The issue is that currently throughout the world, it is becoming a norm to criminalize and police language. I’m
not appealing to some slippery slope, where I think this is going to spin out of control. It already has. Societies either
need to decide that we can say whatever we want, or not. Somebody not calling you by your preferred name in no way inhibits
you from being you. I would like it if from now on, everybody only referred to me as, King Richard the Wild Hearted, Last
of his Kind, Hero to all Free Folk. Yes, the whole thing. I would like it quite a lot actually.
Imagine if everywhere
I went, people affectionately greeted me that way. Walk into the coffee shop or the gym or class, “Good morrow, King
Richard the Wild Hearted, Last of his Kind, Hero to all Free Folk, your standard espresso and muffin?” Life would
be grand. But I do not think forcing anybody to call me by such a title under the threat of financial sanction or
worse is reasonable in a fair and just society.
Hate speech laws are only the beginning. “Progressive”
nations like Sweden quickly move on to censoring even the access of information, such as the recent denial by the Justice
Minister at the request of updated crime statistics.15 This is a classic tactic used by every communist regime we have ever seen. Controlling what people can say is a way to
control what they think. Controlling what information people have access to is a way to control what they think. This is
about keeping a population in the dark, stupid, weak, and dependent on the State. Liberals today have the same value system
that communist dictators have always had. They are the very authoritarians that they claim to fight. The deceitful Left needs
to censor speech and restrict access to information, for those are the only two necessary weapons in the battle for truth.
Liberals can never win in a fair fight of facts and reason. So, they use the State to limit the arms of the opposition by
denying us access to information, and denying us the ability to speak the truth. The Left by nature is anti-truth.
all over Europe have been intentionally covered up to keep people unaware of what is happening to their homelands. From the
Rotherham sex-operation cover up, to the New Year’s Eve sexual assault scandal in Germany, we are only scratching
the surface. In Sweden, gangs of Afghan men raped and sexually assaulted girls as young as eleven at a music festival. When
asked about the incident in an interview, a Swedish politician said that often times, they will leave out stories of this
nature, as they worry the information may “play into the hands” of the Right-wing, nationalist party.16 The Left understands what it is doing very well; it knows that if people knew the truth of their victimization they would
naturally gravitate towards the Right and towards nationalism. It is intentionally keeping these stories, and thousands
like them, under cover, at the grave expense of people’s lives and safety – all so it may continue to rule with
Sadly, the same trend is beginning to emerge in the US as well. After a string of robberies committed by
non-whites on the Bay Area Rapid Transit, San Francisco authorities chose to not release footage of the crimes. Despite
the fact that releasing the footage would certainly help to apprehend the criminals, authorities felt releasing the video
might perpetuate stereotyping. Further, one of the BART directors stated that the footage “would create a racial bias
in the riders against minorities on the trains.”17 Once again we see that those in positions of authority are more concerned with protecting the people who victimize, than
with stopping further victimization. There is a large-scale cover up the world over on the part of the Left of all the crimes
non-whites commit against whites. This war against us is being deliberately waged under the guise of tolerance and political
There is a disturbing trend in government action on political violence. Earlier this month, the FBI arrested members of the right-wing Rise Above Movement, calling them “serial rioters.” Their violence, however, was exclusively directed against antifa, with whom
they tangled on several occasions. The arrests came after an extended investigation of Rise Above; we see no signs of a
similar investigation of antifa.
“Riots” of this kind always follow the same pattern: White advocates
or even just Trump-supporters hold a meeting. Antifa attack, with the express intention of shutting down the meeting. Young
men attending the meeting defend themselves and there is a brawl. The media blame the organizers—not antifa—and
run headlines like “Violent, Far-Right, Pro-Trump Group Hits New York Streets.” I have yet to see a single mainstream article that recognizes this pattern or that has noticed that “far-right”
groups never try to disrupt leftist meetings.
The latest version of this dirty business has been the fallout
from a talk by Gavin McInnes, founder of the Proud Boys, at the New York Metropolitan Republican Club on October 12.
Antifa were lying in wait, there was violence, and the proud boys were blamed. According to latest reports, five Proud Boys and three antifa have been arrested, but New York Governor Andrew Cuomo wants a state police investigation and hate crimes charges against the Proud Boys. More Proud Boys are likely to be arrested, but there seems to be no manhunt
for more antifa.
For those familiar with Dr. Johnson’s work there is much in this book that they have seen before, even some topics
that have been covered by many different authors, such as Robert Putnam’s findings on the connection between diversity
and alienation and John Jay’s celebration of America’s original lack of diversity in the Federalist No. 2.
But this book is intended both as an introductory primer and comprehensive summation for potential converts and those new
to the movement as well as a much more thorough and fully developed discussion of its topics for movement veterans.
