White Survival: Beyond Left and Right

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, March 3, 2015

Conserving the American founding stock should be beyond politics.

Below is the talk Jared Taylor delivered at the National Policy Institute conference, hosted at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, February 27, 2015.

The theme of this conference is “beyond conservatism,” and I’d like to start with a few things that are beyond both conservatism and liberalism, that is to say, some things people agree on whatever their politics. What I am thinking of is related to conservatism since it has the same root. It is the idea of conserving or conservation.

There are some things that essentially all people–no matter what their politics–are conservative about. The planet, to begin with. There are probably some misanthropes who would like to blow it up, but most folks, across the political spectrum, want to conserve it.

Most people also want to keep the planet livable so we can conserve the people who live on it. Mark Twain used to say, “Sometimes I’d like to hang the whole human race, and finish the farce,” but most of the time, people don’t feel that harshly about our species.

And we want to conserve animals. We’d be sorry to see giraffes or baboons die out.

Take the case of the Cuban crocodile. He’s a relative of the American crocodile and said to be a noble beast. But the Cubans are interbreeding with the Americans and could be genetically swamped. As one scientist explains, “the two crocodile species interbreeding may pose a major threat to Cuban crocodiles. In a worst-case scenario, one crocodile lineage can cause the extinction of another.” Scientists are fretting about how to prevent this tragedy.

The United States government worries about conserving species you’ve never heard of: the Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle, the spruce-fir moss spider. If you buy land, and one of them turns up on it, you might not be able to develop it.

And most people want to conserve the different places where people live, and the different ways that people live in those places. We’re happy for Uruguay or China to remain distinctive countries. We all want different languages and cultures to flourish. In that respect we’re all conservative.

We are sad when the last speaker of an obscure language dies or when a distinctive way of life comes to an end. That’s why Brazil now has an official policy of leaving untouched tribes alone if that’s at all possible. People living in the stone age should have the choice of staying there if that’s what they want.

Conserving these things literally does go “beyond political conservatism.”

However, there are things you are not allowed to want to conserve. Hardly anyone will oppose you if you say that the primitive tribes of New Guinea have the right to maintain their customs and their way of life, undisturbed by outsiders. But you better not say the same thing about the French or the Swedes.

If you say that the French have the right to keep their country Catholic and European, you’re not a conservationist. You’re a hatemonger. You’re not beyond conservatism, you’re beyond the pale.

According to current thinking, the French absolutely do not have the right to live undisturbed by outsiders. On the contrary, people from all over the world have the right to move there.

This is astonishing, really. I can’t think of a single thing that New Guineans have contributed to the world. And yet their way of life will endure. That of the Europeans, who have immensely enriched the world, may not.

Not even conservatives argue that France is a distinctive biological and cultural entity that should be conserved. That’s not the way we are supposed to think about white countries. Korea? Yes. Ghana? Pakistan? Paraguay? Fine. Those places, like all other non-white nations, have the right to maintain their identities and ways of life.

And what about conserving white people biologically? They are a small minority of the world population–7 or 8 percent–and some of them are breeding with other groups, just like the Cuban crocodile. But anyone who says maybe we should think about the long-term prospects of white people–like the way we do with the Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle–is no longer a conservationist. He’s a white supremacist.

And so there is not one politician in America, even among the ones who claim to be deeply conservative, who says he wants to conserve the founding stock of this country or who wants to conserve a majority-white United States.

The odd thing about all this is that it’s the Lefties who act as if they had the corner on conservation. They love government power, and they love to boss us around for our own good in the name of conserving the environment. Why aren’t they all in a flutter about the prospects for white people exactly the way they are in a flutter about the ozone layer? I can see them browbeating us: “Now, you white people have to live over here, and you have to marry among yourselves.” “Remember: it’s for the children.” That’s just the busy-body sort of thing they love. Where’s Hillary when we need her?

For most of the history of this country, of course, the idea of the United States as an explicitly white country was taken for granted: It was beyond debate, neither liberal nor conservative. It’s well known that the very first immigration law, passed by the very first congress that was called after the ratification of the Constitution, restricted naturalization to “free white persons.”

Until 1965, we had an immigration policy designed to keep the country European.

There is nothing about the idea of United States as a nation of Europeans that is inherently a Left-Right type of political question at all. It should be beyond politics, just like conserving the white rhino or keeping Japan Japanese.

The racial mix of the country is not logically implicated at all in the position you take on the size of the government, the welfare state, abortion, the role of women, homosexual marriage, income distribution, foreign policy, public prayer, how you interpret the Constitution, or any other political question.

You can believe in cradle-to-grave welfare or rugged individualism, but be in complete agreement on wanting to keep the country majority-white. Jack London, for example, was very active as a socialist, but was adamantly opposed to a multi-racial America.

So: Why would anyone want to conserve whites as a distinct people, and want them to remain a majority in the United States? First, these questions shouldn’t even have to be answered. If the Navajo were dwindling in numbers or losing their culture, no one would say they didn’t have the right to do something about it. No one would ever ask the Navajo: Why do you care about surviving as a people? Why not just fade away? If a white person asked those questions it would be the height of racism.

But for white people? It’s the very opposite. The very desire to survive as a distinct people is “hate.”

Remember the Cuban crocodile: “In a worst-case scenario, one crocodile lineage can cause the extinction of another.” Well, strictly as biological artifacts, white people are surely at least as valuable as Cuban crocodiles, if only for aesthetic reasons. And there’s a lot more than that. Europeans created the modern world. Shouldn’t they have the same rights as the tribes of the Amazon: to be left undisturbed?

These are objective questions, but, of course, there is also my own subjective view of white survival as a white person. Survival is the first law, and there is no more fundamental instinct than the desire to protect one’s own kind and to want it to flourish.

That’s obvious when we are talking about any group but whites.

The number of Hispanics is growing very quickly in this country, and Hispanics are ecstatic about this. It means their language, their culture, their physical type, their heritage, their aspirations are all gaining ground and could eventually dominate the United States. Hispanics want this very much, and they consistently try to change laws and policies to increase their numbers, and benefit their people. This is considered a sign of healthy collective pride.

But if whites tried to delay their dispossession, if whites proposed steps to maintain their majority status, that would be hate and bigotry. Why? The processes are perfectly symmetrical. The percentage of Hispanics increases as the percentage of whites decreases. Why is it right for Hispanics to celebrate their gains but wrong for whites to regret their losses?

I make no secret of my view on this. My ancestors have been white for tens of thousands of years. My children are white and I want my grandchildren to be white. I like the culture of Europe, I prefer the society that whites create. What’s wrong with that?

Well, guess what? Even though they don’t admit it, almost all whites feel the same way I do.

Look at what they do, not what they say. Where do they live? Who are their friends? Who do they invite over for dinner? If you ask a white person to name a single non-white neighborhood he’d like to live in, or a single non-white school he’d want to send his children to, you get a blank.

Whites know in their bones that a non-white America is not the country they want for themselves or for their children. That is why, when the part of America in which they live becomes an outpost of Africa or Mexico, they move away–to some place where whites are still the majority. And most white people still want their children to marry other whites.

Abandoned

They wouldn’t dare say these things openly. They don’t even admit these things to themselves. But look at how they behave–and Lefties are no different from anyone else. As Joseph Sobran used to put it, “in their mating and migratory habits, you can’t tell a liberal from a Klansman.”

As the hippies used to say, white people just need to get in touch with their feelings.

Whites used to be entirely honest about their feelings, and there is no doubt that people who call themselves conservative were honest for longer than lefties were.

In the 1960s, William F. Buckley’s National Review supported apartheid in South Africa, and said that an immigration policy designed to keep the country white “requires no justification.” Preserving a white America was a goal so obviously legitimate that it didn’t have to be justified. It was “beyond conservatism” and “beyond liberalism.”

National Review doesn’t take that position now. It would banish anyone who did to the outer darkness of VDARE.com. And that’s just one of the countless positions that conservatism has simply abandoned.

Take Martin Luther King. In the 1960s National Review called him a “rabble-rousing demagogue.” It said that the expression “civil rights movement” was ludicrous and should instead be called “the Negro revolt.”

Now, 50 years later, conservatives quote King as if he were a moral authority. Whenever they want to argue against racial preferences for non-whites they quote King’s line about judging people on the content of their character. And yet, by the time King died he was open and explicit about wanting race preferences and quota hiring for blacks.

So, why do conservatives quote the words of a plagiarist, adulterer, communist sympathizer, whom contemporary conservatives called a “rabble rouser”?

It’s because they have completely swallowed the leftist view that whites have no racial legitimacy. Conservatives can’t just say plainly that affirmative action discriminates against whites. They have to borrow the moral authority of a black person to say that. And that’s why they quote the “content of their character” line, which King didn’t even believe.

