Why Is It That All Antisemites Are Holocaust Deniers?

PB: Most people lynched were White and deserved it. The showers were for delousing, Typhus was the big killer. I’d trust a mentally handicapped kid with a NS over Woody Allen.

I don’t know if most of those lynched were White. Maybe they were. But the Nazis absolutely murdered 5.7 million Jews, and quite a few others for that matter, in cold. They were trying to wipe them off the face of the Earth or at least off the face of Europe.

I don’t necessarily blame people for being anti-Semites. Sort of like I don’t blame people for being racist against Blacks. Lots of Blacks and Jews act horrifically. To some extent, each is sort of a race of psychopaths. Which is precisely why people don’t like them. A lot of people who dislike Jews and Blacks are simply good, moral, honest people who despise psychopaths and other amoral rats.

But why every anti-Semite on Earth has to deny the damned Holocaust is just beyond me. I mean if you were a real anti-Semite, you would think that the Holocaust was the greatest thing since sliced bread, right. “Woo-hoo! We killed 6 million of those fuckers! Oh Hell ya! Go Nazis go!”

Instead they’ve got to lie and say it never happened.

A Whole Nation Was Guilty of Mass Murder, and Most All of Them Got Off Scot Free

PB: Most people lynched were White and deserved it. The showers were for delousing, Typhus was the big killer. I’d trust a mentally handicapped kid with a NS over Woody Allen.

I assure you with 100% accuracy that there was poison gas in those showers. And I know precisely why they went to that method of killing too. They had been killing inmates in other ways, but there were issues with those ways of killing people, so they went to gas.

And before that, they used mobile gas vans. We have Germans who used to drive those vans on camera testifying about what they did. They were walking about Germany just a while ago. A lot of the men who did things like that never served a day in prison.

The Allies had a real problem at the end of the war. They basically had a whole country full of damned Nazis who were up their necks in all of this mass slaughter. Even if they weren’t doing it, they were often cheering it on or being willfully ignorant.

Right after the war was over, some Jews tried to go back to their old residences. They were met with hostility by just about everyone, and a number of them were simply murdered on the spot. And no one said a word. You had a whole nation full of homicidal antisemites.

What are you gonna do? You gonna execute a whole country. Morgenthal wanted to and his plan was almost put into place. Damn good thing we didn’t have Jews running postwar Germany. It was bad enough that we deliberately hired Jews to interrogate the worst Nazis at Nuremberg.

Out of 550 of the worst Nazis, 98% of them had their testicles crushed. Obviously by their Jewish interrogators. It’s understandable, but now we are as bad as they are. Also now the Holocaust Deniers get to say that all confessions of Nazis at Nuremberg were tortured out of them. Just downright stupid. We should not have had one Jew among those interrogators.

We executed approximately 1,000 of the worst Nazis at Nuremberg. A Hell of a lot more than that were guilty as Hell. Many served short sentences of 2-10 years and got out. Others served longer. Rudolph Hess served until the end of his life, and he was one of the best Nazis of all. The USSR demanded that he never be released so he died in prison at an advanced age.

The truth is that a whole country full of Nazis more or less got off scot-free after the war. There wasn’t really any other way to do it, honestly.

All Identity Politics Groups are “IP Nazis”

All Identity Politics groups divide the world into followers of the IP (the good people) and opponents of the IP (the haters or traitors). They are extremely quick to throw people into the hater/traitor group because like all forms of IP, they are paranoid and see enemies everywhere, even though 80% of the people they say are enemies are innocent.

You see this even in Jews, and in fact, most Jews practice what boils down to Jewish Identity Politics. Some might say that Jews were the original IP group. I doubt that because I believe all IP is just tribalism. All IP also resembles any nationalism or ultranationalism, and that is why when IP groups get extreme, people start calling them Nazis.

All IP is really just tribalism, and that’s why all IP resembles nationalism or ultranationalism because all nationalism is just tribalism, and all ultranationalism is just fascism. To the extent that it is human nature to be tribal, we are all nationalistic in one way or another, and many to most of us probably have fascist tendencies.

Because most indigenous human tribes were extremely racist and were frankly fascists. The tribe’s rules are there are the good people (us and may be a few allies) and everyone else is an enemy. All the other tribes and the non-tribalists in your own group, who are called the traitors.

Starting to see  how feminism, etc. looks exactly like nationalism and tribalism? Starting  to see how all forms of IP look like ultranationalism and tribalism? Since tribalism and ultranationalism are two of the plagues on the human race, why on Earth should any decent human or especially anyone on the Earth support IP at all? They shouldn’t.

If you oppose  tribalism and ultranationalism (fascism) as any good person on the Left should, then you must also hate all forms of IP.

This is where the antifas who hate fascism and ultranationalism don’t make sense. Sure they hate ultranationalism and a few forms of IP such as the IP of the “enemies.” So they hate White IP, Men’s Rights IP, and even Straight IP if it exists. Those are all evil and must be wiped off the face of the Earth.  They’re all “fascism.”

Nevertheless, all antifa support feminazis, gay Nazis, tranny fascists, Black fascists, etc. They hate Jewish IP but Palestinian or Arab IP  (Arab nationalism) is just fine, when really those are just two types of fascism, Jewish fascism and Arab fascism.  So some fascists are ok (the marginalized or oppressed fascists) and other fascists are evil and must be exterminated (the ruling or oppressor fascists).

Obviously this is incoherent. A fascist is a fascist. A true antifa would hate all forms of ultranationalism and also all the fake nationalisms or IP’s (Identity Nazis):

Feminazis.

Gay Nazis. Many of the anti-gays are remarking that the Gay Politics types are increasingly acting like fascists, and they are correct.

Jewish Nazis (Zionists).

Black Nazis (Black separatists, Nation of Islam).

White IP (White nationalists are obviously real Nazis).

The “Blacks Are Genociding Whites!” Nonsense

To listen to the hysteria of White nationalists and other racists, Blacks are waging some sort of a jihad against Whites. They are deliberately singling us out and hunting us down. One sociologist reported that Blacks preyed on Whites with a “hunter’s mindset.” He tried to factor in a notion that most Whites did not live near large Black populations into his fancy figuring.

There are sites out there showing White victims of Black crime, mostly homicide, and I admit it’s not a pretty picture. I don’t link to those sites for obvious reasons. This whips up hysteria among racist Whites that Blacks are slaughtering us like flies.

Indeed Blacks are slaughtering some people like flies – they’re own people! We get off pretty easy. If there’s one thing that gets Whites whipped up about Black people, hey, it’s the crime. But Blacks have as much reason to hate Blacks for crime as Whites do. In fact, they have much more reason to because we Whites get off pretty easy.

Via the FBI crime report from 2019, I obtained the figures below. The problem here as usual was that the “White” figure for both victims and perpetrators, included Hispanics! Untangling Hispanics from Whites and then subtracting everyone all the perpetrators’ figures proportionately resulted in what is probably a mess, but I think it’s actually pretty accurate. The figures below are approximate.

Incidentally, they were about the same when Hispanics were wrapped into Whites as when Hispanics were disaggregated, which implies that Blacks prey on the category called Whites + Hispanics as much as they prey on Whites alone, which seems to rule out this idea that they single us out to victimize us.

For instance, Blacks were 15% of the killers of Hispanics + Whites and 16% of the figures of Whites alone. Ok, Black criminals “single us out for homicide” at a rate of 7%. Big deal.

             Killers of Whites

            Pop %  Offender %

Blacks      13     16

Hispanics   18     22

Whites      65     60

Whites are 8% less likely to kill a White person compared to other races.

Blacks are 23% more likely to kill a White person than other races.

Hispanics are 22% more likely to kill a White person than other races.

This whole argument doesn’t seem to add up to much of anything. Hispanics appear to be just as likely to murder Whites as Blacks are, and neither group murders Whites at a much higher rate than Whites kill themselves. Granted, Whites tend to live away from concentrations of Blacks, which adds a protective factor here. Perhaps if they did not do so, Blacks would prey on them more.

Conclusion: This whole idea of Black criminals running amok massacring and Holocausting the White population are ridiculous. A White is as much at risk of a Hispanic than a Black. Granted this doesn’t take into effect the likelihood of seeing a White, Hispanic, or Black who might kill you on any particular day. Certainly for Whites who live around large Black populations, the risk of victimization of all sorts is going to be much higher.

There is no crisis of Blacks murdering Whites. It’s nonsense. The crisis is Blacks Shoahing their own kind. If we Whites are going to feel compassion for any victims of Black crime, first of all our hearts should go out to Black victims. There’s the real crisis.

Black IP Has a See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil Attitude Towards Black Problems

I want to help Black people. Not the Blacks who hang out here. They don’t need my help because there’s nothing wrong with them. They don’t need to be fixed. But maybe there’s a lot of others who do.

I think Black behavior as a race, a whole, is a serious problem. Not on an individual level. But there’s enough “of us acting bad”, as Tulio puts it (“Face it, we don’t act very good”) that it is a serious problem.

That problem is not solely my concern. These problems hit Black people more than any other race. In fact, it out and out nukes them. Well, maybe Black people enjoy being Holocausted like this. But I doubt it. It’s not an openly suicidal race in the way that any human is suicidal. Blacks don’t like it, they think it’s a problem, but they have no idea what to do about it. And for the most part they refuse to talk about it as it hurts their ego to do so.

And when antiracists shut down the whole Black  public health, incarceration, and behavioral crisis etc. in the Black community, it is curious. Bottom line is Black IP folks don’t want to help their own people. Saving their pride is more important than helping their people.

89% of Black homicides are at other Blacks. The rest of us get off easy. Blacks are going out of their way not to murder us! And they are going out of their way not to rape us either. Or not to victimize us at all. White Nationalists scream about how many White women Black men rape every year. Well, it’s a lot. They throw up how many Black women White men rape, which is around zero. Well, so what?

There are 5X fewer Black women than White women. And 5X more Black women get raped by Black men every year than White women. You do the math. Black women are 25X more likely to get raped by a Black man than White women. Why aren’t Black women screaming about this? I mean some are – check the website What about Our Daughters?

But mostly it is this conspiracy of silence, and everyone who brings it up gets called racist and shut down. Standing up for Black victims of Black crime, murder, and rape victims is racism? Wow. So we better not discuss it? Amazing. Because talking about victims and standing up for Black victims is racism. Incredible. If you do that, you’re a Nazi. Unbelievable.

(((Certain People))) Are Starting to Get on My Nerves

I don’t hate Jews but I have to admit, as a group, they sure get on my damned nerves sometimes. I really can’t stand the Israelis and pro-Israelis – they’re fascist monsters, and it’s nothing but a shitty little country. But it also gets on my nerves when they scream anti-Semite, Nazi, bigot, hater, etc. every ten minutes.

Of course there are historical reasons for this behavior, but still, paranoia is never mentally healthy. Besides, I don’t see why I should put up with their abuse just because they recently went through a horrible tragedy. I mean, I’m very sorry, but don’t take it out on me.

I’ve met a lot of people who told me that they always liked Jews or were even Judeophilic, but recently Jews are really starting to get on their nerves. What’s the reason? Constant screaming anti-Semite, Nazi, hater, bigot, racist any time you look at them wrong or say two words against them. Jews are really starting to make people mad with this paranoid, hair-trigger victim crap.

In other words, Jews are annoying. Or at least a lot of them are. I had a Jewish girlfriend for 5 1/2 years, my longest relationship. I was actually going to convert believe it or not ha ha. I guess wanting to convert to Judaism makes me a real extreme anti-Semite though, right? And trust me, I know anti-Semites very well. No anti-Semite on Earth would have a Jewish girlfriend, certainly not a long-term one. It doesn’t work like that.

But I don’t believe in killing people just for being annoying. I’d have to kill half the people on Earth if that were true because that’s about how many humans annoy me ha ha.

In fact, I don’t agree with harming annoying at all. Mostly I prefer to avoid people like that, thank you very much.

Granted, real anti-Semites do exist (I have met them), and I assure you that real deal anti-Semites are not good for the Jews. Jews are fully within their rights to regard these people as their enemies. If I were a Jew,  I would regard real deal anti-Semites as not just my enemies but my deadly enemies.

But 80% of the time a Jew yells anti-Semite, it’s a hallucination. The person’s not an anti-Semite and the comment was not anti-Semitic at all. In fact, it’s typically just a true statement about Jewish people.

I guess the truth is anti-Semitic! If the truth is anti-Semitic, then I am absolutely an anti-Semite, sorry.

Why the Liberal View of Black Pathologies Is Not Only Wrong But Leads Us Nowhere

I shouldn’t have to justify myself for speaking of the pathologies of the Black race. Whip out any list of statistics that we keep on important human behaviors. It’s sad. Blacks lag in most of the good things and are vastly overrepresented in a lot of bad things. I’m not racist for saying that. You can go look up the figures you want if you don’t believe me. A few examples:

Black rates of:

Murder                        8X White rate

Robbery                       10X White rate

Rape                          6X White rate.

Children born to single Moms: 3X White rate

We could really go on and on here but I don’t feel  like rubbing it in or kicking a man while he’s down. I’m simply pointing out that looking at obvious, uncontroversial statistics, we have a lot of problems with Black people in our society.

Now that we hopefully have that out of the way,  we get to the meat of this post: what exactly is causing these pathologies?

Mostly I blame Black people for these problems. Look: What’s the reason for  these pathologies?

Three choices:

  1. Evil racists forced a lot of Black people to act terrible.
  2. Bad Black genes make a lot of Black people inherently messed up and dangerous.
  3. Lousy Black culture causes a lot of Black people to act awful.

I reject #1. There’s simply no evidence whatsoever that it’s true. The evidence against this theory is as big as a mountain.

I don’t feel like supporting #2 at the moment, though there might be something to it. Anyway, genes are not destiny.

I’ll take Door #3. But when I do that, I am an evil racist. See?

The only acceptable answer is #1. Project the blame over on Whites, blame Whites for all of this, and wage forever wars against racism that never end because bad Black behavior never ends. The theory says that if Blacks act bad, it’s racism that’s doing it. And Blacks will keep acting bad. As long as they do, there will, by this theory, be a horrible racism problem in the US. Which we need a forever war against.

But what if the theory is wrong? What if it’s not racism that is causing the problem? Then the endless wars on racism are worthless. We are using the wrong cure for the problem. That never fixes anything.

Even if you cannot observe the racism in society (we are getting there), there always must be horrific racism even if it’s invisible. Bad Black behavior proves that. Nowadays you can’t see a lot of anti-Black racism. But it’s obviously still horribly there. Black behavior proves it.

So we get all these theories to explain the obvious racism. How can there be racism if we can’t even see it anymore? Well, it must be invisible. It’s must be “structural racism.” The structures themselves are horribly racist, but we can’t really see it. They just are.

Then there’s all this invisible racism. Turns out Whites have racist minds even if they don’t act racist. Well, those racist thoughts of White people are forcing Blacks to act bad. So White people are thought criminals and need to start thinking differently.

Not much obvious discrimination and hate? Well then, that must be invisible too. It can’t be seen because it’s at the micro level. Hence we have microaggressions. Every little tiny micro-behavior hurts Blacks and makes them act bad.

Well, no matter how many wars on microaggressions and structural racism we wage, they will never go away, since as long as Black people act bad, these invisible racisms will still be there. So we are waging a forever war against something we can’t see, isn’t even causing the problem in the first place, and will always be there, no matter how hard we fight it.

