human low intelligence can be ameliorated. The fact that I am so convinced of the ill effects on our species of low IQ is one of the reasons that I am so serious about raising human IQ.

White Nationalists Dislike or Hate All Non-Whites

They don’t like non-Whites. Period. Bottom line. They either dislike or hate all non-Whites, and in many cases they either dislike or hate a very large number of Whites who don’t fit their insanity about who real White people are. I checked this out with an open mind. The WN’s insisted that they don’t hate non-Whites, they just love Whites. Fine. I checked it out assuming they were correct about only loving their own and put the theory to the test. It’s not true. The only exceptions are some moderate WN’s who are Asiaphiles. For instance, Jared Taylor really likes NE Asians, especially Japanese. There are some other commenters on Amren who are married to Asians. One is married to a Japanese and another to a Filipina. Those guys catch a lot of crap for their “treason.” Stormfront doesn’t even allow you to have non-White friends. Armenians were banned and 300 pro-White Armenians were tossed off the site. Your Whiteness has to be pure. They let you have a little bit of Amerindian in you, but you need to shut up about it. But the more moderate ones are just the same. The people who comment there just flat out don’t like any non-Whites period! Even going beyond that, what motivates a White separatist? Obviously, these people despise non-Whites so much that they don’t want to have anything to do with them whatsoever. They want to separate from them totally. That right there really implies that they don’t like them. WN means you can’t date or marry non-Whites. Really, the only way to enforce that, as the Jews showed for centuries, is preach hatred of the Other. That’s the only way you can keep your guys especially from putting their mitts on the women of the Other. I’d like to point out further that the vast majority of WN’s are Nordicists from what I can tell. They simply dislike Southern Europeans and they insist that they are non-Whites. They dislike Southern Italians, Yugoslavs, Spaniards, Portuguese and Greeks. They really can’t stand Turks and Armenians. And they deny that obviously extremely White folks like Armenians, Georgians, Azerbaijanis, White Turks, White Berbers, Kurds, Iranians, Lebanese, White Pakistanis, White Afghans, Assyrians and Arab Christians are White. It doesn’t really make sense on any level. I will say that incredibly Stormfront is much better in this regard as they have sections for Yugoslavs, Portuguese, Spaniards, all Italians, and Greeks. It’s pretty sorry movement when Stormfront is the normal people.

Sample From a Race Denier

From this post, New Cavalli-Sforza Gene Maps, a comment from a race-denier:

Why do you categorize people like this? Race is purely a social concept not a scientific concept. I hate to see people categorize people like this, it makes no sense to do so. We all have the same 46 chromosomes.

Nothing makes us different than skin, hair and facial features. But how important is that? They are all beautiful in their own way. It is ridiculous to keep putting people in groups. Africa is a continent full of people with different facial features, hair, and skin. But all is beautiful.

Just like Europe has people with different skin, eyes, and hair. I am tired of reading about Africa and seeing people trying to separate everyone due to looks. This is 2009!

Well, I must say, I object to this whole line of thinking. Why don’t we stop putting animals and plants and languages into groups, after all, separating them out just makes us want to kill some plants as weeds and cultivate others for crops? Some animals are varmints to be exterminated, while others are cuddly and furry house pets. That’s so discriminatory. Truth is they are all just critters. Why separate out languages anyway? It just makes people fight. Look at the Sri Lankan Civil War that Obama, the World Media and the World Elite are all so ecstatic about since the fascists got the upper hand. In a huge way, this was a war over language. Let’s quit dividing up all these languages and just say that we all speak Human. This nonsense was already getting started back in 1962 with the big fight over Carleton Coon and Carleton Putnam. They were both upper-class Northeastern bluebloods, one a professor of history, the other a businessman and author. Putnam plunged headlong into the Civil Rights controversies raging at the time, while Coon coolly stayed out of it all. At this time there was a war going on between two schools of anthropology, the Boas School and the anti-Boas school. The Boas School had the upper hand. Boas was Jewish and had for some time been pushing a strong anti-racist and even race-denying, “culture is everything” line. Margaret Mead was an acolyte, played for a sucker by canny Oceanians and hung to dry later on humiliating winds of ridicule for her silly meanderings about culture in the South Seas. This was 1962 and anthropologists had good reasons for being Boasians. Eugenicists and racialists had just about blown up the world while massacring millions on the grounds that they were genetic defectives. The Civil Rights Wars were raging in the South. At this time, Carleton Putnam wrote a book called Race and Reason, a horrid racist tract that is appallingly revered by White nationalists to this day as one of their Bibles. This blatantly White Supremacist diatribe was distributed widely in Southern schools were teachers were forced to teach it to K-12 kids as a mandatory syllabus. Its premise: Blacks were inferior, there was nothing to be done about it, they were uncivilizable and did not deserve equal rights, and therefore, segregation was proper. The deeper line, not explicitly stated, was that integration would eventually so result in a mingling of the two races in the South that the feared specter of miscegenation would raise its head. Blacks and Whites would so interbreed that the result would destroy the Great Southern White Culture. It sounds retarded to most sane Americans nowadays, but White nationalists, believe it or not, still talk like 1962. In this environment, the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA) was holding regular meetings, and segregation was often discussed. The segregationists had enlisted a number of racist scientists to advocate that Blacks did not deserve rights equal to Whites. Segregationists like Putnam felt that Boas and his fellow Jewish scientists (mostly Communists, according to him – Putnam was enchanted by the Nazi-like Commie = Jew line) had perverted science in favor of an “equalitarian” agenda that was blatantly anti-scientific. In particular, Putnam hated social anthropologists. He expected that Science Guys like physical anthropologists and geneticists would better help the segregationists cause. But these folks wanted no part of the segregationist cause either. In 1961, the AAPA held a meeting where they denounced Race and Reason and the uses to which Southern segregationists were putting it. Carleton Coon was president of the AAPA had been carrying on a surreptitious conversation with Putnam for a year or two. In outrage, Coon resigned as head of the AAPA. Later, Coon published The Origin of the Races. It did not get a good reception, and segregationists used it to further their cause. Coon’s theory was opposed to the current Out of Africa model, and suggested all five races – Khoisan, Bantuoid, Caucasian, Asian and Australoid, had all evolved from separate Homo Erectus types over many hundreds of thousands of years. Coon concluded that Blacks were 200,000 years behind Whites in evolution. This theory has now been proven to be incorrect, and science had shown the all modern humans came out of Africa in the past 70,000 years. And most of the major races are less than 12,000 years old. Nevertheless, Coon did some great work in physical anthropology. He delineated a race called the White Race or Caucasian Race that included Europe, Russia, the Caucasus, Arabia, the whiter parts of North Africa, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. He did aver that there were what he called Australoid types in India who were not White. As a Pan-Aryanist or Pan-Caucasianist, I appreciate his reasonable boundary-marking of our people. The AAPA issued some silly resolutions back in those days, and they were well on the road to race denial. You would think we would have made some sensible progress in almost 50 years, but we’ve only gone further into dumbass race denial. For such a supposedly smart species of critter, that’s pretty discouraging.

References

Jackson, Jr., John P. 2001. ‘In Ways Unacademical’: The Reception of Carleton S. Coon’s The Origin of Races. Journal of the History of Biology 34: 247–285.

“A Plea to True Believers Everywhere," by Alpha Unit

This is the latest piece by our bad ass Black female guest author Alpha Unit. In it, she seems to be noting that White racists are surprisingly cowardly for all their tough talk. They talk pretty hard on the Internet, but when they come face to face with real Blacks, they are bafflingly meek. Alpha says if you’re gonna talk the talk, you need to walk the walk. Throw it down, tough talking White boys!