It’s hard to think of a more contemptible mental capitulation.

Fifty years ago, National Review said that the desire to keep America white “requires no justification.” Well, whites never did come up with a justification. That’s a big part of the problem. They never articulated moral reasons to justify their own survival. For hundreds of years–thousands of years–whites, like everybody else, never had to. They just took survival for granted as a legitimate goal.

But now, it means whites have no stock of tested ideas and arguments that they can draw on to justify survival. They have a deep foreboding about what is happening, but they don’t have words to express that foreboding. Without words, without convincing moral foundations, whites cannot act.

And that is what makes whites different from everyone else and what makes them uniquely vulnerable. Non-white immigrants don’t have to justify their conquest of the United States. They don’t have to explain why they want their numbers to grow at our expense. They know instinctively that it’s good for them, and that is all they need to know.

The same is true for Third-World immigrants to Europe. They don’t have to justify conquest. No, it is Europeans who would have to justify even the most basic steps necessary to assure their survival.

It should be no more necessary to explain why whites have the right to a future than to explain why it is better to live than to die. But that is the dilemma we face. Slowly, slowly, both in America and in Europe, we are waking up to this dilemma.

Topics: , , ,

Share This

Jared Taylor
Jared Taylor is the editor of American Renaissance and the author of White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century.
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.
  • Mr. Taylor has written a strong piece regarding our dilemma. When I see white males with Asian or Mexican wives, I am acutely aware that a gene line that goes back thousands of years has been destroyed when there are children involved. Ditto the white female with the nonwhite male. You’d think that mothers might want their children to look like themselves, but no.

    Not until we embrace our right to exist and lose our fear of the word “racist” will be be able to articulate openly the feelings of doom we experience. What is puzzling is how so many in government, including white politicians, have come to betray us. I believe that money talks and that economics is driving the push to turn the US nonwhite. We pesky whites demanding our rights and our unions and our nice suburbs are the primary force creating the middle class.

    The power elites want all the wealth for themselves, so death to the middle class also means death to the white race.

    • propagandaoftruth

      An America that was 80% White, 15% PRODUCTIVE non-White, 5% gene-scum would be a great place in my opinion. Sure, sure, sure, 99% White would be paradise but this is earth, you know, quite a black iron prison no matter how spiffy we make it.

      But I’m typical of a former Marxist (“Progressive”). We (former) Marxists figgered it would all fall into place long time ago, found out it wouldn’t, made race a social construct, waged war on the “caste” (class) known as “White Folk”.

      Because Marxism needs someone to blame for “all the problems”, even for the weather. That someone must be a person, preferably a “class” of people, who are the cause of all the problems, all the misery, of the poor good people. The White Marxist worm at some point totally commits himself to the evil impetus toward totalitarian “goodism”. Atheist or agnostic or “Universalist” hippy dude from Galilee style Xtian, he closes his eyes when convenient and repeats the soothing mantras. All misfortune is unnatural, all people are the results of nothing but their environment, all bad things are caused by bad people. Who can be sued, who can be made to pay…

      For all the good stuff, agin’ all the bad stuff. The most abominably wicked mental illness there is. Thank God for my dark enlightenment.

      How you doing there, Biggun?

      • Jason Lewis

        What you want could happen fairly quickly if whites had more babies.

        • TrueNorthFree

          The birth of white babies has been very efficiently suppressed by generations of feminism (and I consider myself a feminist!) I just woke up to what is happening to whites now and all of my former beliefs are being turned inside out.

          • Jason Lewis

            Many of us originally thought it was about equal rights. Loads of women I talk to will not call themselves feminist. I love the awakening.

          • bilderbuster

            Now that’s real liberation.

          • Bob G

            Thank you for your truthfulness.

          • listenupbub

            Feminism will be turned inside out for you, too.

            I will explain it: patriarchal mating behaviors are seen even in apes. There are laws of attraction in the human species, and one of these is that women are attracted to strong provider-type males.

            Women will never have the same “power” as men because of this simple fact. They can make millions of dollars leading companies, they can be doctors far more often than men, they can make scientific discoveries, they can bodybuild and become army rangers.

            But when the time comes to get a mate, they have to sit back and wait. If they try to take initiative over the mating process and start hitting on down-on-their-luck men, paying their husband’s bills, having him be a stay-at-home dad, women will simply stop feeling attraction for the man. This is because strong, provider-type males are attractive to women, while weak beta or omega males are not attractive. Women are not likely to go out of their way for men who are unattractive to them; they would rather complain that there are “not enough good men left.” So women are forever the “objects” in the mating process, waiting for a man to come along to “prove” himself by initiating the conversation, asking her out, buying her the ring, paying the bills and being the man.

            It is a part of nature, neither good nor evil. There are things we can control, and things we can’t. Feminism is a dead end. It is futile. It is against our nature. That is why there was never a feminist civilization.

          • TrueNorthFree

            I agree with everything you said, but I learned it in a different way. Years ago I read the book “He’s Just Not That Into You”. It basically said (in a nutshell) that men have to be the ones who do the chasing. It was a very persuasive book and I believe that all young females would save themselves a lot of heartache if they read it.

          • listenupbub

            That’s pretty funny.

            I am not trying to be depressing or sexist, I am just illustrating a fact that is undeniable.

            Men have obstacles and limits to our sexual power as well. The gender roles are different, not unequal.

            The reason I think this fact dismantles feminism is because 99% of straight gender issues are really issues of sexual empowerment. Feminists want to have power, but specifically sexual power.

            That is why male feminists do not really comfort and please the feminist women. These guys are unanimously unattractive males that the women don’t want, so the fact that they care about “equality” does not matter. They offer women no more sexual empowerment over quality males.

            If an attractive, intelligent male with a positive attitude went to feminist groups and asked the girls out on dates, the girls would chill out and their psychological problems would heal a little it.

            I could go further and present an argument for traditionalism, but this is not the time nor place.

          • TrueNorthFree

            “If an attractive, intelligent male with a positive attitude went to
            feminist groups and asked the girls out on dates, the girls would chill
            out and their psychological problems would heal a little it.”

            interesting.
            I believe that in the broad scheme of things the social pendulum tends to swing, eventually.
            Perhaps what you describe will begin to happen when women realize that endless amounts of empty sex, porn style, without loving commitment does not create a very happy life for them.

          • TrueNorthFree

            “I could go further and present an argument for traditionalism, but this is not the time nor place.”

            I think it would be interesting to read more of your thoughts on this…

          • listenupbub

            I am not totally convinced that traditionalism is a good idea in the 21st century, because I believe women are better suited for 21st century work, and probably also smarter (damn the IQ “standard deviation” arguments). Basically, I’d say humans are maladapted for the 21st century in some ways (not super important, though).

            But I understand the arguments for traditionalism:

            Since men have to be the pursuers, and since men and women instinctively know the males must perform the role of “strong provider,” the best way to have high birthrates and the number of adults with satisfying sex lives (pretty important for a satisfying, stable social life) is to maximize the number of males who have a position in society that allows them to make enough money and earn enough respect to be considered “strong providers.” That way, they will be in a position to pursue and marry women, and actually become providers for children.

            Now, mind you, I am not raving about crazy theoretical concepts that do not show up in the real world. These are corroborated by facts about the millennial generation in America: less than half of marriageable-aged millennials are married. The average age for Americans to have a first marriage is going up, overall marriage rates are going down. Births out of wedlock are a big thing in feminist nordic European countries, even ones with good economies.

            Why are birthrates important? If a society does not produce enough children, it will eventually get outcompeted by one that is fecund. This is happening in America, where non-patriarchal whites are naturally getting swamped by ultra-patriarchal hispanics. In Europe, feminist whites are getting swamped by ultra-patriarchal Muslims. This is probably the reason feminist civilizations do not really show up in the historical records. If people ever decided to go feminist, they would get destroyed by either conquest or genetic drift.

            Another way to maximize birthrates without enforcing a patriarchy is to allow polygamy. That way, women could make up 90% of the professions, and the 10% of professionals who are male will just have a lot of wives. If the remaining men are noncompetitive and sedate, then the society will be stable, and enough children will be made.

            However, what will happen in a few generations is that the most competitive males will end up being the successful ones (because this trait has great effect on life success), which means that in a few more generations, humanity will evolve to be much more competitive. This is why the polygamous Arab people and the formerly polygamous Chinese are such competitive people, imo.

            Once the men become competitive, they branch off into one of two directions. The first is that the loser 80% of males will gang up and hold the top 20% down so they can have a chance to pass on their genes and not lose out in life. This is probably how the tradition of monogamy evolves. The second optioin is that the society as a whole could go to hell, involving war and incest for the loser males. War is obviously bad; incest is less obviously bad, but it is actually very dysgenic, which is dangerous long-term. This is the middle east in a nutshell.