A Black Man Tried to Join the KKK

Polar Bear: Hard to take a Black NS salute seriously.

There’s an actual true story about a Black man who sincerely tried to join the KKK. He approached a local group and asked to join. The KKK guys were taken aback:

You’re Black. Why in the Hell do you want to join the KKK?

The Black man said:

I don’t like niggers either.

Even my Mom thinks that one is funny, and she’s not actually racist at all, though SJW’s would say she is because she is a longstanding race realist.

I am told that racial or racist humor is not funny, and no one is supposed to laugh at it else you are a racist. I don’t know about that.

On Niggermania, Chimpout, and Other Racist Humor Sites

Apparently laughing at racist jokes makes you a racist. I don’t know about that. I mean some awful humor is really funny, right?

The guys at Niggermania and Chimpout are basically awful people. And everyone on there is damned racist. To any Black people on this site – trust me, they are not your friends!

However, I did used to go there for a while because they were so damned hilarious. I mean I might feel guilty for laughing, but that stuff was damned funny. Sure, a lot of it was cruel, but it wasn’t murderous or genocidal. They were mostly just ridiculing Blacks and definitely looking down on them. They regarded them as hilarious objects of derision.

However, the overall mood there was not particularly hateful in most of the humor forums. It seemed like they were laughing too hard at Blacks to get into really vicious and malicious hatred of them. Have you ever noticed that when people are rolling on the floor laughing, even if they are ridiculing someone, it seems hard for them to hate that person? Laughter seems to dissipate brutal hatred and vice versa.

Unless you are a gleaming-eyed sadist, it seems that you are either laughing or hating, but you can’t really do both to a full extent. The more you laugh, the more the truly vicious hatred seems to take a back seat. It’s like if you let that brutal hatred in, you wouldn’t be able to laugh so hard.

Also when you are laughing at someone, you aren’t taking them seriously. It order to destructively hate someone, it seems that you have to stop laughing about them and start to take them very seriously. Real  hatred is not a laughing matter. It’s serious stuff. Do you follow?

There was a feature called Nigger World Tour on one of those sites. I forget which. It’s not what you think. It’s a tour, travelogue, or guide to the Black countries of the world. And face it, a lot of them are pretty screwed up. That was one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

Those sites are not White Supremacist. WN’s keep trying to join but the sites keep shooting them down by saying that they only dislike Blacks; they don’t dislike other races. There are quite a few non-White anti-Black racists on there. There are some Asians and Hispanics on there, and there is a rather shocking number of Indians on there. I get the feeling that Indians really don’t like Black people.

It feels bad to pity Black people, but it’s sad how many other races don’t like them. On the other hand, maybe that’s a warning sign that too many Black people don’t act real great. I mean where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

If only a couple of other groups hated Blacks, we could chalk it up to other things or unreason. But when the dislike extends to all sorts of different groups that don’t have much connection to each other, it’s hard to make the case that all of the animus is utterly irrational, which is the anti-racist line of course.

Racism in general is immoral for sure, but a lot of it is not entirely irrational. Do you blame Israeli Jews for hating Arabs? I am pro-Palestinian and I utterly despise Israel and don’t think much of the Jews who live there, but one must look at this fairly.

If you are a Jew and you live there, Arabs are people who are trying to murder you. I have a hard time not disliking people who want to murder me, sorry. I don’t care how much I deserve it. If you want to murder me and would definitely do it if you could get access to me and carry it out, I’m sorry. I’m going to hate y’all.

On those Black humor sites, I would laugh my ass off and then feel guilty. I do have a confession to make though, and I really hate to say it. It felt damn good to laugh at Black people. Now I don’t want to laugh at my Black friends because I like them, they act good, and I don’t like to belittle and ridicule my friends. Why did it feel good to laugh at anti-Black humor?

It’s like with women in the post recently. I’m a liberal. I’ve been a liberal my whole life. I’ve never felt a lot of overt hatred or dislike for Black people, even when I should have when I taught in the ghetto.

I used to joke that at the end of the school day, I was ready to join the KKK, but that wasn’t really true. Also most of the Black teachers and administrators were fine people. Even some of the Black kids were perfectly ok, especially in high school. The lower grades acted a lot worse.

But the hatred was mixed in with pity. I really got the feeling that some of the younger ones could not control themselves. There was one intelligent 10 year old boy who I kept having to discipline. I started to feel sorry for him after a bit because it seemed like he could not control his boisterousness and jack in the box activity. It seemed like there was something wrong with him, at least at that developmental state.

So why did laughing at those sites feel so damned good. As a liberal I am not allowed to feel much hatred, rage, or even anger at Black people. I simply don’t experience that, even when reading about vicious Black crimes. It’s like I’ve been immunized not to think that way.

But I am absorbing all of that tidal wave of bad Black behavior anyway. And apparently it’s been pissing me off, even though I don’t experience it much cognitively. I either suppress or even repress my rage. At any rate, I push it down inside of me, bury it. In psychology, some think that you don’t really bury anything. Instead you’re just putting a lid on a boiling pot.

Obviously any of your interred stuff tends to come out in dreams. But it can come out in other ways. Suppression and repression are like putting a lid on a pan of boiling water. You think you are going to stop the boiling action by capping it, but really all you do is delay it, and sooner or later, the suppressed boiling action bubbles over the lid of the pan.

After pushing all that anger down, I get exposed to this anti-Black humor, and all that bottled-up rage that I stored up as a liberal unable to express anger towards these people came pouring out. It felt very good, like a pack of rocks had been lifted from my shoulders. It was also a harmless outlet for this bottled-up anger because I won’t allow myself to express it in any other way.

I realize sites like this are wrong, but racist humor is like bullying and a lot of other unpleasant and probably permanent aspects of being human. It’s not going away. So what to do, then?

I thought hey, why don’t Blacks make sites like this making fun of us Whites in a similar way? As long as it wasn’t too vicious, I would  probably laugh at it. Paul Mooney’s humor is very anti-White, but I roll on the floor every time I hear him. He spears us Whites hard and deep, and damn if we don’t deserve it.

I haven’t been to those sites in a while, as I feel too guilty to go there.

White People Are Far Too Altruistic for Their Own Good

Polar Bear: Whites, maybe even Nordics, are more accepting of racemixing. This fits with their lower rates of Identity Politics.

Yes, White IP tends to be a nasty beast. You don’t have to look back that far in history to see that. I can understand people’s visceral negative reaction to White IP. Face it, White IP movements can create some huge monsters, whole populations of basically “White orcs”.

Face it. We Whites are too nice. We’re too good. We are the most self-sacrificing race on Earth. Name another race that voluntarily cedes its power and advantages to others on a regular basis.

I’m waiting…

Truth is that we Whites are so good, so damned altruistic and other-oriented, that we are out and out committing what boils down to racial suicide. And most of us could care less.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s fine to be a saint. But there is such a thing as being too good. Taken too far, saintliness can be downright suicidal.

I’m not against a world that’s less White. But in my own society, I would prefer the non-Whites to be high quality people: higher IQ, educated (college or grad degree preferred), well-behaved. I don’t understand why that’s so evil, racist, and controversial. Non-White races and groups have a huge number of high quality people in them that I would be happy to share my society with.

The quality debate refers to whole races and groups, not individuals. The problem with a lot of non-White races and groups that while they have many high-quality people among them, they also have vast numbers of lower quality people who won’t be good for my country. That’s why you can’t just let them in willy-nilly like you could with Norwegians and Japanese. Sorry, some races and groups simply call for more scrutiny.

If non-Whites meet those criteria, who gives a damn that they’re not White? They are going to act like us for all intents and purposes. We Whites say that if you are well-behaved (and it helps to be intelligent too), you “act like we do.”

That’s why all the talk of Black culture being so different from White culture is just silly. As long as Blacks act good, we will say that they “act like we do.” Any differences in their culture will be waved off as unimportant because to us they are.

We Whites don’t particularly care what non-Whites do, believe it or not. We have better things to worry about, like getting laid, making rent and paying bills. Instead, all we care about is that you are well-behaved when you do whatever it is you do.

On the other hand, if you don’t select the non-Whites by quality, you might end up with Brazil – lower IQ, poorly educated, terribly misbehaved non-Whites that almost create a Dantean Hell on Earth.

White extinction is a long ways off. I recently went to a shindig in the Sierra Nevada, right here in California of all places, and I swear every single person there, of all ages, was White. Plenty of pretty redheads running about too. So in a way this is hue and cry over nothing. I will be gone in 25 years and I assure you that there will still be huge numbers of Whites in this world.

An Educated Public Is Bad for Israel

Some pro-Israel activists think that is only people were more educated about the Israel-Palestine issue, they would be more likely to support Israel. In fact, I doubt if that is true. Indeed I would say that the less someone knows about the conflict, the more likely they are to support Israel.

The more someone learns about it, the more likely they go anti-Israel. Jews would best benefit from keeping people as ignorant as possible about these issues. It’s like political science and economics.

I really hate to admit it, but once I started looking deeply into this issue for the first time in my early 40’s, I rather quickly become pro-Palestine and extremely anti-Israel. It took me a mere few months of very intensive research to do so.

I also realized that I had been pretty much taught a pack of lies about this issue. I was also quite angry at my country and especially my media because I felt that they had lied to me for the first 43 years of my life about this issue. I became rather jaded towards Jewish people because I realized that they had been instrumental in selling me this clever nonsense.

So you see, education about this issue is a two-edged sword. From the Israeli POV, I would say that the less a Gentile knows about this issue, the more they support Israel. I realized that the Jews and their supporters had to come up with this clever pack of lies in order to sell their necessary project, that is, to survive. We all have to survive.

I also realized that the Arabs have not exactly been on good behavior on this issue either. For all the talk of Zionazis, the Arab cause has been nothing but sheer terrorism of the most vicious type from Day One. They haven’t even tried to sugarcoat it. Look at this:

This list was appalling. I don’t particularly mind the attacks officials of the Israeli government. It’s a dirty guerrilla war after all. But look at how many of those attacks are simply against Jewish people, synagogues, restaurants, etc. They’re attacking Jews for being Jews!

Are the Jews in the Diaspora squatting in Palestine? Nope. So the Palestinian cause is to attack all of the Jewish people in the Diaspora? The Palestinians should be happy there is a Diaspora. From their POV, that’s where the Jews should be. I am sorry, but attacking Jews as Jews is an old game. Most recently, Mr. Hitler did that. Anti-Semitic political attacks are ugly stuff.

As far as my position, of course I am inclined to let the Palestinians run free in Israel and let nature take its course. The problem is that they probably won’t simply build humble abodes and make themselves at home. I am very worried that they will start a guerrilla war and start killing Jews. Look at the wars in the Arab World, and you might end up with that.

I don’t know the solution, but I am willing to let all the Jews stay where they are as long as they let the natives mingle. On the other hand, I don’t want to see a guerrilla war on Jews. In any just solution, the Jews of Israel need to be able to live in peace in their land without maniacs trying to murder them.

Whatever crimes the Jews of Israel have committed, the Palestinians have committed offenses of equal amorality or worse. And whatever their failings of the civilian Jews of Israel, I don’t think they deserve the death penalty. In particular, though I am not happy about Israeli Jews at all, it’s clear that they are all completely brainwashed.

I opposed killing Nazi civilians, for Chrissake. I can’t condone killing Israeli civilians. The last round of Jew-killing was particularly horrific, and I personally don’t have the stomach for much more large scale Jew-killing. I think a lot of the rest of the world feels the same way.

I don’t even oppose all Israeli parties. I could live with the Meretz Left and of course Hadash (Communist Party of Israel).

Absolutely Everything Is Now Officially Racism Now in California

Recently I have had a number of awkward experiences in which my comments were interpreted as “extremely inappropriate” by the people I was talking to. The comments had to do with race and they were apparently inappropriate I would assume due to racism. Here they are:

I was in a coffee shop:

Barista:  “Hey Bob. Joe!”

Me: “Joe what?”

Barista: “Joe Mama!”

Laughs all around. I point out where the phrase comes from.

Me: “That phrase actually comes from Black culture. Apparently this is a racist comment!”

Me: “That comment means,’Joe Mama stand on de corner.’ Your mother stands on the corner. It’s calling someone’s mother a prostitute. It’s an insult.” Extreme racism, plus maybe #metoo crap for unwanted sexual comment.

Me: “In Black culture it is an extreme insult to attack another man’s mother.” Extreme racism!

Me: “You might actually get killed for insulting  someone’s mother in that way. They make a really big deal out of it. It’s a huge insult in Black culture.” Extreme racism!

Barista makes some cryptic remark implying that my comments are extremely offensive!

Other barista shakes his head like he can’t believe I just made such offensive remarks.

Look, I’m sorry. This is just weird. I actually learned this at home at from talking to my parents. They told all of us kids what that phrase meant. I guess my parents are extremely inappropriate! I’ve talked about this a number of times over the years with many different people and no one gave two fucks about. All of a sudden this discussion that I have been having all my life is extreme racism!

More to the point. I have no idea why this comment is even racist. Pointing out that the comment has its origins in Black culture as an insult of someone’s mother is racism? How in the Hell is that racist? It’s simply true. The truth has been racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and bigoted for a long time now in this insane country.

But honestly, truth is a defense against racism. Obviously you might want to phrase certain truths about groups carefully because the Goddamn facts about certain groups are frankly shocking and don’t make them look all that good. But the truth is never bigoted or hateful. That’s preposterous. How can proven scientific fact be “hateful?”

This stuff is just getting weird. I’m obviously not keen on out and out hardcore racist comments, particularly in public where people can hear them. But now it’s like the very mention that race exists at all is profoundly racist and “hateful.” This is bizarre and furthermore, it’s insensible.

There’s no logical reason for society to think like this, unlike we want to live in Snowflake World, where everyone’s feelings are on the verge of falling apart at any time, where folks have their antennas out all day long to make sure that no one says or does anything that makes “uncomfortable,” that most people are fragile weaklings who break down and have panic attacks over the most innocent behaviors and comments.

You all really want to live in Snowflake Land like this where you have to walk on eggshells all the time because everyone is on edge and on the verge of been made to feel “uncomfortable” at any time for any reason? Why? That sounds like a drag. Like no fun. Like party pooper, prig, prudish, uptight, tense, dour no fun.

Here is another one.

In a hair salon where I get my haircut talking about a beauty supply store where they suggested I go to get something I need:

Salon people: “It’s at 41 and Fresno Street.”

Me: “Do they even intersect? I thought they ran parallel?”

Salon people: “Yes, they do. Farther down they intersect.”

Me: “Oh! I know where that is! That’s the Black part of town, right?” Uncomfortable looks around the room like I said something wrong. Actually it is the Black part of town. Apparently saying there is Black side of town is a very racist remark!

Me: “Actually a lot of Black women wear extensions, right?” Apparently extreme racism.

Me: “Black women like to have their hair straight because it looks better that way so they are always straightening their hair and whatnot.” Apparently extreme racism!

Me: “But Black men don’t look good with straight hair. Have you ever seen a Black man with straight hair? Like James Brown? It doesn’t look good for some reason.” More extreme racism.

How on Earth is a discussion of Black people’s hair habits racist, in a damned hair salon for Chrissake, a perfectly appropriate place for such a conversation? Everything I said was straight up truth. Magazines, especially women’s and beauty magazines, talk about this sort of thing all the time. These are well-known facts.