A Plea to True Believers Everywhere

by Alpha Unit

Evidently there are hardcore, bad-ass White racists out there who drip with contempt for Black people and yet are somehow able to stop dripping when they are in the presence of actual Blacks. But why? Any hardcore, bad-ass racist worth his salt should be willing to be perpetually hardcore and bad-ass, especially in the presence of Blacks. And yet, if you go into any public place, you seldom see Black people in altercations with hardcore, bad-ass racists. I guess it’s because hardcore, bad-ass racists have an astounding ability to conceal their toughness. Except on the Internet. I tell you, if any Black person anywhere on earth were to read what is being said about him on the Internet, he would be terrified to leave his room. If he were to know just how deeply he is despised, he would be panic-stricken at the sight of a White man. Because, you see, that White man minding his own business in public may not be as harmless as he seems. He might be a member of a secret society of hardcore, bad-ass racists who are going on the Internet and being really mean to Black people. It’s easy to be deceived by these Clark Kents. They can be civil, friendly, and even kind to Black people. But if you could see what they become once they are home, relaxed, and in front of their keyboards, you would shudder at what emerges. A White-Race Superman reveals himself, coming to the rescue of Whites everywhere who are sick and fucking tired of these lowlife, menacing Blacks and their brainwashed White enablers. I would appeal to these heroes to come out of the closet. I don’t think they should shy away in the least from making their case to the actual bad guys. What they should do is go to the nearest Black neighborhood or to any place they see a gathering of Blacks–preferably a gathering of big, dark-skinned Black males. They should then proceed to inform these Black people of how wretched the Black race is, how utterly stupid and oversexed and irresponsible Blacks are. They mustn’t hesitate to use racial epithets. (After all, Black people call themselves the n-word, don’t they?) I promise you, these Black people will be so horrified at what they are hearing, so ashamed at coming face to face with the truth about their condition, that they will lower their heads and slink off to plan their one-way trips back to Africa. I strongly urge any hardcore, bad-ass racist out there to try it. He needn’t worry about the one or two in the group who might try to argue with him. The mean IQ for Blacks is an entire standard deviation below the White mean. So it is unlikely that their response will be coherent. It is likely to be nonverbal in its entirety.

Lawrence Auster's View From the Right

For the first time, I am reading Lawrence Auster’s View From the Right. There is actually much interesting material here, and I am stunned to note that I agree with much of what he says. OMG! Does this mean that I am a closet reactionary? Dubious. Auster is a racialist and paleocon. He hates modern feminism, multiculturalism, political correctness, illegal immigration, the whole insipid nine yards of Kool-Aid. In other words, when it comes to the insanity of the modern Western Left, he thinks like a sane human being instead of some weird programmed PC cyborg. For daring to think like a normal human, his fellow rightists, the neocons at Little Green Fascists, I mean Little Green Footballs, call him a NAZI. Truth is, Auster is by no means a Nazi. Auster is Jewish, and contrary to the endless lies of most Jews, very few even self-hating Jews are actual Nazis. I figure your average Jewish self-hater would walk a mile to help a fellow Jew with a broken toenail. So much for Jewish “self-hatred.” Ethnocentrism runs deep in the hyperethnocentric culture of Jews, and Jewish culture takes a bite out of you that you never get back. As we might expect, he’s a Zionist (that’s the Jewish part that he can never shake loose no matter how many times he goes to church), and a pretty nasty one too (once again rational considering his Far Right leanings). But it all makes sense considering his anti-Black racism and his sympathy for White separatism. What’s Zionism but White Nationalism for Jews? He’s just expanding his Zionist racism against Palestinians towards additional Others, like Blacks, a logical progression. Anyway, Auster’s not about to heap it on the Jews. He’s basically a White nationalist, but he’s always unloading on the rest of them for their incessant (And moronic!) anti-Semitism. He’s recently hinted at White separatist sentiments, a degeneration typical of most all afflicted with White Nationalism Disease at some point or other. He’s widely hated by the anti-Semites in the movement for not fessing up to the devious role da evil Joooz have played in forcing poor innocent Whites to act like masochistic and suicidal dumbfucks, but that’s to be expected. Much of interest here. Lots on Black crime! How I do love Black crime! I especially love the lurid and truly evil kind where the hot young and of course eternally innocent White chick goes off with the more or less societally acceptable Black dude but then ends up murdered in the most horrible and despicable way by the savage Black animal masquerading as upstanding member of society. WN’s do have a nice take on this. The media ignores Black crime. Especially the most inflammatory Black crime of all, where the, you know, savage, ape, jungle, etc. Black missing link dudes kill hot White chicks in the most evillest and Ted Bundiest of ways. It’s sick, it’s fucked up, it’s sets box office records. It’s so horrible and awful, please give us some more. The media, like, buries that stuff. I guess for fear of mass race riots. The WN’s are right, and this mini-epidemic is indeed buried. Where WN’s are wrong and stupid as always is in thinking these animals only massacre White chicks. For every White girl cruelly murdered, probably 5-10 Black chicks are done in, often in an equally sadistic manner. But no one cares about Black females who die. They were invisible alive, so they are invisible dead, and their last terrifying moments are worthy of no more than a passing sigh before we Whites move on. Auster has an interesting take on all this. Hot young White chicks are massacred by Black psychopaths because they are ho’s who stay out late unchaperoned and drink in bars and stuff. And, I guess, walk alone on the streets at 4 AM and other shameless ho-like stuff. Yeah. I don’t understand this. Most White guys think the modern trend of young White women to act like ho’s is admirable in a utilitarian sense. But Auster is old, and I guess he can’t get it up anymore? Cool article on how the Professional Liars in the meatpacking industry ruined a bunch of great paying jobs by hiring mostly illegals and destroying the unions. Go capitalism go! Oh, and wages dropped 5 ICE raided the scumbuckets, and they had to hire White people and stuff. Turns out…whoa! There were lines around the block, and they stayed in business. Real Americans lined up 5 people strong for every opening for an illegal who got canned. Despite all his noble obeisance to sanity, Auster wrecks it all by being an uber-dumbfuck when it comes to religion. Judaism is sort of horrible as a religion, but at least you get to be Chosen. There’s moronic stuff in there, but it’s all subject to Talmudic hedging, denying, second-guessing and backtracking. And you can always be Reform and believe in nothing but Chosenness and some God you can’t even define in 500 words or less. So this brainy Jew leaves the ultimate intellectual’s religion behind for Christianity. No problem I guess. But like a dumbass, he flies headlong into the stupidest Christianity of all, the fundamentalist Protestant kind. Effect is like some high-IQ guy who streaks down the street every day. One of his obsessions on here is how Evolution never happened. If that you’re that dumb, you’re like someone with a weird sexual fetish. Keep it to yourself for Chrissake. But instead Auster spends half of his blog telling us how Evolution never happened. Which is like dancing around in the street and screaming what a dumbass you are. He also spends a disturbing amount of of time casting doubt on the Out of Africa Theory, suggesting that the human races actually began separating many hundreds of thousands of years ago. He also suggests that we bred in with Erectus. These views are controversial to say the least. However, while not subscribing to the hard theory, I would suggest that some aspects of this theory may be possible: Scenario 3 (which I present as Coon’s theory):

Erectus 1 evolved into Race 1, Homo sapiens. This Homo sapiens migrated to the territories of the four other Erectus types and interbred with them. This produced four new sapiens strains–each containing “a bit of Erectus.”