            So polygamy either puts you back into square one or it ruins your society.

            Blacks are in a similar but different situation, but they don’t count here because they are
            not homo sapiens, they are what I call homo
            scatapultus
            : poo-flinging man. They have completely different mating behaviors,
            which cannot be replicated by people in the species homo
            sapiens
            , because these mating patterns seem essentially alien
            and crazy to members of the species homo sapiens.

            I would argue for radically closed borders which can allow our people/tribe to survive the low birth rates that follow from women’s empowerment. We need less human on earth anyways. And ultimately, we might need to think about having the government intervene in radical ways to make sure children are being produced if the birth rates become too serious a problem (Encourage married people to have more kids, raise some kids with by the state, force people to marry for certain jobs and positions).

          • TrueNorthFree

            I don’t agree with everything you said here, but most of it is pretty good.

          • Jack Frost

            Just a glance through the CL women seeking men shows what havoc feminism has wrought. While young women were exhorted to become as loose and carefree as males, the biology is still valid, men don’t get pregnant. Now, several decades into the fray, with a bevy of babies from different fathers, what is increasingly found on CL by lonely females? Looking for just a date, to see a movie or eat. No sex! No FWB, no hookup!! Looking for a gentleman. There are no gentlemen any more after being told endlessly they were archaic and useless. The end has been found but it may be too late in the grand scheme of things!

          • TrueNorthFree

            Healing of women, and men, can happen Jack.
            I have hope.

        • Light from the East

          To maintain the population, the birthrate should be 2.1. For white people’s survival, I think the average birthrate around 3 to 4 is ideal.
          The earth’s optimal population size is 1 billion to 3 billion, earth resource is not sufficient to support 7 billion or more people. When resources are not enough, people tend to start conflicts and white people are ones of finest human beings so if competition happened, chances are other low IQ race will fail and their number will reduce. Besides having more children, a healthy mindset of white race is essential.

      • Shaquan Jamison

        That may be the best explanation of the Marxist and Marxism that has ever been presented.

      • Looks like a few trolls went on a trolling spree in this thread. The fact that this thread has attracted so many trolls tells you all you need to know: we need more material like this. If an article gets many trolls, then you must be doing something terribly right. One troll indignantly asked: “Why do you think whites will go extinct?” Before I will answer the question, let me rephrase it to: “Why are whites being threatened?” which is a better question to start from.

        My native language, Cantonese, has well over 70 million speakers. It dwarfs most of the world’s languages. You might therefore say that it is in no danger of disappearing. However, that is wrong. You have to see the situation of my language in context. It is spoken in a country with a national language which is spoken by more than a billion people. The speakers of my language and the people of my culture are utterly outnumbered. Our culture and language will probably have gone practically extinct by 2100. You might object to this idea saying that there might be more speakers of Cantonese than ever before. If there are more speakers of Cantonese than ever before, it does not make a difference; we still have to see the size of my language in context. It will not change that we are utterly outnumbered. My language which is inherently linked to my particular culture is under an existential threat in the lands where it used to be indigenous. Any language and culture can die if the people are threatened or if they are being forced into using another language or assimilating into another culture for economical or other reasons. I feel much sympathy and empathy for the cause of the survival of whites, because I can understand every detail of their cause from this perspective. While I am currently unable to save my own language and culture, I do know what whites face is real, and that is why I support them. I do not want them to go extinct like my own culture and language.

        Whites have more than 700 million people. Most would think that this is a huge number of people. However, things have to be seen in context. Whites live on a planet with over 7 billion people, and many of those people want to come live in their countries. Whites are facing unprecented migratory trends towards their countries, and this is an existential threat for a group of people that is outnumbered by the population of the rest of the world. Whites, like my native language and culture, might be practically extinct as early as 2100 or as late as 2200. So, my take is that their practical extinction (i.e., point of no return) will take place within that timeframe. You might object to this idea saying that there are more Whites than ever before. Again, this does not matter. The size of the white population has to be seen in context. The fact is that whites are utterly outnumbered. Whites who as a race of people are inherently linked to Western civilisation are now under an existential threat in the lands that they traditionally inhabitated, even on their continent of origin. Any civilisation can die when its people are being threatened. Whatever may be said in favour of increasing the quality of a population, it is still a fact that quantity does matter.

        I recommend that people who are interested in Western civilisation should buy and read Prof. Ricardo Duchesne’s 2012 book “The uniqueness of Western Civilization.”

        • propagandaoftruth

          You are a sharp one, CNM. Only 70 million native Cantonese speakers? I didn’t realize there were so few.

          See my “Threefold Compact” below regarding parents and their kids vis-à-vis out-marrying.

          Parents may not be able to tell their kids who they can and cannot marry, but…

          1. Parents can raise their children to understand and accept the parents’ beliefs.

          2. Parents can disown, shun, and disinherit whatever child they choose for whatever reason. Including marriage to someone unacceptable to the parents.

          For truly grief stricken parents (at the loss of a child – “You are dead to us”) I suggest finding a struggling young White family and following a grand old Roman tradition – adult adoption. Help and mentor and invite to family get-togethers a struggling young White couple to fill the void and assure more Whites will be in this world, healthy and strong.

          I personally know a lot of White/Oriental folks who, and whose 3/4 White kids, I have no problems with at all, by the way. The choice of who is or is not acceptable to parents is the business and affair of the parents alone.

          In an America roughly 80% White, 15% productive non-White, 5% gene-scum, a pretty Chinese Nationalist Maiden here, a talented high Mestizo there, a high achieving swarthy-but-Caucasian Sikh – in an America where Whites were numerically in control and respected, I would not fear at all a trickle of outside genetics since such would make our White mongrel population no less White in the big picture.

          • LHathaway

            I think we need a country where only whites, or those married to whites (leaving upon divorce) live. Marriage numbers with non-white spouses could even be regulated by gender, to avoid horrid sexual discrimination. The mixed race children would very likely marry other Whites. They would nearly have to.

            As a bonus, it’s the only way to keep people of color from racism.
            Don’t they deserve a break at last?

            Lets see how That goes for a time.

            I wonder if other White regions would follow, or if we would be the only sure survivors?

          • bilderbuster

            You just described 1939 Germany with it’s prosperity after they removed the 2% of the non-Whites from power. They had to be stopped before other White regions followed their example.

          • LHathaway

            Germany was pretty aggressive with their war mongering and invasions.

            But it wouldn’t surprise me if Hitler himself was some kind of an inside man, the ultimate provocateur. According to Wikipedia, his very first foray into politics was being sent by local police to monitor/infiltrate a far right political group.

            Who knows how the world will see these things in the future, as North American, anyway, separates along racial lines?

        • mike

          yes languages die everyday. Cantonese may die. although it isn’t listed as endangered. amok, anung, aqaw gelo, ayziz, chintaw..those are listed as critically. hell it may be replaced by English. if the death of a language is equivalent to the death of a culture, whites have committed more genocides than anyone.

          yes, whites as a percentage of the total population is shrinking. maybe the lowest it has been since the great plague. that doesn’t mean the white race or western culture is on the verge of collapse or extermination.

          “should buy and read” it’s not online? is it in the library? I have to buy it? never seen anyone say that before, ‘buy’? are you he?

        • Bon, From the Land of Babble

          The truth must be spoken regarding this issue and NOT censored.

          Until and unless it is, nothing will change. We need to ferret out who is doing this to us and WHY. It is an issue too important and dire to keep hidden considering we are talking about the genocide of an entire race of people. Why cover any of it up?

          Thanks for your support, BTW.

          • You are one of the best commenters I know along with Augur. I enjoy reading through your posting history, and I will definitely read more of your comments, both old and new, when I have more time.

            Keep up the good work!

        • David Ashton

          Duchesne is no special friend of Chinese Vancouver, but he deserves support.

          • That may not be the correct way to put it, because Prof. Duchesne is not anti-Chinese nor does he hate Chinese people in any way. His views on immigration are, perhaps, much closer to those that propagandaoftruth advocated above.

            He just wants the West to stay chiefly European, and he supports what he calls ‘organic immigration’ and a ‘level playing ground in the multicultural arena’. The media purposefully misrepresented his views on Asians. Prof. Duchesne, for instance, never said that Asians are dirty.

            What is more, he has always treated me very kindly from the very first day that we had contact via internet/e-mail, and he has remained like this without exception. He is just a very intelligent, honest, and kind man, and many misinterpret him and his views.

            I still have e-mail contact with the Professor, and unlike anyone else whom I know from the internet, he even knows my real name. I trust him. People may think about him what they want to think, but he is not a mean person and his kindness is not fake. He is a brave person who is true to his words.

          • David Ashton

            I accept your positive account of Duchesne’s personal character.
            He criticized the arrogant demands of some Chinese in “Hongkouver” in the British quarterly “Salisbury Review” with which I am no longer associated.