What is new is the focus on the two ultimate topics of our movement. The first topic is the ultimate problem: the fact that
our race is undergoing a process of destruction or genocide by multiracialism. The second topic is the ultimate and only
sufficient solution to the problem: a grand separation of the races either by the removal of non-Whites (the only solution
for Europe) or partition of the country’s territory into independent nations for the different racial groups, now
commonly called “ethnostates,” a term derived from Wilmot Robertson’s 1992 book of that title which has
gained increasing currency over the last decade.
interesting and observant article by a Brit using a literary pseudonym. Worth reading and considering. Applicable to both
the UK and the USA.
Queen and Country, God and Guns
Guest Post by Revanchist
Though our stars tend to rise and fall in opposition through
the years, your reputation for adventure, fearlessness and a legendary hunger for more
lingers, and for the most part we find that admirable—no, more than that—we find it astonishing.
We may denigrate your American whisky (as well as your tendency to spell it with
the Irish ‘e’) as you joke about our pasty faces and reliance upon dentures but we are cousins—if
not always kissing—and share a rich common language, culture, customs and cuisine. We are more alike than different
in nearly every respect but these: One, we are a constitutional monarchy and Two,
despite what you may have heard we really, really envy you your guns.
America has always seemed
the dangerous, glamourous older brother. You were the cowboy, the gangster, the astronaut and the comic book hero of
our collective imaginations. You were the captain of the debate team, dating the homecoming queen and cruising
through life in your ’55 Chrysler, one hand on the wheel, elbow on the door, working on that car tan.
The 40’s, 50’s and 60s were perhaps your finest hours. During World War II you
were overpaid, oversexed and over here, breaker of hearts and hymens. The winds of heaven tousled with a loving
hand your perfect hair, the sunlight glinted off your straight, white teeth. After the war you invented rock
and roll and corn dogs and forty-seven million things to do with sugar including LSD, and we were dazzled.
While we were washing under our arms from basins of cold water in cold rooms in a
bitterly cold country, you were inventing the hot tub. At the cinema, we would bask in shimmering visions of your highways
and high fashions, your Endless Summer California culture, your glittering skyscrapers and flawless pavements,
then trudge home and tune in the wireless for a Parliamentary debate on whether or not we could afford to clean centuries
of coal smoke from our cracked and blackened buildings.
you were bringing Caesar Salad, Martinis, Bananas Foster, Baked Alaska and the almighty, sacred Hamburger into
the world, we anticipated the prospect of instant mashed potatoes finally becoming available down the local
shops. We were unimaginably insular; it is within living memory that people in Britain believed spaghetti grew on trees.
Despite pretensions to polite behaviour we relished your films and television programmes
like The Godfather, The Maltese Falcon, The Third
Man and White Heat; more recently The Sopranos, Breaking
Bad and Deadwood—the more violent the better. We admired Clint Eastwood’s
entire oeuvre. We devoured books like Lonesome Dove and the works
of Steinbeck, Hemingway, Mark Twain and Raymond Chandler. Some of us even like bluegrass but those people are
mainly in the looney bin. We treasure pretty much everything about you, but we’re British so you don’t
hear us mention it very often.
Some Britons flinch when one
suggests ever needing a gun in Old Blighty but don’t believe the lukewarm protestations. As the past few years
have unfolded any remaining hesitation is apt to change, and soon. What we are beginning to remember is that
for thousands of years everyone on this island was armed at all times with daggers—with swords if you could afford
them, with throwing axes and longbows for truly special occasions. Personal defence was not just a choice, it
meant accepting full responsibility for individual safety beyond city or castle walls. Defending ourselves with
grace and strength and skill was something we once took great pride in.
Our downfall can be charted in three separate events:
Two hundred years ago, give or take a couple of decades, Sir Robert Peel established
a full-time, professional and centrally-organised police force with the passing of The Metropolitan Police Act of 1829.
It was not well received at the time; the public felt they did very well already with night watchmen and personal
vigilance and besides, who was expected to pay for it? And why hadn’t the people been consulted? As things usually
go between governments and their subjects, government had its way. We turned our weapons over to legally-sanctioned
protectors and began to soften as a people.
midst of austerity after The Second World War, universal healthcare for all was rolled out to tremendous fanfare, followed
by a steadily increasing system of welfare for mothers and children, later for pensioners, then veterans and
civil servants. There was in the early days some shame associated with taking a government handout but practice makes
perfect and before long anyone with a doctor’s note affirming a sprained wrist or dodgy knee could sign
on and be supported for life. No one asked this time who would pay—no one wanted to hear the answer anyway. And
we grew softer still.
Simultaneously, the government
threw open its doors to the former colonies, or rather the brown colonies. Indians, Pakistanis
and Caribbean Islanders answered the call to serve as a labour force and in short order became a demographic who never
actually seemed to leave. Politicians had discovered the lucrative stand of virgin timber that was the immigrant
class and promised them anything, even citizenship, in exchange for their vote. And vote they did, until their
children grew up, stood for election themselves and were voted in by their own people on the colour
of their skin. When native Britons asked why they were never consulted on allowing this flood of immigrants
they were called racialists. Since Britain had just finished dealing Jerry a bally good
hiding, any accusation of holding Nazi sentiments was social poison. Hence we softened our principles and muffled
the warning of our hearts.
