Jared Taylor, Taki’s Magazine, June 1, 2009
Lost in Justin Raimondo’s torrent of mistaken assumptions and wild accusations [see below for excerpts] is one useful question: What do “white nationalists” want? By putting the term in quotation marks, Mr. Raimondo has stumbled onto an important truth, namely, that there is no accepted term for contemporary Americans who still hold some of the views about race that were taken for granted by virtually all Americans until about the 1950s.
Until then, most people believed race was an important aspect of individual and group identity. They believed that the races differed in temperament and ability, and whites preferred the societies built by whites to those built by non-whites. They wanted the United States to be peopled by Europeans because they believed only people of European stock would maintain the civilization they valued. These views were so wide-spread, so taken for granted, so indisputable that there was no term for them. Just as there was no name for people who expected the sun to rise in the East, there was no name for people whose views are today sometimes given the clumsy term “white nationalism.”
The national-origins immigration policy that lasted until 1965 embodied this basic understanding of race. As one of the supporters of that policy, Congressman William Vaile of Colorado explained in 1924, “[the United States] is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different.” I might add that even if this sentiment shocks Americans today, it is exactly the view of their own country held by virtually every Japanese, Israeli, or Mexican.
What perhaps most succinctly characterizes those whom Mr. Raimondo calls “white nationalists” is the conviction that it was a terrible mistake to abandon national-origins quotas and throw the United States open to immigration from everywhere. As Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina wondered at the time: “What is wrong with the national origins of the American people? What is wrong with maintaining them? What is wrong with preferring as immigrants one’s own kinsmen?” There were no good answers to those questions then and there is none today.
I believe Sam Ervin—and Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt—shared my desire for a country in which our ancestors were respected as pioneers and statesmen, not reviled as murderers and thieves. I believe they wanted a country in which their children’s children would walk in the ways of their forebears, sing the same songs, worship the same God, revere the same heroes, and proudly carry forward the civilization and culture of the West. I am certain they believed this would be possible only in a nation whose majority people were the biological heirs to the creators of that culture and civilization.
My hopes for the land in which my descendants will live are no different from those of virtually every person who has ever lived anywhere. The idea that nothing will be lost if a founding population is replaced with aliens is a new disease that strikes only whites. Our Mexican neighbors would scoff at the notion that “diversity” is a strength or that millions of English-speaking, white-skinned immigrants were a form of “cultural enrichment.” They would be astonished at the idea of elevating to a position of power a gringa who claimed white women made better decisions than Mexican men. In all these things they could not be more natural, normal, or healthy. It is we who have betrayed the ideals of our ancestors and diced with our children’s future by opening the doors to dispossession.
Is dispossession too strong a word? Just visit Detroit or Miami or parts of Los Angeles. You will not find the civilization Jefferson or Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt thought they were building for their children. There are great swathes of America in which Spanish—or even Chinese—is the lingua franca, and where English-speakers are out of place. At the college down the road there are footbaths in the student union so Muslim immigrants can clean their feet before salaaming in the worship area they demanded be set aside for them. Washington’s and Jefferson’s names are being pulled down from public schools to be replaced with Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King.
I am not certain it is possible to salvage from the chaos immigration is bringing to this country a nation of which my grandchildren can even feel a part, much less be proud. But unless whites wake up from their stupor, unless they—like the white firemen of New Haven—realize they have legitimate rights as a group and are prepared to fight for them, they will be shoved aside by Africans, Asians, Mexicans, Haitians, and Muslims who have, in addition to very sharp elbows, a keen sense of their own interests.
It is certainly true that there are many group identifications besides race. Our deepest ties are to our families, and our loyalties expand in concentric and overlapping circles: clubs, friends, work groups, nationalities, even cities and states. But the largest group to which most people feel a natural loyalty is race. That is because race marks the limit of our extended families, and defines the group to which we are genetically closer than to any other.
Loyalties of this kind are not rational but they are no less powerful for this reason. I love my own children more than I love the children of strangers, not because they are objectively superior but because they are mine. No one disputes my right to this irrational loyalty—nor should they dispute my right to an equally irrational, equally deep and genetic loyalty to my extended family.
At the same time, though I make sacrifices for my own children that I would never make for the children of others, this implies no ill feeling for other children. I can even have great affection for other children but mine come first. It should not require pointing out that, in like manner, loyalty to a race or nation need imply no ill feeling for any other. I can admire and like the Chinese or the Watusi without wanting my own country or my own descendants to become Chinese or Watusi. They, in turn, have no desire to fill their countries with Europeans.
Mr. Raimondo seems to think only a Nazi could oppose miscegenation or care about the racial/ethnic composition of his country. I’m sure we can count on him to explain to Israelis who want a Jewish state, and to the many Jews and blacks who oppose inter-marriage that they are actually Nazis. And, of course, the many Americans who opposed what they called “amalgamation” and even passed laws to forbid it were all Nazis long before Nazism. The Japanese, who would rather invent clever robots than encourage immigrants, and the Mexicans who do not let non-citizens own property are no doubt Nazis, too. This is the sort of silliness that comes from thinking in clichés, from swallowing the mantras of liberal egalitarianism.
Mr. Raimondo seems to insist on looking at everything from a libertarian perspective so let us adopt one. Mr. Raimondo does not appear to understand that I am not proposing a state-enforced caste system; I want to dismantle the one we have, the one that turned the New Haven firemen
Many doctrinaire libertarians think there should not even be immigration control. They argue that in an ideal world of private property each property owner could set his own immigration policy. Until that day comes, I am certainly not proposing an expansion of state power; merely a policy that preserves our heritage rather than devour it.
And what if, like Mr. Raimondo, we are to put libertarianism before the preservation of race or heritage? Perhaps he has not noticed that it is only whites who have even imagined an individualism as pure as libertarianism. How many non-white allies has he found in his battle against the state? Does he really think Mexicans and Africans will help him dismantle state power rather than seize it for their own purposes? By ignoring race Mr. Raimondo is ensuring the failure of what I take to be his most cherished project.
Where Mr. Raimondo and I most clearly part company is that I am in earnest about the survival of my people and their civilization. For that I apologize to no one. If Mr. Raimondo does not see the crisis, he has every right to enjoy his ignorance, but he joins forces with the very multi-culturalists he claims to oppose when he denies to whites an awareness of their group interests without which they are doomed to oblivion.
Original article
(Posted on June 1, 2009)
Justin Raimondo, Taki’s Magazine, May 28, 2009
Jared Taylor’s recent posting on Takimag
To being with, he avers that “if you can’t beat them, join them”—that is, if you can’t beat the multiculti rules and regulations that increasing afflict our lives, then the best policy is one of . . . surrender. He cites a case where the city of New Haven threw out the results of a test taken by aspiring firemen in which blacks didn’t do as well as the city would have liked. New Haven bureaucrats threw out the test results for all races, not just blacks, and did the whole procedure over again: this, claims Taylor, is anti-white “discrimination.”
While Paul Gottfried inexplicably claims that most of the white nationalists he has met are “libertarians,” it appears that their Maximum Leader is not among them: for the libertarian would argue that the entire procedure and the unfairness inherent in it could be eliminated by simply privatizing the fire department. Of course, it would still be possible to pursue the elusive goal of equality of results through enforcement of the so-called civil rights laws—yet that is precisely what Taylor would do on behalf of “oppressed” whites. This kind of scam is wrong when blacks try to pull it off, but right when engaged in by whites.
The Taylorite commitment to “white racial consciousness” is simply a cracked mirror image of the worst excesses of the “black power” movement—and it is advanced with much less justification. {snip}
{snip}
{snip} Taylor is dead serious, but what is he serious about? Ostensibly, he’s upset over those white firemen denied jobs in New Haven, but it quickly becomes all too clear that’s not his main beef: what he’s really against is miscegenation, or what his intellectual heirs used to call “race-mixing”:
The real solution may have to wait another generation or two after which, if some who call themselves conservatives have their way, there will have been so much miscegenation there will be no more white people left to worry about.
He then cites a number of commentators who think this trend is desirable, from Michael Barone to the Socialist candidate in the French election for Prime Minister, and then snarks: “If those New Haven firemen got a raw deal, I guess their parents just married the wrong people. “
But what has miscegenation got to do with the issue he supposedly cares about, those poor oppressed white firemen? It’s not clear. What is all too clear, however, is that the real agenda of the “white nationalist” movement has zero to do with legitimate issues, such as the injustice of affirmative action. It is all about race-mixing—an “issue” that, in an age when a mulatto is president of these United States, has a certain explosive quality, as well as an aura of outright nastiness.
{snip}
As the white-collar wing of the same movement, Taylor and his American Renaissance crowd are salivating as the prospect of massive recruitment because one of “them” is in the White House. They hope to infiltrate what they call the “pseudo-conservatives” with their message of genetic determinism and white supremacy, imbuing the rightist critique of Obama and all his works with a racialist tinge.
This, of course, is just what the Obamaites ordered: they would love to marginalize their opposition and banish them to the fever swamps of race-obsessed neurotics and social misfits. Nothing would please them more than to see the rising resentment of their policies ascribed to the spreading influence of racist agitators. If I were the Democratic National Committee, I’d funnel millions into Taylor’s outfit, and like-minded groups, for the same reason that the interventionists encouraged Nazi infiltration of the America First antiwar movement in the run-up to World War II.
{snip}
What I don’t understand, and I doubt Taylor does either, is this: what do the “white nationalists” want? What is their program? They are “nationalists” without a nation. Do they want to expel all non-whites from U.S. territory? Do they want to carve out their own ersatz “nation” in, say, the nether reaches of Idaho and the Dakotas? Do they want to create a caste system based on racial heritage, as the Nazis tried to do, with whites on top and the “mud people”—their disgusting term for non-whites—on the bottom? Or do they just want to abolish race preferences in law and custom—in which case they shed their “white nationalist” hoods and morph into white versions of Ward Connerly? Would Taylor outlaw miscegenation if he could? I have no doubt that he would, no matter what he says in public.