          • I am aware of his criticisms, but I agree with him. His criticisms are objectively true, and unlike his opponents he is not making false claims or accusations. I even wrote a personal mail to Vancouver City Councillor Kerry Jang to Prof. Ricardo Duchesne’s defence. I am obviously no supporter of Asian liberals, and I do certainly not appreciate dishonesty and injustice.

          • David Ashton

            It is a pleasure to read your comments here and elsewhere. You are a thoughtful asset to this site.

          • Thank you for your kind words! I can unfortunately not post as often as I would like to due to studies and recurring health issues, but I will try to post more often.

        • dd121

          You are so wrong! The Roman Empire will always prevail and Latin will always be the dominant language of Europe. /sarc

          The language that wins is almost always the language of the political/military victors. It’s Russian among the Slavs and Mandarin among the Chinese. Say goodbye to your language and culture.

          PS I’m a native English speaker; not the Gaelic of my ancestors.

        • listenupbub

          Excellent comment.

          I have much empathy for the Asian peoples who will be the next in line for the Great Death that multiculturalism brings, after we whites disappear.

          Japan’s resolve for monoculturalism and monoracialism already seems to be wearing down. The anime that is most popular for my generation (last time I checked), called Naruto, has some strong multicultural themes in it, even with a black ninja village. If Japan opens borders, the third-worlders will certainly pour in (along with socially awkward whites). Japan has not had hardly any crime in a long time, but that will change for the worse. Since Japan is just a little bit ahead of the rest of Asia, the same will happen to China.

          You simply cannot keep up with Africans in the game of reproduction. Our white ancestors noticed the senselessly high fecundity of blacks a long time ago. Their numbers are potentially infinite.

          I am not trying to downplay the issue of the death of the Cantonese language. If you cannot win this battle against the multiculturalists, you will have a hard time finding the ideological and intellectual firepower to resist the next multicultural reform. This battle must be won so that you can know how to win the next battles.

    • mike

      so you want a law against inter-racial marriages?

      • SevenSamurandwiches

        Well, you know that we can’t trust people to do what’s best for them or their people on their own – so, yes, we must create laws against such immoral acts. Inter-racial marriage = super icky, just because.

        • how about this

          Do you really think that there is no reason to oppose interracial marriage? Often the children of such unions are very unhappy, with high rates of drug abuse, depression and even suicidality. To quote Jared Taylor’s book White Identity, “A study of White/Asian children found that they were twice as likely as mono-racial children–34 percent vs. 17 percent–to suffer from psychological disorders such as anxiety, depression or drug abuse.” He cites several other studies to the effect that people who have a clear racial identity are more mentally healthy than those who do not.

          • mike

            lol. now this should be interesting.
            could you please link your study? or is this written in a book published in the 1800s?

          • anony

            Whites of the 1800s were much more racially aware than most Whites today and much more practical.

          • mike

            ok. what does that have to do with suicide rates among mixed race kids? and the cause?

          • anony

            I’m responding to your comment: “Could you please link your study? or is this written in a book published in the 1800s?”

          • mike

            ok. I imagine everyone was ‘more racially aware’, back we your race could get you enslaved or the position of master. I still don’t get your point. ‘how about this’ said the rate for suicide was double for inter-racial kids. so I asked for his proof. is that unreasonable?
            I said is this book written in the 1800s implying that it might not be online in he digital form. but let us presume his stats are correct, is he claiming a genetic causation?

          • anony

            Not sure which book you refer to. Taylor’s book, WHITE IDENTITY was published in the last several years. As to the study showing the issue with mixed-race people, I don’t know when that study was published.

          • mike

            “He cites several other studies” ok. what studies?

          • anony

            Don’t know, Mike. Do your own homework.

          • how about this

            White Identity was published in 2011. Here are some more quotes from page 124:

            “A 2003 study of 90,000 middle-school and high-school students found that black/white mixed-race children had more health and psychological problems than children who were either black or white. They were more likely to be depressed, sleep badly, skip school, smoke, drink, consider suicide, and have sex. White/Asian children showed similar symptoms. The principal author conclude that the cause was “the struggle with identity formation, leading to lack of self-esteem, social isolation and problems of family dynamics in biracial households.
            “The authors of a 2008 study reached the same conclusion: “When it comes to engaging in risky/anti-social adolescent behavior, however, mixed race adolescents are stark outliers compared to both blacks and whites. … Mixed race adolescents–not having a natural peer groups–need to engage in more risky behaviors to be accepted.”

            Here are the citations given in the book for the above two, respectively:

            Connie Cass, “Study: Mixed-Race Youth Have Health Woes,” Associated Press, Oct. 30, 2003.
            Roland G. Fryer et al., “The Plight of Mixed Race Adolescents,” National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. 14192, July, 2008.

            “Yoonsun Choi of the University of Chicago found that in Seattle middle schools, a clear racial identity seemed to protect against certain problems. Bi-racial children were the group most likely to smoke, take drugs, have been in fights, hurt someone badly, or carry a gun. Prof. Choi believes mixed-race children suffer because no racial group accepts them. “there is some indication that a strong ethnic identity helps protect kids from these [undesirable] behaviors,” she said.”

            I believe I am not supposed to post links here but you can look up Yoonsun Choi; she has been involved in more than one study (including one in 2010) to the same effect. I believe the above (again from White Identity) is referring to this:

            Are multiracial adolescents at greater risk? Comparisons of rates, patterns, and correlates of substance use and violence between monoracial and multiracial adolescents.
            Choi, Yoonsun; Harachi, Tracy W.; Gillmore, Mary Rogers; Catalano, Richard F.
            American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol 76(1), Jan 2006, 86-97.

            There is also this:

            Udry, J. R., Li, R. M., & Hendrickson-Smith, J. (2003). Health and Behavior Risks of Adolescents with Mixed-Race Identity. American Journal of Public Health, 93(11), 1865–1870.

          • mike

            ok. I googled those two. I see a ‘marginal man’ hypotheses and some increase in problems related to ‘identity crisis’. I don’t see any stats on the doubling of anxiety or suicide?

          • how about this

            The mention of psychological problems doubling was from a 2008 study at UC Davis by Nolan Zane and Lauren Berger. When I look it up I seem to find news articles about it rather than the original article, unfortunately.

            Let’s say for the sake of argument it is all society’s fault. Which do you think an individual has more control over: long-term trends in society around them, or their own behavior in terms of choosing mates (for marriage) of their own or different races? I think it is always a better idea to try to control your own behavior and consider the likely consequences of it given current realities rather than assuming that you or anyone else will be able to effect fundamental changes in society.

          • mike

            clearly you have more control over your own actions than the lager society’s reaction to said actions.
            but that doesn’t make the reaction right.

          • Anna Tree

            Blaming society is so easy as usual.

            (Paraphrasing)
            The evidence shows that even though society is more accepting and endorsing of mixed marriages and children than ever before, the associated health problems of men, women (the incidence of
            spousal homicide is 7.7 times higher in interracial marriages compared to intraracial marriages and each parent shares more common DNA with a random person of his race than with his own child) and children caught up in this racial mixing has continued to increase, not decrease.

            By the logic of pro-diversity activist, smokers became inflicted with lung cancer, heart disease, etc, due to “smokophobia” or people’s social stigma on smoking, rather than the smoking itself. But that, in a nutshell, describes the manipulation of the pro-diversity activist movement (and any similar movement.)

            Beside the fact that scientists today are as much brainwashed as anybody and that not many are interested researching controversial issues.

            Also, there are some bi-racial children who speak up (look in youtube) but not many: one of the worst parts of abuse is society’s refusal to see an injustice. Emotional abuse is particularly difficult because it is invisible and therefore ripe for denial. Moreover when praised by everyone in the vicinity as cool, better than normal and no cause to be aggrieved (even worse, a reason to be grateful), the natural instinct of the child is to blame herself for revealing their insecurities, for choosing one parent to the other, their lack of identity or desperate/emotional search for an identity etc.

            I am not saying that mixed races parents are automatically guilty of any kind of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse to the children they raise. Nor am I saying they are less likely to take good care of children. What I mean is this: mixed races parents give mixed identities and so no identity. To intentionally deprive any child of an heritage and identity has become in itself a form of abuse for me.

          • mike

            sorry I stopped reading when you said ‘smokophobia’. lol.
            I got a story for ya though. I was at my sisters and looked out and thought to myself, who’s that black kid. then I saw his face, it was my nephew. so I said to my sister, you might want to get alex in out of the sun, I thought he was black. we all laughed. then she told me how he came home crying from school (he was 6 at the time) because a kid asked him what he was? he said he was white, but the other little boy said, ‘I don’t know what you are, but you are no white boy’.
            didn’t scar him or anything, but I can imagine if we was actually inter-racial, that might have an effect on him. and it might continue his entire childhood.