This stuff is just getting weird. I’m tense a good part of the time when I am out, monitoring my every word and action to make sure I don’t do or say something that violates SJW bullshit. It’s not really a very fun place to be. I feel like I’m in a prison, and the world feels like a scary place now where anyone can get offended and upset for any reason at any time about my behavior. This is supposed to be fun or something?

This is making the world into a huge drag where entire subjects are completely off the table at all times. It’s like have turned into a nation of church ladies. Not to mention, SJW offense over the 600,000 things you can’t say and the 300,000 things you can’t do is profound moralfaggotry because it shames people and tells them that they are bad human beings simply for stating inoffensive and uncontroversial facts of life.

Calling people immoral, bad, and evil for fairly innocuous statements and behaviors is the essence of moralfaggotry. Face it. SJW’s are extreme moralfags, some of the worst in our entire benighted land.

The Meaning of the Word “Uppity”

Alpha: “Uppity” is Jason’s word, but I take it to mean arrogant or self-important. Trump does think he’s better than other people. He bragged about his behavior toward women, saying that when you’re a star “they let you do it.” He declared, wrt America’s problems, “only I can fix it.”

He’s told us that if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue he wouldn’t lose any votes. He has declared that “Article II” of the Constitution allows him to do anything he wants. He refers to himself as “your favorite President.”

You say that’s all narcissism, not uppityness. Doesn’t matter to me one way or another.

Yes, that is narcissism, not uppityness. Another word for narcissist is blowhard, jerk, overbearing, douchebag, braggart, full of himself, arrogant, ass, etc.

If uppity means narcissism then sure Trump is uppity. I just think it means something other than that. It implies that someone doesn’t know his place – that someone of relatively low status is trying to pretend that he has higher status and that this is therefore insulting to the persons of higher status he is interacting with.

You know the history of word – an uppity nigger who doesn’t know his place might be Black person standing up to White person about some sort of injustice the White are perpetrating on the Black.

Or a woman who doesn’t know her place in the patriarchy and is getting out of line, talking back to male superiors.

The Black and the woman both need to be put back in their places by the Whites and the men.

In these cases, the uppity person is really a hero going up against oppressors who think they are superior.

The word is ugly and I don’t think we should use it. It has an ugly anti-Black racist history, and we should just junk it except to refer to the old use of it.

I would use uppity to describe women who viciously attack male strangers for no good reason. Or kids who openly and outrageously defy adults. Neither is acceptable to me.

A male stranger can attack me viciously. Fine, now it’s mano a mano, man to man.

If a female stranger attacks me, it’s infuriating. The first thought in my mind is that I want to kill her. I’m not going to do it of course because I have controls, but that’s the feeling. It’s unfair for female strangers to attack us men. I can fight back against a man, but I’m not allowed to fight back against a woman, or a kid for that matter. A kid doing the same is equally outrageous. I probably wouldn’t want to kill the kid but maybe I might want to slap him upside the head.

I still wouldn’t use the word in either case though except sarcastically. That’s due to its racist pedigree. The word’s contaminated and it’s hardly good for anything anymore.

Just my two pfennig.

“Bolivia Faces Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, and South African-Style Apartheid?” by Andrew Korybko

Granted, there’s a lot of hyberbole in this article. There’s no evidence that ethnic cleansing of or South African-style apartheid against Bolivia’s Indians is going to happen, and it seems a bit far-fetched.

But trust me when I say that this coup is absolutely racist to the core.

The opposition in Bolivia is strange. They’re White Supremacist Nazis who aren’t even White people! They just think they’re White. I really doubt if there are more than 5-10% actual Whites in Bolivia – never mind that they’ve always run the country.

The Bolivian Nazi opposition are actually mestizos – how dark they are is a matter of conjecture – but they’re not pure White by any means. I remember the time I saw a Bolivian opposition woman waving a Nazi flag. I looked closely at her and she was quite brown-skinned. She had more or less White features, but she obviously had some Indian in her. The contrast was shocking. I’m thinking why in the Hell is this brown-skinned mestizo woman waving a Goddamned Nazi flag?

I guess they’re Whiter than the Indians so they think they’re White?

What’s odd here is that this seems to lend credence to the moronic anti-racists’ attitude that there’s no such thing as race and that race is simply a social construct.

That’s obliviously not true, but it’s definitely the case that the race people identify with is not necessarily their own. In other words, people’s own racial identification is often a hallucination or a product of their mind.

The opposition comes from the wealthier eastern part of Bolivia which is more of a tropical jungle than the freezing Andean highlands where the Quechua and Aymara Indians with the bowler hats reside and have long worked in the mines, lately mostly tin mines. Bolivia has long been one of the world’s biggest producers of tin.

Recently riches of oil and natural gas have been discovered in the east, and this has resulted in a lot of prosperity in that region.

Morales’ economy was not socialist by any means, but he infuriated these mestizos in the east by nationalizing the oil and gas reserves for the Bolivian people. Previously they had been privately owned, and having them owned by the private sector was a great way for a lot of the people in the east to suck a lot of that oil and gas money out of the country and into their pockets.

There are also Indians over in the east – lowland jungle Indians. I’m not sure that the easterners have any problems with them.

Morales also massively redistributed wealth in the country, taking a lot of the oil and gas wealth from the east and shifting it over to the Indians in the west. Obviously this infuriated the easterners. Well, if you think income redistribution is the definition of socialism, I suppose Morales had a socialist economy, but that’s not the way I define the term.

As the article points out, Bolivian politics have always been about the ruling mestizos and Whites’ overwhelming hatred of the Aymara and  Quechua Indians of the western mountains. That’s the theme running through Bolivian politics for over 100 years.

With Morales, for the first time, the Indians had power in Bolivia. It must have been a supreme insult for these haughty mestizos to be ruled by those lowly Indians. A similar dynamic is going on in Venezuela. The light-skinned ruling class is furious that darker-skinned more or less “niggers” are ruling over them. It’s like the maids and the servants taking over your mansion and locking you in your bedroom while they party with your stuff.

Morales also engaged in a lot of affirmative action with the Indians, so a lot of jobs were opened up to Indians that were closed off to them in the past. I assume that Bolivian Indians are about as competent or intelligent as Bolivian mestizos, so I don’t have a problem with AA when the groups are relatively equal.

I just don’t like lesser qualified people being hired and promoted over the more qualified ones. To say that’s perverse is an understatement.

But I believe that that AA for the Indians is definitely on its way out with this new government. They’ve made some statements along those lines.

Frankly, the statements being issued by the new fascist coup regime officials are absolutely shocking in their outrageous and blatant racism against Indians. There’s also a frightening amount of venom behind those words.

I knew the US always loves fascists, but I didn’t know we loved actual Nazis. Well, we supported them in prior fascist governments in South America in Bolivia and Argentina in particular.

And we installed a blatantly Nazi regime in Ukraine, mostly anti-Russian Nazis in that case. By the way, Israel was a strong supporter of the Nazi putschist regime in Ukraine. Many young Israelis went over to Ukraine to fight in the Maiden alongside out and out Nazis.

I’m sorry but I lose all respect for any Jew who supports Nazis for whatever insane reason they have. I really don’t care what happens to Jews like that. You don’t support your worst enemies for God’s sake. If you do, you’re an utterly amoral slug of a person, barely fit for life. You don’t stand for anything and you have no morals, no values, nothing at all of any consequence. You’re basically just a pure whore of a human being.

Here we are again, supporting Nazis, this time anti-Indian Nazis. Just when I think my country can’t get any lower, we do something like this.

Bolivia Faces Ethnic Cleansing, Racism and South African-Style Apartheid?

Post-coup Bolivia is at risk of Croatian-style ethnic cleansing and South African-like apartheid unless the protesters succeed in putting substantial international pressure on the new “authorities” and ensuring that genuinely free and fair elections are held as soon as possible as the most realistic attempt to reverse the recent regime change.

Far From Over

The Hybrid War on Bolivia succeeded in carrying out regime change and could potentially have far-reaching geostrategic consequences, but its most devastating impact might be domestic if the new “authorities” are allowed to carry out their socioeconomic agenda.

Post-coup Bolivia is at risk of Croatian-style ethnic cleansing and South African-like apartheid unless the protesters succeed in putting substantial international pressure on Jeanine Anez and her military backers in order to ensure that genuinely free and fair elections are held as soon as possible as the most realistic attempt to reverse the recent regime change.

“Former” President Morales’ Movement For Socialism (MAS) reached an agreement with the the self-professed “president” on Thursday night to work towards new elections, during which time lawmakers also voted to approve a member of MAS as the new Senate head. Although there are still protests and the death toll continues to rise, the latest political developments are somewhat encouraging, but that doesn’t mean that the Hybrid War itself is over, or even close to it.

A Christian Supremacist As The “Head Of State”

Anez is a Christian supremacist who harbors extremely racist views towards her country’s indigenous population. She wrote in a now-deleted tweet from April 14, 2013 that

“I dream of a Bolivia free of Satanic indigenous rites. The city is not for the Indian: they should go to the highlands or the Chaco”.

She also dramatically declared herself president while brandishing a gigantic Bible and stating that “the Bible has returned to the palace“, which was meant to imply that President Morales wasn’t really a Christian like he claimed but a paganist because of his previous support of indigenous religions.

It’s also extremely symbolic that her so-called “cabinet” doesn’t include a single indigenous person, and it shouldn’t be forgotten that the capital was convulsed in an orgy of violence against Morales’ many indigenous supporters the night that the coup succeeded.

Taken together, it convincingly appears that one of the hyper-nationalist coup plotters’ agendas is to ethnically cleanse the indigenous population out of the cities and back to the countryside where their racist supporters believe that they “belong” so that the “civilized” parts of the state can become “purely” Christian.

The Roots Of Racist Rage

President Morales’ 13 years in office saw the massive influx of indigenous people to the cities as this demographic became empowered through his socioeconomic policies and finally began to more actively play their rightful role in the country’s affairs.

This shift upset some of the mestizos who felt that their comparatively privileged positions were being challenged with the connivance of the state, which contributed to their rising anger against the long-serving leader and the racist-fascist views that some of them started to more openly embrace as a result of perceiving this to be a “civilizational struggle”.

Investigative journalists Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton exposed the dark social trends behind the Bolivian coup in their piece last week titled “Bolivia coup led by Christian fascist paramilitary leader and millionaire — with foreign support.”, The article drew attention to the shadowy role played by Croatian-Bolivian oligarch Branko Marinkovic, who they wrote:

“has long been dogged by rumors that his family members were involved in the country’s powerful fascist Ustashe movement.”

It’s a well-known fact that many former fascist fighters from all over Europe fled to South America after the war, so it wouldn’t be surprising if those rumors about his family are true.

The Croatian Connection

Those journalists’ investigation revealed that Marinkovic shares Anez’ Christian fundamentalist views which also not-coincidentally align with the Ustashe’s.

Hence, the case can be put forth that some of the former fascist fighters who fled to South America (of which Marinkovic’s family might have been a part) fertilized the social soil over the past seven decades and made the revival of World War II-like fascism possible in present-day Bolivia.

Modern-day Croatia, one should be reminded, is the partial geopolitical revival of a Nazi puppet state, and it carried out the largest ethnic cleansing in Europe since 1945 during 1995’s US-backed “Operation Storm” against over 200,000 members of its indigenous Serbian minority.

History has an odd way of repeating itself, and while that same scenario probably won’t unfold the exact same way in post-coup Bolivia, its ethnic cleansing end game could potentially be pursued by pressuring the indigenous population to leave the cities en masse following a forthcoming campaign of state-supported intimidation against them.

“Clever” Ethnic Cleansing

This could be “cleverly” conducted away from the watchful eye of the international community through “plausibly deniable” means such as turning a blind eye towards fascist mob violence, the de-facto imposition of discriminatory hiring practices by coup-sympathizing mestizos, and the dismantlement of the plurinational state promulgated under President Morales on the basis of “removing societal divisions”.

The latter isn’t just purely speculative either since Anez said that:

“We want to be a democratic tool of inclusion and unity…We leave behind those times in which ethnic and class resentments which divide Bolivians are used as an instrument of political control…”

…which could be interpreted as a dog whistle to her supporters that the coup “authorities” intend to reverse the hard-earned socioeconomic and political gains that the indigenous population received during President Morales’ tenure.

Affirmative action programs could therefore be rolled back on the basis that they were “polarizing the country along ethnic and class lines” in a way inimical to Anez’ “inclusive and unifying” vision, potentially even making the AA programs restricted to specific territories instead of demographics so as to encourage indigenous migration back to the countryside as a first step towards apartheid.

Bolivian Bantustans

After all, to crudely paraphrase the feelings that many of the coup’s mestizo supporters have towards their indigenous compatriots, the mestizos believe the Indians are “uncivilized heathens” who “deserve” to live in ethnic “reservations” that would de-facto function as a Bolivian form of South Africa’s notorious “Bantustans”.

Putting pressure on this enormous segment of the population to “return to their rightful homes” for both physical safety and social security after being intimidated to leave the cities and having their affirmative action rights stripped from them unless they live in specific territorial zones could eventually accomplish the dual goals of Croatian-style ethnic cleansing and the imposition of South African-like apartheid.

All the while, these Indians would also risk becoming slaves to the neoliberal-globalist system that the coup plotters are planning to impose upon the country, therefore becoming second-class citizens once again after almost a decade and half of finally experiencing freedom.

It’s therefore incumbent upon the Indians to do everything within their power to put substantial international pressure on the new coup “authorities” and ensure that genuinely free and fair elections are held in order to avert this worst-case scenario before it’s too late and the world stops caring.

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Repost: Do the Yezidis Worship the Devil?

This is a repost of a repost. The first repost was fully 10 years ago. Amazingly the graphics carried over after the shut-down because the images were saved on my Blogger site, which is still up and running. Yay!

This is an awesome post if I do say so myself, though it looks like it needs an edit. Anyone interested in Comparative Religion, Paganism, Polytheism, Islam, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, the Middle East, Iraq, Iran, metaphysics, Middle Eastern History or even philosophy might want to look into this post.

I know it’s long. It runs to 35 pages on the web. But you can read it. I read it myself, more than once too! If I can do it, you can do it. If you are interested in this sort of thing, you might find it quite an enjoyable read. If it’s not your thing, well you can always pass it on by. But even if you are not normally interested in this stuff you might find it interesting because this post goes quite a bit beyond its obvious subject matter into a lot of more universal subjects.

Repost from the old site. This is a very, very long piece, so be warned. But the subject, the Yezidi religious group, is extraordinarily complex, as I found out as I delved deeper and deeper into them.

They are still very mysterious and there is a lot of scholarly controversy around them, mostly because they will not let outsiders read their holy books. However, a copy of their holiest book was stolen about 100 years ago and has been analyzed by scholars.

I feel that the analysis below of the Yezidis (there are various competing analyses of them) best summarizes what they are all about, to the extent that such an eclectic group can even be defined at all. The piece is hard to understand at first, but if you are into this sort of thing, after you study it for a while, you can start to put it together. There are also lots of cool pics of devil and pagan religious art below, for those who are interested in such arcana.

The Yezidis, a Kurdish religious group in Iraq practicing an ancient religion, have been accused of being devil worshipers by local Muslims and also by many non-Muslims.

The Yezidis appeared in Western media in 2007 due to the stoning death of a Yezidi teenage girl who ran off with a Muslim man. The stoning was done by eight men from her village while another 1000 men watched and cheered them on. Afterward, there has been a lot of conflict between Muslim Arabs and Yezidi Kurds.