He quotes blogger Mathilda who has made such things into her raison de etre. Mathilda is an otherwise great blogger, but on these issues, she is simply insane. Mathilda also spends a very large amount of time arguing that Southern Europeans have little or no Black in them. This, along with opposition to Out of Africa and suggestions that racial differences are hundreds of thousands of years old, is creepy. Almost everyone arguing along these lines is some kind of a White racist, usually a virulent one. Matilda insists she is not one, but I’m very worried about her obsessions. That Auster buys into all of this, along with Auster’s hostility towards Blacks, amply displayed on his blog, suggests that not only is Auster a racist, but he is one Hell of a nasty one too. Auster is also afflicted with most of the usual trad Conservative obsessions. He hates homosexuals, and suggests that they are mentally ill. I don’t hate gays at all, but I have one gay male friend who thinks gays are screwed up in the head. I don’t think it’s homosexuality that makes them nutty but instead it’s acting feminine. Acting feminine is not normal, and men who act feminine are going to be punished by nature for this transgression by being unhappy and a little crazy. He also really hates Islam. I have major issues about Islam myself, but he takes this way too far, suggesting that Muslims should be removed from the US. He says we need to attack Iran, and we also need to attack Pakistan now that the nukes are in danger of being seized by the Taliban. He doesn’t think the Pope should be reconciling with Islam, which is just retarded of Auster. The less you dialogue with Muslims, the angrier they get. That’s why the loss of the Arab Christians is so tragic. The Arab Christians are our link between the Christian West and the Muslim Arab World. Anyway, all around interesting read from a weird but sui generis mind.

A Meeting With an Executive of Jewish Central Control, Inc.

I recently met a multimillionaire Canadian who is an heir to a Jewish media fortune (mostly radio). He shall remain nameless. His family also has close connections with the Bronfmans (another huge name in International Jewry due to the Seagrams fortune). For all intents and purposes, the guy is an embodiment of World Jewry, Jewry, the Jew Mafia as commenter heg calls it, or whatever euphemism you want. I spoke with the guy for a while and I felt he was a good, progressive, liberal, anti-racist type guy. He had a great personality and he was a really nice guy. He didn’t hate Gentiles or even Arabs at all. He was confused over Zionism and agreed that it was racism and apartheid, but he still sort of thought Jews might need it. He had read my blog (which many Jews call anti-Semitic) extensively, and he said it was fascinating. He laughed and agreed with me that the Jewish-Israeli Lobby had the US government by the balls. He also said that the US media was heavily Jewish. The Canadian media is too (Israel Asper has grabbed 6 About money, he mentioned that his empire was starting to get into porn in the hotels (showing porn movies on closed circuit TV in the hotel rooms) they had an interest in. He didn’t care about porn himself, but he said it was a big seller and people really wanted it. He didn’t seem to be promoting porn in order to dissolve the White West. He was just a guy trying to make a buck. I’ve been reading critiques of the Jews for ages. Some try to hedge their bets and say they don’t hate all Jews, they only hate this Jewish elite, Jewry, Organized Jewry, International Jewry, the Jew mafia or whatever. This guy was obviously a prime specimen of all of those things. He didn’t seem to embody any of the charges against this group of people. The guy was just really normal. He was just like me, even politically. Other than the fact that he was a multimillionaire, he was practically a Commie. If that’s what this horrible World Jewry thing looks like, I don’t understand why people are so worried.

Ethnocentrism, Racial Supremacism and Zionism

It really is a tricky subject, is it not? All humans are logically and normally ethnocentric. I said before that I have met folks all over the world, and they were all ethnocentric. But it is not just that! Many of them, especially in the 3rd World, are not only ethnocentric in that they love their race, ethnicity, tribe, nation, etc. but they really do think that their they are better than everybody else! This often takes the form that they are center of something or other. Hindu nationalists think that much of world civilization started with them. Chinese nationalists say that all four winds start in China, the Middle Kingdom, meaning it is the center of the world. Japan was the Land of the Rising Sun, the place where the sun itself actually came up and warmed the world. I talked to a Moroccan once who informed me that first of all, he was a Berber, not a Moroccan, but also that the Berbers had started all of modern man’s civilization. Vietnamese nationalists say that they are center of East Asia. It’s almost as if the ethnic nationalist sees themselves as like the Sun in the solar system, and other nations as revolving around them. I used to work with American Indians. There is no Amerindian solidarity, not even in the US. They dislike each other too much for that, and they care nothing about the Indians across the border. Dislike is too strong of a word. Indifference is better. The others are like they are almost not really there. Or if they are, they are not on the same level. It’s almost as if they are like those deer out in the fields, nice to look at, but not on the same level as fellow humans. They only cared about their own tribe! They were indifferent to the other tribes around them, and they were overtly hostile to some of them. I talked to some folks in the surrounding tribes and they were the same way. Now and again I would mention something about some other Indian tribe. The tribal members I was working with would act kind of bored, like this was not important. “Yeah,” they would say. “But that’s not us. They’re not us.” On the other hand, ethnocentrism can and does lead to supremacism, but most of the naturally ethnocentric folks I have met from other places were not all that racist. If they were, they would not have even been talking to me. One may logically ask what is wrong with supremacism. If you think about it logically, ethnic or racial supremacism taken to its logical end can lead only to expulsion, apartheid or separation of the outgroups or Other. Apartheid meaning any kind of ethnically restrictive legislation or practice including Jim Crow. Much of the polemic against the Jews is that they are some sort of supremacists. It’s true, but more for the less assimilated. The less assimilated the Jew, the more tribal, supremacist and bigoted they are. Anti-Semites act like this is something special about Jews, a uniquely evil fact. Yet when you spend time with other ethnic supremacists you realize how much their supremacism is simply a mirror of that of the Jews. So Jewish chauvinism, supremacism and racism is simply the human variety. What’s interesting is this statement: If you think about it logically, ethnic or racial supremacism taken to its logical end can lead only to expulsion, apartheid or separation of the outgroups or Other. And what exactly has happened in Israel? Precisely this, no? Israel is the racial ethnocentrism and supremacism of the Jews, codified into a political movement (Zionism) and taken to its logical and probably unavoidable conclusion. Things are not as hard to figure out as they seem sometimes.

Metal Gear on the Jews and Anti-Semitism

This seems to be a pretty nice take on the Jewish Question that ought to satisfy most of the sane people for the time being. Metal Gear is a friend of mine. Our politics differ in a number of ways, but although we are both ethnocentric White men (he is part Jewish too) he isn’t really a racist at all, though I would call him some sort of a radical nationalist. He runs a very interesting website for big government loving statists like me. There are all sorts of nefarious characters lurking about there, but mostly what they have in common is a love of Big Gubmint. There are Stalinists and fascists, and they seem to get along happily under a big government tent, though I assure you that they have some very strong disagreements. In particular, the Stalinists strongly object to a lot of the fascist program. I hate to flog a dead horse and play into reactionary and libertarian BS, but let’s face it, Communism and fascism are both forms of Big Government. They are both uber-statist solutions and as such are the polar opposites from anarchism and libertarianism. One can definitely draw a useful dichotomy there. Anyway, it’s a pretty interesting website. Name? Free Media Productions. I’m on the roster of writers, but I don’t write much. It’s mostly for extremists who have been rejected or ejected from much of the rest of the Net or blogosphere so they set up this free speech zone where everyone can say outrageous stuff. It’s odd to have fascists and Stalinists under the same tent, but I’ve seen stranger things. Whoa, check out My Father, Enver Hoxha. Haha. Something for everyone.

