A Weekend of Fellowship, Part 2

American Renaissance, June 6, 2014

Talks by RamZPaul, Jared Taylor, and Sam Dickson.

RamseyDicksonTaylor

Topics: , , ,

Share This

AR Staff

AR is based in Oakton, Virginia.

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • DaveMed

    What a splendid Friday! Thank you, AmRen.

  • Truthseeker

    I wish everyone in America would watch these videos. Great, great stuff.

  • Kenneth Arrow

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd5zP_-P8EE

    That’s the shelling you get if you are anti-migration. Don’t bother to think that it’s much different on the continent.

    • Garrett Brown

      How can Western Europeans be racist against Eastern Europeans when they are both white Europeans. Lol, is this reporter serious?

      • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

        A good example of the type of thinking that is destroying the West. The English should welcome immigration from Eastern Europe by fellow Whites, who will maintain European culture and civilization. Non-Whites should not be allowed in England, and their pathological behaviors should be boldly cited as logical reasons. Islamic ideologies are in direct conflict with Western Civilization, and the pathological behaviors condoned and encouraged in Islamic lands should be cited as reasons. As far as Africans, the extreme degeneracy and dysfunction of Negroes the world over is more than enough reason to bar immigration. To allow these groups into England is morally wrong. The English people do not deserve to have HIV positive gang rapists and suicide bombers welcomed with open arms by leaders that have twisted egalitarianism into a suicidal masochism.

    • Archibald_Cunningham

      That interviewer is bat-s*** crazy. She should be institutionalized. Seriously.

    • antiquesunlight

      Jesus, what an awful idiot she was. Her argument from the dictionary was completely illogical nonsense. I wish he had called her out on that.

      • Sick of it

        She sounds like a typical liberal moron.

      • Usually Much Calmer

        I wholeheartedly agree with your first two sentences but quibble with the last.

        The best way to win at her game is not to play.

        • antiquesunlight

          I suppose that’s the conventional wisdom, but she was so antagonistic and so blatantly illogical that I think a swift takedown would have been more than justified. The trick is to do it without getting upset. Easier said than done.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            She was out of control, for sure. Her crass naked glee at what she thought were her little rhetorical triumphs were unnerving. But I’m glad he didn’t take the bait. I thought Farage handled himself with aplomb.

  • Garrett Brown

    Here comes the cream of the crop! Thank you Amren and Mr. Taylor!

  • Kenneth Arrow

    Mr Taylor’s speech is simply outstanding. I haven’t been so touched in years. That’s the kind of leadership we need yet it’s so rare. And I completely agree with the message. Cold reason is simply not enough. We need vision.

    • DaveMed

      He is magnificent. And so easy to listen to.

      Our movement aside, he may be the most affable man I’ve ever seen or heard.

      • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

        Indeed. Sir Jared is a first class gentleman, a brilliant man!!

  • Medizin

    “All men are created equal.”

    A little research would prove its use today is not what Jefferson meant.

    Jefferson also responsible for “separation of church and state” that has been taken out of context and used against us.

    • Sick of it

      God loving all of His children isn’t quite the same as every man on the planet magically having the same potential as every other man or women somehow being the exact same as men, except a few minor anatomical differences. I’m not sure RamZPaul spent enougn time referring to the Founders’ distaste for the French Revolution, but he was pressed for time. Their worldview was a lot more like the barons in old England who declared their rights before King John than that of an egalitarian madman (like a Marat or a Robespierre). I should say that RammZPaul, like the Founders, also seems to realize that not all white men have the same abilities, thus the need for a proper hierarchy and he was spot on when talking about White Nationalists failing in that regard.

      • Medizin

        Didn’t watch all of RamZPaul. Missed his comments on “All men are created equal.” Will watch the second half.

        Was referring to Sam Dickson.

  • Sick of it

    “He said the Republican health plan was “don’t get sick”, and “if you do get sick, die quickly”. After demands from Republicans that he apologize, he defended his comment and in a House Floor speech stated, “I apologize to the dead and their families that we haven’t voted sooner to end this holocaust in America.” He was then further lambasted for his use of the word holocaust by Jewish spokespersons across the nation. Grayson, who is Jewish, apologized to the Anti-defamation League for those offended by his generic use of holocaust.” – Wikipedia (Alan Grayson)

  • Medizin

    Who is the gentleman introducing Jared Taylor?