As Western media turned to the Yezidis, there has been some discussion here about their odd religion. For instance, though the local Muslims condemn them as devil worshipers, the Yezidis strongly deny this. So what’s the truth? The truth, as usual, is much more complicated.

The Yezidis believe that a Creator, or God, created a set of deities that we can call gods, angels, or demons, depending on how you want to look at them. So, if we say that the Yezidis worship the devil, we could as well say that they worship angels. It all depends on how you view these deities.

In the history of religion, the gods of one religion are often the devils of another. This is seen even today in the anti-Islamic discourse common amongst US neoconservatives, where the Muslim God is said to be a demonic god, and their prophet is said to be a devilish man.

Christian anti-Semites refer to the Old Testament God of the Jews as being an evil god. Orthodox Jews say that Jesus Christ is being boiled alive in semen in Hell for eternity.

At any rate, to the Yezidis, the main deity created by God is Malak Taus, who is represented by a peacock. Although Yezidis dissimulate about this, anyone who studies the religion closely will learn that Malak Taus is actually the Devil.

On the other hand, the Yezidis do not worship evil as modern-day Satanists do, so the Satanist fascination with the Yezidis is irrational. The Yezidis are a primitive people; agriculturalists with a strict moral code that they tend to follow in life. How is it that they worship the Devil then?

First of all, we need to understand that before the Abrahamic religions, many polytheistic peoples worshiped gods of both good and evil, worshiping the gods of good so that good things may happen, and worshiping the gods of evil so that bad things may not happen. The Yezidis see God as a source of pure good, who is so good that there is no point in even worshiping him.

In this, they resemble Gnosticism, in which God was pure good, and the material world and man were seen as polluted with such evil that the world was essentially an evil place. Men had only a tiny spark of good in them amidst a sea of evil, and the Gnostics tried to cultivate this spark.

This also resembles the magical Judaism of the Middle Ages (Kabbalism). The Kabbalists said that God was “that which cannot be known” (compare to the Yezidi belief that one cannot even pray to God).

In fact, the concept of God was so ethereal to the Kabbalists that the Kabbalists said that not only was God that which cannot be known, but that God was that which cannot even be conceived of. In other words, mere men cannot not even comprehend the very concept of God. A Kabbalist book says that God is “endless pure white light”.  Compare to the Yezidi view that God “pure goodness”.

This comes close to my own view of what God is.

The Yezidi view of God is quite complex. It is clear that he is at the top of the totem pole, yet their view of him is not the same as that of the gods of Christianity, Islam, Judaism or the Greeks, although it is similar to Plato’s “conception of the absolute.”

Instead, it is similar to the Deists’ view of God. God merely created the world. As far as the day to day running of things, that is actually up to the intermediary angels. However, there is one exception. Once a year, on New Years Day, God calls his angels together and hands the power over to the angel who is to descend to Earth.

In some ways similar to the Christian Trinity of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost, the Yezidis believe that God is manifested in three forms.

An inscription of the Christian Trinity, the father, or God, as an old man with a beard; Jesus, a young man; and the Holy Ghost, here depicted as a winged creature similar to Malak Tus, the winged peacock angel. Compare to Yezidi reference for Šeiḫ ‘Adî, Yazid, and Malak Tus (Father, Son and Holy Ghost)

 

The three forms are the peacock angel, Malak Tus (the Holy Ghost); an old man, Šeiḫ ‘Adî (God or the Father) – compare to the usual Christian portrayal in paintings of God as an old man with a long white beard ; and a young man, Yazid (Jesus) – compare to the usual Christian paintings of Jesus as a healthy European-looking man with a beard and a beatific look. A similar look is seen in Shia portraits of Ali.

Since the Yezidis say there is no way to talk to God, one must communicate with him through intermediaries (compare to intermediary saints like Mary in Catholicism and Ali in Shiism). The Devil is sort of a wall between the pure goodness of God and this admittedly imperfect world.

This is similar again to Gnosticism, where the pure good God created intermediaries called Aeons so that a world that includes evil (as our world does) could even exist in the first place. On the other hand, Malak Tus is seen by the Yezidis as neither an evil spirit nor a fallen angel but as a divinity in his own right.

One wonders why Malak Tus is represented by a bird. The answer is that worshiping birds is one of the oldest known forms of idol worship. It is even condemned in Deuteronomy 4: 16, 17: “Lest ye corrupt yourselves and make a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air.”

More likely, the peacock god is leftover from the ancient pagan bird-devil gods of the region. The ancient Babylonians and Assyrians both worshiped sacred devil-birds, and carvings of them can be seen on their temples. The Zoroastrians also worshiped a sort of devil-bird called a feroher.

A winged demon from ancient Assyria. Yezidism appears to have incorporated elements of ancient Babylonian and Assyrian religions, making it ultimately a very ancient religion. Note that devils often have wings like birds. Remember the flying monkey demons in the Wizard of Oz?

 

The pagan Phoenicians, Philistines, and Samaritans worshiped a dove, and the early monotheistic Hebrews condemned the Samaritans for this idol-worship. The pagans of Mecca also worshiped a sacred dove. Pagan Arabian tribes also worshiped an eagle called Nasar.

What is truly odd is that peacocks are not native to the Yezidi region, but instead to the island of Sri Lanka. The Yezidis must have heard about this bird from travelers and incorporated it into their religion somehow.

In the Koran, both the Devil and the peacock were thrown out of Heaven down to Earth, with the Devil and the peacock both suffering similar punishments. So here we can see Islam also associating the peacock with the Devil.

In popular mythology, peacocks tend to represent pride. Note that the Koran says that the Devil was punished for excessive pride (compare with a similar Christian condemnation of excessive pride). Peacocks are problematic domestic fowl, tend to tear up gardens, and so are associated with mischief.

The Yezidis revere Malak Tus to such a great extent that he is almost seen as one with God (compare the Catholic equation of Mary with Jesus, the Christian association of Jesus with God, and the Shia Muslim association of Ali with Mohammad).

Malak Tus was there from the start and will be there at the end, he has total control over the world, he is omniscient and omnipresent, and he never changes. Malak Tus is the King of the Angels, and he is ruling the Earth for a period of 10,000 years. Yezidis do not allow anyone to say his name, as this is degrading to him.

Yezidis also superstitiously avoid saying an word that resembles the word for Satan. When speaking Arabic, they refuse to use the Arabic shatt for river, as it sounds like the word for Satan. They substitute Kurdish ave “river” instead. Compare this to the Kabbalist view of God as “that which can not even be comprehended (i.e., spoken) by man.”

In addition to Malak Taus, there are six other angels: Izrafael, Jibrael, Michael, Nortel, Dardael, Shamnael, and Azazael. They were all present at a meeting in Heaven at which God told them that they would worship no one other than him. This worked for 40,000 years, until God mixed Earth, Air, Fire, and Water to create Man as Adam.

God told the seven angels to bow before Adam, and six agreed. Malak Taus refused, citing God’s order to obey only Him. Hence, Malak Taus was cast out of Heaven and became the Archangel of all the Angels. Compare this to the Christian and Muslim view of the Devil, the head of the angels, being thrown out of Heaven for the disobedience of excessive pride.

In the meantime, Malak Taus is said to have repented his sins and returned to God as an angel.

So, yes, the Yezidis do worship the Devil, but in their religion, he is a good guy, not a bad guy. They are not a Satanic cult at all. In Sufism, the act of refusing to worship Adam (man) over God would be said to be a positive act – one of refusing to worship the created over the creator – since in Sufism, one is not to worship anything but God.

The Yezidis say that God created Adam and Eve, but when they were asked to produce their essences (or offspring), Adam produced a boy, but Eve produced an entity full of insects and other unpleasant things. God decided that he would propagate humanity (the Yezidis) out of Adam alone, leaving Eve out of the picture. Specifically, he married Adam’s offspring to a houri.

We can see the traditional views of the Abrahamic religions of women as being temptresses and sources of evil, conflict, and other bad things. The Yezidis see themselves as different from all other humans. Whereas non-Yezidis are the products of Adam and Eve, Yezidis are the products of Adam alone.

Eve subsequently left the Garden of Eden, which allowed the world to be created. So, what the Abrahamic religions see as man’s greatest fall in the Garden, the Yezidis see as mankind’s greatest triumphs. The Yezidis feel that the rest of humanity of is descended from Ham, who mocked his father, God.

Compare this to the Abrahamic religions’ view of women as a source of corruption. Christians say that Eve tempted Adam in the Garden of Eden, causing both of them to be tossed out. In Islam, women are regarded as such a source of temptation and fitna (dissension) that they are covered and often kept out of sight at all times. In Judaism, women’s hair is so tempting to men that they must shave it all off and wear wigs.

The Yezidis say they are descended directly from Adam, hence they are the Chosen People (compare to the Jewish view of themselves as “Chosen People”).

Yezidism being quite possible the present-day remains of the original religion of the Kurds, for the last 2,000 years, the Yezidis have been fighting off other major religions.

First Christianity came to the region.

As would be expected, the Nestorian Christians of Northern Iraq, or “Nasara” Christian apostates, as an older tradition saw them, hold that the Yezidis were originally Christians who left the faith to form a new sect. The Nestorians and other ancient Christian sects deny the human or dual nature of Jesus – instead seeing him as purely divine.

This is in contrast to another group also called “Nasara” in Koran – these being the early Jewish Christian sects such as the Ebionites, Nazarenes, and Gnostics who believed the opposite, since they regarded Jesus as purely human whereas Nestorians regarded Jesus as purely divine. These early sects believed only in the Book of Matthew, and retained many Jewish traditions, including revering the Jewish Torah, refusing to eat pork, keeping the Sabbath, and circumcision.

Mohammad apparently based his interpretation of Christianity on these early Christian sects which resemble Judaism a lot more than they resemble Christianity. Hence, the divinity of Jesus was denied in the Koran under Ebionite influence.

The Koran criticizes Christians for believing in three Gods – God, Jesus, and Mary – perhaps under the influence of what is called the “Marianistic heresy”. At the same time, the Koran confused human and divine qualities in Jesus due to Nestorian influence, so the Koran is of two minds about Jesus.

Finally, the Koran denied the crucifixion due to Gnostic influence, especially the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, hence the Koranic implication that modern Christians are actually Christian apostates having diverged from the true Christianity.

The local Muslim neighbors of the Yezidis, similarly, hold that the Yezidis are Muslim apostates, having originally been Muslims who left Islam to form a new religion.

Šeiḫ ‘Adî (full name Šeiḫ ‘Adî Ibn Masafir Al-Hakkari) was a Muslim originally from Bait Far, in the Baalbeck region of the Bekaa Valley of what is now Eastern Lebanon.

He is one of the tripartite of angels worshiped by the Yezidis  and was a Sufi Muslim mystic from Northern Iraq in the 1100’s. He attracted many followers, including many Christians and some Muslims who left their faith to become Yezidis. Yezidism existed before Šeiḫ ’Adî, but in a different form.

Šeiḫ ’Adî also attracted many Persian Zoroastrians who were withering under the boot of Muslim dhimmitude and occasional massacre in Iran.

He came to Mosul for spiritual reasons. Šeiḫ ’Adî was said to be a very learned man, and many people started to follow him. After he built up quite a following, he retired to the mountains above Mosul where he built a monastery and lived as a hermit, spending much of his time in caves and caverns in the mountains with wild animals as his only guests.

While he was living, his followers worshiped him as a God and believed that in the afterlife, they would be together with him. He died in 1162 in the Hakkari region near Mosul. At the site of his death, the his followers erected a shrine, and it later became one of the holiest sites Yezidism. However, Šeiḫ ’Adî is not the founder of Yezidism as many believe. His life and thought just added to the many strains in this most syncretistic of religions.

The third deity in the pseudo-“Trinity” of the Yezidis is a young man named Yezid. Yezidis say they are all descended from this man, whom they often refer to as God, but they also refer to Šeiḫ ’Adî as God. In Šeiḫ ’Adî’s temple, there are inscriptions to both Šeiḫ ’Adî and Yezid, each on opposing walls of the temple. In a corner of this temple, a fire  – or actually a lamp – is kept burning all night, reminiscent of Zoroastrianism.

There is a lot of controversy about what the word Yezid in Yezidi stands for. The religion itself, in its modern form, probably grew out of followers of Yazid Ibn Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan, the 2nd Caliph in the Umayyad Dynasty of Caliphs. Yazid fought a battle against Mohammad’s grandson, Hussayn, in a battle for the succession of the Caliphate.

Hussayn’s followers were also the followers of Ali, the former caliph who was assassinated. The followers of Hussayn and Ali are today known as the Shia. The Sunni follow in the tradition of the Umayyads. In a battle in Karbala in 680, Hussayn and all his men were killed at Kufa, and the women and children with them taken prisoner.

To the Shia, Yazid is the ultimate villain. Most Sunnis do not view him very favorably either, and regard the whole episode as emblematic of how badly the umma had fallen apart after Mohammad died.

Nevertheless, there had been groups of Sunnis who venerated Yazid Ibn Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan and the Umayyads in general in northern Iraq for some time even before Šeiḫ ’Adî appeared on the scene. Šeiḫ ’Adî himself was descended from the Umayyads.

Reverence for Yazid Ibn Muawiyah mixed with the veneration of Šeiḫ ’Adî in the early Yezidis. It was this, mixed in with the earlier pagan beliefs of the Semites and Iranians discussed elsewhere, along with a dollop of Christianity, that formed the base of modern Yezidism. But its ultimate roots are far more ancient. Yezidism had a base, but it was not formed in its modern version.

Here we turn to the etymology of the word Yezidi. It is possible that the figure of “Yezid”, the young man-God in the Yezidi trinity, represents Yazid Ibn Muawiyah.

By the mid-1200’s, the local Muslims were getting upset about the Yezidis excessive devotion to these two men. In the mid-1400’s the local Muslims fought a large battle against the Yezidis.

To this day, the top Yezidi mirs are all related to the Umayyads. Muslim scholars say that Yezid bin Unaisa was the founder of the modern-day Yezidis. Bin Unaisa was one of the early followers of the Kharijites, an early fanatical fundamentalist sect that resembled our modern-day Al Qaeda and other takfiri Salafi-jihadi terrorists. Bin Unaisa was said to be a follower of the earliest Kharijites.

These were the first Kharijites. Early split-offs from Ali’s army, they took part in the Battle of Nahrawan against Ali’s forces outside Madaen in what was known as the Triangle of Death in the Iraq War. In 661, the Kharijites assassinated Ali, one of the ultimate moments in the Sunni-Shia split.

At some point, bin Unaisa split from the Kharijites other than some of their early followers who were following a sect Al-Abaḍia, founded by ‘Abd-Allah Ibn Ibad who left with bin Unaisa. bin Unaisa said that a Muslim who committed any great sin was an infidel.

Considering his Islamic fundamentalist past, he also developed some very unorthodox views for a Muslim.

For instance, he said that God would send a new prophet to Persia (one more Iranian connection with the Yezidis). God would also send down a message to be written by this prophet in a book, and this prophet would leave Islam and follow the religion of the Sabeans or Mandeans. Nevertheless, he continued to hold some Kharijite beliefs, including that God alone should be worshiped and that all sins were forms of idolatry.

In line with this analysis, the first Yezidis were a sect of the Kharijites. The fact that bin Unaisa said that the new prophet would follow Sabeanism implies that he himself either followed this religion at one time or had a high opinion of it.