Schipper on Racialism, Ethnocentrism, Nationalism and Decolonization

James Schipper has always proven to be one of the most thoughtful commenters on this blog. He chooses his words carefully, and as EB White suggests in the Manual of Style, scarcely wastes a word. This comment was in response to the Mystery Solved post, and it is so great I am going to post it. I am curious why he calls White nationalists raci(al)sts. I assume he is trying to say that they are at once racists and racialists. That makes sense to me. WN’s are continuously saying that they don’t hate any other races; all they do is love their own kind. If that were the case, perhaps we would not mind. But the non-racist WN is a rare bird indeed. I know one fellow who might qualify, but he refers to Whites breeding with Blacks as “cross-species breeding.” That’s seems like a pretty racist thing to say. I will admit that some WN are more racist than others. I’ve met a couple that don’t seem to dislike Blacks, but that is rare. A fair number of WN are Asiaphiles, but they are always being denounced as traitors. Even Jared Taylor is something of an Asiaphile. Some have Amerindian in them, but they’re constantly being threatened with being thrown out of the movement. In short, the vast majority of them are quite racist individuals, and many are savage racists. That’s just a fact. Schipper suggests that ethnocentrism has nothing to do with race, but I even feel that Punjabis and Yemenis are members of my family, albeit distant cousins, yet Mexican Indians and Hmong are not. Am I mentally ill for thinking this way? I’ve recently expanded my view of my ethnic group to include most Caucasians, and it feels nice to include 1.5 million+ humans in your ethnic family. As far as the Mexican Indians and the Hmong, well, there’s friends and theirs family, right? Oaxacans and Hmong may be friends, but they can’t be family. It seems to me that a narrow ethnocentrism that focuses only on one’s nation leaves something to be desired. If I were a Slovenian, I would rather be a Pan-Caucasianist and count 1.5 billion relatives than be a Slovenian nationalist and only count 2 million. Schipper’s explanation of the rejection of White ethnocentrism as a rejection of White colonialism is an excellent one, and his summary of the crimes of White colonialism is chilling. I think most other ethnic groups would have done the same thing had they had the means, and they probably would have been crueler about it, but that doesn’t let us off the hook. One of the disgusting things about White nationalists is that they usually cheer on the worst excesses of White colonialism and imperialism. Either they think it was a great idea, or they can’t admit they were ever wrong. Anyway, it’s stomach-wrenching. His analysis of Hitler is excellent also, and I agree it’s bizarre to say that Jews aren’t White. Of course they are White! I agree that Hispanic is a nonsensical category. Around here, a huge number of them have lots of White ancestry. Many are anywhere from mostly White to about as White as I am. The internal racism of US Hispanics is much exaggerated by WN’s. WN’s insist that Hispanics are obsessed with race and love to be White. Truth is most of them don’t seem to care, and the whole subject is pretty touchy. The really White ones, if they have some money, are often proud to admit to Spanish ancestry, and you often hear Hispanics bragging about having ancestors with blue eyes or blond hair. When my Mexican-American neighbor was growing up in Morenci, Arizona in the 1930’s and 1940’s, she said whenever a baby was born, the first thing everyone asked was, “Que blanco?” “How White is it?” Among this particular group of rural working class SW US Hispanics in that period, Whiter skin was valued like gold. Nowadays, brown pride is all the rage. In the bars and all over town, you see Whiter Hispanics hanging out with, befriending, dating and marrying darker ones. At the lower end of the income spectrum, no one cares. Maybe at the higher end, people get touchier, but even there, you don’t hear about it much. I would surely consider any mostly-White Hispanic to be part of my family, and there are millions like this. Asians are not really a race, it is true, but there is a huge Macro-Asian race, along with smaller NE Asian and SE Asian races. I’d love to see Pan-Asianism take hold in Asians. If they could embrace 2 million or so humans as family members, what an interesting world it could be. Unfortunately, they probably dislike each other too much to do that. I myself never cared about White ethnocentrism until I moved to a majority-Hispanic town and was an obvious minority. Since then I’ve embraced White ethnocentrism thoroughly, and I feel so much better than in my previous deracinated state. Ethnocentrism of any kind definitely feels good, and deracination feels like crap. It’s like the difference between getting a religion and being an atheist. Even if atheism is scientifically rational, it surely feels terrible. Schipper: Let’s not confuse race and ethnicity. WN are not ethnocentrists, they are raci(al)sts. Of course, ethnocentricity and racialism are psychologically similar because in both cases our own group is put first and at the top. In one case it is our ethnic group and in the other it is our race. I’m white and so are Vladimir Putin, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Silvio Berlusconi, but I certainly don’t think that they belong to the same ethnic group as I do. Ethnocentrism is indeed very common, but it doesn’t have anything to do with race. Until recently, Europe was an all-white continent and also filled with various ethnocentrics and chauvinists. The French liked to feel superior to the less civilized boches, the British felt superior to crazy continentals, the Poles thought that they were so much better than those half-Asian Russians, etc. Even smaller nations could be pretty chauvinistic. I have met plenty of smug ethnocentric Dutchmen. However, none of this had anything to do with race. White racism existed mainly in Western Europe and it arose in a colonial context. Since 1492, white racism became one of the ideological underpinnings of colonialism. By 1939, the white racists from Western Europe had conquered the entire Western Hemisphere, nearly all of Africa, Oceania and large chunks of Asia. Of course, not all colonialists were believers in white racial superiority. Some believed in the superiority of the Christian religion or the cultural superiority of Europe. It is this close relation between white racism and colonialism that made it contaminated. To some extent, the relentless denunciation of white racism is a reaction to colonialism. Decolonization was indeed necessary because it was a system of domination and privilege. Attacks on white racism are a form of mental decolonization. As to Hitler, he was a combination of anti-Semite, Aryan racist and German nationalist. Since Jews are white and most whites are not Aryans, it is quite wrong to see Hitler as a practitioner of white nationalism. All of Hitler’s crimes were committed against other whites. I don’t listen to people who tell me that Jews aren’t whites. Racism and nationalism are antithetical in multiracial countries. WNs in the US should feel more affinity with Russians, Frenchmen, Georgians, Greeks, Serbs, etc than with fellow American who are of a different color. People who put race above the nation are bad nationalists. WN in the US are bad Americans for the same reason that Catholics in the US who feel more affinity with Polish, Portuguese and Argentinian Catholics than with Americans of a different religion are bad Americans. If Jared Taylor feels more affinity with me than with Obama, then he is not a very good American Nationalists worthy of the name put their national identity above their religious, racial or other identities. WNs don’t do that. They don’t deserve to be called nationalists and should start calling themselves raci(al)sts. As to Hispanics, they are a totally artificial category of the American government. In Latin America, people see themselves as Colombians, Chileans, Cubans, Argentinians, etc, or racially they see themselves as white, Amerindian, black, mestizo, etc. More educated Latin Americans may feel part of a broader Latin American nation, but Latin Americans who see themselves as members of a Hispanic race don’t exist. That only happens after they arrive in the US. Do you really believe that Néstor Kirchner, Álvaro Uribe, Fidel Castro or Hugo Chávez see themselves as members of a mythical Hispanic race? Asians aren’t a race either. They certainly aren’t an ethnic group, even if we confine the term Asian to East Asians. It is just as absurd to believe that Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos and Thais will all see themselves as part of one happy East Asian family as it is to believe that Poles, Swedes, Germans and Spaniards see themselves as members of one European nation. Just because people have the same type of eyes doesn’t make them one race or one ethnicity. I’m indulgent toward mild ethnocentricity as long as it is not combined with gratuitous hostility toward members of other ethnic groups. Somebody once said that the best friend is someone who is slightly inferior. Since he is only slightly inferior, we can feel affinity with him while still enjoying the sinful pleasure of feeling superior. Maybe it is the same with many ethnocentrics. They like to feel superior but also to be friends with people who aren’t co-ethnics.