    • DaveMed

      Apparently, his first name is Martin… Perhaps someone can provide more information.

  • antiquesunlight

    Jared is hilarious. I watch his talks as much for the laughs as for inspiration or information.

    “Anything [liberals] accuse of being racism is probably a pretty good idea.”

    • Stan D Mute

      And yet..

      We take the African from his habitat and expect his to behave in a manner for which he completely biologically unequipped. The African should be considered exactly like the Andamanese, the Pygmy, and the Australian Aborigine. He should be left alone in his habitat, undisturbed, protected from outside influence and interference, and protected from the “evils” of the outside world.

      Every liberal in the world would have head-spinning conniption fits if it was proposed to remove the Andamanese from their islands, bring them into downtown London, give them a council flat, and force them to drive taxi cabs. Study of the Africans’ genome shows they have the same exact role in human evolutionary history as a sub-species isolated for tens of thousands of years. Yet the Africans are forced into a shoe that does not fit and we ALL suffer the consequences. Why?

      • LHathaway

        I think most whites are already on our side. They have just never see anyone who is vocally on our who is also not an obvious racist. Perhaps one day a magic non-racist white advocate will appear.

        I suspect it’s fear that drives us forever further left, not ideology. Being a ‘racist’ (going against the left in any way) has consequences. Compliance is manufactured.

        When ‘whites’ protect the endangered snail darter fish, I think whites suspect, on some level, these preservation efforts could help form a framework where whites themselves might seek racial justice at some future time, or at least racial survival. Nothing could be further from the truth. Perhaps this wishful belief helps assuage their conscience. A conscience that has been manufactured in order to assure compliance – they are going to knuckle under to what frightens them, regardless. Right now, that’s ‘tolerance’. Perhaps we should be fearful of their guilty conscience, for now, before the dawn, is the most dangerous time of all for us?

        The nothing white men eventually do get as a form of justice might in some way make them feel regretful, and perhaps, joining our side will be something they can do that can assuage their guilt.

        I don’t think being nice, cautious, respectful, courteous, generous and considerate will have anything to do with masses of whites joining our cause, but these are all virtues we could use a lot more of!

        • OhWow

          Very true. I think the first step is proving to the mainstream that conscious nationalist whites who are for the preservation of our race do not have to be evil racists. Right now the common belief is that any ounce of white pride or talk about preserving the white race is essentially KKK speak. That has to change if we are going to get other whites on board. I really hope AmRen grows and becomes more mainstream. It really is a very informative, eye-opening, and interesting organization.

    • Carney3

      Just about every stupid policy idea, enacted or not, is justified one way or another under the guise of fighting some kind of bigotry. And just about every sound and needed idea is fiercely opposed under the guise that it is bigoted.

  • Medizin

    Jared Taylor, outstanding. A great deal to think about. Worth watching several times.

  • TrayvonCohen

    My Taylor used altruism to explain the white suicide, but how to explain the colonialism and slavery if whites are truly altruistic?

    • Stan D Mute

      Colonialism is easy, slavery not so much. Colonialism pretty clearly improved the lives of the natives who did not fight to the death in resistance. It included a strong component of effort to educate and civilize the natives. Virtually every colonized country was better off during colonial times than it is today under native rule. Slavery, on the other hand, was just plain evil. It is VERY important however to understand the practice was not invented to deal with Africans, but had existed since the dawn of time itself. White altruism ENDED slavery, it did not start it.

    • Carney3

      Taylor did not assert that all whites everywhere are always altruistic. He said that we have a greater tendency toward altruism than other races do.

      As for as slavery goes, I’d say that all groups have engaged in slavery, but no other group sought to justify slavery as better for the slaves than their prior condition. No other group treated slaves better, especially the slaves of British North America who probably had, on average and overall, the least harsh condition of any enslaved group. No other group fiercely debated the morality of slavery, especially enslaving those from outside the group. And no other group eventually decided to oppose slavery, not only on a “don’t enslave me” basis, not only on a “we won’t enslave anyone basis”, but even a “don’t anyone anywhere enslave anyone else or we will come and stop you” basis.