Americans don’t like racists, not because they have been indoctrinated by leftist professors and do-gooder social workers, but because “white nationalists” and their ilk are looking for the unearned: they want power, prestige, and money in the bank based on factors over which they had no control, that is, their genetic heritage. That’s why they spend so much time posing as amateur “scientists” and “anthropologists,” extrapolating entire theories of social organization from the results of “intelligence tests” that presume to measure the ineffable. It is a soulless, materialist, dogmatic view of life that has nothing in common with authentic conservatism, and which has all sorts of statist implications—not to mention a history of racialist-inspired statist measures—that make “white nationalism” antithetical to libertarianism.
{snip}
Original article
Comments
I have followed this dust-up closely. I once had respect for Raimondo although I didn’t necessarily agree with all his assertions, etc. I have written him off entirely now. His hit-piece is embarrassingly narrow-minded and typically long on vitriol, short on substance - the very type of bilge, in fact, we have come to expect from our enemies on the left.
Conservatism is a dead-end street for our people anyway. The sooner we accept that fact, the better-off we will all be. We need to redefine the whole political debate in terms of…if you will, Black and White, not left and right!
This guy is a clown! His whole article just gives a dry history lesson about evil white racism. And this apparently makes it morally wrong for whites to organize politically. Of course like every other liberal idiot, he never thanks whites for creating western civilization, but oh yeah, that was minorities too, I forgot. What a crock of ****!!!
Taki Theodoracopulous and his mag have the same problem that PJB used to have (fitting, as Taki was the first editor of PJB’s AmConMag), and that is aracinated paleoconservatism.
Jared Taylor wrote:
Loyalties of this kind are not rational but they are no less powerful for this reason. I love my own children more than I love the children of strangers, not because they are objectively superior but because they are mine. No one disputes my right to this irrational loyalty—nor should they dispute my right to an equally irrational, equally deep and genetic loyalty to my extended family.
This reminds me of the debate between Historama and other posters in threads from late last week. Just as Jared Taylor is right that you love your own children more than the children of strangers, you love your own children more than your nieces and nephews, you love your nieces and nephews more than your first cousins once removed. The genetically closer to you another person is, the more preference you give to them. Therefore, my position is halfway between Historama’s and his critics. Whites in general are everyone in our family, but our kind of white ethnicity is our children, and other kinds of whites are our nephews. The truth of the matter is more complicated than that, but you get the point.
Strangers in our own land.
I used to think Christianity was involved, but now, even though I think it has some time bombs in it, I am not sure. We were stronger as a people when we attended to it.
But one of those time bombs it this: What credit do you get when you do good to those who love you? Even the Pharisees do that! No, I tell you: Do good to your enemies! Love those who hate you and would take everything from you! (my paraphrase of Jesus’ well-known words.)
At any rate, what good is a religion that can so easily and completely be taken over by our enemies, if indeed it has been taken over?
According to Justin Raimondo, the destruction of white America is a fait accompli.
To justify his view, he opines that “Americans don’t like racists”, meaning they welcome miscegenation, affirmative action, and non-white immigration, and the displacement of whites as a majority.
What does Justin Raimondo want? He wants white nationalists to go away. He wants a return to the good old days, when white nationalism barely spoke its name. He wants the hearts and minds of the majority of white Americans to be turned against “nasty” white nationalists. He wants whites to be in the front ranks fighting white nationalism.
Justin wants a majority of whites to be ignorant and stupefied on the drug of liberalism, long enough so that the ‘facts on the ground’ of mixed-race children and non-white migrants can create the democratic majority of a future America.
The demise of whites in America is not a fait accompli. As long as white nationalism can speak in a free press, there is still time to shape our future.
Abraham Lincoln
When our Government was established, we had the institution of slavery among us. We were in a certain sense compelled to tolerate its existence. It was a sort of necessity. We had gone through our struggle and secured our own independence. The framers of the Constitution found the institution of slavery amongst their other institutions at the time. They found that by an effort to eradicate it, they might lose much of what they had already gained. They were obliged to bow to the necessity. They gave power to Congress to abolish the slave trade at the end of twenty years. They also prohibited it in the Territories where it did not exist. They did what they could, and yielded from that necessity. What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races.
This white person knows what he wants.
I want a country that does not reward Incompetence. I want a country where free speech rules the day and science does not have to be politicized and subjected to political correctness. I want a country where everyone must learn the true history of the nation from it’s founding not some liberal loose interpretation.
Justin Raimondo just doesn’t understand this or most likely refuses to believe there are real injustices being imposed upon whites daily, the very whites whose forefathers founded this great nation.
It is gut wrenching to watch the minority classes now in power tearing down the once greatest nation on earth.
Where is the hope?
You know, you’d think the title ‘white nationalist’ would be self-explanatory. Asking “what do white nationalists want?” is answered within the question:
A WHITE NATION. Was that so hard to figure out?
Why shouldn’t we want a white nation? White nations, historically and up to the present day, are the freest, richest, and happiest places on earth, according to innumerable studies and statistical comparisons. Why would we Not want to live in one? Why would we not want our children to live in one?
Moreover, why shouldn’t we want to be around people like ourselves? If we love ourselves, it stands to reason we’d prefer the company of people like ourselves. Why wouldn’t we want our grandchildren to look like us? If we like how we look, that’s how we’d like our grandchildren to look too. Apparently the only morally acceptable position, according to Raimondo, is to hate ourselves and how we look, otherwise we are bigots!
That’s why they spend so much time posing as amateur “scientists” and “anthropologists,” extrapolating entire theories of social organization from the results of “intelligence tests” that presume to measure the ineffable.
If what the intelligence test measure is so “ineffable” then why do they tend to predict equally well how a city or a nation will do based on its population mix (read racial make up)? Most importantly, why are intelligence tests perfectly valid in every walk of life except when it comes to determining differences between racial groups?
“New Haven bureaucrats threw out the test results for all races, not just blacks, and did the whole procedure over again: this, claims Taylor, is anti-white “discrimination.””
I don’t get how someone who can’t understand something so elementary is taken seriously by anyone.
It was discrimination because the people who scored the highest were white. How hard is that to understand?
Having read the original story earlier, I have to say Raimondo’s essay is among the most bewildering non sequiturs I’ve ever seen. How exactly do you argue with someone who doesn’t even address the questions you raise, and then goes on to accuse of you with no evidence of plotting out things that you might do if you were the dictator of the USA?
“Where Mr. Raimondo and I most clearly part company is that I am in earnest about the survival of my people and their civilization. For that I apologize to no one. If Mr. Raimondo does not see the crisis, he has every right to enjoy his ignorance, but he joins forces with the very multi-culturalists he claims to oppose when he denies to whites an awareness of their group interests without which they are doomed to oblivion.”
What I find most interesting here and in Mr. Raimondo’s anti-white diatribe against Mr. Taylor, is that both men wish to define the other through the neon Red “rainbow” of multiculturalism. From Mr. Raimondo’s perspective, it appears that anything goes with regard to miscegenation and the nonwhite invasion, so long as there is an almost anarchic reduction of governmental influences on our lives. Mr. Taylor on the other hand, simply states that there needs to be a reawakening of white solidarity and subsequently sociopolitical action with regard to the racial/cultural preservation of the USA, as a white majority country.
Thus, who is right and who is wrong, regarding the question of being a fellow traveler with the multiculturalism is the road to “utopia” crowd?
Well, that does sort of depend on how you define multiculturalism. I for one, broadly define multiculturalism as a form of neo-Marxism, that seeks to redistribute Western wealth and property from whites to nonwhites and has a genocidal component, that views whites as the global oppressor class requiring extermination through: territorial displacement; unrestrained interracial crime/violence, that is officially downplayed as marginal at best by treasonous elites, and openly encouraged miscegenation. In short, the present sociopolitical model of the USA and the rest of the West.
Clearly, Mr. Raimondo is the guilty party here. He may not want to see that above definition of multiculturalism “enforced” by governmental policy, however he does not mind if it continues its creeping genocidal influences, in a “free market” arrangement.
A convoluted sociopolitical paradigm to be sure, but it remains genocidal in its likely outcomes nonetheless!
As always, God help us all!!!
I have to admit I became a little emotional when I read this piece and actually shed a tear.
These rank among the words that have inspired men throughout history to sacrifice everything for their posterity.
Thank you Mr. Taylor.
“Americans don’t like racists,”
But they just elected one and his approval ratings are high. Why isn’t Justin angry about this?
“because “white nationalists” and their ilk are looking for the unearned: they want power, prestige, and money in the bank based on factors over which they had no control, that is, their genetic heritage.”
Huh? Has Raimondo ever read Taylor or American Renaissance? All we want is fairness and justice. If we score highest on the test give us the jobs or slots in school. It is blacks (and others) who want power, prestige and other people’s money based on their skin color. But you won’t see Raimondo criticise this. Afer all, he is an anti-white racist.
“He cites a case where the city of New Haven threw out the results of a test taken by aspiring firemen in which blacks didn’t do as well as the city would have liked. New Haven bureaucrats threw out the test results for all races, not just blacks, and did the whole procedure over again: this, claims Taylor, is anti-white “discrimination.”
But how is this not anti-white discrimination? Why would a libertarian and supposed “anti-racist” support this?
Raimondo is only against “racism” when whites are fighting back against the state sponsored racism that afflicts us.
As usual, Mr. Taylor makes no attempt to actually define ‘whiteness’ in any concrete or specific fashion. He casually uses the terms ‘European’, ‘the West’, and ‘white’, but doesn’t elaborate on the precise boundaries and limitations of these terms. Perhaps ‘whites’ aren’t opposing ‘their’ dispossession because they are not even capable of possessing the sort of cohesiveness that Mr. Taylor desires? Historically, Europeans have NEVER banded together in the name of ‘whiteness’; they have always banded together under much more meaningful foundations. For the National Socialists in Germany, it was ethnicity, culture, history, language, race, and anti-communism. More commonly it has been under the banner of religion, with ‘race’ only being encompassed as a side consequence of this fact.