          • Anna Tree

            Funny, I stopped reading you when you wrote you stopped reading me.
            If you are not here to read other people thoughts, then I won’t read yours. I am here to exchange ideas with mature people. Skeptic, critic and open-minded is a plus.

            The word smokophobia doesn’t exist, although the stigma does, the paragraph was an allegory. Oh well, bye.

          • mike

            sorry but it was very long and that comparison makes no sense. a carcinogen is very different then a psychological effect brought on by social interaction.

            yes interracial breeding is increasing. what is a pro-diversity activist? and you has …. well why don’t you tell me the point of your allegory?

            “What I mean is this: mixed races parents give mixed identities and so no identity” yes studies have show an increase in ‘identity crisis’. so why not just identify as an American?

          • propagandaoftruth

            “The word smokophobia doesn’t exist,”
            I just realized the acronym for my handle is “pot”. I was in the middle of replying to some poster who dared reveal she was female regarding feminism when my cat his some combination of buttons and something insane happened, but anyway…
            I was blabbing about how most modern “feminism” is axe grinding Marxist harridanry, that the vast majority of university feminists are gyno-Marxist abominations who want for all women not what all women want for themselves, but what Marxist Harridanry wants for all women.
            Oh, by the way, I feel great. Got a nasty abscessed molar yanked, feel 100% better. Regardless, I’m now feeling great as well as looking great, so I decided to try to get in touch with an old (female) friend who I haven’t talked to in months. Text her. Doesn’t know who I am. Weird. I think she’s dating a private investigator…
            Anyway, how you been doing, my Amren gf and bffffff 4eva?

          • Anna Tree

            Hi POT, I am good, glad to read you feel better. Been working on new projects and been very busy, but come here to read you all. I wish I could go to this Amren Conference: got my first White privilege conference and would love to be with liked-minded people for a whole week-end…

            I presume the dentist told you to clean the wound with salt water after each meal, I advice with a syringe to do a good job: it can take a couple of month to heal and close completely.

            That friend is indeed weird, maybe her boyfriend is of the jealous kind… Forgetting you… how can be!?

            Take care!


            Will respond to Mike tomorrow if needed…
            (lol that post was so short compared to what I sometimes write)

          • propagandaoftruth

            Not trying to dis nobody, but I don’t know what to make of mike, one way or ‘nother. Not feeling like being the bridge-troll today, you know?

            Sometimes (most times these days) I see a long cascading debate or something “like as such” to quote a former Miss Souf Krakalaka…

            I just let ’em go at it. I don’t have to break up fights. Let ’em rumble. The mod’s OK with it, must be OK, you know?

            When I was a crazed Marxist I used to love to pick troll fights, get mean and show people I was smarter than they, destroy the enemy. Chaos, conflict, bloodletting reduced to words. My great Marxist messianic duty, you know?

            Some of that carried over into my post dark enlightenment phase, of course, and I’ve had some fun here and there, of course. I no longer feel guilt for being bad and evil, you know, lol?

            But I really feel like I’m at he end of a long metamorphosis from slimy, crazy, weak, whiney, blamey, wormy “progressive” (American Marxist), to whatever the Hell I am now. This tooth extraction seems to have dislodged something, and now I’m free, an ideological butterfly – no longer a Marxist worm.

            Maybe it’s just Spring. Upon further reflection, my friend may have just changed phone service. Her life was a stable continual series of crises involving her and her girls, which always seemed to work out, and it’s more than possible one of these crises involved the changing of cell phone service. She was dating a private dick, though, last time we talked…hmmm…

          • LHathaway

            POT could stick. You never know.

          • propagandaoftruth

            “POT could stick.”

            If it’s any good it tends to be sticky. So I’ve heard…

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Yes, wow, not having a solid racial identity might have followed your nephew throughout life. He might have even been psychologically wounded by this, with no way to fix it because the root problem would be rather obviously genetic – that is, not genetically belonging to a group he could identify with.

            Or we could “fix” it by having everyone mix to the point of genetic mush and losing all of our unique cultures in the process! That could work, right?

            …Do you normally argue by reinforcing your opponent’s points for them? How’s that working out for you?

          • mike

            well my nephew is half german and half greek. so if you want to claim the greeks aren’t white, they have been conquered by arabs at one time, that is alright. but most western culture is based on greek philosophy.
            why would genetic mush mean losing cultures? cultures and genetics are two different things.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Who said anything about whether or not the Greeks are white? Stop trying to change the subject. You’re like a rabbit being chased. No one is impressed by your zigzagging arguments – they’re obnoxious.

            cultures and genetics are two different things.

            Not entirely, no – not in the sense you’re suggesting. Culture does NOT produce people; people produce culture. That is a monumentally important thing to truly grasp. If you don’t, you will always put the cart before the horse.

            If a group of people from a particular genetic stock produce the same sort of culture over and over and over again every time they group together in sufficient numbers, what does that tell you?

            1) The culture they produce is partially based on genes that influence what sort of people they are as a group.
            2) If you wipe out the genetics of those people, that type of culture will vanish from the earth because no one else is like them as a group.

            This isn’t difficult. Stop thinking of “culture” as some mysterious thing which is plucked from the ether solely by virtue of hazy concepts like “where you live.” Two different peoples plunked down in the same environment would not produce the same culture.

          • mike

            you said, “that is, not genetically belonging to a group he could identify with.” so I asked if the greeks are white. that was clearly his genetic make up that allowed him to tan to the point of looking black.

            “Culture does NOT produce people; people produce culture” people can establish a culture. but once the culture is established it produces people, or the achievements of said people.
            ‘look she has blonde hair, therefore she is one of us” makes no sense. a black person can be more western, having growing up in the west, then a white person who has grown up in Africa.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Are you so totally unable to follow an exchange for more than, oh, a COMMENT? Everything I said there was in response to your proffered theoretical, “if we was actually inter-racial.”

            IF.

            but once the culture is established it produces people, or the achievements of said people.

            Nope. Find me an example of this in history. Find me an example of a country totally changing genetic stock and yet maintaining the very same culture as before.

            a black person can be more western, having growing up in the west, then a white person who has grown up in Africa.

            Nope. All of our PROBLEMS with black people in the West stem from how very non-Western they are by nature. When they are successful in the Western world, the level of their success generally correlates VERY well to how much that individual person is genetically like white people.

          • mike

            who said anything about ‘totally changing stock’? I’m talking a about a genetic stock? I’m talking about an African in a white nation. or vise-versa.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Because, sir, that would be how you actually tested your theory. If culture “produces people,” then gradually and completely swap out the people who originally “established” the culture, allowing the culture to be taught to the new people, and see what happens.

            If you are correct, they should carry on that established culture just the same as before, yeah?

            Can you find an example in history of something like this happening?

          • mike

            name 5 or 10 or as many things as you want, that define culture.

          • bilderbuster

            Just look at mixed breed dogs. They don’t have the identity formation per say.They have two different breeds in their DNA and hybrids are usually a bit screwy.

          • Dwight

            Infinitely more important than any of that is the fact that miscegenation destroys the white race, one race traitor at a time. Perhaps the non-White Samura or mike don’t mind if their race is hybridized out of existence, but many of us are opposed to such genocide.

          • mike

            correct I do not mind.
            I am in favor of freedom.

          • IBWHITE

            You mean like freedom of association? Where Whites could separate and form their own communities or countries?

          • mike

            yes there is freedom of association. but that doesn’t mean you can kick people out of their own country.
            you want a club where only whites are allowed, that is allowed.
            If you can find an uninhabited island and set up your own white only country, so be it. good luck with finding anything of size that whites haven’t already introduced blacks on too.
            but in America you and I and blacks have freedom of movement. so a black guy can go to Idaho and by land. if his land is next to yours, too bad. you don’t have to talk to him, shake his hand or whatever. but you can’t drive him off his own land because you want to separate yourself from him. just like muslims can’t ‘volunteer’ to segregate the sexes in a public forum. or the jews who tried to force a woman to sit at the back of the bus in Brooklyn.

          • IBWHITE

            So the Indian reservations should be seized and anyone should be allowed to move in on them?

          • mike

            what? that might be one of the most bizarre leaps I’ve ever seen.
            1. who wants Indian reservation land, isn’t it the crappy land?
            2. are you saying if an Indian marries a white he or she can’t bring their spouse onto the reservation?
            3. I think reservations weren’t set up to keep whites out, but Indians in?
            4. you are comparing Indian reservations, small isolated pieces of land that the people who once occupied the entire convenient, to what? the old Italian neighborhood that is now black? you do realize the Italians moved out? voluntarily?
            sorry boss I’m not following you at all. I’m not saying your property or even the county park should be seized and given to immigrant?