Mystery Solved

One thing has never made sense to me. I’ve known people all over the world. They tend to have one thing in common. They’re all ethnocentric. They all love some combination of their race, ethnicity, tribe, nation or culture. They tend to think their culture is better than anyone else’s, and they probably think their people are better than anyone else too. At PC Anti-White Brainwash University where I recently obtained a Master’s Degree, a liberal professor actually told me that this is normal. We all think we’re better than everyone else. It’s probably genetic and left over from our tribal past. At the same time, most folks I have met like people from the other races, ethnicities, tribes and nations too. They are willing to make friends with them, work with them, live with them and in many cases even date or marry them. This seems to be the natural way of humans, even though it’s contradictory. We all sort of think we’re better, but we still like the other people enough to get along with them and maybe even fall in love with them. This is probably a leftover from our tribal past too, since tribes that would not outbreed probably inbred to the point of going extinct. Anyway, it adds up to the kind of healthy ethnocentrism you see in most folks on Earth. In the US, you find it in almost all Hispanics and Blacks. They’re all proud to be Hispanic or Black, yet most are not racist at all towards all non-Hispanics or non-Blacks and are willing to live with, be friends with and maybe even date or marry some of them. Problem is that with Whites, as soon as they start feeling the tiniest bit good about themselves, it seems like they go bonkers. As soon as a White person says, “I’m proud to be White,” they’re typically gone. Most Whites who say things like that are seriously racist towards most or all non-Whites, do not want to make friends with them or live around them and for sure don’t want to date or marry them. In the vast majority of cases, they wish to completely separate from them. Which begs the question. Why can’t Whites just say, “I love you,” to that White face in the mirror without turning into total racist assholes? It seems like a mystery, but there’s an easy answer. In World War 2, a serious asshole in Germany killed millions of people more or less in the name of White power. A distorted vision of White power, but White power nonetheless. Nevertheless, after WW2 in the US, White pride was pretty much still the thing, especially in the South. After the victory of the Left in the civil rights battles 40 years ago, White pride was associated not only with genocidal Austrians but also with segregationist cavemen with Mississippi drawls. With the victory of the Left came the first buds of Political Correctness which blossomed to its full bloom of idiocy that we see today. A bunch of people, lots of Jews but also plenty of liberal Gentiles, along with Blacks and even Hispanics, decided that White pride sucked. Jews thought it sucked because some maniac practically wiped them off the planet under the banner of White pride. Blacks thought it sucked because it was under the flag of White pride that they were so viciously oppressed for so long. Hispanics experienced a milder version of the same crap that Blacks did. Liberal Whites looked at all the sorry shit that White people did while shouting White pride and they said screw that. So it was that White pride in all of its manifestations was outlawed. We Whites were and are not allowed to feel good about ourselves in any way whatsoever and all statements to that effect were and are seriously punished. As in, you lost your job, your career was over. Stuff like that. In its place was substituted White apathy and White self-abasement. Whites were expected to say, “I don’t care about being White.” Or, better, they would say, “I’m White. I’m inferior. Haha,” while listening to Lou Reed singing “I Want to Be Black.” The net effect was that all the sane White people dropped their ethnocentrism. The only Whites left with the balls or craziness to say they were ethnocentric were the true racist crazies who just didn’t care. Just like when they say, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” And so another mystery is solved.

Democrat Hate Crime Bill Protects Pedophiles But Refuses to Protect The Troops

Excuse me, that should be THE TROOPS, not the troops. You know, like when you stand up and at the top of your lungs shout, “I SUPPORT THE TROOPS!” I suppose some of you may have gotten one of these alerts in your email, or seen Republican lunatics posting similar messages on blogs or whatnot. I never really knew what it meant, and never bothered to look into it either. I just found out what this is all about. It’s the usual Republican lies. I thought after losing the election and after this spate of articles from the rightwing US media about the Republican Party heading towards permanent minority status, that the Republicans would finally get more sense and more to the left and towards the center a bit. If it’s that or never win again, it seems like a no-brainer. But they’re just as insane as ever. What happened was the Dems tried to pass a Hate Crimes Bill. They pass these things from time to time, and I don’t really care. What really worries me is the Hate Speech laws that a certain type of people keep pushing. Republicans have always hated these Hate Crime bills, and I never could figure out why. The bill just says if you beat someone up for being queer, or Italian, or Black, or Catholic, etc., you get a hate crimes enhancement because not only did you beat someone up, but you did it out of some prejudice or bigotry. The Republicans’ logical attitude was that all that matters is that you kicked someone’s ass, not why you did it. By punishing the fact that no only did you do it, but you did it for some ideological purpose, you are essentially outlawing thoughts and thought-crimes. Kind of an interesting little intellectual argument there. But I don’t think that’s really why the Republicans oppose this. These are the same throwbacks who want to throw you in prison for burning a flag. These are the same clowns who put rock and roll singers on no fly lists and banned them from entering the country as a threat to national security. The same morons who keep trying to ban porn. The same dickwads who bombed the Al Jazeera offices in Baghdad and Kabul, apparently as an enemy target, then lied and said they didn’t. The same losers who set up “free speech zones” enclosed by fences and cops a long ways from wherever George Bush was speaking, since, you know, little old ladies with signposts are probably suicide bombers. Not exactly free speech buffs. So why do Republicans hate hate crime bills? Probably because theirs is the party of the White males. And a lot of White males dig beating up queers, women and minorities. So what better way to get the sexist, racist and homophobe vote all at once under the banner of free speech? Anyway, this time around, the Republicans could not stop the bill. So they stuck a poison pill in there. The bills protect as a protected class races, ethnicities, religions, nationalities and sexual orientations. If you victimize anyone with the intention of attacking them in a bigoted manner due to their being a member of a protected class, you are guilty of a hate crime. The Republicans, just to be total assholes, stuck a mega-stupid rider on the bill. It established “the troops” as a protected class! Dumb-ola! US troops are not members of a protected class. No professions are. It’s not bigotry to attack someone because they are a fireman or an electrician or are wearing a Raiders cap or a purple shirt. It’s weird, but you don’t get a hate crime enhancement for it. The Democrats, being reasonable, said, “Look, this is way lame. ‘The troops’ are not a protected class and however lamentable it is f they get attacked, it ain’t a hate crime. Instead it’s just ordinary against the law.” Why did the Republicans say “the troops” needed protecting? Because you know millions of liberal socialist Commie Democrats are swarming all over the country spitting on returning soldiers every time they see one. It’s a serious problem! So anyway, the bill got killed because the Dems said that’s too lame, no way are making “the troops” into a protected class. Get it? Evil Dems refused to protect the troops from the downpours of spittle raining down on them as soon as they come back from Southwest Asia. Dems hate the troops! That’s called part 1. There were 2 parts to this trick. For part 2, Republicans read the hate crimes bill very carefully with a magnifying glass. They found one evil sentence in there, inserted way back in 1996 or whenever the bill was first passed, that says it’s a hate crime to attack someone for their sexual orientation. Then the Republicans consulted some dictionaries and manuals and whatnot looking for stuff. Stuff like definitions. Like the diagnostic manual of the mental health professions, the DSM. Turns out that the DSM defines various weird, sick and fucked up things as sexual orientations, like bestiality, pedophilia and tasty orientations like coprophilia, urolagnia. Really those aren’t orientations; they are paraphilias, but never mind. It’s also interesting although various persons do engage in bestiality, no human has ever been recorded as having a pure bestiality orientation where they are only attracted to animals and nothing else. Anyway, the Republicans then played their hand. The sentence that protects sexual orientation means Democrats say it’s a hate crime if you beat up a pedo. Actually, the protected class is homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual or transgender (I don’t know about pre-op trannies or shemales, but I guess they are included too) At the same time, the Democrats say it’s not a hate crime to beat up “the troops.” In other words, Dems love pedos and hate the troops. Lame or what?