I think Mr. Taylor is reaching for something that simply doesn’t exist. Yes, other countries have a sense of family feeling and solidarity, but their interests are expressed within the context of a consolidated political state and a common identity. The Chinese, for instance, are not racially uniform, but the races within China are protected through the common identity shared across China altogether. Perhaps before the 1920’s in America, when everyone was more-or-less Northern European, with a common Germanic language and Germanic culture, could there be a sense of ‘family feeling’ and solidarity, but not now. You’ve got all sorts of ‘whites’ who have nothing to do with each other. Russians, Greeks, Poles, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Italians, Ukranians, etc. You’re only fooling yourself if you think that you can ‘unite’ these people under the banner of whiteness. Furthermore, who says it would be desirable if they did? Why is it good to homogenize the white world?
IMO, the lazy ‘whites’ of America today are not the same ‘whites’ who actually built the country from a wilderness. They are mostly opportunists who came late in the game to grab a piece of what they did not actually create. This might sound harsh and ‘un-PC’ for Amreners, but its the truth nonetheless…
Paul Gottfried is a man I much admire, and whose views I find informative. But in this case I must disagree with him. Jared Taylor addressed the nub of the issue. White racial solidarity is not a surrender to the multi-cult, it is simply recognizizng and dealing with reality. The Human species is tribal and has been for far longer than it has been democratic, capitalist, socialist or any other political idntity. Blood is not just thicker than water, it is thicker than ink.
We seem to be looking at the second and third parts of a three-part correspondence. Anyone happen to know where the first part is?
What I fear in this issue is that if a White National state was established, the Whites would fall back into ethnic squables over religion principally, splitting hairs the same way the Protestants did against Catholics and among themselves much the way colonial America was seperated between sects of Christianity and intolerant of all the new ones popping up. One had no rights outside their own parish. The Catholics would be motivated to purge their own as well as hard times always make Catholics do this. I suspect that no White Jews would be tolerated. This is why I can only envision a new religion that is about being White instead of these old, poisonous and actually really silly belief systems. It is also why I doubt that any such solution is likely.
A case well stated by Jared Taylor. The unstated fatal flaw by past Anglo generations, was to assume that things racial were “understood”, and could be controlled by the political process. Without enshrining ‘race’ into the Constitution as a basis for nationhood and citizenship, white Americans lost control of their poorly identified ethnic state to more organized ethnic and financial interest groups. The ensuing toxic befuddlement about a nebulous “proposition” nation has since led us to the debacle that we are now facing.
Sorry, couldn’t get through more than a paragraph of Raimondo’s rant. Recent events in my home town have robbed me of what may be the last vestiges of my willingness to be objective when it comes to how white people are being treated.
I skimmed over the remainder of Raimondo’s claptrap and spied the word “Nazi.” That’s enough to tell me his writing lacks originality and is nothing but a self-serving effort at ingratiating himself with the diversity crowd…I think.
Jared Taylor makes a great rebuttal in this instance; Raimondo can’t compete.
Justin Raimondo has expressed a valid opposition to the concept of White nationalism as a futile undertaking in a country where the implementation of a race-based, preferential hierarchy has been in full swing ever since the early seventies; white firefighters are denied the jobs they were legally qualified to hold because of the so-called perception (not reality) of discrimination. Sotomayor and her jurist colleagues viewed the test results to be skewed because no black/minority candidates qualified for promotion (in essence, they were simply not proficient in those skills deemed necessary by the firefighters association who drafted the exam). There must be a token representation of minorities or the test cannot be used as a measuring stick for selection. Diversity and proportionality trump objective norms for choosing the most appropriate candidates in virtually all fields. Raimondo argues that the privatization of the firefighters would preclude this imbalance (according to existing laws, this is an impoverished canard that flies in the face of legal realism and constraints.)
Jared Taylor has equally solid arguments although he doesn’t specifically answer the questions asked by Raimondo: what would a white nationalist world look like? Could the idea of America as a multi-cultural entity survive? How does one reshape the legal landscape that gives rise to the society of today? How could white race realists come to terms with the rapid mecegenation of the population? Is Obama black or white? He himself had to make a deliberate choice to declare himself black. Black was the ethnic identity that he could prosper in, not mixed race or mulatto. Where will America be in 35 to 50 years? The browning of America is a demographic force that simply cannot be stopped; it may be slowed, with immigrations laws that once again favor Europeans, but that is only a stopgap measure. What AR and its members must do is to fashion an ideology that reasonable, concerned citizens can espouse without pushing themselves into the marginalized world of race haters, being shunned by the majority and derided by intellectuals who see their struggle as vain, egocentric, and decidely anti-American (however one may define that term). If Whites and their culture are worth saving, then this goal must be articulated in a manner that main-stream Americans can embrace without the threat of exclusion or violence. There must also be a reconciliatory movement toward the conservative movement so that viable arguments can be assimilated without opprobrium or ridicule. The cultural revolution must come from ideas and civic action, not carping on the sidelines.
“If two hands together make a clapping, what is the sound that one hand makes?”
What do White Nationalists want? A White Nation.
There. Wasn’t that easy?
This has nothing to do with White Nationalism.
A specific example of George Washington’s name, or reference, being removed from public schools is evident in Los Angeles. A middle school that was formerly named Mount Vernon Middle School was renamed Johnny Cochran Middle School. It is intellectual and moral nihilism institutionalized.
Bravo Jared…what I love most about your argument is that Multiculturalists simply have never heard something so straightforward and unapologetic. They are left speechless.
Mr Raimondo, there is much in your writing for a rational and reasonable person to take exception with. I will mention but one.
Apparently you dont see New Haven’s actions as discriminatory towards whites. I find this very odd. New Haven’s actions denied 19 whites and 1 hispanic (working from memory) their rightful and EARNED promotions within the New Haven FD. I suppose if 19 blacks and 1 white had qualified for promotion and those results were thrown out BECAUSE NOT ENOUGH WHITES QUALIFIED, you would not see that as anti black discrimination?
I am not familiar with you or your writings Mr Raimondo, but with all due respect, you seem to be sorely lacking in the reasonable and rational department.
You can read a good article about white nationalism, even an inspired one, by clicking on the Canadian flag on the front page.
“it would still be possible to pursue the elusive goal of equality of results through enforcement of the so-called civil rights laws—yet that is precisely what Taylor would do on behalf of “oppressed” whites. This kind of scam is wrong when blacks try to pull it off, but right when engaged in by whites.”
If it is wrong for the nation to be pro-black and have the ‘civil rights’ agenda fill up the nations textbooks, how do either Mr. Taylor or Mr. Raimondo go about righting that wrong? Neither men do a thing to right the ‘wrong’. The only way to counter it, one way or the other, is the ‘mirror-image’ pro-white organization. The sort of ‘racelessness’ most whites inherit, in a society where race means everything, isn’t really working out too good for them.
Raimondo writes: “It is a soulless, materialist, dogmatic view of life”. He is ostensibly criticizing Taylor, but in reality is perfectly describing those on the Left. It is Taylor whose view of life is more natural and more soulful.
“They argue that in an ideal world of private property each property owner could set his own immigration policy.”
America’s most visible libertarian, Ron Paul, is adamantly opposed to illegal immigration.
We are dealing here with the breakdown of the human mind.
We have been thoughtfully asked this question:
How does one reshape the legal landscape that gives rise to the society of today?
Background:
It was judges, appointed by the English Crown, not the legislatures of Maryland and Rhode Island that legalized slavery. Thomas Jefferson
So we can now see that:
The Founding Fathers made the mistake of making judges hard to remove from office, erroneously believing that this would insure they would do the right thing. We now know that judges are as easily corruptible as any politician…probably more so and their corruption almost always goes against the honest working stiff in these civil lawsuits. Think here of divorce, probate, and now the new hate speech crimes.
So the answer is:
We must make all judges accountable to the people they serve by having their activities reviewed annually by a special grand jury with the power to dismiss and jail.
But this can only happen after a statistically measurable portion of the population refuse to sit back as sheeple victims basically taking whatever comes at them.
Those of you who have not been the meat in one of these kangaroo court legal actions really have no idea how corrupt, and how hopeless the situation really is.
I prefer to live in societies built by whites - compare Northern Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Canada to Asia, the Middle East and Africa and the reason is apparent. Obviously, judging by the millions of non-Western immigrants pouring into Western countries, I’m not alone.
So does the preference of Asians, Middle Easterners and Africans to live in Western countries in preference to their own mean they are also ‘white nationalists’?
Reality wins the end game. White race consciousness is growing after 30-plus years of increasing anti-white,AA based discrimenation. When white people continue to lose economically, for no other reason than they are white, they will increasingly fight back. It grows with each riot in the hood- the LA riots for example. It grows with the injustice of the Duke lacrosse rape case. It grows with the excuses for violent black crime-name a case, name a city. If you want the libratarian utopia you dream of, you need to get parasitic, race hustlers of the Marxist left on board with your ideas. Wish you luck with that; in the mean time I’ll opt for survival of my culture and people.
At its core, White Nationalism comes down to this:opposition to the race replacement of Native Born White Americans at the hands of post-1965 hispanics,muslims,asians and africans and and the restoration of Native Born White Americans to 90 percent of the population.
If post-1965 immigration policy is allowed to continue, Native Born White Americans will be reduced to an ever dwindling racial minority within the borders of America. And once this happens, you can be certain of the following:asians,hispanics,muslims and africans will implement a national origins immigration policy that will keep Native Born White Americans an ever dwindling small racial minority within the borders of America. And you can als be sure of the following also:Native Born White Americans will face vicious discrimination,economic marginalization and violence. Post-1965 will be a majority in the military and in police departments. They will have the power to do anything thet want to Native Born White Americans. Why should Native Born White Americans be in favor of this?
I should also point out that Justin Ramindos website antiwar.com-a great website I might add- recieves money from very wealthy Silicon Valley Libertarians. These are the paraasites that have received a massive wage subsidiy through the hated H-1B and L-1 B visa programs. These Silicon Valley parasites have stolen the wages and wealth of thousands of Naive Born White Americans in the tech field.
Paul Gottfried hasn’t got a clue about what White Nationlaism is. If Professor Gottfried want’s to find out what White Nationalism is about in blood and guts terms, he shoould start reading the comments on Americans Renassaince. White Nationalism is not a political abstraction. White Nationalism is about soil,blood,genes,history,community and very strong connection to the land and soil of a particular place. White Nationalism is very normal and healthy.