          • IBWHITE

            “you are comparing Indian reservations, small isolated pieces of land that the people who once occupied the entire convenient, to what?”

            Convenient?!! What in the world are you talking about?
            I’m pointing out the fact that a race of people were allowed to physically separate and even financed by this government to do so. I’m also pointing out the fact that people like yourself have no problem with this when the darker races are allowed, and even encouraged to separate but then condemn and ridicule White’s who wish to do the same. You and others like yourself are the biggest problem in this nation by pushing and demanding everyone conform to your way of life. This will eventually end and the outcome isn’t going to be pretty.

          • mike

            the Indians didn’t volunteer to go to reservations, they were forced. google ‘trail of tears’. how much area do you think are designated indian reservations? and again, are non-Indians not allowed?

            I’m talking about your analogy being insane. no one is stopping you from separating yourself. buy a 100 acres in Montana and separate yourself.

          • IBWHITE

            Are you really that ignorant regarding anti-discrimination laws? The federal government aggressively pursues anyone involved in violating housing, employment or business discrimination laws. How could you not have heard or read about Denny’s or Cracker Barrel being sued? So, no, there is NOT freedom of association in this country regardless of what you want to parrot.
            If your going to debate a subject at least be informed – or honest.

          • mike

            yes I know there are anti-discrimination laws. so you want to be able to not rent to non-whites? you want to be able to not hire non-whites?
            so ‘voluntary separation’ equals discrimination in your mind? ok. sounds about right.

          • IBWHITE

            I wanted to point out you have no idea what you’re talking about and I’ve accomplished that. Now please go away.

          • mike

            so, just to be clear, you want the right as a business owner to discriminate?
            of course there is freedom of association. just not when it comes to running a for-profit public business. those are two different concepts.
            so you want to be able to run a restaurant and not let in blacks? or Indians of course?

          • IBWHITE

            American Indians have that right on their land why should we not be allowed to also. In the 1990’s the sport of mixed martial arts was banned in this country and the promoters of the UFC had no place to stage a show. UFC owners contacted an Indian tribe and were allowed to have a PPV produced at a gaming casino which was not bound by federal laws. On most, if not all tribal lands you have to furnish proof that you’re at least part Indian, or married to one, to be able to live/own Indian land within the United States. They set their own laws and promote their own agenda without interference from outside groups. They’re not bound by affirmative action, housing, employment or even our hunting and fishing laws. But people like yourself want to deny White’s that same right. If I wanted to purchase 100 acres and build a subdivision for White’s only I would be taken to jail at the point of a gun. But Indians are not only allowed but encouraged to do it.

          • mike

            yes, there are indian nations within American borders. those lands were deeded to them as parts of treaties or against their wills after having been defeated in war. you do see the irony here, you are claiming that you should be allowed an indian reservation. shouldn’t you be advocating a return to Europe then? to your ancestral lands? you can buy 100 acres and build houses that you give to only whites.

            “Indian land within the United States.” obviously they are not part of the united states or they wouldn’t have been allowed to host the UFC. they are considered different ‘nations’. your comparison doesn’t hold water. but if you want to go the way of the Indian, declare war on the American government. maybe you can get your own reservation. it might only be 10X10. but hey, it’s a start.

          • IBWHITE

            Well first off, people like you have made a mess out of Europe too. White’s built this country and shouldn’t have to relocate anywhere. As far as the Indians being here first is open to debate – read up on Kennewick man.
            I was pointing out the hypocrisy of people like yourself condemning all of us “White racists” and “Naatzee’s” while ignoring other races that have actively separated themselves. I guess this is a little over your head.

          • mike

            what? I’ve never even been to Europe. how did I make a mess? when did I call you a ‘White racists” or a “Naatzee”?

            I believe you comparison to American Indians, “actively separated themselves” is a false premise. they were forced onto reservations and there are less than 3 million in America I believe. that would hardly equate to the 200 million white americans. plus the tiny, tiny, tiny bit of land that may be reserved for indian ownership only, is insignificant and irrelevant to your wish to discriminate against blacks and others.

          • IBWHITE

            “what? I’ve never even been to Europe. how did I make a mess?”
            Do you have a learning disorder?

          • mike

            I don’t think so. I went to college, 3 of them. how did I, or people like me mess up Europe?

          • listenupbub

            MY GOD, THE STUPIDITY OF THAT GUEST!!!

          • Epoche

            I have only two main wishes: that we get rid of the laws against restrictive covenants and we get rid of the income tax.

          • mike

            getting rid of the income tax might be a pit too much. a 15% flat tax would be good. or you can replace it with a 5% sales tax.
            I’m not familiar with ‘restrictive covenants’ laws?

          • Epoche

            I like the fairtax plan to abolish all income tax. The idea of restrictive covenants is to allow property owners the legal means to discriminate against the bias and bigotry of the civil rights guild.

          • mike

            so if you had a restaurant, you want the right to refuse people based on race?

          • Epoche

            I would like for it to be possible for private property owners to take race into consideration as much as the small business administration or the major university admissions selection committee does.

          • mike

            so if you had a line out front you want to let the whites in first? I don’t get your analogy.
            and what do you mean by ‘private property’? do you consider a home the same thing as a business that provides a service to the public?

          • Epoche

            Would I personally allow whites in first? Not personally but if some did it would be no worse than watching Jesse Jackson demand formal discrimination against whites and call it inclusion. Its an exclusive inclusiveness that he wants to be the sole proprietor of. Whats so outrageous about allowing large organizations to use SAT scores or IQ tests when determining hiring or promotions policy?

          • mike

            well I certainly don’t want to follow any model put forth by jesse Jackson.
            is there a law against using SAT and IQ test in hiring and promotions?

          • Epoche

            The Duke v. Griggs Power decision, the civil rights act of 1991 all put the burden of proving that a test is not discriminatory against protected groups on the shoulders of the business/property owners. We shouldnt assume that business owners are an especially malicious group of people, that their motives forever be questioned. When the civil rights movement was founded it originally was not supposed to allow quotas because the detractors of it believed that quotas were a form of discrimination that could be at least as bad as the problems they were attempting to remedy. Then the civil rights leaders demanded quotas after the act was passed.

          • mike

            “We shouldnt assume that business owners are an especially malicious group of people, that their motives forever be questioned” it doesn’t look like it was assumed but well known. Duke had only allowed blacks the lowest paying jobs, and then after the civil rights act implemented an IQ test.
            I agree, things shouldn’t ‘forever’ be questioned, but it looks like that most certainly should have been. here is the problem, whites have shown a willingness to be a ‘malicious group’ when it comes to blacks. therefore the pendulum has swung to far to protect them. I am against all affirmative action, whether for blacks or women. but the solution isn’t to expand the program to allow whites to discriminate.
            of course and organization isn’t a transgression in and of its self. no one in their right mind would say so. but the means of attaining the ‘well-being’ can certainly be a transgression.

          • Epoche

            I agree, things shouldn’t ‘forever’ be questioned, but it looks like
            that most certainly should have been. here is the problem, whites have
            shown a willingness to be a ‘malicious group’ when it comes to blacks.
            ——————————————
            By not allowing them preferential treatment in organizations that they had no hand in creating? Usually the oppressed attempt to get away from their oppressors. The solution is to allow whites to discriminate. We should can even do it online therefore nothing to burn down. We will call it the historical grievance society.

          • mike

            “By not allowing them preferential treatment in organizations that they had no hand in creating?” no. no one demanded preferential treatment in Duke power. they just wanted a fair chance to move up to better paying jobs which they were openly denied based on race in the 50s.
            “no hand in creating”? so you can’t work for a company unless you are a founder? that makes no sense. so you created the schools you went to, all the companies you have worked at?
            so you want whites to be able to openly oppress blacks so they might flee the country?

          • Epoche

            quotas are preferential treatment. Jesse Jackson demands them even today in his demands for diversity. Diversity and inclusion are the catchphrases that rationalize quotas. The phrase “fair chance” is politically meaningless and susceptible to demagoguery. Should the NAACP be forced to have white quotas or not? I am asserting that I think shareholders, business owners and property owners should be the determinants of who gets what position. You prefer the EEOC to make such determinations. It doesnt matter whether or not you dont think such an organization should exist. It does.

          • how about this

            If I ask a girl out and she says no, is she oppressing me? She is denying me something I want, but she is within her rights to do so, don’t you think? Freedom of association includes the freedom to reject people.

            In the case of Duke Power, IIRC, they judged applicants using IQ tests, as was the custom among the majority of US businesses at the time. This was a good thing, as it allowed them to predict the performance of the potential employees. IQ tests still have high predictive validity today. Judging people based on something which is proven to be reliable in predicting their performance isn’t oppression. The objection (which the court upheld) was basically that Blacks, unlike Whites, should be given jobs even when the employer has a good reason to think that they will not perform well in those jobs. This is the attitude which I believe all of us on this site are disgusted by.