This is how we joined the invertebrates.
Now we are facing Islam, though not many know that what is happening today is just
another battle in a very old war.
From the 16th to the 18th
centuries upwards of two million Europeans were captured and sold as slaves in Tunis, Algiers and Tripoli. These weren’t
people who were taken at sea but from their beds, in the dark of night in coastal towns and villages in Cornwall,
Devon, Dorset, up into Wales and along the west coast of Ireland, as well as throughout the Mediterranean. Why
who would do such a thing, you may ask—the Barbary Pirates, of course—Muslims.
This carried on for two hundred years with only sporadic and half-hearted interruption.
England talked a good game and now and then ransomed a lord or two out of slavery, but what’s a few missing Cornish
fisherman, their wives and children here and there? It wasn’t until American ships began to be attacked
and raided for goods and slaves that investors studied the situation and concluded, “You know, this could be
bad for business,” and went to war.
in the interest of fair play, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams made the perilous journey across the Atlantic to London
for a sit-down with Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, the envoy from Tripoli. When asked what right the Barbary pirates
had to force Americans into slavery, Jefferson recorded the ambassador’s answer in two letters and his personal
“He replied that the right was founded on the
Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran that all nations who should not have answered their
authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to
make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was
sure to go to Paradise”.
So, not a lot’s changed
In an Anglo-Dutch-American alliance three campaigns
of The Barbary Wars were fought and the Muslims were at last subdued and colonised. Client kings and strong
men were installed and until the present day Muslims have remained a benign tumour on civilised society.
It was a stunning victory and Francis Scott Key composed a song to mark the occasion.
The original verses included:
And pale beamed the Crescent,
its splendor obscur’d By the light of the star-bangled flag of our nation. Where each flaming star
gleamed a meteor of war, And the turban’d head bowed to the terrible glare.
It wasn’t a huge hit at the time though after the War of 1812 he dusted it
off, rewrote some of the more laboured lines and it eventually became the American National Anthem.
Were you taught all this in school? No? Nor I. Why is it that where our history intersects
with Islam it always seems to either vanish like morning mist or become corrupted into making the Christian world into
the bad guys and aggressors?
This brings us to the
current mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, the platitude-puss Pakistani with links to Hamas, Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda and the Muslim
Brotherhood. When he’s not scurrying along the baseboards he’s raring up on his two hind legs and
sporting the most punchable, weapons-grade constipation face this side of the Atlantic. It doesn’t take an adept
in Texas Hold’em to ascertain that Khan’s tell is one of a man who is eternally biting back what
he really wants to say.
Within an hour of the latest cultural enrichment, Khan is
on hand with fair-minded and reassuring statements like, Terrorism is part-and-parcel of living in
a big city or London is one of the safest cities in the world. Meanwhile, the poisonous
flood of piety and bloodlust threatens to drown us all.
people in Britain are gradually coming to grips with is that Islam teaches that this life on earth is merely
a stepping-stone to Paradise and that Muslims must stop at nothing to attain it. To paraphrase Kyle Reese, they
can’t be bargained with, they can’t be reasoned with, they don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear
and they absolutely will not stop, ever, until all non-Muslims are dead or enslaved.
For politicians, though, hope springs eternal; just fire the old PR firm and hire
a new one. Hence, the RUN•HIDE•TELL campaign is off to a rocketing start. Of course, scruffy young tearaways
were quick to deface the posters by substituting the last word to read RUN•HIDE•SUBMIT but the kings of PR,
the Americans, have gone us one better with DRAW•AIM•SHOOT as the only viable response. We respect
this, of course, because we love your guns.
news, on 28 May 2017, police sent a helicopter and combat-ready police to confiscate a karaoke machine from a backyard
BBQ because the hosts played a song mocking Osama bin Laden. Bear in mind this was four days after bomb and
bloodshed at a concert attended by teenaged girls in Manchester Arena. Several days after the karaoke caper, the horrific
massacre on London Bridge took place. Clearly, prioritising threats could do with some work.
Our current PM, Barren Cat Lady, famously stated upon her election, “Brexit
means Brexit.” We’re still waiting. After the London Bridge Massacre she said, “Enough is Enough.”
At this rate she’ll probably say,”Potatoes are Potatoes,” next and the media will still stand up
and applaud it.
But now I am just lobbing outrage darts
at the page so I’ll wind this up.
which no longer guarantee the security of their citizens are worthless, and those that disallow the right to defend
oneself are worse than negligent, they are clearly dangerous to support in any way. People here are beginning
to get this, but I still feel it’s too late to prevent the rivers of blood alluded to by the brilliant Enoch
Powell, king of ‘racialists,’ true patriot and martyr.