Muslim historians mention three main Sabean sects. All seemed to have derived in part from the ancient pagan religion of Mesopotamia. Sabeans were polytheists who worshiped the stars. After the Islamic conquest, they referred to themselves as Sabeans in order to receive protection as one of the People of the Book (the Quran mentions Jews, Christians, and Sabeans and People of the Book).
One of the Sabean sects was called Al-Ḫarbâniyah.

The Sabeans believed that God dwelt within all things that were good and rational. He had one essence but many appearances, in other words. God was pure good and could not make anything evil. Evil was either accidental, necessary for life, or caused by an evil force. They also believed in the transmigration of souls (reincarnation).

It is interesting that the beliefs of this sect of Sabeans resemble the views of modern Yezidis. Therefore we can assume that Yezîd bn Unaisa believed in God and the Resurrection Day, respected angels and the stars, and yet was neither polytheistic nor a true follower of Mohammad.

At the same time, bn Unaisa lined himself up with those People of the Book who said that Mohammad was a prophet yet did not follow him (in this respect, he was similar to Western non-Muslims who acknowledge Mohammad as the prophet of the Arabs).

Although most orthodox histories of the Yezidis leave it out, it seems clear at this point that Yezîd bn Unaisa was the founder of the Yezidi religion in its modern form and that the Yezidis got their name from Yezîd bn Unaisa. This much may have been lost to time, for the Yezidis now say say that the word Yezidi comes from the Kurdish word Yezdan or Êzid meaning God.

After naming their movement after Yezîd bn Unaisa, the Yezidis learned of Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s reputation and become his followers, along with many Muslims, Christians, and Zoroastrians.

Presently, like their founder, the Yezidis believe in God and the Resurrection, expect a prophet from Iran, revere angels and stars, regard every sin as idolatry, respect Mohammad as a prophet yet do not follow him, yet at the same time pay no attention to Ali (recall that the early Kharijites assassinated Ali). Being opposed in a sense to both Mohammad and Ali, bn Unaisa is logically despised by both the Sunni and the Shia.

The fact that the Yezidis renounced the prophet of the Arabs (Mohammad) while expecting a new one from Iran logically appealed to a lot of Persians at the time. Hence, many former Zoroastrians or fire-worshipers from Iran joined the new religion, injecting their strain into this most syncretistic of religions.

There is good evidence that many Yezidis are former Christians.

The Yezidis around Mosul go by the surname of Daseni or Dawasen in the plural. Long ago, there was a Nestorian diocese in Mosul called Daseni or Dasaniyat. It disappeared around the time of Šeiḫ ’Adî. The implication is that so many of the members of this Diocese became Yezidis that the Diocese collapsed.

Furthermore, many names of Yezidi villages are actually words in the local Syriac (Christian) language, more evidence that many Yezidis are former Christians.

Adding even more weight to this theory, the Yezidis retain two Christian customs – the baptism and the Eucharist.

The Yezidis must baptize their children at the earliest possible age. At the baptism, the priest puts his hand on the child’s head as he performs the rite. Both customs mirror the Christian baptism precisely.

When a Yezidi couple marries, they go to a local Nestorian Church to partake of the Eucharist. The cup of wine they drink is called the Cup of Isa (Jesus). The Yezidis have great respect for Christian saints and houses of worship and kiss the doors and walls of churches when they enter them.

When a Yezidi woman goes to the home of her bridegroom on wedding day, she is supposed to visit every every religious temple along the way, even the churches. On the other hand, Yezidis never enter a mosque. Sadly, the Yezidi reverence for Christianity is not returned by the Eastern Christians, who despise the Yezidis as devil-worshipers.

Yezidis revere both Jesus and Mohammad as religious teachers, not as prophets. The group has survived via a hefty dose of taqqiya, or the Muslim tradition of dissimulation to ward off persecution, in this case pretending outwardly to be some type of Shia Muslim.

This is common for minority faiths around the region, including the Alawi and Druze, who have both proclaimed at the top of their lungs that they are Muslims and have hidden to the aspects of their religion which would cause the Muslims to disown them at best or kill them at worst.

Yet the primary Islamic influence on the Yezidis is actually Sufism, not Shiism per se. But even the fundamentalist Shiism practiced in Iran is very friendly to Sufism, while fundamentalist Sunnism is very hostile to this form of Islam.

There are traces of other religions. Hinduism may possibly be seen in the five Yezidi castes, from top to bottom Pir, Shaikh, Kawal, Murabby, and Mureed (followers).

The Yezidi caste called Mureeds are unfortunately about on a par with Dalits or Untouchables in Hinduism. Marriage across castes is strictly forbidden in Yezidism, as it has been disapproved in India.

Pre-Islamic Iran (Zoroastrianism) also had a caste system, and the base of the Yezidi religion seems to be derived from Persian Zoroastrianism. Hindu caste dates from 3,500 YBP.  The suggestion is that going back a few thousand years, caste was common in human societies and caste-based religions were religion. So caste may be the leftovers of an ancient human tradition.

The Yezidi, like the Druze and the Zoroastrians, do not accept converts, and like the Druze, think that they will be reincarnated as their own kind (Druze think they will be reincarnated as Druze; Yezidis think they will be reincarnated as Yezidis).

The Yezidis can be considered fire-worshipers in a sense; they obviously inherited this from the Zoroastrians. The Yezidis say, “Without fire, there would be no life.” This is true even in our modern era, for if we substitute “electrical power” for fire, our lives would surely diminish. Even today, when Kurdish Muslims swear on an oath, they say, “I swear by this fire…”

Many say there is a resemblance between Malak Taus and the Assyrian God Tammuz, though whether the name Malak Taus is actually derived from Tammuz is much more problematic. This connection is not born out by serious inquiry. Tammuz was married to the Assyrian moon goddess, Ishtar.

Ishtar the Goddess of the Moon, here represented as a bird goddess. Worship of birds is one of the oldest forms of pagan idolatry known to man. What is it about birds that made them worthy of worship by the ancients? It can only be the miracle of flight.

 

Where do the Yezidis come from? The Yezidis themselves say that they originally came from the area around Basra and the lower Euphrates, then migrated to Syria, and from there went to Sinjar, Mosul, and Kurdistan.

In addition to worshiping a bird-god, there are other traces of the pre-Islamic pagan religions of the Arabs in Yezidism.

Yezidis hold the number seven sacred, a concept that traces back to the ancient Mesopotamians. The Yezidis have seven sanjaks, and each one has seven burners of the flame. Their God created seven angels. The sculpture carved on the temple of Šeiḫ ’Adî has seven branches.

The Sabeans, another ancient religion of Mesopotamia who are now called star-worshipers by their detractors, also worshiped seven angels who guided the courses of seven planets. Believe it or not, it is from this formulation that our seven days of the week are derived. In the ancient religion of Assyria, Ishtar descended through seven gates to the land of no return. The ancient Hebrews likewise utilized the number seven in their religion.

An ancient seven-armed candelabra, a symbol nowadays used in the Jewish religion, with demonic sea monsters drawn on the base.

 

The Yezidis worship both the sun and moon at both their rising and setting, following the ancient Ḥarranians, a people who lived long ago somewhere in northern Iraq. Sun-worship and moon-worship are some of the oldest religious practices of Man. The ancient pagans of Canaan worshiped the Sun.

At the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, the religion practiced there had little in common with Talmudic Judaism of today. For instance, the horses of the Sun were worshiped at that temple (see II Kings 25: 5, 11). The ancient Judeans, who the modern-day Jews claim spiritual connection with, actually worshiped the “host of heaven” – the Sun, the Moon and the Planets. So much for Jews being “the original monotheists”, eh?

In Babylonia, there were two temples to the Sun-God Shamas.

Another pre-Islamic Arab pagan belief is the belief in sacred wells and sanctuaries that contain them. These sacred springs contain water that has curative powers. The holy water found at the Zamzam Well in Mecca is an example; even to this day, Muslims bottle the water and carry it off for this very purpose. Often sacred clothes are used to make the pilgrimages to these waters because ordinary clothes are thought to contaminate the holy site.

In pre-Islamic days, when the pagans circled the rock at the Kaaba, they were completely naked. In Islam, men and women are supposed to remove their clothing and wear a special garb as they circulate around the rock. In Mandeanism, both men and women go to the Mishkana or tabernacle, take off their clothes, and bathe in the circular pool. Emerging, they put on the rasta, a ceremonial white garment.

At the temple of Šeiḫ ‘Adî, there is a sacred pool. The Yezidis throw coins, jewelry, and other things into this pool as offerings. They think that Šeiḫ ‘Adî takes these things from time to time. They also must remove their clothes, bathe, and wear a special garment when they visit the holy valley where this temple resides.

The ancient Arabs also worshiped trees. There were sacred trees at Nejran, Hadaibiya, and Mecca. The pagans hung women’s ornaments, fine clothes, ostrich eggs, weapons, and other items from these sacred trees.

Similarly, the Yezidis also worship trees. They have their favorite trees, and sick people go to these trees and hang pieces of cloth on them, hoping to get well. They believe that whoever takes one of these down will get sick with whatever disease the person who hung the cloth had.

An inscription of a sacred tree from Ancient Babylonian civilization. Trees were worshiped not just in ancient Arabia; they were also worshiped in Mesopotamia.

The Christian Trinity combined with the pagan Tree of Life in an interesting ancient Chaldean inscription that combines pagan and Christian influences. The Tree of Life was also utilized in Kabbalism, Jewish mysticism from the Middle Ages. Nowadays the symbol is used by practitioners of both White and Black Magic. Radical Islam committed genocide once again on the Christians of Iraq, including the Chaldeans earlier in the Iraq War.

 

Yet another Tree of Life, this time from ancient Assyria, an ancient civilization in Mesopotamia. The concept of a tree of life is a pagan concept of ancient pedigree.

The ancient Meccans used to worship stones. At one point the population of Mecca became so large that they had to move out of the valley where the Kaaba resided, so when the former Meccans formed their new settlements, they took rocks from the holy place in Mecca, piled them outside their settlements, and shrine or mini-Meccas out of these things, parading around the rock piles as they moved around the Kaaba.

In Palestine, there were sacred wells at Beersheba and Kadesh, a sacred tree at Shekem, and a sacred rock at Bethel. As in animism, it was believed that divine powers or spirits inhabited these rocks, trees, and springs. This tradition survives to this day in the folk religion of the Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese.

The Yezidis also have certain stones that they worship. They kiss these stones in reverence.
When the Yezidis reach the goal of their pilgrimage or hajj, they become very excited and start shouting. After fasting all day, they have a big celebration in the evenings, with singing, dancing, and gorging on fine dishes.

This hajj, where they worship a spring under Šeiḫ ‘Adî’s tomb called Zamzam and then climb a mountain and shoot off guns, is obviously taken from the Muslim hajj. Mecca also has a Zamzam Spring, and pilgrims climb Mount ‘Arafat on hajj.

The shouting, feasting, singing, dancing and general excitement is typical of a pagan festival. The non-Yezidi neighbors of the Yezidis claim that Yezidis engage in immoral behavior on this hajj. No one knows if this is true or not, but if they do, it may be similar to the festivals of the Kadesh tribe discussed in the Old Testament, where the Kadesh engaged in licentious behavior in their temples.

Although the Yezidis have a strict moral code, observers say that they allow adultery if both parties are willing. That’s pretty open-minded for that part of the world.

What Should Be Done about Black People?

Alpha Unit: What do you propose, Robert? What should be done about Black people?

Nothing! I object to the question in the first place. The truth is that there’s nothing whatsoever wrong with Black people. Per se. There’s nothing wrong with Alpha. We have had many Blacks coming to this site for many years, and there was not a damned thing wrong with any of them. Or, more accurately, they were no more screwed up, dysfunctional, or poorly behaved than your average White person.

There’s literally nothing wrong with being Black. Per se.

There’s the rib.  I don’t care if Black people are screwed up, nuts, poorly behaved, irresponsible, impetuous, impulsive, dysfunctional, poorly behaved, failed, aggressive, violent, criminal, or even murderous.

We all are. Humans are all of those things.  White people are all of those things. I assure you that you can find more Whites than you can count that have all of these qualities in spades. I’ve been meeting them my whole life. I ought to be more scared of Whites than Blacks.

As long as Black people have those qualities at the same levels as my people, it’s all good. No one’s asking for perfection for God’s sake.

I refer to a certain type of Black person below.

No Black has ever harmed me physically. They’ve menaced me, sure. They’ve stolen from me, oh Hell yeah! That’s a Black specialty of a certain type of Black person – thievery! They’ve conned me and manipulated the living hell out of me. Of course. A certain type of Black person are masters of con artistry and manipulating others.

They’ve displayed a remarkably low level of empathy towards me – in short, they really cared nothing whatsoever about me, my feelings, needs, and desires, how they hurt me, how they made me feel.

They also felt absolutely zero guilt over how they harmed me in remarkably non-empathetic, psychopathic-appearing manners. Low empathy for others is another Black specialty of a certain type of Black person. They display this more than any other race, and they excel at this quality.

They don’t all display this!

But if you look at the group as a whole, yes, Blacks have lower empathy than Whites. Maybe 2X lower. Or put another way, Whites are twice as empathetic as Blacks. Nevertheless, most of both Blacks and Whites probably have empathy levels somewhere in the normal range.

Blacks are also more psychopathic than Whites. Maybe 2X higher. But most Blacks are not psychopaths. Perhaps 4% of Black men are psychopaths. Perhaps 2% of White men are psychopaths.

But when it comes to subclinical psychopathy (1-19 on the PCL).  Black scores are 2X as high as Whites. Scores of 1-19 on the PCL are within the normal range. That is, if you score in that range, you are not a clinical psychopath. But that doesn’t mean that you don’t have any psychopathy going on. It’s more that your psychopathy is at a low enough level that we choose you call you normal and non-psychopathic.

Say your average White scores a 6 on the PCL. Perhaps your average Black scores a 12 on the PCL. Neither average person is a psychopath in any way. They are both within the normal range.

Although both are normal and not psychopaths, the Black will still be more psychopathic than the White. That is because the PCL allows quite a bit of psychopathy while still classing one as normal. It’s only when one’s psychopathy starts getting seriously out of line (PCL score => 20) that we call someone a clinical psychopath.

Look.

I refer to a certain type of Black person here and you all know exactly who I am talking about. You hang around enough Black people long enough and you will be:

1. Victimized. Repeatedly. In some way or another. If you are extremely careful of the Blacks you associate with, you can avoid this, but most of us are not so picky and lucky.

2. Stolen from. They’re going to rip you off by hook or by crook, one way or another. I will say that it is normally for small amounts, less than $100 and usually less than $30. Black people nickel and dime you to death. Petty thievery, often less than $30 a shot, is habitual and nearly an everyday thing for a certain type of Black people. I’ve never had a Black person steal more than $80 from me though.

Once again, if you are very choosy about the Blacks you associate with, you will never be a victim of thievery, but most Whites are not so picky. Perhaps we ought to be.

I want to help Black people. Not the Blacks who hang out here. They don’t need my help because there’s nothing wrong with them. They don’t need to be fixed.

But maybe there’s a lot of others who do. I think Black behavior as a race, a whole, is a serious problem. Not on an individual level. But there’s enough “of us acting bad,” as Tulio puts it (“Face it, we don’t act very good”) that it is a serious problem.