      The very moral opposition to slavery you are articulating in this forum is entirely and solely a white invention. The egalitarian ideology used to slander and demonize whites is a white invention.

      • The Verdict of History

        Excellently put!

        The entire dogma which undergirds the anti-Western ideology is anchored in Western thought and intellectual rigor.

        Even socialism arose from the work done by white philosophers, particularly Henri de Saint-Simon and Robert Owen.

        I’m sure that even THESE people would be deemed to “hierarchical” and “Eurocentric” for modern day international-socialists…

  • 21conIND

    Might I suggest an oath?

    I will be generous, and I will be virtuous.
    I will not be rude, and I will not be arrogant.
    I will let my demeanor carry my message further than my words.
    And I will strive to see my opponents good faith so that they might see mine.

    “[I]t’s not enough to be right. I think you have to be generous. It’s not enough to be logical. You have to be virtuous…[Y]our demeanor will carry your message, perhaps, even further than your words will…[P]eople don’t just disagree with us. Many of them genuinely think that we are evil, and when people think you’re evil, I don’t think they listen very carefully to your words…I believe rudeness and arrogance, they would drive people away, that would only confirm their own prejudices…Our opponents don’t recognize our good faith, but -and this is a hard thing- I think we must try our best to recognize their good faith…You can’t expect them to recognize our good intentions unless we are willing to recognize theirs.”
    -Jared Taylor

  • Hal K

    Around 30:00 RamZPaul says that mainstream conservatives keep getting dragged to the left because they believe in equality just like liberals. There is another way of looking at it, though. One thing liberals and conservatives have in common is that they both blame whites for the under-performance of blacks. Liberals blame white racism, and conservatives blame white liberals. They are both anti-white in that sense, so they don’t believe in equality when it comes to whites. To liberals, especially, whites are the only race truly capable of and culpable for “racism.” This means that the emphasis on “equality” as the bogeyman of the Dark Enlightenment misses the point, which is that it is anti-whiteness (and anti-maleness, etc.) that is truly behind the inexorable drift to the left of our civilization. The two main “heresies” when it comes to race are 1) standing up for whites explicitly and 2) discussing the possibility of innate differences between races. When you dwell on belief in “equality” as the problem, you miss the racial dimension, and especially you overlook the need for explicit white identity politics. This is the main drawback to the “Dark Enlightenment.” We have to get away from trying to use universal terms like “equality,” either in a positive or negative sense. Instead, we have to be for something. In particular, we have to be for the white race and its group interests.

    • Kenneth Arrow

      Your comment made me think but I still think equality theorem explains your reservations better. Whites are the ones who stand-out. Thus equality mongers have to do one of two things to redeem their theorem; bring everybody else to the level of whites or bring whites down to the level of everybody else. The former is near impossible as affirmative action implies. The latter remains the only feasible option. It is achieved by claiming white superior achievements are a consequence of us exploiting others somehow (slavery and colonialism). I think this is actual cause of their indignation. They can not doubt their equality theorem because it is a religious dogma. Thus they take any white superior achievement as a direct consequence of some hidden form of exploitation (Marxist theory helps them here). This way we are literally restrained by inabilities of others. If we excel we are automatically guilty.

      • Kenneth Arrow

        Equality theorem really has immense explanatory power. I like to use this line of conversation: (1) I assert that Western civilization is morally superior. (2) The wave of indignation follows. (3) I ask: if you could choose would you rather be born in Africa or in the West? (4) Some choose the West, but hastily add it is not Africa’s fault, it is because we exploited them, but even so they prefer living in the west. They see we live better but deny that this is a consequence of our cultural virtues. These are clearly egalitarians.

        But (5) some answer well, I don’t know, they (Africans) are just different so I can’t really say. I’m not in their shoes. These are subjectivists (multi-culutralists). These don’t really care about intrusion of other cultures because they see it as something different, not something worse. They say, OK I might be old and used to my own ways, so I am bothered by it, but my children will live in new culture, adopt it and it will be as fine for them as original was for me. They think so because they deem their judgement as impotent in judging objective value. So everything goes. It is therefore not surprising that multiculturalism leads to anarchy.

        To conclude: Egalitarianism leads to anarchy by outright rejection of any hierarchy. Subjectivism is belief that we can’t objectively distinguish between good and bad. Therefore anything goes. Anarchy follows. The former are explicitly egalitarian. The latter just reject they can distinguish between good and bad. They are egalitarians by proxy. Is see a steep increase in number of these subjectivists and I can’t get my head around it.