We want this nation and we’re going to get it.
Tom Iron…
Richard Spencer
The fact that Europeans slaughtered each other for centuries is completely irrelevant to White Nationalism.
Richard Spencer:1)Are you opposed the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans at the hands of post-1965 asians,hispanics,muslims and africans.2)Or, are you for the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans at the hands of post-1965 asians,hispanics,muslims and africans.
These two questions go to the heart of White Nationalism.
Ron Paul’s aracial, Ann Ryandian free market alternative is completely compatible with the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans. In fact, it would help bring about race-replacement ..rather quickly I might add.
White Nationalism is not a political abstraction.
Quote from Raimondo’s full article:
“Taylor’s is the legacy of Lothrop Stoddard, Madison Grant, the Count de Gobineau, and that failed portrait painter from Vienna: ours is the legacy of Christianity, which recognized the centrality of the individual soul, and rejects collectivism, including racial collectivism, as inimical to freedom, reason, and just relations among men.”
That reference to Christianity is rich coming from a homosexual like Raimondo.
Eventually, at least a faction of the Hispanics will assimilate nicely to the point that they’re almost unrecognizable from European Americans. I have a guy living across the street from me who is Mexican, but he and his family show absolutely no signs of loyalty nor even similarity to native Mexicans. In fact, guys like him are often LESS tolerant of illegals than most White leftists. In short, he looks and acts like Americans should.
The problem is the counterculture that will inevitably form, just as it has in the case of Blacks. The immigrants who refuse to assimilate become a giant burden in so many ways (failure in school, demand for handouts, cries of racism, rampant crime, and innumerable fatherless children).
What gives me hope is the possibility that the minorities who rise above all the hypocrisy, like my neighbor, will stand with those of us who are tired of having to listen to miscreants tell us they are victims.
-Paradigmhttp://www.belatedtruth.com
All important and valid comments from ‘white nationalists’. But you’re not going to get anywhere as long as you are named something like white nationalist. Where can us pro-white folks turn? Please, name the website.
The problem in America is races are mingling but not mixing. The reality on the street, in politics, and in every urban high school is that you are either white, or black, or brown (hispanic), or yellow. Everything else is a footnote, and mixed race kids end up choosing a side.
Race mixing is the dog that didn’t bark and isn’t barking and won’t bark. Instead we get an unfree balkanizing caste society. Browns want to be brown, blacks want to be black, yellows want to be yellow, and whites better obediently work to keep the machine running.
That will last until the day the Mexicans decide to just take over the Southwest, which might come sooner than you think. Schwartzenegger is talking about letting California state parks run wild on a “tourists, enter at your own risk” policy. That means they will be safe havens for Mexican drug cartels to grow dope unmolested and hide from authorities.
Jared Taylor writes brilliant prose that presents the truth in a way that regular folks and super smart intellectuals can understand.
That said, I think we need to stop doing these “outreaches” to race-less, anti racist Libertarians.
After 9-11-01, if libertarians can’t see any danger with unrestricted Third World Muslim immigration there isn’t any hope that they will somehow “see the light” by well reasoned presentation of facts, appeals to individual’s right for “freedom to choose”.
If Justin Raimondo and other know it all race-less, open borders immigration libertarians resort to joining the likes of the SPLC, LaRaza and call us “evil Nazis” I think we are well within our rights to write them off and wish them the neighbors they chose: m13 gang bangers, Al Qaeda throat cutters.
Maybe Justin Raimondo can try to get on the good side of the invading Muslim Jihadists by telling the Al Qaeda crowd that he is “proud to be gay, against White racism and he welcomes all Muslims - all 2 billion Muslims in the world to move to California and enrich his community with their special Muslim form of multi culturalism.
Yeah Justin Raimondo - those 2 billion Muslims are going to be real “tolerant” to a gay libertarian California Left coaster!
What Raimondo advocates is genocide of whites and whites only. His “anti-racism” is a code for anti-white, nowhere in any of his writings does he advocate his “libertarianism” for anything outside of white countries. I read his writings three times a week and he never even contemplates telling this or that country they should adopt his brand of wordism (genocide).
Anon at 9:44
You do not have to refer to yourself as a White Nationalist. All you have to do is oppose the race-replacemant of Native Born White Americans at the hands of post-1965 asians,muslims,africans and hispanics.
But keep this in mind:Jared Taylor,by not shying away from the term White Nationlalist, has put the issue of the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans on the public radar screen. The MSM has taken notice of the White Nationalist. Jared Taylor has been on major network television and many radio shows. This very likely would not have happened if Jared Taylor was weak-keened about White Nationalism. Comming up with the term White Nationalism was strategically brilliant. It resulted in lots of free publicity about the issue of the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans at the hands of post-1965 asians,muslims,africans and hispanics.
At this point in time Anon, it is time to get over your White Guilt. The only thing that will prevent Native Born White Americans from being race-replaced at thehands of post 1965 asians,hispanics,africans and muslims is a full-blown raced-based..at the core..political movement. This is White Nationalism. It is one minute bfore midnight for Native Born White Americans. In one year, when the 2010 census data comes out,the non-whites and their leftist-liberal supporters-leftists Alexander Cockburn has alrady started doing this;check out his post this past Friday over at Counterpucnh- will be taunting Native Born White Amerians on a daily basis. You will evolve into a White Nationalist very quickly Anon. Trust me. It happened to me. White Nationalism is quite normal and healthy.
America has AIDS (figuratively speaking), while most of other nations do not. Our national immune system, demonized as “white nationalism” or “racism”, has been de facto disabled by groups and individuals that are in the process of transplanting alien population(s) into the U.S. This process has been aptly named the “whites’ dispossession” (or “displacement”).
Not surprisingly, America may die of trivial infection (figurativelyspeaking), like, for instance, invasion of Mexican illegals.
Until the HIV virus (again, figuratively speaking) is neutralized and eradicated, nothing really can be accomplished.
> “Where can us pro-white folks turn? Please, name the website.”
I write about this kind of stuff at http://www.belatedtruth.com
That blog is all about exposing the hypocrisies of reverse racism, faux diversity, non-centrist agenda, etc.
I’d love for you to comment there.
When thinking of the validity of White Nationalism I think of the line in Robert Frost’s poem defining “home”. I paraphrase: “Home is the place where they have to take you in.”
If society breaks down and people are color blind about what groups they coalesce into, then we’ll know that the ideas expressed here at AmRen were bunk.
If Whites and other groups coalesce into their own groups, then we’ll know we were right.
By Robert Frost’s definition, the proof will be in the pudding.
We desperately need a PAN EUROPEAN MOVEMENT that transcends nationalities and borders and responds with solidarity to Euro interests anywhere in the world (nore how little international help whites receive in Zimbabwe, how the horriblke trial of Cholmondeley is ignored even here).
He then cites a number of commentators who think this trend is desirable, from Michael Barone to the Socialist candidate in the French election for Prime Minister, and then snarks: “If those New Haven firemen got a raw deal, I guess their parents just married the wrong people. “
Justin Riamondo
I wonder what will be the state of our culture in twenty years; as another new Brazil where a smaller and smaller white elite rules over a huge restive mixed race population? What sort of rights will average white people (like the New Haven firefighters) have then? Environmental degradation, high crime, racial conflict, cultural nihilism, overdevelopment and the loss of individual rights will be the order of the day. Miscegenation will not solve our racial problem but only create new worse ones.
Jared’s views are too exclusionary and isolationist to be taken seriously.
The only way we are going to get anywhere is if we simply talk about white interests and white rights.
Exploiting fears about miscegination is only going to get us on Donahue.
I often visit Raimondo’s Anti-War site for war news, and I’ve read some columns he’s personally written. They often made sense. This present one on White Nationalists makes no sense at all. I found myself asking myself it Raimondo really wrote this piece. It’s really childish and sounds like it was penned by a simpleton. It’s obviously a subject that Raimondo knows nothing about.
Mr. Raimondo is a childless homosexual. Of course he isn’t concerned with posterity - he won’t have one!
“All important and valid comments from ‘white nationalists’. But you’re not going to get anywhere as long as you are named something like white nationalist. Where can us pro-white folks turn? Please, name the website.”
I too had this sentiment. I was originally perusing another pro-white website, but the porridge there was a bit too hot. I was also turned off by idiotic rants and a cornucopia of poor grammar. However, if not for that “other” site, I would not have learned of amren.com. I stumbled across a post suggesting it, and I was drawn to the intelligent arguments (and proper spelling). I have found the porridge here to be “just right”. The content is thoughtful and the residents appear to have a brain. Let’s be strong *and* smart.
The only contact I have with anti-white PC people like Justin Raimondo anymore is online, when I’m trolling them into a rage. They’re a guilty pleasure, a form of entertainment, nothing more.
A Nation consists of one’s own RACE. No other meaning would suffice.
For those who talk about “assimilating” other races into one nation and how nice some are and how they “think” like we do, I have to say that is disheartening to think people can really believe this and still promote it. That is a totally counter-productive solution. That is what got us into this mess we are in now. As for miscegenation, that needs to be thoroughly condemned. Either you are for your own race (extended family) or you are not. No compromises, as so many seem to espouse. Where does one draw the line? When America becomes 10% White? We are almost there now, then what?
No. 41 try here www.whitakeronline.org/blog/the-white-mantra/
Some races are born nationalists, some achieve nationalism, and some have nationalism thrust upon them. The other races are not genetically capable of anything but the genocide of whites, if whites will let them. They have always acted as they do now, and can’t do otherwise. This is what whites have to understand.
Always frame the immigration “debate” exclusively in terms of the interests of Native Born White Americans. If race-replacement enthusiasts jump up and take a hissy-fit..well, who cares.. I certaintly don’t.
So here are some questions for Justin Rmaindo”
Why should Native Born White Americans be in favor of continuing post-1965 immigration policy which will reduce them to a racial minority within the borders of America?
2)Why should Native Born White Americans be in favor of an immigration policy that will transfer billions of dollars in wealth away from ordinary Native Born White Americans to the greedy cheating class-Jared you must use this expression in all future debates-whose members include Jack Welch who has publicly declared war on Native Born White workers?