And that problem hits Black people more than any other race. In fact, it out and out nukes them. Well, maybe Black people enjoy being Holocausted like this. But I doubt it. It’s not an openly suicidal race in the way that any human is suicidal. Blacks don’t like it, they think it’s a problem, but they have no idea what to do about it.

And when antiracists shut down the whole public health crisis, incarceration crisis, “behavioral crisis,” etc. in the Black community, it is curious. They don’t want to help their own people.

89% of Black homicides are at other Blacks. The rest of us get off easy. Blacks are going out of their way not to murder us!

And they are going out of their way not to rape us either. Or not to victimize us at all. WN’s scream about how many White women Black men rape every year. Well it’s a lot. They throw up how many Black women White men rape, which is around zero.

Well, so what? There are 5X fewer Black women than White women. And 5X more of them get raped by Black men every year than White women. You do the math. 10X more likely to get raped than White women? Why aren’t Black women screaming about this?

I mean some are – check the website What about Our Daughters? But mostly it is this conspiracy of silence, and everyone who brings it up gets called racist and shut down. Standing up for Black victims of Black crime, Black murder, and rape victims is racism? Wow. So we better not discuss it? Because talking about victims and standing up for Black victims is racism. If you do that, you’re a Nazi.

Mostly I blame Black people for all of this. Look: What’s the reason for all of this? Three choices:

1. Evil racists forces a lot of Black people to act terrible.
2. Bad Black genes make a lot of Black people inherently messed up and dangerous.
3. Certain lousy Black cultures cause a lot of Black people to act awful.

I reject #1. I don’t feel like supporting #2 at the moment, though there might be something to it. Anyway, genes are not destiny.

I’ll take Door #3. But when I do that, I am an evil racist. See?

The only acceptable answer is #1. Project the blame over on Whites, blame Whites for all of this, and wage forever wars against racism because bad Black behavior never ends. The theory says that if Blacks act bad, it’s racism that’s doing it. And Blacks will keep acting bad. As long as they do, there will, by this theory, be horrible racism problem in the US. Which we need a forever war against. Follow?

But what if the theory is wrong? What if it’s not racism that is causing the problem? Then the endless wars on racism are worthless. We are using the wrong cure for the problem. That never fixes anything. Even if you cannot observe the racism in society (we are getting there), there always must be horrific racism even if it’s invisible. Bad Black behavior proves that.

Nowadays you can’t see a lot of anti-Black racism. But it’s obviously still horribly there. Black behavior proves it.

So we get all these theories to explain the racism that must obviously be there because Black behavior proves it is there.

How can there be racism if we can’t even see it anymore? Well it must be invisible. It’s must be “structural racism.” The structures themselves are horribly racist, but we can’t even see it. They just are.

Then there’s all this invisible racism. Turns out Whites have racist minds even if they don’t act racist. Well, those White people’s racist thoughts are forcing Blacks to act bad. So White people are thought criminals and need to start thinking differently, right?

Not too much obvious discrimination and hate? Well then that must be invisible too. It can’t be seen because it’s at the micro level. Hence we have microaggressions.

Every little tiny micro-behavior hurts Blacks and makes them act bad. Well, no matter how many wars on microaggressions and structural racism we wage, they will never go away since as long as Black people act bad, these invisible racisms will still be there, as the theory proves.

So we are waging a forever war against something we can’t see, something that probably isn’t even causing the problem in the first place, and something that will always be there no matter how hard we fight it.

That seems like a bad idea. It also seems really dumb.

Alt Left: Some Dynamics of Black and White Cultures in the US – Culture Clash and Hellscapes

Blacks will never understand White feelings towards them because they did not grow up in our culture. If Blacks grew up in White culture, and yes, it is absolutely a thing despite what the White self-haters say, Blacks would have figured this out a long time ago. More than anything else, it is a set of values. Fairly strict and serious values, not as serious as the Asians, but pretty damned serious, especially with very strict rules about politeness, appropriate behavior, and whatnot.

If you consistently go below the bar in White culture, people will get in your face, scream and  yell at you, cause huge scenes in public. Scenes in public are outrageous in White culture and either mean someone is deranged or someone is in horrible violation of codes.

If you consistently violate the moral rules of White culture like 50% of Blacks routinely do, in White society, you will literally be thrown out of restaurants, stores, and homes, and people will make big scenes when they do it.

People will even start retaliating against you – throwing rocks at you, stealing your stuff, vandalizing your property. Someone might leave dogshit on your front porch. And you are cruising for a bruising too. You simply going to get hit if you keep this up.

For this reason, there are multitude of things that “You just don’t do!” in this nonexistent White culture of ours. A lot of the time it is too strict. I was fired from a job for taking a sick day on the 10th day of a new job. The response from the depraved Normie faggot boss who fired me: “You just don’t do that! You just don’t do that!” But I was sick.

Whites do not look at “Black culture” because there is no such thing. There are various Black cultures here in the US, maybe 20-30 of them. Quite a few are functional. Alpha has shown me this and I am very thankful to her for that. I will be indebted to her for this for the rest of my life.

But there are certain Black cultures, mostly urban and modern, which fall into the rubric of ghetto or low class Black cultures. Perhaps 50% of Blacks live in cultures of this type.

They are different but they all have certain things in common. In these cultures the sort of behavior that will very quickly make you persona non-grata in any White community is done habitually, casually, on a daily basis without a thought in the world. And that’s when they are acting pretty good.

When they are acting bad, which is very regularly, their behavior is off the charts menacing, criminal, dangerous and often deranged, unfathomable, or simply insane.

In White communities, we don’t deal with much open criminal behavior. Armed robbery and homicides are rare. We feel safe most of the time. We usually don’t feel menaced except by a few psychos and punks who everyone hates.

Black cultures in the US have six times more crime and eight times more violent crime than White  societies. You can’t expect Whites to not notice or react to discrepancies like that! But if we notice it we’re evil!

Blacks never grew up in our White culture, so they will never understand what sort of otherworldly violations of our moral and politeness cultural rules so many Blacks engage in as automatically as breathing.

Further, those of us who are liberal are concerned. Bad Black culture mostly impacts Black people. Antiracists literally don’t care about how these cultures holocaust their own Black communities because even to acknowledge this fact is racist in and of itself. For these Blacks, mention of the facts above are all bad PR, so it’s like the problems are not even there.

Blacks get their pride and ego hurt by the truths of Black culture and behavior, so they shut it all down, deny that these truths exist, project the bad Black behavior onto Whites, and claim that Whites are the awful, criminal, evil people. This stuff is Psychology 100.

But we White liberals care so much more than antiracist types about the devastating effects of Black cultures on Black people themselves than antiracists do. To us it looks like a Holocaust. We see how many Blacks are horribly victimized, damaged, traumatized, assaulted, robbed, beat up, shot at, and even murdered by their own culture. Our sympathy is with these Black victims.

Antiracists literally do not care about these victims because to acknowledge them hurts their feelings, so it’s off the table. Fighting evil racism is more important that acknowledging the truths about Black cultures and showing sympathy for these urban battlefields full of wounded and killed Blacks that their own culture causes. Fighting racism is more important than the Holocaust of Black victims of their own cultures.

We want to help the victims. We want to ameliorate the problem. We look out there and see Black society at large as a clusterfuck, a public health crisis (the Black victims are actually a public health crisis in and of themselves), and near warzones. You can’t expect liberals not to be concerned with literal warzones as bad as Iraq in our big cities.

Mostly this does not affect us because we are not victimized by it. 90% of the victims are Black. We care about these people – care much more than antiracists. It breaks our hearts.

We are appalled. And we are shocked. Shocked that these conditions exist in our society. It’s a black eye and an embarrassment.

Because this is a clusterfuck and a holocaust of Black people, some liberals care. It’s obvious that there are problems here.

This caring means we are literally evil.

We are not pessimists. We do not think this situation is genetically doomed. We are trying to figure out why it happens and make some suggestions for improving this matter – in order to save Black lives, preserve Black bodies, make Black cities livable, and to keep so many Blacks from being victimized.

And for this, the antiracists condemns us. Why? It’s embarrassing. It hurts their egos. It’s humiliating.

Well, we care more about helping all those Black victims than we about the hurt egos of antiracists, sorry about that.

Alt Left: African Blacks Act Dramatically Worse Than American Blacks

Polar Bear: Read an article on a Sub-Saharan African gang raping dogs.

Nothing really surprises me when it comes to depravity in Black Africa. But I would like to point out something. Even the worst of our US Blacks have some standards. Sure the low class ghetto type group acts awful, but do the men form street gangs that go around raping stray dogs? I mean even our ghetto thugs have certain things that are completely beneath them.

A lot of Whites think that a certain large group of Blacks act pretty bad, and in fact they do.

But I would like to tell you something. I have met Sub-Saharan African Blacks from Africa. Most were from Nigeria. I had a Yahoo group for people who were scammed by Nigerian scammers.

At one point a lot of Nigerians came into the group. They claimed to be “helping us to fight the scammers.” Well, they almost all tried to scam us themselves. And these were the good ones!

The men’s behavior was horrific. We had cam sessions and most of the group was women. So it would be just me and maybe one other man and a room full of women. Yet the Africans were constantly PMing the women on cam, and when the women would go look at their cams, the Africans would all be jerking off. Some of the women got freaked out by this.

And as I said, most of them tried to steal from us at some point or another. It was always “I had a catastrophe. Can you help me?” Or “I need to start a business. Can you help me?” They always had their hands out.

And most of the men were what we called “marriage scammers.” They were trying to marry a White woman to get out of Nigeria. However, these marriages almost never work out. The men are habitual cheaters and they treat women terribly. The women don’t take kindly to being held prisoner.

The men refuse to work and just live off the women. They stay home all day and chase women on dating sites or try to scam people out of money. The marriages are disastrous and never last.

Anyway, my point is we had some US Blacks in the group. First of all, most of them were not part of “that group” of Blacks that causes all the problems. They were just regular decent Black folk that no one ever talks about. We did have one guy who was part of “that group.” His behavior was very bizarre and he was quite shady. We finally figured out that he was a psychopath, and we threw him out. But he was the only one. ~95% of the US Blacks in our group were ok.

Almost none of these Africans were ok. Maybe 5%. And the ones that did act good spent all their time defending the ones that acted bad.

Eventually we had to throw all the Africans out. and we had to institute a totally racist “No African Blacks” rule in the group. A bunch of people called us racists and took off to form a new group with a bunch of the Africans. Thing is we had to be racist in this case. There was simply no alternative but racism. Anything less was not going to work.

But I had a shocking realization. The behavior of these Africans was just awful. They were a bunch of uncivilized animals. And compared to them, the US Blacks looked positively angelic. Granted this is the group that acts fine and no one talks about. But they were very easy to find, and it was very hard to find one African who acted decent. There may be tens of millions of Black people just like that here in the US.

I almost wanted to shout for joy and praise God for leaving us with these wonderful African-Americans! It could have been so much worse. He could have left us with these awful Africans!

And another thing dawned on me. US Blacks are not far removed genetically from Africans. So why is their behavior so dramatically better? Look, it’s got to be culture. These US Blacks have been living here with us for hundreds of years.

Although they will probably never admit it, hundreds of years of exposure to White Christian culture has probably had a dramatic effect on US Blacks. They probably acted about like these Africans when they showed up. But they’ve gotten dramatically more civilized over the centuries to where 20 million of them don’t act a whole lot different from us.

And this was even with White people acting pretty damn bad towards Blacks. We enslaved them for hundreds of years, and then there was a century of Jim Crow. Even for a couple of decades after that, things were not real great. Yet somehow or other, even when we acted awful, our culture must have worn off on them.Even when we treated them terribly, their behavior got a lot better. How much better would they have acted if we had treated them well?

I’ve been saying here forever now that White people have a good effect on Blacks. Throw a few ghetto Blacks into a White town and watch them shape up dramatically. Whites serve as good cultural role models for Blacks, even the worst ones. I think it’s good for Black people to like Whites. Blacks who like White people seem to do a lot better than those who are hostile towards us. As awful as we’ve been towards US Blacks, it was probably still better than staying in Africa.

I think we ought to give US Blacks a bit of a break. You don’t realize how great they act until you meet Africans. Their behavior and culture has improved dramatically over centuries in the US. Let’s give them some credit. A metaphorical pat on the back and a cheer of encouragement, if you will.

Alt Left: White Nationalists Are Fighting a War Against Time

Jason: So as I was saying, they’re constantly moaning about multiracialism (corrected), but they don’t get that the country IS multiracial. It’s not Jews trying to push something that isn’t already here.

Exactly. Damn you are on a roll tonight, Jason. You can’t push something that’s already here. Bingo.

These WN’s are literally fighting a war against Time. They are reactionaries in the true sense. They literally want to turn back to clock back to 1950’s America.

Mixed Race Ads in the US Media

There seems to be a lot of them lately, and of course, White Nationalists don’t like it. However, the problem is that the US IS multicultural, and when you have a multicultural nation, people will mix. Telling them not to is unnatural and dumb. I mean, there are things like boys and girls bathrooms in the US, but seriously, segregation beyond that is abominable.

Now, when I say mix, I mean people will naturally mix in everywhere, including sexually, if there’s a multicultural nation. In fact, the US was a multi-thing even in the 50s to some extent. There were Blacks, but they weren’t represented in the mainstream media in proportion to how many that actually existed.

O.K., what’s the solution for WN’s? They have to quit blaming Cultural Marxism as if the norm in a multicultural nation isn’t for people to interact in every way and concentrate on making the US no longer multicultural (fat chance of that!) or on just leaving the country.

Where has apartheid been tried and failed?

We know it has in South Africa and the Southeast USA, but not because of Jews as WN’s say but because it’s simply an inhuman way of dealing with a multicultural nation. It’s doomed to destruction from the start.

Portrait of a Sex Fetish – Black Women Who Are “White Men Only”

Jason: Apolitical people are a lot cooler but there is so much pressure to be political or you get regarded as a sort of “Uncle Tom of your group”.

Well, I’d like to be friends with more people on social media, but there’s just too much Identity Politics on their timelines (White Redneck, Black, Gay – whatever).

Sure. I’m not against gay rights. I am a strong supporter of gay rights. I’m against Gay IP, a toxic monstrosity. I am not against Black rights. I am against Black IP! Incidentally, Blacks who are deep into Black IP, which is a vast % of them, strike me as being not very happy. They always seem miserable and pissed off.

On the contrary I have encountered a number of Blacks, mostly Black women, who are “White lovers.” A lot of these Black women are into a sex fetish called “White Men Only” or “White Cock Only.” It is an actual fetish or movement with a lot of memes of Black women saying they only want White men and telling Black guys to get lost. I don’t imagine Black men like that very much, but I am not a Black guy.

And all of these women who absolutely love Whites, especially White men, seem to be very happy people. And their behavior is pretty good.

They do not act bad in that typical Black Underclass or Ghetto Culture way. I assume they don’t because most Whites simply will not put up with the constant bullshit you have to deal with in people from that culture.

Some of the women into this White Men Only fetish are still more or less ghetto in a lot of ways. I saw the porn blogs of two young Black women into this fetish who were pretty ghetto. They were both in their early 20’s, and each had a kid already with no man in sight, which is a typical outcome for young women in this culture.

Nevertheless, I thought they acted pretty good for ghetto type women. They didn’t seem dangerous. They didn’t even seem thieving. I felt that if these women had not been into White Men Only, they would have been acting a lot worse. In other words, going White Men Only dramatically improved the behavior of these women.