        • Hal K

          The reason nonwhites come to the West is so they can benefit from the economic opportunities provided by living around whites. Race is the basis of civilization and differences between civilizations. Culture matters, but race and culture go hand in hand.

          • LHathaway

            And you say this because of your vast scientific knowledge of the subject, or because you read this before in a post on AmRen?

          • Hal K

            Your comment sounds sarcastic. If you have a problem with what I wrote then explain why. Don’t just snipe.

          • Kenneth Arrow

            I don’t see where could we disagree. I believe that genetics as well as culture shape civilizations. It is also clear that non-whites come for pecuniary reasons. They don’t bother to adapt because we don’t make them to. If they integrated and remained a minority they would not be a significant nuisance. But because of genetic ability they would anyway fall into lower social tranches, generating more dead weight for society to carry.

            I wanted to talk more about distinction between subjectivists and egalitarians. The former are much more numerous at least where I live (Europe). I don’t yet know all the implications that carries. For now I noticed, they lean to the egalitarian side when it comes to migrations. But with some distinction as I showed above. Subjectivists are actually a group that might be swayed towards more sustainable migration policy stances. That is why we should talk about them.

          • Hal K

            Subjectivists sound like people who have merely learned to avoid heretical patterns of thought. They are the “go along to get along” type.

            The question of what is good and bad is subjective to a great extent. To Third World immigrants, it is good for more of their kind to immigrate to the West. Perhaps it would help if white subjectivists would realize that as whites they have group interests that are different from those of other racial and ethnic groups.

            I think in terms of white liberals and white conservatives. In his book “The Righteous Mind” Jonathan Haidt divides people into two groups: liberals and conservatives. Liberals are more concerned about fairness and prevention of harm, while conservatives are more concerned about loyalty. Haidt doesn’t get into the racial implications of this, but I think the racial implications are important. The problem with the West is that the people who would ordinarily be looking out for white group interests (i.e. white conservatives) have been trained to avoid explicit expressions of white solidarity. This means that the pro-white side of white racial consciousness has been hobbled in mainstream political thought.

          • Kenneth Arrow

            I would agree partially since subjectivists are not entirely driven by “avoiding heretical patterns of thought”. After all there are strong economics arguments to curb immigration. Economics is in the center of public discourse yet you rarely see such treatment of immigration debate. The point is you don’t even need ‘heretic’ justifications to oppose immigration.

            But subjectivists by definition can’t evaluate merits of competing cultures so it is possible they just fail to see economic consequences of immigration. For example: poorly educated immigrants that came in last six years (finished primary or secondary school), amount in size to 40% of all registered unemployed in my country (EU). Meaning unemployment could be reduced by up to 40% by restricting low quality immigration. BTW unemployment hoovers around 14% which is huge. That is a huge cost and we didn’t even start talking about race.

            Immigration debate is economic as well as racial issue. First kind of arguments are benign, the second ‘heretic’. It is beyond me how we lost on both counts.

            But what follows is that conservatives didn’t just fail to look after white interests, they failed to look after the interests of all US citizens (immigration of Mexicans hurts blacks disproportionately more than whites). On the other hand immigration always benefits businessmen. Maybe it’s time for Americans as well as Europeans to realize we are both run by oligarchy.

          • Hal K

            Third Worlders want more of their people in the West. This is how nonwhite identity politics helps the pro-immigration side. They don’t care if it drives up unemployment. If you argue based on economics you get drawn into minutia that are difficult to understand for most people. The pro-immigration side can always trot out examples like Google.

            I think you are missing something when you say our countries are run by oligarchies. It is an alliance between oligarchs and nonwhite ethnic interest groups. Whites are politically hobbled because explicitly pro-white interest groups are effectively banned.

          • Kenneth Arrow

            I think you are right adding nonwhite ethnic interest groups to business lobbies. It is clear why mexicans want amnesty, reunification… But it is less clear why should blacks support immigration. They are here for decades, they have no families to bring over and they are in the lowest strata of society (most hurt by other poorly educated newcomers). It’s possible they trade their support for various affirmative action and social policies.