As I write this it’s less than seventy-two hours till we march once more unto the polls to vote
in an election that probably won’t make a bit of difference except to take our Brexit away for good. And yet
it could also upset the entire apple cart as well. Such are the times we live in.
My American friends, you are surely aware that you don’t have to own a gun to
fight like hell to retain your right to bear arms, as well as the freedom to play anything you damn well please
on your karaoke machines. Preserve those rights, defend them, they are more precious than you know. Never sell
them. Never soften.
They say a falling knife has no handle
and yet our British politicians keep snatching it in mid-air, then expressing astonishment and dismay at the
cuts on their hands.
Based upon past experience they’ll just
carry on trying to catch it while the rest of us bleed to death.
Do you ever wonder what happened to America? Do you wonder how we went from a stable, prosperous land in the 1950s —
a land whose cities were the jewels of the world with neighborhoods where no one locked their doors and an education system
that was second-to-none — to a country where it isn’t safe to walk the streets at night, and where huge
numbers of people graduate high school unable to read, but fully convinced that White heterosexual men (particularly those
of the working class) are StupidEvilRacistSexistNazisWhoWannaKillSixMillionJews? Do you wonder where strident feminism came
from? How about the “trans-gender” agenda? Do you wonder who’s behind the rise of militant black racism
or open borders? Or why radical red guard-style communists, masquerading as “anti-fascists”, are free to roam
our streets attacking any White person, they deem “racist”, or “sexist”, or “homophobic”,
etc., with relative impunity? In short, have you wondered how we lost America?
In January of this year, Tom Kawczynski
found himself at the epicenter of a manufactured national media firestorm designed to force him out of his position as the
town manager of Jackman, a small community in rural northern Maine, for daring to ask these questions. Jackman’s loss
was America’s gain. His forced resignation gave him the time to answer these questions and more.
Recently there’s been an upsurge in the left engaging in public displays of shaming and shunning public figures
associated with the President Trump. Maxine “Impeach 45” Waters famously wants Trump allies to be shamed wherever they go—gas stations, department stores, and even their homes.
And the trend is catching on. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Scott Pruitt were unceremoniously asked to leave restaurants. Kirstjen Nielsen (at her home) and Mitch McConnell and his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao got similar treatment. Jared and Ivanka have resorted to working out in a darkened gym to avoid the harassment. And then there’s the woman who confronted Steve Bannon in a bookstore, calling him a “piece of trash.” Right now it’s everyone from Kellyanne Conway to Stephen Miller facing hecklers wherever they go.
Sometimes it edges into violence. Breitbart
tabulated 304 incidents of harassment or violence against Trump supporters since the election, all basically ignored by the media.
Most of the victims are non-celebrities, like the teenager who was attacked by a Latino adult throwing soda at him and stealing his MAGA hat. Most pathetically, a woman who thanked Eric Trump for raising $16 million for St.
Jude Hospital was subjected to “unreal hate” on social media. The trend is clear.
Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders George T. Shaw (ed) Arktos, 2018
“After absorbing the initial impact the alt-right remained intact and forward-oriented, no nearer or further from
its goals, but now more serious and matured.” Thus remarks Evan McLaren, former Executive Director of the National
Policy Institute, in a profound personal account of Charlottesville and its immediate aftermath. McLaren’s account
is one of 21 essays which together comprise the latest offering from Arktos: A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words
of Its Members and Leaders. His thoughts offer a succinct summary of the broader contents of the volume — the
essays here are representative of a movement in some respects battered and bruised from legal and media entanglements, but
also remarkably clear-headed and ideologically robust. Heightened media attention devoted to the Alt-Right, which peaked
in 2017 and not always for the better, has been intense and fluctuating, dating probably from Hillary Clinton’s September
2016 “Basket of Deplorables” speech. At first this attention seemed oriented towards crowning an Alt-Right leader
who could then be used as a focal point for both defining and maligning the movement. It now seems absurd that Milo Yiannopoulos
was the first pick, though he gradually faded into obscurity as the 2016 NPI conference, along with the “Whitefish”
incident, brought Andrew Anglin and then Richard Spencer to national prominence. Arguably, it was Whitefish that first offered
an opportunity for the media to introduce fear of the movement, rather than simply horror or disgust, into its narrative.
Tanya Gersh, one of the key protagonists in that affair, declared she was not being harassed by trolls or deplorables, but “terrorists.” The texture of media coverage quickly
changed in the aftermath, absorbing the language introduced by Gersh and her backers in the Southern Poverty Law Center,
and culminating on August 11–12, 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia.