After I encountered a lot of these White Men Only women, I happened across some Tumblr non-porn blogs of Blacks who were deep into Black IP, which is pretty much the majority of them nowadays.

They didn’t seem very happy. They were all about racism against Blacks, and some were very involved in Black local politics. You can be angry and happy, but these people did not seem like that. Instead they seemed somewhat miserable and pissed off. They were not having a good one.

Now in contrast the White Men Only Black women never say one word about White racism or racism against Blacks at all. No doubt they are effected by it, but they are simply not concerned about such things.

Now according to Black IP most of us Whites are pretty much flat evil and are behind this mysterious nebulous systemic or structural racism against Blacks, and that’s when we are not out and out nigger haters of varying intensities.

Well, if that were true wouldn’t these White Men Only Black women be experiencing a lot of racism, certainly systemic racism, from the White men they are dating? I mean those White men probably treat them bad right, since most Whites really hate Blacks?

Instead they are very happy and say that White people treat them great. In fact many of these women actually look up to Whites as role models for themselves and their race. The fact that these White Men Only Black women experience mostly nothing but pleasantness and kindness from Whites and deal with little racism makes one wonder just how racist White people really are.

Which lets us in on a dirty little secret of Black-White relations. Guess what, Black people? If you like us we treat you a whole lot better! Amazing, isn’t it?  You know, just like for most human contacts? If you act like you don’t like us Whites, we are not very nice to you.

A recent survey showed that 31% of Whites could be described as anti-Black racists. That figure does not surprise me. It’s probably out of three of us. But look at the opposite figure. 70% of us Whites are not particularly racist against Blacks at all. That’s most of us. Some would describe that as “the vast majority of Whites are not all that racist towards Blacks.”

My conclusion is that Black IP is from the very start based on a false premise about White people that most Whites hate Blacks and we are out to do them wrong.

They also blame all of the sadly considerable failures and discrepancies of the Black race on this all-present racism. Well that’s a convenient excuse for Blacks, isn’t it?

How many times have you ever seen someone screwing up and then insisting it wasn’t their fault, they did nothing wrong and instead it was someone else’s fault and they are just a victim of this other person?

It’s a convenient out and this is probably why humans seem to love being victims. Being a victim gives you an out. You no longer have responsibility for your behavior, and in fact you lack agency altogether due to your victimhood. You are simply at the mercy of the evil oppressors who will do with you what they will.

 

Alt Left: The Flat Out Truth for Black People: The Vast Majority of Whites Do Not Particularly Dislike You

This is the flat out truth for Black people:

Most Whites don’t hate you.

There is no such thing as systemic or structural racism. Yes, 1/3 of Whites don’t like you, but that’s not most of us. Deal with it. Life’s tough. Life’s not fair. Life’s a bitch and then you die. You need to just toughen up and deal with a reality where a good third of Whites don’t like them. You need to get a thicker skin.

Most of your many problems are your own damned fault. I assume that there’s nothing wrong with Black genes (a big if) so that means that your culture is the source of most of Black problems since we know these problems are not due to racism.

Or should I say certain Black cultures or subcultures because there are Black subcultures that are pretty good as I am just now discovering. But the problem ghetto culture that causes most Black problems has ensnared over 50% of you, or at least of your women. That’s my impression from dating sites. On Tinder a good half of the Black women on there are more or less part of that culture. On Bumble it’s not much different.

You already have most rights. The problem isn’t lack of rights, but instead it is simply that far too many of you  act far too lousy. Yes, many Whites act lousy too, and a lot of Whites act pretty damned lousy. But the issue is that far more Blacks than Whites behave badly and their bad behavior is generally worse in quality than White bad behavior.

I have decided that the main problem with Blacks in that ghetto culture (and I have known quite a few) is lack of empathy. They simply have less empathy than the rest of us. They are not without empathy since most are not actual psychopaths, but they have a lot less empathy than Whites.

They also take responsibility for nothing and blame everything on the people that they victimize. In other words, they victimize you in some way or other and then insist that they didn’t or that you victimized yourself or that somehow you acted so horrible that it was within their rights to victimize you.

They are basically what I would call scammers. They more or less scam their way through life and victimize large numbers of people, often in minor ways, on a near quotidian basis.

And most of them have elevated psychopathy or sociopathy. I do not mean they are psychopaths, though I have definitely run into Black psychopaths.

Psychopathy exists on a scale of 0-40 and both zero’s and 40’s are not common, however, Ted Bundy was unusual in that he actually scored a perfect 40 on the PCL. Most of us  do not have zero psychopathy so you can say that we are all at least a bit psychopathic in some way or other. Low levels of psychopathy are not a problem to deal with since people with low psychopathy levels simply act like most people you meet every day.

However, just for the sake of argument, let’s say your average White has a PCL score of 5 out of 40. Repeated testing over  decades has shown that Blacks have a psychopathy level about twice that of Whites. So let’s say your average Black has a  psychopathy scale of say 10 out of 40. So their level is twice our level. Now a person with a PCL score of 10 is not a psychopath in any way. You need at least a score of 20 to be labeled a psychopath, and 98% of humans score below 20.

Instead Blacks are in the normal human range for psychopathy. However, within that normal range, Blacks do show significantly higher levels of psychopathy than Whites, typically in minor ways harm others but only on a low level, and this will be apparent and can be observed in their behavior on a nearly day to day basis.

They are more annoying than infuriating and enraging. Instead of wanting to kill them you just shake your head and say this is a lousy person, and I am simply not going to deal with them anymore. So you act like they are not there, and don’t even greet them when you see them. You also develop a rather cynical and disgusted attitude towards them and their ilk.

Alt Left: Identity Politics, the Working Class, and the Left

If a gay man were to come up to me and say, “I’m a gay worker!”

I would answer him this: “Pick one.”

Either your identity is gay or your identity is worker. Not both. It’s fine and dandy to fight for your rights and all of that, but silly things like gender, race and sexual orientation shouldn’t take precedence over true hard realities of political economy like whether someone is a worker, a capitalist, or an entrepreneur.

Suppose instead or in addition to identifying as a worker, I ID’d as “straight.” Well, I am straight, so why not ID as straight. I could go join some straight rights groups and fight for me people. Actually I would only ever join any group like that to get laid, but that’s another matter.

I would get all worked up about how put upon we poor straights are and how teh geyz and the trannies are hogging all the rights. I would probably start to get quite angry at the gays and he-she’s oppressing us poor cis straights.

Why on Earth is me being straight of all things an important matter? It’s not.

I could ID as a male instead of IDing as a worker. I could get all wrapped up in fake victimhood and wound-nursing and get all hopping mad at women and how they are oppressing us bepenised ones. Why should I do that? That’s just going to make me all angry and miserable and I’m going to get quite mad at women. How is any of that going to help me. Besides, is the most important thing about me that I am a man? Are you kidding?

I could go join some White rights group and fight for my fellow palefaces. I would end up constructing a big narrative of endless victimhood and a sense of being picked on, bullied, attacked and oppressed by those bad non-Whites. Obviously I would end up getting very mad at non-Whites because that’s what White IP does – it makes you mad at non-Whites.

Have you noticed something? Straight IP makes straights hate gays and trannies. Male IP or Men’s Rights makes men hate women. White IP without fail makes Whites hate non-Whites.

IP always ends up making you hate the group that is supposedly picking on you.

Hence:

Black IP makes Black people hate Whites. That ought to be obvious by now but this is  continually impressed upon me.

Women’s IP or Feminism makes women hate men. That’s way more than obvious by now, proven so many times we don’t even need to discuss it.

Gay IP has a tendency to make gays hate straights.

Tranny IP definitely makes trannies hate us “cis scum.”

Have you ever noticed something else?

None of these people are happy.

Blacks into Black IP seem miserable.

Feminists always look angry and unhappy.

The Gay IP crowd acts like they have a wild hair up their ass. No wait.

Straight IP people (straight pride marches) don’t seem very happy. Their “pride” parades are more like hatefests.

Men’s IP or Men’s Rights people seem pretty damn unhappy. MRA’s always seem to have a sour look on their faces, then when they are not actually raging and shouting threats at women.

If there’s one thing that impressed me about the White IP crowd or White nationalists, it’s that they are not real happy. These are very angry and often mean people. They’re not happy campers. Many of them positively seethe and rage with pure hate. They don’t seem to be having a good one.

All Identity Politics divides the working class, and it all makes classes of people who ought to work together, such as workers, to divide into hateful tribes and declare war on each other. All Identity Politics focuses not on rights for the group but more on hatred for the supposed oppressor.

Alt Left: Germany’s Self-Abasement to the Jews – When Will It Finally Be Enough?

Germany’s support for crazy US-Saudi lies about Iran is hard to figure, but it’s probably just Germany sucking up to Israel the way they always do.

Germans have cucked badly to Jews for decades now, bowing in abject slavery and humiliation at the feet of the Jews in order to do penance for their Nazi crimes, which were horrible after all – let’s face it.

But Jews being Jews are of course not reasonable about this, and no matter how many billions Germany hands over in extortion money to Israel or International Jewry, it’s never enough, and the Jews keep agitating for more payoffs in what amounts to a blackmail/shakedown operation by the Jews.

Obviously anti-Semites are still prevalent and more or less Nazi parties regularly get 10-15% of the vote. The latest regeneration is called the AfD.

But as a whole Germany is incredibly philo-Semitic now at the state and educational level. Germany is so pro-Jewish and pro-Israel that visitors would wonder in amazement how Nazism could ever take hold in such a philosemitic land. There are ~50,000 left in Germany; a few have come back in recent years. They are treated like conquering heroes by the Germans, who fawn over them. Germany has half-built Israel’s army. It even sells them nuclear submarines.

Germany’s political class is constantly bowing and apologizing to Jewish interests. That’s understandable for a while, but it gets old. The education system is virtually anti-German, with a focus on the horrible crimes of Germany in the 20th Century and the theory that these crimes grew out of an essential German anti-Semitic evil that apparently is genetic.

There are regular lessons in the schools on the Holocaust and on the awesomeness of Jewish people. Not to mention the usual Holocaust Museum on every corner that you find in every Jewish-cucked country, including our very own abject and abased United States.

Alt Left: Temporary Ban from Facebook for This Completely Non-racist Paragraph

Israel: Just Pack Up and Go

Garren Seifert: Not dumb. Hateful, yes. I don’t care about Jews other than the ones infesting Palestine. Jews belong in the Diaspora, sorry. This whole Zionist project has been a terrible and tragic mess.

Hey Israelis! You can’t get along with even one country in that whole region! Hell. Just pack up and go, Israelis. Take off. Leave. Everyone hates you. No one likes you. You hate all your neighbors and wage war on all of them, and they all hate you. You are the problem.

Some Jew on Faceberg reported me for this. I got a three-day ban for hate speech. I guess “Israeli” is a race or ethnicity. Who knew?

Of course the Jews and a lot of their Gentile fellow travelers have been trying to say that anti-Zionism is a form of Jew hatred forever now. It often is but it doesn’t have to be. You can despise the Israeli state but leave the Diaspora Jews out of it.

What did the Diaspora Jews every do to you, Palestinians? Did they steal your land and water and leave you shelterless in your very own homeland? No? Did they hurt and kill you? No? They didn’t hurt you themselves. Other people did. So why not leave them out of it?

Now I don’t like Israel-firsters in the Diaspora too much either, but if you hate them, you have to hate the tens of millions of Gentiles propping up  the whole eroding Zionist castle in the sand by the sea. I hate too many humans as it is. No need to hate 60 million new ones.

I do hate this loudmouth Jew for getting me a ban, of course.

But there are an awful lot of Jews who are not Israel-firsters. If you never mention Israel you might think they were the coolest people in the whole world.

The Linguistic Crack-up of America and France: Coming Soon

A great comment on the coming linguistic breakup of the USA and France. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it’s fascinating nevertheless.

Francis Meville: English is a genocidal language, of course. I have some good news for you, though. That language is about to suffer an defeat that will be as surprising and fast as the fate awaiting the American nation proper, which won’t survive four more years of Trump. How so? As you know America, or rather Murrica, is being engulfed in a maelstrom of obscurantism as never experienced during the Middle Ages proper.

Murrica is being indoctrinated into the rejection of everything French as essentially evil, this being facilitated by France’s being governed by a president who plainly hates every French for a different reason.

Another aspect of this rejection is unfortunately the fact that such an opinion is not entirely mistaken right now, as the late French Republic is specializing in being the international refuge haven of figures like Epstein and the world teacher of fake Left deconstructionism at the service of world capital.

As you know there are more words of more or less French origin in English than of Anglo-Saxon or other Nordic origin and also more of them in English than there remain in modern French, the French language having been severely culled of a great part of its vocabulary during the Era of Enlightenment.

A movement is developing right now in Trumpland to remove from American English all words known to be of more or less French origin and also of learned classical Latin and Greek origin, as the classical European culture is denounced as something that should be phased out together with humanism and democracy.

When they could not find real Anglo-Saxon root words to replace them (something impossible as phonetic evolution would have made many such root words sound all alike), they would rather resort to Klingon or Hebrew.

They won’t succeed in that linguistic utopia of restoring Anglish of course, but they will succeed in dividing the American English language into two unbridgeable halves as the Second Civil War develops (there is no future for the US after Trump, and California will be the first state to secede) and do their best to teach the young a form of language making them incapable of accessing works written during the humanistic era.

Blue State America will take the opposite direction, rejecting all English words that sound too populist in favor of polysyllabic jargon of the kind loved by the fake Left. Both languages do not differ too much as regards their real daily usage in the beginning but have completely incompatible official terminology as regards their legal use.

Moreover not all Blue States will agree on the same kind of ideal sophisticated English to use so as to distinguish from the Morlock kind of language that will become the norm in Murrica.

People of California will try their best to distinguish from East Coast intellectuals they despise through the use of gender-neutral forms and other transformations deliberately planned to prevent books from other generations to be understood by the young, while the East Coast will stick to old school sophisticated expression.

England will be subject to the same phenomenon. English there will divide among that of the Brexiters and that of the Remainers, though Brexiter English will not be Murrican at all.

British English being already very divided by social class and regional jargons, the divide will come easy: there will be simply no longer any Queen’s English as a norm of reference to be striven to by all, and Britishers of Pakistani and Indian origin will do their best to distinguish between each other by a very different kind of English too.

India as you know speaks English quite well for one sole reason mostly, employment in telephone service for Western clientele, and they will have to adapt to a rapidly fracturing English with the result various Indian castes and regions specializing in varieties of English less and less mutually intelligible.

The resulting mess will have the consequence that English will cease to be any guarantee of good communication with colleagues worldwide in any domain, especially as regards pronunciation and terminology, each splinter of the Anglophone society trying to redefine the whole language according to their ideology.

Zionist Jews will speak and use modern Hebrew only, so as not to be heard by outsiders. In addition, it will require goys to come to the Jews’ language if they want some chance to be talked to (and even then not to be welcomed). The reverse will not be true any longer, as the Jews all drift rightwards, they will also fall more and more prey to their most rabid rabbis that will do their best to bring them back into ghetto life conditions.

Another factor differentiating Jews from goys will be that the US Ultra-Right will speak Murrican only as a second language while the Tel Aviv Gay Pride Paraders will rather use Californian Google English.