3)Why should Native Born White Americans support the continuation of post-1965 immigration policy that is causes exponetially explosive popualtion growth-100 percent non-white-that will result in the destruction of farmland,wilderenss areas,forests, wipe out America’s wildlife,make access to America’s great Naational and State Parks impossible?
Look, Justin Ramndo and his leftist friend over at Counterpunch Alexander Cockburn are demanding that Native Americans commit racial suicide. They hate Native Born White Americans. It is this simple. Their intentions towards Native Born White Americans are fundamentally malignant.
Richard Spencer
Go take a look at the victims of immigration Wall over at Brenda Walker’s website where you can read about damage LEGAL asian immigrants have inflicted on ordinary Native Born White American families. Do you have a concience?
A beautiful riposte. Could not be better.
First off, Raimondo is a hypocrite. The blog Majority Rights has picked up on this, and one of the commenters found a 1994 issue of the Rothbard Rockwell Report (RRR) where Raimondo sings Jared Taylor’s tune. I read Majority Rights all the time, but don’t agree with their anti-Semitism, therefore I won’t provide a link. RRR is how I learned of the existence of one Samuel Todd Francis, Ph.D., also from one of its 1994 issues.
Raimondo has a lot of nerve criticizing WNism as “soulless, materialist, dogmatic view of life.” Talk about pot kettle black, that’s what libertarianism is, and that is prostrating to the very same kind of economic rationalism that communism does, the only difference being how involved the formal government should be in the economy. I remember the Bible saying something about those about for whom their bellies are their gods (Phil 3:19). I also remember the phrase “man cannot live on bread alone.”
Also, he has a lot of nerve criticizing WNism as a political dead end. And what is the Libertarian Party, the way to win elections? L-Ism is a perennial 1%er at best. Yes, Raimondo, let’s go on the campaign trail and tell people that you want to take away their Social Security checks. That would go over like a “lady of the night” letting out a big rip of flatulence in church. George Wallace did win a lot of elections, by contrast.
I have to correct myself. The LP candidate for U.S. Senate from Mo got 4.7% of the vote in 1994. (Wow!) Though the only reason it was that high is because (1) Missouri is not the deep south, 3rd parties flop in the deep south b/c of the heavy black population voting D and the whites reacting by voting R, they know that a vote not for an R is the equivalent to voting black, 3rd party candidates tend to win in lily white states because there can be no racial consequence in “throwing your vote away,” and (2) John Aschroft was going to win anyway, and win big time. 3rd party candidates do better when it is a foregone conclusion that one major party candidate is going to trounce the other, this frees up some fence straddlers to vote third party. In a close and contentious race, the fence sitters mostly settle back in to the R or D. (3) The Libertarian that got 4.7% of the vote, one Bill Johnson, was not an orthodox Libertarian, he was vocally opposed to free trade, open borders, affirmative action.
“As for miscegenation, that needs to be thoroughly condemned. ither you are for your own race (extended family) or you are not. No compromises, as so many seem to espouse.”
Your argument doesn’t seem to make sense. In a mixed race nation, miscegenation is the only way to make the nation white.
“It is whites who engaged in the slave trade, and some of them fought a war to keep blacks in chains.”
You clearly indicate something is not right with your sense of morals when you publish a statement with so little consideration to the fact that nearly as many or perhaps more whites died fighting for the slaves’ emancipation!
“Where is the history of white “oppression” at the hands of black slave-masters?”
There isn’t one, and due to race based preferences enacted by government, (which strangely you recognize as unfair) apparently there should have been. White Americans are oppressed based on the idea that they are privileged as a whole with out taking into consideration the individual’s rights.
“It is all about race-mixing—an “issue” that, in an age when a mulatto is president of these United States, has a certain explosive quality, as well as an aura of outright nastiness.”
I fully agree with whomever believes that it would take a small minded person to believe that their race or ethnicity completely defines themselves or anyone else as an individual. I also fully agree that a person is only doing damage to their own credibility by believing that there is any way you can convince 7 billion human beings that any basis for the likeness and differences we see in ourselves and others can should be devalued. Within all groups of people you will find individuals who are inspired, influenced by, and value greatly their forebears and the culture, traditions, and the appearances they have passed on to them, and they have a right to take what they want of that and pass it on to their children regardless of what you or anyone else tries to do or say.
For clarification, the above reply was a letter I sent to the editor.
The white Anglo-Saxon culture, being fair minded and bound by laws of justice gave the world the greatest gift of all—the United States of America.
“What AR and its members must do is to fashion an ideology that reasonable, concerned citizens can espouse without pushing themselves into the marginalized world of race haters, being shunned by the majority and derided by intellectuals who see their struggle as vain, egocentric, and decidely anti-American (however one may define that term).”
Like someone else said, whites need to orgainize for their interest and their rights — that’s fair enough! That is the path most whites can relate too, and many non-whites will have a hard time combating this approach. From that path who knows what will materialize many generations down the road. However, if we did this path, plus culivate a culture unique and truly inspiring amoung OUR whites, in what is bound to be a hell hole soon enough, that could be the ticket for our rebirth. Call me a quiter, but white America is dead. Now lets get over that and plow ahead in idenity politics!
“Ron Paul’saracial, Ann Ryandian free market alternative is completely compatible with the race-replacement of Native Born White Americans.”
Ron Paul is against more immigration to the US. No one did more to disavow the civil rights movement, and expose it all for the naked racism that it was, than Ayn Rand. She was incorruptible. Every other figure bowed, excused, rationalized, apologized, back-tracked, groveled. Not Ayn Rand. Ever. I would have to think she would be the first to side with whites today.
Historama criticizes Mr. Taylor for: making “no attempt to actually define ‘whiteness’ in any concrete or specific fashion. He casually uses the terms ‘European’, ‘the West’, and ‘white’, but doesn’t elaborate on the precise boundaries and limitations of these terms.”
But Historama, though obviously intelligent and articulate, makes no attempt, after much criticizing and caviling, to define what he WANTS. Just what DOES Historama want?
Obviously, Jared Taylor’s sociobiological approach to life is more sociology than biology.
Proof: how else to explain abortion and rampant parental neglect of vulnerable young children. In the latter case, the law always has to step in.
Anon at 9:35
Ron Paul is a traitor. More than that, he is an enemy of Native Born White Americans. In an interview with Peter Brimelow over at vdare.com Ron Paul stated that with a decrease in illegal immigrataion, he make a corresponding increase in LEGAL IMMIGRATION-especially in the tech and medical fields. In other words, “the great man” Ron Paul would bring about the race replacement of Native Born White Americans through LEGAL IMMIGRATION. The asian population in OUR AMERICA would exponentially explode.
I am Libertarian on certain issues. However, to most Native Born White Americans. across-the-board-full-blown Libertarianism would be unacceptable. Human societies are not reducible to a collection of economic transactions. Communitiy is much more fundamental. Unregulated-full-blown free martkets are pathological and attack and destroy Community.
Alan Greenspan was a very close-intimately-with Ayn Rand. Several years ago, Greenspan testified before congress and made the case that immigrants are crucial to the economic health of the Nation because without them wages would rise for Native Workers and that would be very bad. Imigrants are good for the economy because the puta lid on real wage growth.
If American society was structured according to the Randian blueprint…hell-perhaps somthing even worse would be recreated in America.
You should do some research on Ayn Rand’s personal life. Her close associates knew that she was borderline psychotic. She had an absolutley disgusting personal life.
The American people overwhelming rejected the privatization of Social Security. This would have been a gift to the greedy cheating class. Ron Paul is a supporter of the privatization of Social Security.
Don’t worry about turning off the armchair intellectuals with scary words like White Nationalism. All you need is a few courageous souls like Mr. Taylor out there speaking clearly to get the message out in a correct way. Ideas have their time, and the masses resist new ideas until the bitter end when reality bites so hard you can’t ignore it. When the times really change, the herd and the armchair intellectuals will follow. They always do.
WN ideas are becoming current because blacks have black power, latinos have “La Raza Unida,” and even asians have some local clout in the west. This happens not by “convincing” perennial fence sitters (the herd and the trendy chattering class). It happens because you wake up one day and your skin color determines your future.
What do WN’s “want”? Nobody gets everything they want. Life and history doesn’t work that way. Better question: What can WN’s reasonably—-and morally—-consider as a plausible future? Thomas Chittum’s book “Civil War II” has some maps that seem fairly realistic. It’s free on the internet, or you can buy it to support the man’s good work in writing a prescient text.
I couldn’t let this one pass without comment. Justin Ramaindo wrote on Taki.com”Americans don’t like racists amymore”. Always throw the racism charge back at the Immigration Enthusiasts.
Post-1965 asians,hispanics,africans,muslims and amerian blacks do like racists,very much so. In fact, the elected one President of the United States. Post-1965 non-whites and american blacks imposed on Native Born White Americans an anti-white Kenyan bigot who is hell-bent on reducing Native Born White Americans to an ever dwindling racial minority as fast as possible.
Immigration Enthusiasts,post-1965 non-whites and american blacks should be forced to defend themselves aganst the racism charge all the time, nonstop.
The main point:WE are accused of being racist for having a strong preference for OUR own kind. Well,so do post-1965 non-whites…so they are racists also. Expose the double standard. Bit into it like a pit bull and shake hard…do this in every single public debate. This is how you wake up Native Born White Ameria.
What do whites want? We want our race preserved and allowed to prosper to the best of our abilities. What we don’t want is government sanctioned genocide, which is masked by the term “anti-racism” which really means anti-white.
Jared Taylor’s response to Raimondo’s article was excellent. Raimondo doesn’t provide support for any of his assertions and relys heavilly on name-calling. He claims Jared would ban miscegenation if he could. When has Taylor ever said that? Raimondo even calls him the white Al Sharpton. Reality check - Sharpton smears people with false accusations of rape and favors a racial caste system while Taylor does not. Raimondo even puts intelligence tests in scare quotes, implying he doesn’t believe intelligence is real or can be measured. The man is a dishonest and nasty writer. I avoid Taki’s Magazine because of people like him.