Shemale, heshe, she-it, pre-op or whatever the fuck you want to call em. For extra points, find three things wrong with this picture.
Shemale, heshe, she-it, pre-op or whatever the fuck you want to call em. For extra points, find three things wrong with this picture.

Support For the Tamil Tigers (LTTE)

The Tamil Tigers are about to be defeated in the conventional aspect of the war between it and the Sri Lankan fascist state. Despite all of the problems of this Tamil Sri Lankan revolutionary group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, I have always supported them. I do not support their tactics, and the shooting of innocent civilians who are trying to flee their zone of control is simply outrageous. This is part of a campaign in which the rebels have apparently forced their own civilians to be human shields. It was never going to work anyway, as the Sri Lankan fascists are ruthless. Recently, a hospital in the rebel zone had to be abandoned when it came under ruthless, multi-day shelling. Let’s not forget the death squads. The Sri Lankan fascists have always run their lovely death squads, a hallmark of most state counterinsurgency operations in the modern era, but they’re really ramped up the nastiness in the last few years. Just about any Tamil civilian can be hauled off and killed or disappeared. The Tigers took up conscription two years ago, and that made a lot of people mad. But guerrilla armies, when they get very large, often have to conscript, especially when they are losing a lot of forces in fighting. And it’s usually fairly unpopular in the areas they control. The Salvadoran FMLN did that at one point, and it wasn’t very popular with them either. No one likes a draft. The Tigers have made many additional mistakes, killing and persecuting other Tamil nationalists who did not support its cause, including other rebels, and virtually forcing Tamils to support them whether they wanted to or not. That’s not the way a nationalist revolutionary movement is supposed to operate. The problem was the megalomania of one man, Velupillai Prabhakaran, who has led the group for 30 years, bringing it from a tiny guerrilla band to a huge and feared conventional force. It was probably the going to a conventional military that defeated the LTTE, although they are really not defeated. They have lost the conventional war, but I am sure that they will take up guerrilla war. The government says that now that the LTTE is defeated, the government will start negotiations to grant the Tamils the rights and autonomy that they want. That’s a bunch of crap. That’s what the LTTE has been demanding all along. There is no reason on Earth for a victorious government to grant one single right to the defeated rebels, and they will not. That’s why they went to war in the first place, so they wouldn’t have to grant the Tamils any rights. The truth is that the Sinhalese are a bunch of fascist bastards. They’ve dominated, repressed and lorded it over the poor Tamils from Day One in that place. No wonder the Tamils want their own state, for Chrissake, who could blame them. Tamils have always been 3rd Class citizens in that place. That’s what the whole war was about. The Tamils are a minority, 1 The Tigers actually have very broad support across the Tamil community inside Sri Lanka and certainly outside Sri Lanka. I’ve known two Tamils in India, and they both supported the Tigers all the way. What’s truly sickening is the way almost every single state on Earth has cheered on the fascist Sri Lankan Sinhalese state. Other states have flooded them with guns, and I guess that’s how they won the war. The world’s international media has been cheering the fascists on, and can barely contain its glee over the defeat of the rebels. This actually points out the anarchist argument that states in general are no good. I don’t know how we get away from states, but when the chips are down, they always support the fascists among them. Just about every state on Earth opposes the right of minorities to secede. Even the most civilized states of on Earth, those inhabited by White European stock (the only states that grant minority nations succession rights) have cheered on the fascist Sri Lankans. Barack Obama, a liberal Democrat to my eyes but a socialist-Communist to the US Right, is delighted that the fascists have won. The world’s media doesn’t seem to support the right of minorities to secede either – why else are they cheering on the fascists? Statism as a fascist-like ideology is supported not only by the world’s states, as one might expect, but by the media too. And by extension, the rich and elite of the world. Which begs the question of why the elite and the media always oppose self-determination and support state fascism (in other words, the elite and the media always line up with the states), but I’m stumped. This time I’m with the anarchists, and I will leave it up to them to answer that question.

Fuck Off Israel

It’s called “ambiguity” and it’s really starting to get on my nerves. It’s been going on for 40 years and that’s way too long.

Everyone with a brain cell in their skull knows Israel has more nuclear bombs than matzo balls. The only people who won’t admit are Zionist Jews, and they’re some of the biggest liars on Earth anyway, so why listen to anything they say? Paying attention to a Jewish Zionist is like listening to the boy who cried wolf. They lie like they breathe, so why bother analyzing if what they are saying has any truth to it?

The Jewish Zionists insist, for some Realpolitik reason, that they have no nuclear weapons. Everyone knows they have like 200-300 of these things, but they won’t admit. Every other nuclear nation on Earth has admitted it (Correct?). Yet the Israeli ultra-liars won’t fess up. What’s going to happen if they admit it? Are they all going to turn into pumpkins at midnight?

The entire US (((media))) goes along with this BS charade. The entire US (((government))) does too. For example, the US recently announced the right of Israel to have its (non-confirmed) nuclear arsenal as long as one single enemy nation is threatening to develop one single nuclear weapon.

Wait a minute!

Israel gets to have 300 (actual but we won’t admit it) nukes in the case that perhaps even one of their enemies might deign to develop one single micro-nuke. Why does this make sense? Why does Israel get all nukes and its enemies don’t get any?

In the Cold War, it was acknowledged that the US and the USSR and China all had a right to arsenals as long as their enemies did. Further, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty allows all nations under threat of nuclear attack to develop their own nukes. That means, de facto, that all Arab nations and Iran, along with North Korea and Cuba, have a right to develop nuclear weapons, according to international treaty.

The special case of Israel has to do with some nonsense. Supposedly, these folks called “Muslims” are “suicidal”. They all wanna die – not just today but yesterday!

Pakistan is actually an extremely Islamist-oriented and -influenced land, yet they have never deigned to shoot a nuke at India, though they could easily do so. India would retaliate and kill millions of Pakistanis. If the Pakistani military, full of Al Qaeda and Taliban sympathizers, won’t even shoot a nuke at the infidels, why would the super-sane Muslims in Iran or the pro-West sellouts in the rest of North Africa and Arabia do so?

The whole bullshit about Israel rests on two profoundly silly notions.

First, that Israel must be able to overwhelmingly dominate all of its enemies.

Second, that all of Israel’s preposterously weak enemies are actually Samson-like Superman ready and willing to exterminate the Jewish state in single bound, stopping all the speeding bullets along the way.

This ought to be a joke for a stand-up comedian, but instead, it’s recited with dour seriousness by the entire US and media elite.

How dumb.

The story of how Israel got the bomb is most interesting. JFK was dead set against the Israeli bomb, and the Israelis and their agents in International Zionism were practically threatening to kill him over this. This has given rise to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that suggest that Israelis or their Jewish sympathizers killed JFK.

Truth is that Israel got the bomb around 1966. How? Jewish spies, working for Israel and against the US in a dual loyalty role that Jews insist that no Jew has ever played, infiltrated the US nuclear program, lifted the blueprints and documents out from under our noses, and gave them to Israel. We know their names and everything about them, but no prosecutions have ever occurred.

Israel already had the bomb by 1973, and they came very close to using it. That they were threatening to use it was one reason that Kissinger opened the arms shipment floodgates that enabled Israel to turn the war around.

Prospects For a Pro-White Movement In the US

In the comments section, Public Enemy No. 0 asks:

I guess I wonder, if AA and mass immigration aren’t going to go away, are we doomed? If not, why not?