            That might be the distinction that drives blacks towards democratic party. They can offer them goodies and cultural consolation although their (blacks) stance on immigration should be more in line with hardline conservatives. As Mr Taylor said we should try to understand the other side. Only then we will see a cornucopia of interests driving them. That will make them substantially easier to defeat.

          • Hal K

            Nonwhite races and ethnic groups (including both blacks and Jews in this context) see it as in their
            group interests to bring in more nonwhites since it reduces the latent
            power of whites, whom they view as a potential threat.

      • Hal K

        If you haven’t already, watch “A Conversation about Race” by Craig Bodeker, a ~1 hour documentary on YouTube. He gets into many of the anti-white double standards, including where people accept racial differences when it comes to East Asian tendencies but not when it comes to white tendencies. A belief in equality, per se, is not the problem. Appeals to “equality” are only salient in our mainstream culture when they help to tear down generic whites and generic white males and lift up nonwhites/women, etc. I think the Dark Enlightenment does not go far enough because it is still hung up on universal concepts like equality. We have to watch out for the tendency to steer towards more politically correct stances just because they are less controversial.

        • Kenneth Arrow

          Thanks for the suggestions. They are new to me and I will allocate some time to explore them.

    • LHathaway

      Thank you, Hal K, for your illuminating post.

    • Zimriel

      The Dark Enlightenment actually identifies *chaos* as the enemy. Equality is just one strain of chaos, and not the only one. And as flip side, the Dark Enlightenment does stand for something: order. Hierarchy is its prescription for the disease, not the final state of health.

      It doesn’t have anything to offer to pro-white audiences as such, true. The whole concept is far more Oriental than European.

  • Stan D Mute

    Jared’s presentation was great. But we do utterly fail however at taking care of OURSELVES. Consider: ALL of us are here anonymously. We are terrified that we will be exposed and lose our livelihood. A very real and valid fear. But why must it be so? I’d guess most of us are in positions of middle to upper management or are self-employed in our own companies. Yet what do we do for our brothers and sisters? How do we help them? How do we help our people who are economically trapped in deteriorating neighborhoods or cities, those who would move if only they had help in finding employment to support their families?

    It’s one thing to say that a large part of our dispossession and displacement is due to our philanthropy, but where is any evidence that we really DO help each other?

    • Hal K

      It’s one thing to say that a large part of our dispossession and displacement is due to our philanthropy, but where is any evidence that we really DO help each other?

      That was one of his points, as I see it. We do help each other. That has always been one of the distinguishing characteristics of white civilization.

      When you talk about helping each other, I think you mean explicitly pro-white charity, and that is difficult in the present cultural and moral climate. People can lose their jobs for taking an explicitly pro-white stance of any kind. We do need more explicitly pro-white networking and support, but it is difficult in practice.

    • LHathaway

      Good questions because most white ‘racists’ are among the poor. Having nothing to lose (for having lost everything already), helps out. At some point or at some age, most whites reach the point where they just don’t care anymore. It’s only a matter of time until we are all ‘racists’.

    • DaveMed

      I am still trying to figure out how to arrange my future training and employment so that I can primarily help White people.

  • Hal K

    Jared Taylor’s talk was good. I don’t agree, however, that our predicament is only about our innate tendencies as white people. It is not all one thing or another. Perhaps whites do have an innate tendency towards altruism, but to the extent that this is a problem, it can be corrected culturally. It is also historical circumstances. Whites achieved world dominance over the past few hundred years. Success breeds complacency. Ethnic groups that consider themselves permanently distinct from us now live among us. They have their own group interests that are at odds with ours. Their high intelligence, in some cases, allows them to move to the commanding heights of our culture. You can’t dismiss this as irrelevant. Our problem originally comes from within our own race, but now it is imposed from without to an extent greater than Mr. Taylor admits or realizes.

    • M.Magog

      We are experiencing the “perfect storm” where many factors have come together, ONE of them is the innate moral nature of white people.That is coupled with the intentional manipulation of that nature by the marxists and the desire to take advantage of that nature by the blacks and browns. Whites ARE susceptible to propaganda, and I believe the reason so many whites see things the way they do today is because of the relentless media propaganda that started in the late 40s. Whites also follow the leader and many who profess to “believe” things to pollsters are only saying what they think is accepted and rewarded. I believe that a very strong white takeover could steer that morality in a totally different direction. The German population shows how easily a people can have it’s morality redefined. When we are not in power, yes, his strategy is the only effective way to go. IF somehow whites seized power though, a concerted propaganda campaign by the government would turn people’s ideas around much quicker than people realize.