The theft and distortion of Nelson Mandela’s legacy by champions of Western liberalism has and continues to
be both sickening and obscene to behold. Libya hovers into sharp relief
Just how obscene, is reflected
by the sight of former US President Barack Obama delivering the annual Nelson Mandela lecture in Johannesburg
on July 17, the 100th anniversary of the giant of the anti-Apartheid revolution’s birth.
has been held annually in South Africa since 2003, organized by the Nelson Mandela Foundation. According to the foundation’s
website “global leaders have used the lecture to raise topical issues affecting South Africa, Africa and
the rest of the world.” Instantly arriving on the back of these words, however, given Obama’s participation
as the event’s star act this year, comes anger and a crippling sense of irony – cruel irony –
as ‘Libya’ hovers into sharp relief.
Not only was the former US president key in turning the
North African country from a functioning state with a ‘high human development rank’, according to
the UN, into a manifestation of hell on earth, but Libya’s murdered leader, Muammar Gaddafi, provided significant
material aid to Mandela and the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa when at its most intense. This was way
before it achieved the status of cause celebre in the West, when Washington and its allies were doing their utmost
to lend legitimacy to the country’s brutal apartheid government and state institutions.
to his credit, never forgot Gaddafi’s support and solidarity, taking the opportunity of a public appearance alongside
then US President Bill Clinton in 1998 to declare that in reference to Gaddafi’s Libya “moral authority
dictates that we should not abandon those who helped us in the darkest hour."
The unvarnished truth
when it comes to Obama’s connection to Mandela is that the only thing they ever had in common – apart,
that is, from the Nobel Prize they both received – was the color of his skin. Other than that Obama stands
as a political and moral dwarf compared to a man who endured untold privation and hardship during the struggle against
Apartheid, including 27 years in prison. Opportunism of champions of Western liberalism, such as Obama
No matter, for champions of Western liberal opportunism have long occupied the slot in the dictionary where shame
should reside. And there is no better example of it than Obama’s 2013 pilgrimage to Robben Island, where
Mandela served most of the long years spent incarcerated alongside other heroes of the struggle for freedom for black
President Obama’s visit to the notorious prison island in the year of Mandela’s
death came at a time when inmates at the equally notorious US detention facility at Guantanamo in Cuba were engaged
in a hunger strike, demanding an end to the harsh treatment and conditions of their own incarceration. This
was the same Guantanamo Obama had pledged to close on his first days in office. The record shows, of course, that not
only did America’s first black president fail to close Guantanamo on his first days in office, he did
not close it on any day of the two terms he served.
Mr. Chang and Mr. Tristan call themselves “American,” but what does that mean? “American” no longer has a racial connotation. It no longer has a linguistic connotation; a declaration by lawyer Aaron Schlossberg that Americans should speak English made him a media target. Outlets such as Time tell us that illegal immigrants calling themselves “Dreamers” are “new Americans,” so you can be an American
without even being a citizen.
The United States may be the “sole superpower” but American identity means
nothing more than participation in an economy. Today, appeals to America identity, such as “that’s not who we are” or “those aren’t our values” are usually used to tell us we are not morally allowed to act in our own interests. Reporters and watchdogs look
down their noses at even the bloodless civic nationalism represented by American symbols. Millions of “Americans”
show no respect for the national flag and don’t support the national team.
No one is opposed to nationalism—except in historically white nations.
Then it becomes “populism” or even “racism.”
It seems likely Black Panther will be eventually incorporated into school curriculums as a form of cultural reparations,
teaching young Americans what Africa would have looked like were it not for European interference. Some public school students
are already getting advance screenings of the film. This attempt to boost the already unrealistically high self-esteem of blacks is likely to be effective. Unfortunately, it will also fuel the pathological sense of grievance blacks have against
white people for supposedly creating all of their problems.
It’s hard not to see this as intentional. James
Baldwin knew even the most illiterate white person was related to Dante, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Aeschylus, da Vinci,
Rembrandt, and Racine in a way he never could be. But now blacks have been given an attractive myth, being told they are
honorary citizens of Wakanda in a way whites can never be. And as blacks are provided a fantasy of power and success, our
own people are indoctrinated to feel shame and guilt about the deeds our ancestors actually accomplished.
Under almost every system, treason is punishable by death because it endangers not just citizens, but the very principles
of authority and responsibility on which society rests. Thus, what a society considers “treason” tells us what
that society values.
It’s therefore interesting that Jorge Ramos, the Mexican-born Spanish-language news anchor,
is accusing Republicans of wanting the so-called “Dreamers” to commit something like treason.
What Republicans are asking from the Dreamers is like treason. When they say they want to end “chain
migration”, they are telling them: we’ll legalize you but I’ll deport your parents and siblings. When
someone mistreats your parents, you’ll remember it all your life.
Of course, what Republicans are asking of the “Dreamers” is to put their loyalty to this
country—the country we are constantly (and inaccurately) told is the “only country they have ever known”—over the interests of foreigners. This is, after all,
what any country would ask of those who want to immigrate. And yet Mr. Ramos’s reaction is an implicit admission that
the propaganda line being used to argue for amnesty—that “Dreamers” are simply undocumented Americans—is
false. To accuse Mr. Ramos and his ideological allies of “dual loyalty” would be to understate the case; he
appears to have little loyalty to the United States at all.