I have my own views of what a pro-White movement would look like, or at least the sane part of it. Simply put, it would be an anti-racist pro-White movement, analogous to La Raza, MALDEF and LULA for the Hispanics and the NAACP and Urban League for the Blacks. White nationalists like to say that these are racist movements, Hispanic racists in the first place and Black racists in the second case, but I really disagree. They really are devoted to a strong anti-racism and a defense of their people against attacks and discrimination. That’s exactly what a pro-White movement ought to be. As anti-White indoctrination, anti-White hate crime and anti-White discrimination continues in the US, we will start to see more and more Whites, especially young Whites, who think this way. I’ve already seen some on the Internet. They are pro-White, but they worked for and voted for Obama and are committed to anti-racism. They aren’t into hating other races at all really, only into the defense of Whites against attacks. Most of the ones I see find non-White females attractive and are willing to date and possibly marry non-Whites. This once again is analogous to the organizations listed above, who of course care nothing about miscegenation. WN’s see anyone supporting miscegenation as lost to the cause, but the truth is, most Whites support miscegenation these days, and opposing it marks you as a Neandertal. There are several other problems facing Whites these days: Mass immigration, especially illegal immigration, especially of non-Whites, who are transforming entire communities into Little Seouls, Little Hong Kongs, Little Tijuanas and whatnot. It’s much worse that’s it’s been in recent memory. In the San Gabriel Valley, you drive for many miles and scarcely see a sign that it is in English – everything is in Chinese. When you go to downtown LA, you think that most places that look like this in the world, an American would need a passport to get into them. Many, especially illegal, immigrants are not assimilating or even trying, and many are not exactly upstanding members of society. Most White Americans are definitely upset if not outraged by the above. The solution is to advocate for a border wall, stricter enforcement of immigration laws in the states, no amnesties and a reduction in legal immigration. Probably a majority of White Americans could get behind a carefully crafted movement supporting that. Another problem is anti-White propaganda. A friend is a freshman at a California university. All new students must take “Multicultural Studies.” My friend is a Communist, but he is still White, and he hates this syllabus. He calls it “Anti-White Studies”. I’ve reviewed the curricula and he’s correct. A lot of Whites are getting sick and tired of being told how evil they are by other ethnicities who are not exactly moral shining stars themselves, to put it kindly! A very large number of Whites probably oppose this frankly dishonest movement that lies about our people, and many others are possibly troubled by it. It’s an excellent target. Anti-White discrimination. The firefighter case back East is particularly egregious. Quite a few Whites are probably disgusted to outraged about such things. I dare say a majority of them might support the White firefighters in this case. Where clear anti-White discrimination exists, Whites are not yet so self-abasing that they will not stand up and fight back. A carefully worded movement could play into these feelings well. Hate crimes against Whites. They do exist, but the media says they’re all hallucinations. A lot of Whites get pretty mad when you bring it up. No one, not even the most self-abasing White, wants to be bashed in the head or killed by a bunch of racist thugs. Protesting against hate crimes against Whites is perfect for White anti-racists. After all, Black and Hispanic anti-racists spend a lot of energy fighting hate crimes against their own. But the fact is… soon this will no longer be a White majority country. At this point we need to think about damage control. AA has already been pretty seriously restricted and ballot initiatives to further restrict it are doing great. The public is still against it, and I wish pro-Whites would quit bringing it up since I think it’s a red herring these days. As far as immigration, damage control. First, focus on the illegals, the most egregious and insane aspect of the insanity. If we can even continue to stop amnesty, we are doing great. But most anti-illegal groups are totally hostile to even liberals not to mention Leftists. The anti-illegal movement must be broadened. Hispanics are a real problem because as they grow in the population, politicians will continue to pander to them. 8 As the Mexican population grows and grows, at some point, we will not be able to stop amnesty. Since the amnesty crowd is also Open Borders, we will have a much more open border on the South anyway, so more and more “illegals” will keep flooding in. Followed by more and more amnesties. At some point it will just be legal to be an unauthorized immigrant to the US. As you can see, this leads obviously to the US as the newest Latin American country. Think about that. This is the kind of crap we are up against and it’s really scary. Many haters of the illegals also love legal immigration. Lou Dobbs wants to double or triple it to 2-3 million/yr. Both political parties and the elite across the spectrum cannot get enough legal immigrants. The public is actually about 7 Advocating shutting it off as most pro-Whites do is ridiculous and seems radical, and anyway, hardly anyone supports it. Pro-Whites should start calling for a reduction in legal immigration from the present 1.2 million (?) to 350-400,000. That will seem reasonable to probably 7 Also we ought to get more restrictive about immigration, especially from Latin America, and test them much more thoroughly. Too many Hispanic immigrants and their kids are becoming problem Americans. We need to do some research and come up with some algorithms about which Hispanics and their offspring are most likely to go bad and which ones are most likely to turn out well. Keep the bad candidates out and let the good candidates in. Many or possibly most White Americans could probably get behind a stricter testing and requirements (points based system) for at least some immigrants. It just seems reasonable to most folks.

“White Lust, Black Tail," by Alpha Unit

This is the latest from Alpha Unit. I almost could not believe it when I read it. I knew she was a good writer, but I did not think she was this good. She surprised me again. Once you give folks a chance, they can show you all sorts of unlocked potential bottled up inside. On another note, this post is directly in line with some of the central themes of this blog. One of which is the inevitability of miscegenation and the fact that guys will screw anything, especially if it’s good looking. And Africa has some of the finest looking women around. And beauty is, after all, in the eyes of the beholder. If you go and ask this to any primitive tribe or any foreign wise man or shaman, Hindu, Buddhist, Amerindian, or any sort of spiritualist, they will fall over laughing and say of course beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. This is an item of basic human knowledge that all wise human cultures (and most cultures are inherently wise about some things) have managed to figure out. Tribes often perpetrate various lies about the tribes around them, mostly along the lines that we are better and they are inferior. Tribal supremacists often try to force lies onto the males of the tribe along the lines that all females of the other tribes are inherently ugly or whatnot. But since this lie goes against the basic facts of human nature, it generally doesn’t work very well. The histories of India, Arabia, North Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, Vietnam, Japan, Siberia and the Jews probably most folks in most places give the lie to that. And it was always the men outbreeding the enemy females. Arab men bred with Black slavewomen. White Latin American men bred with Indian and to a lesser extent Black women. In the Caribbean, Whites bred with Black women and in Puerto Rico, Amerindians were added to the blend. White North Africans bred with Blacks incessantly. In India, the upper castes have been getting darker and darker over the centuries. How? Breeding with lower caste women. In Vietnam, the Chinese invaded 2,200 years ago and never left. While they have always been hated many wars were fought against them by Vietnamese nationalists (Some led by women! So much for sexist Asians.) In Japan, the Koreans and Ainu are despised. Modern Japan was created when de facto Koreans came over from Korea 2,300 years ago. They say themselves as superior to the Ainu, and they drove them all the way to Hokkaido, and then overwhelmed them even there, fighting periodic wars against them. The Ainu were despised as the ultimate inferiors. Yet over 2 millenia, Japanese (probably males) had bred in so much with the Ainu (probably females) that the Japanese genome is now 4 In Siberia, White men bred with Siberian women. In the case of the Altai, the result was an almost 50-50 mixture. In the Sakha, they are only The Jews are an interesting case. The laws were in place, as usual, to protect the purity of the Jewish race by restricting outbreeding by Jewish women with Gentile men. In Spain, for a Jewish woman who had sex with a Gentile man, the penalty was having her nose chopped off. These same lies did not apply to men, and of course, Jewish males continued to screw around with Gentile women to some extent. However, the offspring were lost to the Jews, so the genetic line remained pretty pure. You always know who your mother is, but you don’t always know who your father is. That’s why the law about in order to be a Jew, you had to have a Jewish mother was put in. It had the side effect of maintaining tribal purity since Jewish women were sleeping pretty much only with Jewish men. In many cases laws and regulations were set up to try to stop nature. Casta was prevalent all over Latin America but no matter, even the viciousness of this system could not stop mass miscegenation. In India, there were very strict rules about Brahmins marrying non-Brahmins, including threat of loss of caste privileges, but look at how well they worked. It seems that some things just cannot be stopped. While male members of a dominant tribe are often able to protect their women from the subordinated tribe, the fuckers can’t seem to keep their hands off those lowly, subordinated and supposedly ugly women. You can’t fight Mother Nature. Miscegenation, especially of majority or dominant tribe males and minority or subordinated tribe females, is inevitable. So just lie back and enjoy it.