      • Hal K

        I don’t see things quite the same way. The morality followed by white people today is unnatural. It is kept in place through both propaganda and repression. A pro-white morality would return naturally if the propaganda and repression were removed. I envision a transitional stage where the wall of propaganda and repression has been breached but where some fraction of the white population still has the old anti-white morality. In this transitional stage it would not be possible for there to be a systematic pro-white indoctrination campaign (like you described), but things would change regardless, since it would be a transition from an unnatural state to a more natural one.

        Note that Jews consider themselves permanently distinct from us and they have high IQs on average.

        • M.Magog

          Ok, I have said pretty much the same thing before. I’ve said that the “morality” of today requires a constant support from media and government. When that ceases, people will revert to what is natural for them. Jarred takes a different stance though. I think he thinks whites have come to the place they currently are on their own and will not naturally come around. He seems to be saying that in fact they will resist coming around if the wrong tactics are used. That may be, but I do not know if he is factoring in the current state of affairs where daily whites are being attacked and our nation is currently experiencing an invasion. I think under the present conditions a more strident voice may be more successful in capturing hearts as there are so many people who are becoming totally disillusioned and frustrated.

          • Hal K

            I’ve said that the “morality” of today requires a constant support from media and government.

            It is also the willingness of our elites to cause anyone who speaks up for whites as whites to lose his or her livelihood. This is the “repression” side of things. In either case (propaganda or repression) it is a matter of top-down control. If person B fires person A, it means that person B is higher up the socioeconomic ladder than person A, generally. If person A has violated an anti-white taboo, and person B doesn’t fire person A, then person B has to worry about what his boss, person C thinks, and so on up the ladder. Something similar applies in the arena of social status. If person B doesn’t ostracize person A, then person B has to worry about being ostracized by person C, and so on.

            In other words, our predicament has elite control written all over it.

  • Wow, I just watched Jared’s speech. I had to leave early and missed the Sunday speakers. But it is a powerful speech. And I completely agree with it. European Civilization and Christianity combined created an ethic and morality that puts others before ourselves. We look out for others. But it has become perverted to such an extent that it is hurting, event destroying our people. And yet this ethic is at the core of western man, on both the right and the left. We need to appeal to that morality and live that ethic, but live it for our people. And we need to see that those of our tribe who hate us, are doing so in a misguided attempt to follow that same ethic. But it is misguided. I am very turned off by those in our movement who are filled with hate. It isn’t what guides me. It is love for my people and for my ancestors and for our future. It is this ethic that needs to be stressed and lived. Not one of hate and anger. Even though at times, the present system makes all of us very angry. Good speech, Mr. Taylor. Next year I will stay through Sunday.

  • DaveMed

    I’m not such a fan of this bashing of Jefferson and Co. We know that they were speaking specifically about White people, and I think there are easier ways to make effective points than by essentially characterizing the Founders as ignorant hippies.

    • Martel

      As much as I admire Jefferson (and co.), it is important to reduce some of the emotional bonds white Americans have with the proposition nation. Grass root conservatives pursue implicitly white objectives, and they are targeted because they are white Americans. As long as they believe in ”all men are created equal”, they are walking down the same path as their liberal counterparts.

  • Annabelle Pettyjohn

    The enemy of white gentile Americans is the US government.

    • LACountyRedneck

      By far our biggest enemy.

  • Evette Coutier

    We’ve got to reach the youth.

    • LACountyRedneck

      Educate them. You’re a qualified teacher and it’s your right to protect your loved ones and close friends.

      • Evette Coutier

        All true. However, it’s an issue of spreading the word to subsequent generations. I looked at the average age of the audience in the video. Realistically, our best hope for long term success is to attract a younger generation, and generations in child bearing years. Moreover, there is a need for a younger version of Jared to learn the ropes so that when it’s time they can carry the cause forward.

  • LHathaway

    Being white means being an agitated person in need of psychological medication. Try a glass of wine or two, first.