          • Epoche

            Not only that other groups are allowed to have organizations that represents their own interest group. I just saw an Ad for hispanic chamber of e-commerce. That sounds a lot like discrimination. If we discriminate against the bigots isnt that still discrimination and therefore doesnt that make us bigots ourselves? Are all diversities equally inclusive or do some of them have a more exclusive inclusiveness? Should people be able to achieve privilege by denouncing it and threatening to burn down buildings? If only we were able to use IQ tests in organizations that decide such matters but alas we are not since the supreme court decided such matters for all eternity. To progress!

          • mike

            form a white chamber of commerce. that is not illegal.

          • Epoche

            Will you stand by me if i do?

          • mike

            absolutely. I will join. i’ll be a founder. can we headquarter in tampa or Pinellas county?

          • Epoche

            I am leaning more heavily towards nihilism these days. Maybe instead we could form an organization called Transgender Parity Now that advocates for transgender quotas in civil rights organizations.

          • mike

            ok. I’m not sure how many hermaphrodites there are in the world, seen a pretty niche market. but they are making a lot of news lately. still, it doesn’t sound like the best business plan to me, but you go for it. I can try to recruitment for you though, I live in a very gay neighborhood and there is a she-male at the gay thrift store by my house.

          • Epoche

            What about a whites only software company?

          • David Ashton

            What is it about your neighborhood that somehow isn’t much of a surprise?

          • mike

            well during the late 90s and early 2000s and actually through the bubble gas started to move in and drive the blacks out. prices went up and it became known for a large gay population which attacked more gays.

          • David Ashton

            You mean “attracted”. (You must get some sleep soon.) Birds of a feather. When in Rome. A stitch in time.

          • mike

            of course the girl can reject you. a girl and a for-profit business are two very different things.

            so you are telling me that duke energy used IQ test throughout their history? then didn’t start to use them after the civil rights acts in the 60’s? you know after they could not longer keep blacks in the low paying jobs for no other reason than being black?

            “The objection (which the court upheld) was basically that Blacks, unlike Whites, should be given jobs even when the employer has a good reason to think that they will not perform well in those jobs.” not even close to what the court said. it said the test was arbitrary and not a valid predictor for job performance. they noted the whites already the positions and didn’t have high school diplomas, the other qualification that magical appeared, performed well.

          • Epoche

            “The objection (which the court upheld) was basically that Blacks,
            unlike Whites, should be given jobs even when the employer has a good
            reason to think that they will not perform well in those jobs.” not even
            close to what the court said. it said the test was arbitrary and not a
            valid predictor for job performance. they noted the whites already the
            positions and didn’t have high school diplomas, the other qualification
            that magical appeared, performed well.
            ————————————————-
            The civil rights leaders demanded a quota system which they got. Since blacks are a protected class and protected by quotas why does it matter how well they do? How could anyone possibly make such a determination and what would be their criterion? Either private property, liberty of contract and freedom of association are sacrosanct principals or they are not.

          • mike

            they are not. private property can be taken under eminent domain. liberty can be curtails. you can’t enter into a marriage contract with a 5 year-old. freedom of association doesn’t protect discriminatory hiring or denying services to a member of the public. so if you are a doctor you can refuse to treat someone based on race because of freedom of association?
            no such thing as a sacrosanct principal.

          • Epoche

            You cant really enter into a contract with anyone these days because of inclusion and diversity quotas. The very principals that you denounce are being practiced by the small business administration aka blacks are not just equal before the law but they are special. Discrimination has not been eliminated out of the universe it is just being practiced by a different people.

          • mike

            true. I never said discrimination has been eliminated from the SBA or universities. I said I’m against affirmative action.
            so if you are a doctor, should you be allowed to refuse service to a person because you claim freedom of association? an airline? how about a cab driver. what did you think of the Somali/muslim cab drivers who refused to take helper dogs in their cabs?

          • Epoche

            Jared Taylor talked about monopolies such as utilities being not allowed to discriminate. Its hard because this has become interwoven into our social fabric yet has caused to many problems. Thats why I like the idea of allowing people to establish restrictive covenants so people could create their own communities with their own guidelines from the ground up. Also the internet is not a place where people discriminate but people will be able to order more services and things online such as energy.

          • mike

            so if you are a doctor, should you be allowed to refuse service to a person because you claim freedom of association? an airline? how about a cab driver. what did you think of the Somali/muslim cab drivers who refused to take helper dogs in their cabs?

          • Epoche

            doctor yes you should be allowed to refuse service as long as you werent in a public facility. airline depends on the circumstance may be a federally guaranteed monopoly at this time. Cab drivers should be allowed to refuse anyone they want.

          • mike

            ok, what is a ‘public facility’? if you are in a for-profit hospital? is that a public facility?
            no, there is not a ‘federally guaranteed monopoly’. delta, American, southwest, jet blue, virgin, continental.
            ok. a straight answer. it’s a miracle.

          • Epoche

            I am not familiar enough with how bureaucrats classify medical facilities so I dont want to give the wrong answers. My gut instinct is that there should be appropriately designated teaching hospitals for such purposes and other such facilities would not be bound by similiar constraints.

          • mike

            it doesn’t matter how bureaucrats classify it, I’m asking you for your opinion. not of how it is either, but how it should be.
            teaching hospital????
            if a white guy is injured. SHOULD a black doctor be able to refuse to treat the dying white guy because of the sanctity of freedom of association? it is a simple scenario. injured, dying man. is he like the guy the cab driver can refuse to pick up?

          • Epoche

            In an ideal world there would be circumstances where the black doctor is able to refuse to treat the dying white guy. But because the state finances everything it is difficult to sort things out. Maybe no one would finance a doctors education if he didnt take an oath to treat all races maybe not. My ideal world would be a place where people establish such things using restrictive covenants. We can have nothing of value unless we can exclude others from what we create.

          • mike

            so you must live in a deed restricted neighborhood. you on the HOA board? you really love the restricted covenant concept.
            did you sign a non-compete at work?
            I’m not sure how a provider of services to the public can sign a covenant with a customer they have not meet?

          • Epoche

            No im not in a deed restricted neighborhood. I probably live in a more diverse neighborhood than you. I just think there should be peaceful ways of resolving irreconcilable differences other than federal intrusion in every social relation. This is my idea of fairness.

          • mike

            you seem to be stretching a land use concept past it’s intent. I would hope every one agrees that is I intent to sub-divide 100 acres and you buy first 5, I’m going to put some use restrictions in there. I don’t want you putting a junkyard at the entrance to my new residential subdivision.

            well a covenant is between two people, or more. so I don’t get how the guy standing on a corner trying to hail a cab has entered into a covenant to not be picked up? or the injured man not to be treated?

          • Epoche

            What other purpose is there to own property except to enjoy it including land? Is interfering with my stretched land use concept likely to lead to prosperity? I dont advocate it because its perfect but rather because it is the least bad. Look at Detroit and tell me honestly that America is better because private property, liberty of contract and freedom of association are not taken more seriously by our elite. The legal concepts of consent and consideration are missing from your assessment of the guy hailing a cab or the injured man not to be treated.

          • mike

            you said there are no ‘restrictive covenants’ in America anymore. there are tons. every deed restricted neighborhood is one. every non-compete clause. zoning laws and code enforcement.
            Detroit? what does that have to do with anything. Detroit died because the auto industry didn’t take the threats from foreign competition seriously. what does that have to do with your wish of allowing a company providing goods and services to the American public to be allowed to discriminate based on race?
            so there isn’t an implied consent when driving a cab you will pick up perspective customer. or doctors will treat the sick and wounded. plus they are licensed, I’m pretty sure that is part of the covenant they signed to gain their license.

          • Epoche

            You dont understand the principals involved because you dont want to understand it. Either the individual decides whom he can hire or the state does. If private individuals cannot by law decide with whom to cooperate with then the state has to tell them whom to hire to do. What is the exact proportion of blacks, why are not enough of them in management etc. There really is no middle ground. Detroit died because social engineers thought they could interfere with these principals with no social recourse. People do not build organizations on social justice principles or to satisfy historical grievances however legitimate they do them mostly so they can have families and pass on wealth to their own children. That is the purpose of respect for private property. Things of value dont just magically appear out of thin air. Nobody has to build anything. The main reason people build things is with the understanding that they can exclude others from what they create.

          • mike

            funny that you mentioned the Duke family, but not only did they make a bunch of money, they gave a bunch away.
            before you said nothing has worth unless you can exclude people from it. now you say you build with the understanding to exclude. why are you so hell bent on excluding people? look, if they aren’t qualified, don’t hire them. but to not hire someone because they aren’t ‘your tribe’ and you want to exclude them, makes no sense.
            yes the government governs. and they do so by the consent of the governed. your problem is you are a tiny minority and your ideas on how it should be, have already been rejected. sorry for your luck dude.