White Lust, Black Tail

by Alpha Unit

Human intellect and endeavor are remarkable things. But Nature’s designs are overarching. And its sole response to those within its web? Indifference. Once the earth begins to shift under your feet, it knows nothing of the destruction it causes. Flood, fire, pathogen, animals killing their prey: all indifferent. Human nature doesn’t care about your beliefs. Your beliefs are sort of like microscopic bugs crawling around in the vicinity of your nature. Barely recognized, if at all. There is race. And then there is human nature. If Human Nature squints really hard, it might make out the blurry outlines of Race. Probably wouldn’t, though. I know of a male blogger, distinctly pro-White and unambiguously anti-Semitic, who liked to post photos (some frankly pornographic) of comely lasses for the enjoyment of his readers. He had no problem, even, with putting up a photo of a black woman, and after one such posting, he noted a complaint from one of his readers. The reader objected bitterly to the idea of this dusky female being presented as an object of white male desire–especially on a site dedicated to White preservation. I imagine repeating this to the oldest women in my family–those who lived through the days of Jim Crow and were well-versed in the prerogatives of Southern “gentlemen.” And I can see them laughing. Your own nature will make a fool out of you, with all your pretensions to purity, no matter who you are. Your loins always get the last laugh. They know something about a good-looking woman, no matter how sub-Saharan African her ancestors might have been, that your mind may not want you to admit. And what is that? “Mercy. That is some fine baby-making material there.” Of course, this is the language of the loins. As it gets translated upward, maybe the message becomes “What a rack.” Or “That is one hell of an ass.” Doesn’t matter. Your body approves. That means YOU approve. Yes, you. All kinds of things can be denied, ignored, foregone, decided against. Not Nature. Nature keeps you and me honest.

Why Civil Rights Laws Are Necessary

In the comments section, James Schipper makes several comments against civil rights and anti-discrimination laws, elaborating a libertarian argument for getting rid of them. Although I’m sure he is not a racist personally, advocating getting rid of these laws unfortunately is advocating for a de facto racist project that is bound to harm certain ethnic groups. So in this case, Schipper is a non-racist or anti-racist who is promoting a racist agenda. I know that sounds weird, but life is pretty confusing. He has the entire libertarian and anarchist community behind him in this regard too. Here is his argument:

In Canada, only a minority of adults are now smokers, and I suppose that in the US it isn’t any different. It is therefore nonsense to say that all businesses in the hospitality sector have an incentive to offer the right to smoke.

If all bar and eateries were forced to choose between being totally smoke-free and allowing smoking, then probably 2/3 of restaurants and 1/2 of bars in a larger North American cities would opt to be smoke-free.

I quite agree that non-smokers should not be forced to become passive smokers, but they won’t have to be if they can choose between smoke-free and smoking establishments. As to workplaces, I don’t see why smoking should not be allowed if there is consent of all employees. Anti-smoking laws reveal a Procrustean mentality which seeks to impose the same for everybody. As to anti-discrimination laws, there is such a thing as economic association. Employers and employees have to work together and employees have to work with other employees. Many may prefer to work with their own kind. Anti-discrimination laws don’t work for small firms anyway. If Peter has 10 employees and they are all white, how does one prove that there is discrimination. The sample is too small. Many small companies are ethnically and racially homogeneous simply because the employer hires his relatives and friends. Large firms do not have an incentive to antagonize public opinion. If the vast majority of the population is opposed to racial discrimination, then a firm that openly practices racial discrimination will lose clients. When most people are against racial discrimination, then anti-discrimination laws aren’t necessary. When most people are eager to practice racial discrimination, then anti-discrimination laws, apart from being anti-democratic, are unenforceable. Anti-discrimination laws lead to surreptitious discrimination, which is very hard to prove. As a result, people who are in charge of enforcing anti-discrimination laws will almost inevitably resort to quotas, at least when they operate on the assumption that ability is equally distributed among all populations. Look at the dilemma in which employers in the US find themselves. To avoid discrimination in hiring, they use tests, but when different groups have different average scores on these tests, they can’t be used. Anti-discrimination laws would make more sense if no equal ability between groups is assumed. However, how do you devise tests for all the jobs that are out there? Wouldn’t life be much easier if there were no diversity within countries?

I think they already tried that with bars here in the US, James. Almost all bars just went smoking and said screw it. There were just about zero, or maybe zero, non-smoking bars. Drinkers smoke. As far as restaurants, I guess we had non-smoking restaurants here in the US. Restaurants generally opted to have smoking sections. Most restaurants had separate sections. In 1992, I ate out in the Bay Area and generally the restaurants had smoking sections. And yes, you could breathe the smoke. The problem with workplaces going all-smoking is that a number would do just that, especially working class jobs for guys. Some of these guys don’t smoke, and they would be locked out of those workplaces. In parts of the US with high smoking rates, many businesses would go all-smoking. It doesn’t matter if folks wish to be around their own kind. As a statist, I want to force them to associate with folks they don’t wish to be around in the workplace. This was the old segregationist anti-integration argument by the way. As far as large corporations go, a lot of them now have diversity goals and whatnot. It seems to be working out pretty well. They are satisfied with the quality of the employees they are getting, and they are rarely getting sued or taken to court. Managers are under strict orders to not discriminate in hiring. The reason they adopted these goals was to not run afoul of civil rights laws. The problem is that here in the US, discrimination goes on, particularly in home sales and renting. Less in employment, but still it exists. I assure that if the Fair Housing Act were overturned, rampant discrimination would return to renting and home sales. It doesn’t happen so much now because there are agents all over the place pretending to rent places and the government will sue you good if they can prove you discriminate, and proving it with an agent is pretty easy. Most apartment managing firms are under strict orders not to discriminate and not to work with clients who demand that. Also a lot of folks would stop selling homes to Blacks too. So, while discrimination is not rampant in the US, it’s a problem enough, and the laws have done incredible work towards remedying the problem. The WN’s admit this and are furious about the laws because they know how well they have worked. So the argument that the laws won’t work in either case (your argument) doesn’t seem to make sense. I don’t agree with the testing being thrown out due to differentiating scores, but I doubt that that has to do with Civil Rights laws. I’m sure if there was racial differentiation on test score outcome, it would not be a violation of civil rights laws properly interpreted. It’s not really a huge problem in the US, employers hiring all of these unqualified minorities just to avoid a civil rights lawsuit or prosecution. The only time the DOJ goes after these guys, it’s a pretty blatant and obvious case of illegal discrimination. The enforcers don’t rely on quotas. They work really hard to build great cases, and win almost all of them. They don’t prosecute that many cases anyway, so they choose them very well. I think the number of firms unfairly taken to court over reasonable discrimination must be small.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)