  • LHathaway

    Is it just me or does Sam Dickson speak a little bit like William Buckley?

    • DaveMed

      Talking about the Southern drawl?

      • LHathaway

        I don’t think it was the slight southern accent but I’m not sure. . . He did remind me a lot of the late William Buckley.

  • DaveMed

    By the way, I’m curious as to who drew those sketches.

  • Kenneth Arrow

    I agree. He was making bold theoretical speculation with little practical value. It should be taken more as a brainstorming session. Though I think his humorous approach was extremely refreshing. We should laugh at what is laughable. Humor is a powerful weapon against absurdity.

  • wmhoad

    J. Taylor, “Non-whites and lefties accuse whites of thinking something they don’t think and deny thinking but that they should think… Why is it that white people have gone insane?” I have often thought that myself.

  • OhWow

    Jared is such a fantastic speaker…he is so intellectual but he puts things in a way a layperson can understand at the same time. His arguments and logic are 100% irrefutable. He has the patience of a rock. Seeing him at those universities with all of the angry blacks and hispanics rudely talking and interrupting during his speeches…he simply smiled and waited for them to stop. It killed them that he did not engage in a shouting match like they are probably used to. He is totally correct. It’s harder fighting for our race than just dying for it. That’s too easy. The hard part is having patience, remaining pleasant, and having to do more than just present the truth, because as he said…the truth is no longer enough.

    I’m 25 and have been following AmRen for the past few years and it has really been an eye-opening and throughly refreshing experience. I think the key to gaining access to my generation is posting the videos just like these on YouTube. More videos means more youthful eyeballs and much greater exposure. I think Jared is our clear leader in carrying out the message and should be trying to appear on every prime time show. O’Reilly Factor, 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc. Get the message out to the mainstream enough and the “brashness” of it will wash away. I understand he may be turned away, but I hope he is at least trying very hard to get into the mainstream media spotlight. We need more young people like myself and Matthew Heimbach getting this message out to 20 something whites. Unfortunately many people at this conference including Mr. Taylor are not getting any younger and we will need major reinforcements. How that can happen is up for debate, but it needs to happen.

    Thank you to AmRen for fighting the seemingly impossible fight in making the case for whites to be allowed to exist and keep our own country we founded. Thank you for opening my eyes.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Amazing talk Mr. Jared Taylor!! You should be knighted!! Sir Jared Taylor, spokesmen for our people. Jared is absolutely right. Egalitarianism perverted and contorted is what causes White Leftists to support such suicidal things as Whites becoming a minority in our own homelands. Asian societies are beating us economically because they operate as a United Front. They do not hire lazy, unqualified Negroes to build their cars. Their workers are expected to do the job properly, and there is pride in a job well done. They do not fret over the plight of Africans and try to save them from themselves, but focus on their own people, and their own land. If we, in the West, would take a cue from the Asian countries, seeing our fellow Whites as our people, working together as a United Front, our countries would again be the envy of the rest of the world, including the Oriental lands. This was what made America the great country it was 60 years ago. We were a United Front. The Chinese are a United Front now, while we are a sampler platter of interest groups at odds as Whites, with Lefties insistent on pandering to Negro/Hispanic demands.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    He could have said that the British people are not superior, but that they have a track record of choosing to behave in a superior fashion, and, as such, they deserve the best. This would derail any chances to cast the racism stone from the interviewer, and require the interviewer to address the behavioral issues of Black Africans and Islamists that have settled in England. Crime problems that have arisen where these groups have settled could have been sighted, with references to specific crimes. He could have barraged her with stats proving the behavior issues of these groups, and handily proven his point in gentlemanly fashion!!

  • M.Magog

    I thought he made a good point. He was not talking about “civil liberties”. In fact, that is a code word the left uses for “take way your freedom” we have the bill of rights and he said he supports that. There is no bill of “civil liberties”.He was talking about basing our social values and institutions on a big LIE!!! It has not worked out well and he makes a valid point that the results we have gotten are the results we will always get unless we jettison that lie from our system of beliefs. All men are NOT created equal and hierarchies are GOOD things that create stable societies. Democracies DO have a short time preference by their very nature, and this is our downfall.

  • Jotun Hunter

    sam dickson understands well the ‘yellow peril’ that some on this site would have us embrace.