Victor Davis Hanson, Mexifornia: A State of Becoming, Encounter Books, 2003, 150 pp., $21.95.
Davis Hanson, a classicist at California State University, Fresno, brings a fifth-generation Californian’s perspective
on the state’s slide into Third-World “Mexifornia.” He grew up in Selma in the San Joaquin Valley where
he still runs a family farm, and has witnessed the steady dispossession of “Anglos” (though Prof. Hanson is of
As a child in the 1950s and “60s, Prof. Hanson was one of few whites
in Selma. Most of his classmates were legal Mexican immigrants, along with a remnant of the white “Okies” who
still did farm work. He says there was some mild racial tension, but that a strong assimilationist ethic meant everyone
was American, regardless of race. He even claims to feel most comfortable “with the people I grew up with, a population
of mostly Mexicans, Mexican-Americans and whites who were raised with non-whites.”
It was the disappearance
of Prof. Hanson’s California of the 1950s that prompted him to write Mexifornia. At 150 pages and
without footnotes, the book is a personal reflection of the changes one man has seen over the last 40 years.
Selma is almost entirely Mexican. La Raza-typeracialism has replaced assimilation, and Prof. Hanson deals almost
daily with the problems — unseen by most whites — of mass immigration. Illegals use his farm as a garbage dump.
He regularly finds used diapers, plastic toys, old magazines, television sets, vermin-infested sofas and beds, and even
junk cars on his property. His most bizarre discovery was a 1950s camping trailer (no plates or registration, of course)
abandoned in front of his house. It was filled with broken furniture, tree limbs, garbage, clothes, and old newspapers.
The tires were flat and the trailer was impossible to move. After three weeks, the county finally removed the monstrosity
with a skip loader and a dump truck.
Having been born in a coal and steel company town but destiny delivered,
as an adult, to reside, during extended intervals, in the East and West Coast cities of Los Angeles and New York City, and,
at present, the continent of Europe, I have come to conclude, people born into situations providing economic advantage, both
liberals and conservatives alike, experience difficulty, more often than not, envisaging the lives of those born into a labouring
class existence. Worse, a wilful obtuseness, in combination with a supercilious posture is, all too often, evinced, by reflex,
towards those scorned as "hillbillies," "trailer trash," and "genetic retreads."
December 10, 2017 - 28 Comments Edmund Connelly, Ph. D.
Is there really any use in trying to show that education in America is
firmly in the hands of enemies of the White race? Probably not, since it is so obvious. Plus it has been well addressed already
time and again, including by gifted writer F. Roger Devlin, who delivered an address six years ago at the fourth annual meeting
of the H.L. Mencken Club. VDARE.com's editor, Peter Brimelow, called Devlin's presentation "a searing account
of how the historic American nation has been, in effect, decapitated - its higher education facilities are now entirely in
the hands of hostile forces."
In his talk,
"Higher Education: The Impossibility Of Reform," Devlin began by noting that by now there must be "a sizeable
class of academically trained non-leftists for whom there is essentially no place in the contemporary academy." This
sense of not being welcome has now trickled down from potential teachers to White male students as well. "Young men,"
Devlin observes, "are staying away to avoid what their enemies would describe as a ‘hostile learning environment.'"
Not surprisingly, the knowledge that all levels of American education show
hatred toward White males - either implicitly or explicitly - is the reason that the younger cohort of what constitutes today's
Alt-Right addresses the topic so often. I can think of no better example than Mike Enoch, main host of the "Daily Shoah"
on The Right Stuff alternative media platform. He and his fellow hosts speak from personal experience when discussing the
hostile environment they encountered in school as White non-Jewish males. Typically, this is from kindergarten on up.
On Monday, WSWS International Editorial Board Chairman David North interviewed Chris Hedges, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, author, lecturer and former New York Times correspondent.
Among Hedges’ best-known books are War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, The Death of the Liberal Class, Empire
of Illusion: the End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle, Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt, which he co-wrote with
the cartoonist Joe Sacco, and Wages of Rebellion: the Moral Imperative of Revolt.
In an article published
in Truthdig September 17, titled “The Silencing of Dissent,” Hedges referenced the WSWS coverage
of Google’s censorship of left-wing sites and warned about the growth of “blacklisting, censorship and slandering
dissidents as foreign agents for Russia and purveyors of ‘fake news.’”
Hedges wrote that
“the Department of Justice called on RT America and its ‘associates’ - which may mean people like me -
to register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act. No doubt, the corporate state knows that most of us will not register
as foreign agents, meaning we will be banished from the airwaves. This, I expect, is the intent.”
interview with Hedges began with a discussion of the significance of the anti-Russia campaign in the media.