Historama, anyone who lives in the United States knows what white is. Mr. Taylor doesn’t need to explain it because it is obvious to everyone. If a black or brown or yellow person calls you a honkey, or a cracker, or a gringo, then you are white. No rocket science required.
All the irrelevant, outdated Ellis Island nitpicking nitpicking grudges belongs in the 1800’s. People who try to trump feuds leftover from European peasant wars are not living in the reality of American 2009.
“Alan Greenspan was a very close-intimately-with Ayn Rand. — Jupiter
I am not any authority (or advocate) on Ayn Rand or her cult. But I did note that 9:35’s post was remarkable in its near-worshipful tone regarding her. Excessively so, I thought. I had to be sceptical. No mortal is likely to be that wonderful.
.
68 — browser wrote at 11:04 PM on June 2:
“Historama criticizes Mr. Taylor for: making “no attempt to actually define ‘whiteness’ in any concrete or specific fashion. He casually uses the terms ‘European’, ‘the West’, and ‘white’, but doesn’t elaborate on the precise boundaries and limitations of these terms.”
But Historama, though obviously intelligent and articulate, makes no attempt, after much criticizing and caviling, to define what he WANTS. Just what DOES Historama want?”
I just want to get a better understanding of what the goals are here. At first, I thought that Mr. Taylor was expressing a very sensible, logical concern for the preservation of ‘white Americans’ as this has traditionally been conceived in the US. Several times I’ve heard him specifically invoke the 1924 law in an attempt to provide evidence for his ‘racial views’. Yet, upon further inspection, his reference doesn’t seem to really make senes, because that law had nothing to do with ‘preserving whiteness’ — it had to do with preserving what most people thought the ‘American type’ should be. President Coolidge, for instance, justified his signing of the law by stating that ‘America had to be kept American’, and that interbreeding between ‘Nordics’ and ‘non-Nordics’ was probably unwise. How does this have anything to do with the sort of agenda being pushed by American Renaissance? It is actually very different.
Interestingly, other early 20th century racialist thinkers have also been discussed in the Amren magazine — Madison Grant, for example. Again, this is pretty silly, because one of Grant’s major concerns was that the influx of southern European/eastern European immigrants was racially undesirable. I’ve noticed that, on occasion, certain people here will sort of ‘reluctantly admit’ these realities in passing, but I think that’s a bit dishonest intellectually. It’s taking someone’s ideas and twisting them so that they support this new ‘white agenda’ that is historically baseless and, in all likelihood, undesirable altogether. Why do people here do this? I would probably have more respect for this new agenda if you just admitted these things openly instead of pretending that the all-inclusive ‘Euro-identity’ has anything in common with American history.
So, as I’ve said, I would want Mr. Taylor to address some of these issues, and please explain how his white agenda makes sense in light of these historical realities. Otherwise, perhaps he will continue to alienate certain people like myself who don’t have a ‘white identity’ but a Northern European identity based on my history and in this country.
I think the Nationalistic parties (BNP, for example) and the White Nationlist movement - if it ever coalesces into a party - may actually see some success in the coming years. Worldwide immigration is a very emotionally charged subject and it is not going to go away. Libertarianism always has seemed to me to be a half-brained political dwarfism, unable to connect with the emotional needs of people. The WN movement should take a lesson from the Raza, the Black Muslims, etc. and appeal overtly to the familial. This is why JT is so irresistible, when he gets a chance to talk. I recall when he was being “interviewed” by some Turkish-descended oddball; even that hardcore hater had to admit that he too wanted his grandchildren to look like him, a point JT makes when defending racial awareness. If and when the movement forms a core of WN beliefs the more complex political issues can be dealt with. First though, a new political party with no ties to the existing duopoly. I think the real obstacle, which may lead to a stillborn movement, is the repression we can all expect from the media at the “mere thought” of a White people’s movement. To get over that taboo I suggest an alliance with the BNP; an Anglophilic League if you will.
“I just want to get a better understanding of what the goals are here.” Historama 77.
The BNP is a good model. They are non-strident but forceful and they couch their positions in the correct language. We’ve never had (as far as I know) an equivalent party in the U.S., but we sure could use one.
Their leadership is top quality and difficult to smear with anything that sticks.
I understand some individuals are trying to form a U.S. version of the BNP, but when I checked their website it was clear they’re on the wrong track because it seems everyone is anonymous. No serious people are going to join a political party when you don’t even know who the leaders are. And if you do know who they are, if they have no real bonafides. Honestly, and meaning no disrespect to these folks, you need someone of the ability and stature of a Pat Buchanan to get such a party on its way up. And then you need staying power and the desire to build it from the ground up with local offices, and not just run someone for president as many third parties seem to do.
I would like to suggest that much requested web site of “White Nationalism” that makes sense.
The site is http://www.nordwave.com and the individual is John de Nugent, who ran for President, in 2008.
John de Nugent is an interesting gentleman, with an impressive resume. He is a former Marine Corps Intelligence Officer, and is a Linguist, as well.
I would be interested to see John de Nugent in a Debate with Barry Soetoro, on the topics of National Security, the Armed Forces, Foreign Affairs, the Bill of Rights, in particular, the Second Amendment, which is the Right that ensures all other Rights, as well as Affirmative Action, and Illegal Immigration.
I am certain that John de Nugent would make it his first priority, on his Inauguration Day, to visit the Heroes Ball, of Congressional Medal of Honor Recipiants, unlike our current White House occupant.
Historama, many other identity groups have fuzzy definitions of who they are and what they are to do; black, Latino, Jewish, gay, feminist. There are often deep divisions among themselves about what it all means, but somehow they still maintain a critical mass of activists and loyal followers who promote their agendas. So it should be with whites. You decide who is or isn’t white, and what he/she should or shouldn’t be doing. I suggest you develop your own portfolio of organizations, leaders, beliefs and activities that you feel conform with what you want. I’m sure that AmRen will be a significant part of any plan that you develop for yourself.
John de Nugent was a Candidate for President in 2008. Mr. de Nugent is a former U.S. Marine Intelligence Officer, and Linguist.
John de Nugent’s web site can be found at www.nordwave.com .
Also, there is a current Third Party, that seeks a different path for our Nation, which is the Phalange Party, which is modeled after the Christian Falangist Party in Spain.
As for Pat Buchanan, he had endorsed a Third Party, some time ago, called the America First Party.
The America First Party web site is www.americafirstparty.org .
Historama wrote at 8:54 PM on June 1: As usual, Mr. Taylor makes no attempt to actually define ‘whiteness’ in any concrete or specific fashion. He casually uses the terms ‘European’, ‘the West’, and ‘white’, but doesn’t elaborate on the precise boundaries and limitations of these terms. Perhaps ‘whites’ aren’t opposing ‘their’ dispossession because they are not even capable of possessing the sort of cohesiveness that Mr. Taylor desires? Historically, Europeans have NEVER banded together in the name of ‘whiteness’; they have always banded together under much more meaningful foundations.
The flaw in your argument is that Europeans, and those of European descent, were never in danger of being displaced by those who are clearly not European, as they are today. They never banded together in the name of ‘whiteness’ because, until now, they never needed to.
I think the time is coming when Europeans will realize there is far more that unites them than divides them.
75 — Anonymous wrote at 3:34 PM on June 3:
“Historama, anyone who lives in the United States knows what white is. Mr. Taylor doesn’t need to explain it because it is obvious to everyone. If a black or brown or yellow person calls you a honkey, or a cracker, or a gringo, then you are white. No rocket science required.
All the irrelevant, outdated Ellis Island nitpicking nitpicking grudges belongs in the 1800’s. People who try to trump feuds leftover from European peasant wars are not living in the reality of American 2009.”
So, you consider Jews to be ‘white’? They are extra-European (Semitic people are not indigenous to ‘Europe’) right?
I’d say your method for determining ‘whiteness’ is pretty silly, given the fact that there are all sorts of genotypically non-Europids who could ‘pass as white’. They might be ‘called honkey’ but that doesn’t mean they are actually fully Europid.
Lol, ‘outdated Ellis Island nitpicking’? Apparently, you must not have strong roots in this country. I do, though, and they mean a lot to me. Perhaps it’s okay for you to abandon a certain family tradition just because a bunch of newcomers poured into the country in the early 1900’s and you think they’re all ‘white’, but it’s not okay for me. My roots are important to me. Macro-racial divisions are perhaps useful for doing scientific research, but they have nothing to do with reality. Reality is far more complex than ‘black’, ‘yellow’, and ‘white’.
“White Nationalists apparently do not share all of President Coolidge’s policy goals. For the most part, the ethnic proportions among European Whites in this country are the same as they were in 1924. It’s just that those ethnicities are distributed genetically. For example, instead of all that Italian genetic material being carried exclusively by 100% Italians, much of it is now carried by people with Germanic or Celtic names. That is, a whole lot of Germano-Celtic Whites have got an Italian or a Slav in the woodpile. President Coolidge is probably rolling in his grave.”
Well, then why does Mr. Taylor (and many others here) reference the 1924 law? Do they think that it provides justification for the ‘white agenda’?
You’re probably correct that, the Northern European gene pool in the US has absorbed a significant quantity of non-Northern European genes through intermixture with these types in the last 100 years. That’s precisely why the sort of population figures provided by government sources are completely useless. Surnames don’t mean as much as they used to, on the whole (unfortunately). So, there are probably fewer Nordish left in the US than gov’t surveys would have us believe.
In any case, this doesn’t mean that Northern European preservation is a ‘futile cause’; it just means that people have to be more careful when selecting for spouses/marriage partners, and make inquiries with regards to background. As I’ve said, it is not desirable for Northern Europeans to interbreed with non-Northern Europeans. Why do people here think otherwise? Intra-European racial egalitarianism is just as illogical and stupid as human egalitarianism.
Don’t you see that you’re making basically the same arguments that ‘whig theory of history’ liberals make when they talk about the ‘march of progress’ towards infinite freedom and equality? The only difference here is that you stop the march when you leave ‘Europe’, whereas the liberals include the whole human species. It’s just a really inane way of understanding the historical process. The Americans of the 1920’s didn’t consider ‘Europeans’ to be racially compatible with each other any more than they thought the whole species was compatible. Hence the 1924 law. Why should the racial identity of old Americans be changed, just to accomodate newcomers?