Nevertheless, in practice the new fashionable non-Jewish language among Jews will be Russian, which will gain in prestige for scientific communication. Actually the greater body of the Anglosphere will be very rapidly crumbling all over America like a decomposing corpse due to America’s abandonment by its very soul, which is Zionist Israel.

Ten or twelve years will suffice to break up the English language into linguistic fiefdoms less mutually intelligible than those of modern Arabic. Actually it will be far worse because there will be absolutely no agreement on a classical norm to teach to anyone, whereas dialect-speaking Arabs also know at least some Quranic Arabic and can access the literary language through official media.

Learning one variety or another of English just won’t procure any great advantage as regards communications any more than learning Dutch or Urdu.. With four more years of Trump, America will become the laughingstock of the world and the very symbol of idiocracy, and when the country enters full-scale irreversible civil war, it will become a negative symbol of status.

People will just be ashamed to speak their language and consider that written English as we knew it is a dead language to be mastered as such by foreigners – to be read and written without much caring about how to speak it. Moreover, even as a written language, English is considered to be particularly ambiguous compared to others and not a great advantage for expressing scientific thought.

The French language will also know a similar fate as France enters civil war due to malignant multiculturalism. Old Classical French will become ridiculed and morally condemned as language of bad ideas to be eradicated by all parties involved (including the white nationalists). A new modern genderless norm will become obligatory while each region returns to some form of langue d’oil

Though by a strange turn of things, French will still be conserved in its classical form in several parts of Northern and Black Africa. The reason once more being the same as in the US.

That is that the soul of the modern form of the French language has actually been Jewish since the Era of Enlightenment in a tremendous and obdurate effort not to be constrained by Christian thought, and when the Jewish soul entity suddenly no longer wants to have anything to do with you even as a subservient body, you crumble and decompose.

Spanish despite its multiplicity of accents and regional varieties will still refer to a common Castilian norm and therefore become the new serious language even in the US for the reason that it has never been the linguistic body of a Jewish soul but always quite the opposite.

Quite like Spanish, German, whose fate has already been detached forever from that of the Jewish entity for the various reasons we know of (the Nazi episode and also the fact that German Jews always used to have their own variety of the Jewish soul), will not undergo such a mortal break-up.

Anyway it is in its written official form, German is a language as artificial as modern standard Arabic, to be learned at school by all Germans, not in family.

But modern English has a Jewish soul due to the fact that it formed in great part thanks to Calvinist Reformation which was a movement where the believers fancied themselves as kinds of Old Testament Jews being restored. French also has a Jewish soul due to the fact that with Royal France defined itself as the Roman Church’s Elder Daughter.

Hence modern free-thinking modernistic France had to define itself logically as Israel’s Elder Adoptive Daughter just to gain the right to free debate and high culture on equal standing with Latin. But what has been happening up to now is the gradual death of the former Aufklärung Jewish culture under the triumph of Netanyahu’s anti-cultural anti-humanist Zionism and also of scientific transhumanism to a lesser degree.

The soul to which English referred as a body was to be quickly departed into some other dimension, as the body just decomposes and very quickly.

The apparent cause of the break up will be first, a malignant White Nationalism doing their best to vomit everything too French-sounding and identifying with Vikings rather than with the American Founding Fathers as the founders of their identity, and second, utter self-hate from the part of the French proper, generating in return anti-populist reaction from the coastal chattering classes.

Hindutvas, White Nationalists and Trump Supporters: Some Similarities

The White nationalists are obviously out and out fascists and it is not an exaggeration to say that the Hindutvas are too. The Trump supporters are not so much fascist as they are Muslim haters. Anyway there are some similarities among the three.

SHI: I think there are fundamental differences between USA right-wingers and the Hindutvadi morons. Completely apples and oranges.

While the former is mostly about anti-immigration and against big corporations, the latter are plain and simple crazy bigots and 100% mini-fascists, with Islamophobia being their only agenda. That’s what I find very distressing. The level of hate they have for Muslim persons and Pakistanis is insane. Ironically, many of them don’t mind Hindu Indians working in the Middle East because they send remittance money home.

Since 2007-08, India was in news for Hitler-themed coffee shops and Mein Kampf selling like hotcakes. I thought it was just a sick joke, and the people are just stupid, but the worst nightmare became a reality. It’s like suddenly I woke up one day to Nazi-era Germany.

The real Nazis might be laughing at these brown-skinned posers but there is REAL CAMARADERIE between the neo-Nazis of Europe and America and the Hindutvadi Nazis. There are blogs like Bare Naked Islam and in Breitbart itself where you will find the two ideologies pump each other up.

With American White Nazis, I suppose there is still a way to reason with them. I mean they just describe themselves as race realists, which would have been just fine.

But, then you go to Breitbart, you have the other loonies to deal with: climate change deniers, Holocaust deniers, anarchists, female psychopaths, potential mass shooters, and of course, the honest two-bit racists.

I joined Breitbart for a while. I don’t think this crowd does you any favors.

WHERE ARE THE NORMAL PEOPLE? LOL

Alt Left: The Left Hates Me Far More than the Right Does

SHI: Funny thing I am hated by the Hindutvadi morons more than they do Muslims. Something about me sets a TRIGGER and they react crazily.

They probably think you’re a traitor. You used to be one of them and now you went over to the other side. Few of them will admit it, but a lot of the hatred towards me is coming from that same point of view. Some of them are almost heartbroken. Heartbroken that this good liberal man has turned into such a vicious, evil, racist brute. Except I’m not really racist at all.

The Left hates me for more than the Right does. Most rightwingers are actually quite pleasant. The Left on the other hand has been vicious, destructive, and even evil, waging a campaign of personal destruction and character assassination against me. The take-down of my blog has been only part of that.

I’m lucky I don’t have an academic job, or any job, that these psychos could connect me with because they have openly stated that they will find out my job and try to get me fired on some SJW bullshit charge (racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.).

It might be nice if there were a few employers in this country who reacted to this garbage with, “So what! So my employee is a racist, sexist, homophobe, whatever! In your highly subjective opinion, that is. I got some news for you. I don’t care! People like that are more than welcome to work for me!”

But no one has the balls to do that. I know you would though, SHI, if you were an employer. That’s why I like you.

On the other hand though that employer might get a boycott against him. But if we had enough employers doing that they might stop boycotting because how can you boycott thousands of businesses at once. It’s boy who cried wolf and people would just throw up their hands and say, “Forget it! I’m buying whatever I’m buying!”

I must say though that the liberal-Left is not alone in this insane, destructive, fanatical hate.

I got the exact same thing from the Bigfooters (some of the most vicious and downright wicked and sociopathic freaks I have ever encountered) and the true crime crowd, where a group of people, mostly women waged an all out war on me for  some things I wrote when I was reporting a crime.

From the True Crime Crowd it was basically coming from a total feminist POV, but it also picked up a lot of retarded Middle American monkeys from the Midwest, fundamentalist Christian redneck Trump-lovers.

A friend of mine refers to the enemy of the men as femiservatives. There are many conservatives out there who hate us men just as much as the feminists do. He uses some word like Feminist/Conservatives – I forget the actual terminology. A lot of this enemy is made up of conservative Republican fundamentalist Christian White women, part of the Trump coalition.

They’re the worst enemy I ever met. They tried very hard to dox me, and they reported me to the police probably 50 times. I even got a call from a detective who told me I was a suspect in a terrible crime because so many people had called me in.

Before that it was Jews, mostly super-Jews and Zionist Israel-reporters.  They doxed all of their enemies and contacted their employers and tried to get them fired as “anti-Semites.” Utterly vicious people with a black hole where their heart should be.

Is it something about the Internet and the anonymity of it that brings out the Secret Psychopath in so many people? Is it Snark Culture on the Net, exemplified by Reddit?

In fact, recently I found that people on Breitbart of all places were far more open-minded about US foreign policy, government lying, and media lying and bias. A lot of them are very cynical and they hardly believed anything the state or media said about anything anymore, which is a good idea because 50% of what they say is either lying or biased anyway.

One Brietbart commenter said that whenever the government says anything, your first assumption should be that they are lying. I’m not sure about that but on foreign policy it is absolutely. Disinformation, outright lying and blatant propaganda have essential tools of US foreign policy forever now, going back to the Spanish Civil War and the yellow journalism and state-sponsored hate campaigns that accompanied it.

I was shocked at how antiwar (in an isolationist way) they were. Half of those Brietbart commenters sounded exactly like me!

Then I went over to Daily Kos (the left wing base Democratic Party) headquarters, and they had swallowed all of the media and state lies about that refinery attack whole.

I will say that the Left (Alternet) has a very open mind, except on SJW crap, but a lot of the Alternet crowd are open-minded about that too, and a lot of them are starting to rebel against SJWism which they see as puritanical, prudish, uptight, priggish, party-pooping no-fun people. Others just think it is a silly and petty distraction.

Actually over on Daily Kos (liberals) the SJWism is vastly worse. That’s a brainwashed horde over there. And on the actual Hard Left (actual Communists and antifa anarchists) is where you will find the worst SJWism of all.

I think it is because both the Breitbart crowd and the Alternet Left have gone over to a “conspiracy theory” view of the world for some time now. At times this is quite wrong, but at other times, it is flat out true.

The Democratic Party though says that every time you question the media or state on anything foreign policy or some other things, it’s “conspiracy theory.” All “conspiracy theory” is banned on Daily Kos, for instance. Ok, now right off the bat you can’t talk about 50% of what the media or state is telling you because those are lies that can only be explained by,  frankly, conspiracy theory.

On the other hand though, even Kosnicks have come a long way. The early articles on the refinery attack were very skeptical, with 80% of them saying the government is lying. Now they are all saying the government is telling the truth.

It’s really pathetic when liberals of all people (we came out of the Vietnam War era, remember?) buy the foreign policy lies of the state and media far more than conservatives do, as conservatives have always been more likely to believe this propaganda crap.

Modern liberal Democrats are utterly pathetic. They’re better than they used to be, but they are still a huge clusterfuck.

One thing that particularly galls me is that conservatives are far friendlier, nicer, and more decent to me than the Left is. And I am a Leftist! I am supposed to be one of their sworn enemies! They are supposedly full of hate, viciousness and outright evil, but when you meet them, they’re so nice and pleasant, even to an out and out Leftist!

On the other hand though the SJW Left are utter monsters – savage, destructive,, and vindictive freaks. I always thought we on the liberal-Left were the nice and compassionate ones and the Right was where al the haters and hate was. Now it’s the other way around.

It’s so discouraging and disappointing. In a way, it breaks my heart. I have been a man of the Left my whole life, and now it feels, just as I feel about my country, that the love of my life (the Left) has ripped out my heart and crushed it on the ground like a bug. So I’m also heartbroken. Heartbroken at both my country and the liberal-Left, two things I once held near and dear to my heart.

Alt Left: The Problem with the Cultural Left: A Focus on Form Instead of Content

From a conversation on the web:

Anonymous commenter: Some of the Left has gone from fighting for real, important issues to fighting for Political Correctness and other absurdities. That’s not all the Left, just the most vocal and strident. I am what people would consider a Leftist (even though my worldview is Indigenous), and I couldn’t care less what someone says. I care about what someone does.

Even AIM (the American Indian Movement) has gone from fighting for tribal sovereignty and against the destruction of tribal lands by industries and corporations, which is still going on, to fighting against Indian mascots! Many people are fixated on words and disregarding actual facts, probably because screaming about words is easier than facing the monster of destruction this global civilization has become.

What you call the Cultural Left is more interested in form than in content…it is more interested in style than substance.

To which I reply:

Getting all upset about someone saying some word that everyone says anyway is ridiculous.

Also the Cultural Left seems to me to have become prudish, Puritanical, Victorian and even sex-hating. They are also uptight, priggish party-poopers. They’re the no-fun crowd, people who see a party and rush in and dump turds in the punch bowl.

These types used to be rightwingers or conservatives, and in this sense the Cultural Left are actually quite conservative or even reactionary and backwards.

Let’s focus on real issues, not some BS about what someone said, especially when they didn’t even say anything bad anyway.

Let’s focus on real job discrimination and especially housing discrimination against Blacks.

Let’s focus on abortion rights being taken away from women.

Let’s focus on ending employment discrimination against gays.

Let’s focus on getting rid of all discrimination against transsexuals.

You know, the real stuff, not the bullshit.

Alt Left: Apparently Facts Are Racist Now

I’ve been studying this issue deeply since ~1989. That’s 30 years or half my life. A  journal article by Richard Lynn set me off on this quest.  While it’s obvious that there are racial differences on average between the races, I’m not 100% clear about what causes them, but I doubt if it is racism.

My attitude is that Blacks are deliberately, of their own free will, creating really lousy cultures, and they can knock it off any time they want. In other words, Blacks need their shit  together. While that seems harsh, the alternate opinion, once you throw out racism, is that Black genes are inferior regarding intelligence, and this is where the test score differences come from. I think my view is a lot more Black-friendly, but that’s just me.

I am the odd liberal who even dares to talk about things like this. What is pathetic and rather terrifying is that I get pummeled mercilessly and called racist and ultra-racist for saying things like:

Presently Blacks score 13  points lower than Whites in IQ tests. I believe that IQ tests measure intelligence well and they are not biased in favor of Whites. I am not sure what is causing these differences. Obviously differential intelligence is going to explain a lot of the discrepancies between the races where Blacks seem to come out behind.

That is a perfectly noncontroversial opinion! The entire field of intelligence studies agrees that there’s a score gap.

And now nearly the entire field says that IQ tests measure intelligence well (they fought that one forever, but they caved on that one a while back). The left of this field caved on the question of whether the tests are biased in favor of Whites or not even before this latest cave.

The only argument now is over what is causing the differences, and it is raging right along. The fact is that both sides can collect at least a fair amount of evidence for their side. And at the moment, scholars of intelligence regard the question of what is causing these differences as unresolved.

The left of this field mischaracterizes this debate by saying that there is no evidence at all for the genetic side so it is a pathetic and racist argument. This is not true.

The awful nonscientific folks on the Left in the popular media are much worse, regarding  the Genetic Theory as racist pseudoscience. It most certainly is not pseudoscience and it’s not racist at all. It is simply a hypothesis, just as the Environmental Theory is also a hypothesis.

As I said, both sides have a fair amount of evidence for their case sufficient to make for  adequate scientific questions on their part. And instead of being a  pseudoscience, the Genetic Theory has accumulated a rather frightening amount of evidence for their side. However, the evidence is not yet probative, and the question is regarded as inconclusive and presently under debate.

And I’d rather sit this one out as far as conclusions go for a variety of reasons that I will not go into. But I will say that I do not regard the 15 point gap as set in stone and I believe the environment can close at least some of the gap.

So my statement is:

There is presently a 13 point discrepancy between Black and  White IQ scores (fact).

The tests are not biased against in favor of Whites (fact).

I am agnostic on whether the differences are due to environment or genetics. This is actually the official position of the intelligence studies field at the moment, so it’s hardly a racist position!

I believe that a number of the discrepancies between Blacks and Whites are due to this test score differential. This simply stands to reason. A 13 point lower intelligence score is obviously going to play out in all sorts of behavioral variables on the ground, right? I mean that’s just obvious.

So my statement above, for which I get absolutely pummeled for, is made up of two solid facts, the standard consensus of the field, and a statement that is simply obviously true.

See how crazy this is? If you state obvious, proven, scientific facts, you get destroyed for being a racist!