October 12 is for celebrating the 525th anniversary of Columbus’ discovery of America, for on that day
in 1492, the Great Admiral landed on Guanahani (now known as San Salvador or Watlings) island in the Bahamas.
commemorate this as a true discovery in contrast to all the claims of Vikings, Chinese, Irish, and others who supposedly
came earlier – for once and only after Columbus discovered America, it stayed discovered.
Columbus Day is for most Americans just an excuse for a three-day weekend – which is why it’s a holiday today,
Monday October 9.
What it should be is a commemoration and celebration of Western Civilization – which
is why the Left hates Columbus and his holiday.
As David Stockman writes, Trump "is up against a Deep State/Dem/Neocon/mainstream
media prosecution" and "has no chance of survival short of an aggressive offensive" against those working to
destroy him. But there is no Trump offensive, "because the man is clueless about what he is doing in the White House
and is being advised by a cacophonous coterie of amateurs and nincompoops. So he has no action plan except to impulsively
reach for his Twitter account."
Our president twitters while
he and Earth itself are pushed toward destruction.
F. Roger Devlin, American Renaissance, January 2011
Byron M. Roth, The Perils of Diversity, Washington Summit Publishers, 2010, 577 pp, $29.95.
shift now transforming the demographics of Europe and the United States is likely to leave a more permanent mark on our
civilization than even the two world wars of the last century. The survivors of those conflicts returned to a life that was
poorer than before, but otherwise much the same. This is never the case when one ethnic group displaces another. Barring
wide-spread violence, the effects of large-scale immigration are irreversible. Byron Roth is therefore right to note in
The Perils of Diversity that our current pattern of immigration is therefore “of world historical significance
that will affect future generations for centuries to come.”
American universities that receive government funding
(that is to say, virtually all of them) have “Institutional Review Boards” that approve or block research involving
human subjects. Prof. Roth points out that most faculty members who serve on these boards are openly hostile to research
that might reveal racial differences, often on the grounds that the results might get into the “wrong” hands.
Hate speech laws restrict public debate. Canadian journalist Mark Steyn notes that if an American writer approaches a
publisher with a book criticizing immigration, he will be reminded that it may be illegal to sell it in Canada, and there
goes 10 percent of the North American market. French and German translation rights cannot be sold because the book may run
afoul of European xenophobia legislation, and a British edition may be impossible because libel laws are so lax that anyone
mentioned unfavorably may be able to shut down sales. The result is that such a book may never reach the public, because
it may no longer make economic sense to publish it.
Philanthropic foundations use their wealth and influence to direct
public discussion into narrow channels. They sponsor publications and conferences under color of a disinterested concern
but, as Prof. Roth explains, no one who speaks honestly about the facts of race will be sponsored as a “qualified
expert.” Research on IQ goes unfunded, while millions are available for studies of “racism.” The Ford Foundation,
in particular, has showered money on MALDEF, La Raza, the ACLU, and dozens of other pro-immigration groups.
A future America in which both whites and all other ethnic groups see themselves as minorities will be far different from
our traditional majority-white/minority-black society. Since the 1960′s, the deepening ideological decay of the American
melting pot, especially among the journalists and intellectuals who shape our thoughts, has transformed our official self-image
from that of a nation of individuals living in a common culture into that of a nation of groups arrayed against one another
in an ethnic spoils system. Multiculturalism and “diversity” thoroughly dominate our nation’s schools and
politics and public discourse, encouraging minorities to exercise influence through the mobilization of ethnic or racial
grievance. Under this framework, the rise of a similar ethnic-grievance movement among America’s emerging white minority
is likely, perhaps inevitable...
As the first major state to face the political reality of a shrinking white minority,
California has become the laboratory of America’s ethnic future...
Aristotle is greatly concerned with the preservation of civil peace in the city-state. One of the most common causes
of “faction” and civil war, he says, was the unhappy consequences of unassimilated immigration and the consequent
diversity. Aristotle’s prose is perfectly clear:
Heterogeneity of stocks may lead to faction –
at any rate until they have had time to assimilate. A city cannot be constituted from any chance collection of people, or
in any chance period of time. Most of the cities which have admitted settlers, either at the time of their foundation or
later, have been troubled by faction. For example, the Achaeans joined with settlers from Troezen in founding Sybaris, but
expelled them when their own numbers increased; and this involved their city in a curse. At Thurii the Sybarites quarreled
with the other settlers who had joined them in its colonization; they demanded special privileges, on the ground that they
were the owners of the territory, and were driven out of the colony. At Byzantium the later settlers were detected in a
conspiracy against the original colonists, and were expelled by force; and a similar expulsion befell the exiles from Chios
who were admitted to Antissa by the original colonists. At Zancle, on the other hand, the original colonists were themselves
expelled by the Samians whom they admitted. At Apollonia, on the Black Sea, factional conflict was caused by the introduction
of new settlers; at Syracuse the conferring of civic rights on aliens and mercenaries, at the end of the period of the tyrants,
led to sedition and civil war; and at Amphipolis the original citizens, after admitting Chalcidian colonists, were nearly
all expelled by the colonists they had admitted. (1303A13)
Thus, immigration of different peoples was a common
source of conflict, often leading to civil war and concluding with the ethnic cleansing of either the native peoples or
Here are a few articles on our President, the progressive left, and
deconstructionist media. They serve to explain the hatred directed toward our President.