BTW, schoolteacher, I’m not ignoring your latest post on the other thread. The thread isn’t accepting comments any longer. If you send me your email we can continue the discussion.
85 Historama (Love the numbers, Webmaster), I am not unsympathetic to a desire to preserve Nordishness or Celticness, or Italianism, and Russianocrity, or any other ethnicity, and I don’t think most posters here are either. I do wish to see blondes and redheads everywhere I go, and the non-White preference for Blondes is especially appalling to me. But unless you propose to expel a whole lot of people that I and a whole lot of other people believe to be “White”, you are stuck with the “White” race. I, and I suppose a lot of other WN, have no other racial or ethnic identity than “White American”. For me to start going to Celtic festivals or local Oktoberfests, and putting the Union Jack or the Cross of Saint George on my car would be ridiculous. The Father of my country was George Washington, regardless of the degree of ethnic similarity between us.
“Why should the racial identity of old Americans be changed, just to accomodate newcomers?” — Historama
Because they are here, that’s why. Like it or not, it’s a fact.
Additionally, I feel that Historama’s argument has taken over and diverted this discussion, and that, though deceptively articulate, it is ultimately divisive and harmful. One has to put the major issues before the minor.
When attacked on a broad racial front, as we are, everywhere, quibbling over minor tribal divisions is a fatal mistake. Have we learned nothing from the calamity of the American Indians, so recently behind us? Are we to follow, foolishly,uncomprehandingly, in their footsteps?
I suppose I’ll just post my response from the other thread here; I’m not trying to violate forum rules, just trying to move things along.
From ‘White Pride is Uncool — May 22’
85 — Schoolteacher wrote at 3:20 PM on June 3:
“So are Italians. Ought we reject them and the Renaissance as well?”
Well, just because I don’t want Northern Europeans to interbreed with them doesn’t mean that I can’t appreciate much of their contributions to culture/civilization. That would be just plain stupid. We can always learn from other cultures, appreciate their achievements, etc. That’s what we’ve been doing for centuries; our ‘eclecticism’ played a large part in our success. I don’t want to ‘reject’ the Renaissance, but that doesn’t mean that intermixture is okay. I understand that they are ‘Western’, but they aren’t Northerners.
Yes, similar to how New Yorkers sound very different from people on the West coast in the US. FYI, those differences are not ‘ethnic’, they are regional. There are regional differences in dialect within Germany, and also regional cultural differences, racial differences, etc. But, that doesn’t mean that they possess a different ‘ethnic identity’ per se, they just realize that they aren’t uniform in every respect; and, as I’ve mentioned, total uniformity is not a condition of stabilized ethnic identity.
And, I also realize that there are intra-racial differences in european countries. Southern Germans are different from Northern Germans, with the latter being closer to Scandinavians. You’re talking about different things — ‘German’ is an ETHNOCULTURAL identity, not a ‘race’.
Well, I’m not really ‘lumping them together’ as Germanic; they ARE Germanic, after all. I’m not ‘simplifying history’ at all just by recognizing that fact. I understand perfectly well that there are differences between Germanic/Nordish European countries — racial, cultural, linguistic, historical, etc. There is no question that these various types don’t really recognize a common ‘Germanic identity’ between each other. They have unified ethnic identities from their common histories together.
When I say ‘Germanic’ in reference to old Americans, however, the situation is very different, because of the historical connection between the various North European groups, and because of the intermixture between them. I myself don’t trace my ancestry back to a single country. Most Americans, though, up until the 1920’s/1930’s saw themselves in this way, with Northern European ancestry being their common link for a shared identity (as well as Germanic language/culture). They didn’t see Italians and other types as ‘white racial brothers’; they weren’t mean to them either, but they still considered them to be very different.
But, even then, I don’t ‘lump them all together’ here; I just think that a shared identity between Northern Europeans is a reality in this country. It’s not a reality for ‘all Europeans’.
For you perhaps, but not for everyone; to some of us they are still quite meaningful. Perhaps some of us just have longer memories.
Perhaps a Dutch-Hungarian-American? Perhaps a Ukranian-Finnish-American? Perhaps a Irish-Italian-American?
Again, things aren’t always ‘cut and dry’ due to the racial complexity of those countries. Some of them might drift towards a more specialized identity because of the specifics of their background. In any case, a ‘white identity’ is pretty silly for all of them, because it overlooks the vast differences between the groups. What do Ukranians and Finnish have in common? Furthermore, why would any movement want to recruit types such as these?
It just goes to show that mixing very different types is undesirable. The early Northwest European ethnocultural groups were very compatible, and in fact mixture between them probably even had positive effects. I don’t want this earlier stabilized blend to be disrupted by Eastern/Southern Europeans. I want the ‘look’ of this type of endure, just as much as I want the psychical/cultural characteristics of this type to endure as well. What’s the problem with that?
Well, I don’t consider them to be ‘so compatible’, I just think that some of them are assimilable. I don’t want the overarching Germanic identity to be compromised. I understand the history of the groups is not at all pleasant, in the mass. Hence, it is important to preserve a commitment to ‘Germanic identity’ in the process of assimilating even the most racially compatible types.
See ‘Question Diversity’s’ post; the German element was mostly just at the mercy of the surrounding establishments at that time. At least, the ‘German elements’ that were still fully ethnically conscious of themselves and not yet assimilated into the original Anglo-Saxon identity. They weren’t fighting for much else than sheer necessity; certainly they weren’t conscious of any deeper ethnocultural struggle, on the whole. They were often recruited simply because they weren’t critical enough of the motives of the establishment.
Okay, so they’re ‘our neighbors’, and yet they have probably played the single most destructive role in the downfall of the US as a great country. I suggest you pick your neighbors more wisely.
It never has existed, that’s the point I’m trying to get across. And, I know that I certainly don’t want it to ever exist. I don’t want to share an identity with eastern/southern Europeans, whether they be over in the Old World or the New World.
I would say that they are foolish for doing so. Even then, just because this has happened doesn’t mean that all Europeans are suddenly ‘racial brothers’.
Any evidence for such atrocities against Russian women? I haven’t seen it, although I’ve seen the evidence for Russian cruelty against German women. BTW, they are not my ‘chosen people’, they are just my people. We are both Germanics. I don’t even really consider myself to be an ‘American’, but a Germanic who happens to be living in North America at this point in history. That’s how ethnocultural identity is supposed to function, it transcends geography. This can never be said for a silly, pan-European ‘white identity’.
BTW, how should I ‘broaden my historical consciousness’, by accepting loads of poorly educated, semi-Asiatic Russians into the all-encompassing ‘white group’?
41 — Anonymous wrote at 9:44 AM on June 2:
There is always this friendly hub of information.http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp
I’m sure that would more than happy to know that they’ve helped point you in the Right direction.
And yes unfortunately ‘White Nationalist’ has got some negative connotations about it. And yes unfortuanely we’re in the same bucket as spamers, padophiles and Nazi’s.
And what do White Nationalists want?http://tinyurl.com/qqveoj http://tinyurl.com/3ax9em
Birth rates too responsible? Too selfish? Are our countries too developed? Here in Oz since the 1960’s, 70% of our ‘social sciences’ students have been female, compared to 15% female engineering students, could that have something to do with it?
Non-whites get to have their feet in two Worlds, one foot in the exciting rich West and the other in their country of origin.
On one hand they tell us we have no right to be upset because we aren’t ‘White’ (but there’s a Black?), that we have no culture (though we have shared every part of our culture already, taken away our religion and become sports, materialism and entertainment obessed).
On web sites again there are so many. Some report, some critise, some diagnose, some whine, some relfect and some try to do.
There are so many double standards and fallacies in the racial argument, that unfortuantely we’re wasting so much time trying to be heard with little money, no media support and the public’s negative conditioned responses to certain words.
And we are still evolving as a people, but does evolution always mean forward movement though?http://tinyurl.com/lbw2uk
Bit of a pickle hey.
brower at 2:33
Native Born White Americans are under no obliglation to accomodate the hispanic,asian,muslim and african invaders….and this includes interbreeding with them.
The racial surival of Native Born White Americans requires:
1)the mass deprtation of twenty million non-white illegal aliens
2)shutdown of LEGAL IMMIGRATION to 0
3)deportation of all muslim “Americans”
4)deportation of all the chineses,hindus,sihks,pakistani and koreans who are paeticipating in the recail and economic dispossession of the majority Native Born White population. This would iniclude the majority of asian “Americans”.
The consequences of not doing 1-3 are:1)Native Born White Americans become an evrdwindling racial minority within the borders of America and 2)
88 — browser wrote at 2:33 PM on June 4:
“Because they are here, that’s why. Like it or not, it’s a fact.”
So what? Mexicans are here, too. Does this mean that the racial identity for Nordish in America has to change to accomodate them as well? What about Blacks, many of them have been here far longer than 20th century ‘whites’; should they be accomodated too? The fact that they are ‘here’ is a pretty lame argument, imo.
Well, for one thing, I don’t think that my identity should be compromised just because it’s a ‘reality’ that they’re here. I don’t think that there needs to be any hostility, just a mature, rational recognition of natural differences.
Well, I’ve heard Mr. Taylor mention the ‘old racialists’ several times before, and voice his support for the earlier immigration based on national origins. Plus, Richard McCulloch’s work has also been promoted to some degree by AR. So, naturally, I am curious about what the deal is.
Plus, I suspect that there are quite a few individuals here who are Nordish, and so it is in my interest to promote Nordish preservation to them.
Lol, so it’s a ‘minor’ issue to decide just what the actual boundaries of ‘whiteness’ really are? I would think that this would be a major issue, if not THE major issue, for people who support the cause that Amren claims to be fighting for. How can you have a successful movement if you don’t even have a clear sense of who you’re actually representing? As I’ve said, Mr. Taylor casually uses broad terms, but what is there beneath the surface?
IMO, it is only ‘divisive’ from the point of view that you’ve taken before the fact — namely, that the supposed ‘white race’ as a collective needs to rally together because it is being collectively opposed. I don’t see things that way.
Lol, these might be ‘minor tribal divisions’ for you, but for me they aren’t. They also weren’t minor for most Americans 100 years ago. And, I suspect that the same is true today for a substantial portion. Besides, I think that finer distinctions in quality and identity should always be considered, regardless of the situation. A small, cohesive, highly-talented group is infinitely better than a scattered bunch of mediocre individuals bound together by a loose identity. Look at the Jews, for instance: their strength is certainly not from their numbers, but from their high average IQ, cohesiveness, aggressiveness, etc. I think you are the one who needs to reorganize your priorities.
In the future that is unfolding in world history, I don’t think that anything will be won for groups with very weak identities and mediocre ability averages; the future will belong to those who are the most cohesive, most talented, and most capable (on average), just as it has been for the last few centuries. Absolute numbers might be more visible, but this visibility is deceptive. A small minority group can easily control a much larger population if they possess the right skills, ability level, etc.
91 — Jupiter wrote:
Nor am I (necessarily) promoting intermarriage even among those, just acceptance of the fact that they’re here, legitimately, and have been for generations. Like it or not (and apparently a few here don’t) they are part of the American scene. I don’t think they have any plans of going away. That’s OK with me.
Incidentally, I liked Histomama’s response, especially some heartening comments in the earlier post, 7:58 PM. I am impressed that he is intelligent and articulate and I don’t wish to offend him; but frankly, I do think he sounds a bit like European monarchists arguing over who is the legitimate heir to the French throne. What throne? They refuse to recognize that history has moved on and they have missed the boat.
Re:Absolute numbers might be more visible, but this visibility is deceptive.
94 — mark wrote at 4:21 PM on June 5:
“No, absolute numbers are very important. There are millions more intellectually advanced people in China, for example, than there are in the USA. Their talent pool is much larger than ours.”
That’s because of the averages of those two countries; the situation would be quite different if the averages changed. Look at the Jews, they are a perfect example. They make up about 3% of the US population, but have earned almost 10 times their numbers in US Nobel Prizes. On a global scale, their Nobel Prize representation is equally impressive. They have contributed far more Nobel Prizes than the Japanese (the Northeast Asian group with highest average IQ).
Even if a small minority is competing against a much larger population, the small minority can still dominate if their performance distribution is significantly different. The Jews, with an average IQ of 115 (although, I think it is probably even higher) will virtually dominate the tip of the Bell Curve from which the most creative and productive elements are drawn. This has been the case so far, and will in all likelihood continue into the future.
“I don’t know what “visibility” means.”
Well, if you have lots of people, they are obviously more ‘visible’ when compared with a smaller group of more talented individuals. You might notice the larger group more because they take up more space, but that doesn’t mean that they will dominate intellectually, economically, etc. Again, look at the situation in the US if you want proof.
The only way to improve the situation is to improve the quality of the gene pool, on the one hand, and reinforce the sort of stabilized ethnocultural identity that we had before in the US. To successfully compete, we need two main things: good genes which predispose one to be intelligent, conscientious, etc., and a stabilized identity that allows for enhanced in-group cooperation and increased out-group awareness.
On a web site called Live Leak.com, there was an article that stated that the Federal Government had ceded its Right of Eminent Domain, to Red China, so China would continue to finance the U.S. debt. The date of the article was February 26, 2009.
I am willing to bet that no one reading this had ever heard so much as one word of this on Newtwork News. Why?
So, basically,if the U.S. defaults on its Debt to China, then China can claim sections of U.S. territory as its own, which would include entire Cities.
I have read this article several times, and have seen confirmation of it elsewhere, and I still can’t believe it.
96 Anonymous: We do not have a debt to China, for we have paid China, in dollars. They may choose to spend these dollars as they wish, buying Saudi oil, Manhattan real estate, African rulers, or whatever, because the rest of the world accepts dollars. We can erase the debt by hyperinflation,which is our best option at present. The rest of the world will be mad at us, but since they mostly hate us anyway, so what? I would guess that most people here think we ought to repatriate the post 1965 immigrants and their offspring, and the world would hate us for that too. Historians of the future could call it, “The Great Regrouping”. A new, leaner, less populated America, with a much smaller “carbon footprint” and much less need for imported resources. I don’t need a big screen TV and a cellphone that does tricks, or eight pairs of shoes and a trip to Las Vegas. Environmentalism is our ally, though its organized ranks may be filled with our enemies and their unthinking drones.
“…and I still can’t believe it.”
I can’t either. I am simply incredulous.
A hundred years ago, Uncle Sam was invading banana republics that couldn’t pay their debts. Are we now to get the same treatment?
98 voter: The countries that were taken over had failed to pay their debts to Western banks. The Western occupiers were simply debt collectors for private enterprises. Usually, they would take control of the custom houses and collect the import-export tariffs.
It seems that Historama and I are not about to agree on who “our people” are. Historama would limit “us” to Nordic and Celtic peoples, and I would include Italians and Slavs and others. I don’t know which view holds more favor among WN, but I would guess that mine is the majority view here. I have seen some posters question the Whiteness of southern Italians, Spaniards, and Armenians, but I don’t recall ever reading here that Russians weren’t White. In any case, what is to be done?
Schoolteacher,
The vast majority of white Americans are from Northern Europe. Therefore, allowing millions of Southern Europeans to immigrate to this country would denigrate our heritage.
And no, Slavs and Mediterraneans shouldn’t be deported from America. This is because there is not all that many of them here. And the ones who are here have already been assimilated.
As for the intelligence of Southern Europeans, the famed intelligence researcher Richard Lynn has done some work on this subject that might interest you. According to him, Northern Europeans are more intelligent on average than Southern Europeans — especially Southeastern Europeans.
From Lynn:
“Professor Lynn, who caused controversy last year by claiming that men were more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, said that populations in the colder, more challenging environments of Northern Europe had developed larger brains than those in warmer climates further south. The average brain size in Northern and Central Europe is 1,320cc and in southeast Europe it is 1,312cc. “The early human beings in northerly areas had to survive during cold winters when there were no plant foods and they were forced to hunt big game,” he said. “The main environmental influence on IQ is diet, and people in southeast Europe would have had less of the proteins, minerals and vitamins provided by meat which are essential for brain development.””
Here’s the link to the article:
http://club.cdfreaks.com/f1/germans-dutchies-smartest-europe-174198/
101 — Sanders wrote at 7:27 PM on June 7:
Be careful there, Sanders. People here might blast you for ‘nitpicking’ (yeah, who cares about maintaining a meaningful connection with our heritage, we’re all ‘white’ right? lol..)
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘assimilated’; the most critical aspect of assimilation is intermarriage, something that should be actively discouraged between North and South Europeans. According to Richard McCulloch, it is impossible for the Nordish American gene pool to physically integrate the total number of non-Nordish Europeans without diminishing essential Nordish characteristics. The links are here:
http://www.racialcompact.com/partitionmap.html
http://www.racialcompact.com/averageisdestiny.html
I agree they shouldn’t be deported, but separation is still necessary — separation within the continent of North America.
RE — Intelligence Research: Lynn’s study is interesting, but I don’t think that it addresses the whole complexity of the situation. European achievement isn’t just clustered between certain countries, it is also concentrated in specific regions within those countries. This is probably a reflection of the racial complexity of those countries, i.e. the differences between the European races of various national backgrounds.
Plus, I think that dysgenic breeding habits have to be considered as well; the ‘native averages’ are, in all likelihood, very different from those found today in modern European and Euro-derived countries.
101 Saunders: Interesting numbers. I see that while the Dutch and the Germans are at the top, with average IQs of 107, the Slavic Poles are right behind at 106. Next are the Nordic Swedes at 104, but then the Mediterranean Italians come in at 102, ahead of the British, the Norwegians, the Danes, and the Irish, at 97. The Russians are right behind the Irish, at 96, but I imagine they’d have done better if the Reds hadn’t killed the Kulaks, who were the most intelligent and successful farmers. Communism was bad for the Russian and Ukrainian gene pools.
Re We do not have a debt to China, for we have paid China, in dollars….
104 Mark: The Chinese have been paid in a declining currency. They have been suckered. They are afraid that we will inflate the dollar, and they were asking Bernanke (Geithner?) about that a week or two ago. They were told that No, the U.S. wasn’t going to do that. I doubt that they were reassured. Some Chinese posters have boasted that China has us over a barrel because they could start dumping their dollars on the market and so destroy its value, but that would destroy the value of their assets too. They are as stuck as we are, but we have the advantage that we are here and they are not, except for a few colonies. I do expect the dollar to collapse and great economic trouble to spread all over the world, accompanied by wars and famines. I don’t think that Chinese repo men will be very effective. They’ll have their own troubles at home. I know that sounds really simplistic, The World Will Go To Hell And We’ll Sneak Out The Back Door, but I’m not aware of any way out of the economic mess we’ve come to. More “stimulus packages?” Political pressure forced the interest rates down for a couple months, but they’re climbing up again. Most of us here think that the country cannot be sustained socially or economically by the foreigners we’ve allowed in, but we are told by the political class that the Third Worlders and their many children will save social security and the like. Which is it, collapse or growth? I personally think we have long been on a slow decline that is now accelerating faster that our Rulers will be able to manage. I might be wrong. Ask Obama.
Amendment to post 105: Looking at the actions of our Rulers over time has caused me to think that they have planned for a long slow decline of the nation. People ask, Why do they do what they do, don’t they realize what will come of it? I think they do realize, and that they don’t care, as long as they can extract enormous amounts of wealth. Do robbers care about the people they impoverish? Do rapists care about the offspring they may leave behind? I think our Rulers hope to ease things slowly down for as long as possible, but are prepared to jump ship at any time.
In the Great Bar Fight that will follow, we will need to keep our heads, remember our goals, and protect our own. Looking towards that time, WN need to be personally prepared. Along with the whole survivalist kit, we should be capable, productive members of our communities. To reconstitute society will take more that clear thinking idealogues, it will require able electricians and farmers. We should be those useful people, and not just racially aware office workers.