Excerpts: What is going on right now is just downright weird-into-evil. And the shots currently being
fired at Trump - both the hateful insults as well as the death threats - are unprecedented in the history of our nation...
CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, etc., etc. have spent the past sixty years shaping opinion by bending the appearance of
truth before all the millions of people who now live their lives in the fantasy world that began as 'entertainment'.
When someone like a fog-busting Trump comes along, you've got to get the camera off of him. And because you can't
do that now that he is president, you've got to take him out entirely...
liberal news-media and entertainment have for decades been progressively shaping the attitudes of
their consumer-audiences in priming them for whoever will buy their mesmerized allegiance. And now, as a result,
our President is the TARGET of the most dangerous group of EXTREMISTS on earth: our liberal press, television/entertainment.
And through their actions and 'journalism', who can deny that they have issued what is tantamount to a deadly
fatwa on our president...
Working Americans - the nose-to-the-grindstone, beat-up taxpayers who have
been underwriting Obama's father's dreams - finally had had enough. And they went and did what ABC, NBC, CBS,
CNN, et al. never dreamed of: They put their foot down and shouted a resounding "HELL, NO!"...
most infuriates big media/press, etc., is that President Trump is quite obviously not afraid of them...
The Left is freaking out because they've lost control in their effort to make this a nation run by a
Party and not a Constitution
Meanwhile, as the Left protests the existence of a non-Leftist government, they
are showing us that they consider the Constitutional process optional. As long as their Party gets elected, our Constitutional system is commendable. But put them out of power in a major way and the goal becomes shutting down
the Constitutional process and imposing their will on the rest of us...
If immigration can't become,
in effect, open immigration, then all efforts to crack down on illegal immigration are considered opposition to
all immigrants and must be fiercely opposed...
And the ultimatum continues. Everything on President Trump's
agenda must be opposed, so come up with an argument why each item will cause untold evil, and boycott, protest
and disrupt wherever and whenever possible.
Some say a coup is in progress. I call it the Cold Civil War. The forces of destruction have been deposed by the election of Donald Trump and are trying everything short of armed revolt.
The cold coup d'etat had taken place under Obama but was unable to consolidate its hold by turning the military
into the armed forces of the Left and by stopping the election of a Republican President for the third consecutive
time (and the final one, I would say).
Now, facing defeat, all they can do is try to sabotage the restoration
of our republic and multi-party government...
Enter President Donald J. Trump: A comatose nation has been revived
and is undergoing physical therapy in preparation for return to a normal life. Once we get beyond the boycott
of Trump administration nominees we can get back to functioning as a great nation.
The Democrat Party-induced
protests will fade, as did the anti-Tea Party protests, Operation Wall Street, and Black Lives Matter. ISIS will
be put on the run, illegal immigration will be brought under control, and the shackles will be taken off of economic
growth. It's going to be quite a ride, America, so fasten your seatbelt and prepare for takeoff!...
When Does a Modern Country Become a Third World Country?
a First World country become a Third World country? The better question is, how many third world immigrants can a modern
country take on until they become the newest Third World country? This is why in the 1880’s, at the height of America’s
largest legal immigration period, American law reflected the fact that the country would control the number of immigrants
and the origin of the immigrants would be limited by a quota system. Further, the absence of communicable disease was a
requirement for entry as was the absence of serious criminal behavior in the background of the immigrant as much as could
Today’s churches and their “immigration outreach services” have total disdain for
the welfare of the country, as a whole, as they facilitate law-breaking behavior to the overall detriment of American citizens.
The FBI has stated, for example, that one in ten immigrants from the Middle East could be expected to be radicalized. This
is a euphemism for terrorist potentialities.
Why would any organization, even a church, advocate for the entry of
these people without proper screening? Are we to assume that the Lutheran church is just fine with the events of Orlando,
San Bernardino and 9/11? If so, this is why I want nothing to do with the modern American church.
This Site may
contain links and pointers to other Internet sites, resources, and sponsors of the Site. Links to and from the Site to other
third-party sites, maintained by third parties, do not constitute an endorsement by us of any third parties, the third-party
sites or the contents thereof.
You're not being tolerant, inclusive, nor anti-racist.
You're being invaded, colonized and replaced.
Powered by Earthlink
News items and photos republished
under Fair Use Doctrine of the Internet. Global Gulag dot US makes no money from advertising and does not request financial support from our readers. Items posted are for informational and educational