          • Epoche

            It hasnt been rejected, it has not been accurately portrayed. The decline of America began when these movements began. Equalism is a dead end philosophy. Nothing lasts forever. The government demands that all organizations discriminate .

          • mike

            what is ‘equalism’?
            how does the government demand all organizations to discriminate? that is not even close to true.

          • Epoche

            Equalism is the word representing the sentimental egalitarianism behind all of these ideas. If the government demands that diversity as a ruling ideology as well as inclusion or else!! But whose diversity is best and are all inclusivenesses equally inclusive? I might be in the tiny minority, but you have no moral, social or existential methodology to resolve any of the issues that I raised. Should all Africans be eligible for affirmative action or SBA quota system or only African Americans? Should the NAACP be forced to have transgender quotas or are only formerly white, christian and male organizations to be colonized by their oppressors?

          • mike

            I understand your principles. you want total freedom. I used to agree. true liberty would allow a company to discriminate against who ever they want. you could have a restaurant and only let in midgets if you want. then I got out of college and ventured into the real world.

          • LHathaway

            How will you find funds to support a White homeland?

          • Epoche

            Whatever the government deems worthy of doing should be done without taxing income.

          • LHathaway

            Whites are just weaker and more feeble and so therefore need legal separation and protection, at least if they want to continue. Can we do this the same way as affirmative action? Would that please you? Whites will get their own special territory and reservation, because they are weak and feeble and can’t compete, yet it will be official policy and pronouncement that this is because non-whites are racist? It’s the very least one can say and believe in order to be considered sensitive.

          • mike

            ‘continent’. that is a typo. I’m a very poor speller and a worse typist. combine that with autocorrect and some strange words come out in some strange places sometimes.

          • IBWHITE

            Your not much on logic either

          • BlueSonicStreak

            3. I think reservations weren’t set up to keep whites out, but Indians in?

            This has to be one of the stupidest things I’ve seen here. Do you know what the word “reservation” means?

          • mike

            to reserve. a place that has been reserved.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Uh-huh. And when you place a “reservation” at a table at a restaurant, does that mean that the restaurant is penning you in at that table?

            Or does it mean that no one else can sit there except you?

          • mike

            yes and yes.
            I think you mean penciling in? but can a restaurant give away your reservation, yes. they do that sometimes. you ever hear of airlines overbooking a flight?
            not sure what any of this has to do with anything.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            No, I meant “penning.” Look it up. The usage you are suggesting is bizarre, and I would have said “penciling in” if that’s what I had meant.

            Your answer “yes and yes” is incorrect – or, at least that’s what you’d hope.

          • mike

            oh penning as in, putting in a pen. I thought you were saying writing down with a pen. you know as opposed to writing with a pencil, which can be erased. comparison of a indian reservation, a piece of land, and a restaurant reservation must have confused me. you know, because they have nothing to do with each other.
            yes the restaurant doesn’t corral you into your chair. at lest hopefully not.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            The point of the analogy was to explain to you why your above comment was idiotic, as you don’t seem to understand how the word “reservation” is used. Would you like me to try again with even smaller words?

          • mike

            yes please. with smaller words. but first can I ask you this: is the democratic people’s republic of north korea, either democratic or a republic?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            No, because that’s a stupid argument in this context. Do you seriously believe that logically follows?

          • mike

            so you didn’t explain it to me with smaller words?
            so Indians were not corralled into reservations? they weren’t penned? they vacated their table in the middle of the restaurant for one by the kitchen?
            of course it logically follows. your argument is about the word reservation being a positive thing, while in fact it is being misused to label something that is bad, as if it is positive.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Oh, really?

            Sure, go inform the Native peoples that they don’t get to have sovereign land anymore, as that’s bad. I’m sure they’ll be thrilled by the news that the land on which they currently preserve their peoples and cultures is not good for them, and they should assimilate into our culture instead.

          • mike

            who said they don’t have sovereign land? I’m saying that their sovereign land is a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of what it once was.
            I didn’t say it wasn’t good for them. I’m saying it is not as good as what they had.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            I would agree with that. But it’s entirely beside the point; reservations are currently very much to keep whites (and everyone else) out.

          • mike

            ok. so you want all, or most or what percentage of America to be ‘white only’?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Personally, my primary concern is actually Europe, which should be 95%+ white.

            I am less committed to a white North America. I think the planet overall benefits from a white North America though, and anyone who ideologically opposes a white North America should bite the bullet that they are accepting a much, MUCH lower standard of living for the continent – as well as reduced aid and advancements to/for the rest of the planet – if that is what they want.

            But so long as EUROPE is being invaded, I will continue to defend white majorities in North America, because we have nowhere else to go.

          • mike

            Europe is being ‘invaded’?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Not militarily; but by any other definition of “invasion,” yes. It is. Do the majority of Europe’s NATIVE populations welcome mass non-white immigration? No. It is an invasion.

          • mike

            if the majority doesn’t support it, why is there not laws against it?
            let me guess. it’s my fault and the jews?

          • David Ashton

            No, the reasons are complicated. In the UK the political class certainly pushed “anti-racist” legislation at the behest of various minority lobbies, including the Board of Deputies of British Jews (this is fully documented) probably in the latter case because the most vigorous KBW agitation came from neonazi groups. There were token efforts to limit immigration, but there was an agreement by the main parties not to make it an election while simultaneously pro-immigration groups were agenda-networking in education, the media and some political parties like the Liberals and Labour Left, with a gradual upwards and outwards success which has made “equality and diversity” the official ideology of the “multicultural society” which has replaced the English nation, now reinforced by incremental legislation and police action against dissidents. Comparable forces have been at work in other EU countries, as in Canada and to some degree in the USA itself. In the mid-1980s we were falsely assured in Parliament that immigration had virtually ended, but in fact by various means and for various reasons it has exploded, with millions deliberately brought in during the Blair years to change the nature of society permanently (also documented), From the 1950s to the present opinion polls in Britain have expressed concern and opposition to immigration, but it continues with the support of business interests on one hand and PC ideologists on the other.

          • anony

            Indians are not required to live on reservations.

          • David Ashton

            There is a difference between allowing race-crossing because one believes in freedom, and in welcoming its possible consequences.

          • mike

            so you would limit freedom of association because of concern for its consequences.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            So, hump a white girl a few times. I don’t mean to be vulgar; however, if this matters so much to you, bring out your own, make your own. Who could possibly have a problem with that? Hint: No one at all.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            I don’t care if individuals oppose interracial marriage. Really, I don’t care. “Often” may mean something to you or those that care about your skin-tone. I don’t care. I do understand your concerns – however, I share no such concerns. How is that so problematic to you? Really, I don’t get it.

          • propagandaoftruth

            I recommend the Threefold Compact between parents and children, stated early and repeated regularly but not too often.

            ============================================

            If you marry or conceive child with or copulate/consort with someone of another race or ethnicity that I/we do not approve of (choose your own acceptable level of tolerance)…

            You will be dead to us. This means that:

            1. You will be disowned. You will not be recognized as a child of mine. Your children will not be recognized as my grandchildren.

            2. You will be shunned. You will not be welcome at any family events ever.

            3. You will most certainly be disinherited as will any of your progeny. We refuse to pass on our hard earned wealth to our existential enemies, and furthermore you will certainly not receive any further financial assistance of any kind ever.

            You will be dead to us.

            Furthermore, in our grief at the loss of our child, we may decide to “adopt” a worthy, down-and-out, struggling White or White family, and give them money, invite them to holidays, call them our children and their children our grandchildren.

            Sign here: _______________________ Date:______________

            ========================================

            That’s the kind of stuff serious race realist Whites need to hit their kids with.

      • John Smith

        How about just bring back segregation instead?

        • Dwight

          Separation, not segregation, is what we need. We need our own nation with a new constitution. Segregation means that large numbers of non-Whites are still in our nation but forcibly kept apart from us. As noted by Arthur Kemp re South Africa, that will not work for long. Separation is the only solution.

          • mike

            sounds like you should take up arms and try to conquer some island? not to give away your battle plan, but were are you targeting? Australia? Ireland? Iceland?

        • mike

          because it is immoral. are you not in favor of freedom? you want a white dictator too, well you are at it?

          • CM732

            I am in favor of freedom. The greatest risk to the White race is from within – for example John Smith.

          • John Smith

            So is letting negroes victimize white people. We managed to have segregation without dictatorship previously.

          • mike

            who is letting negroes victimize whites? you talking about OJ?
            yes, we had segregation without a dictatorship before. I remember.
            so that is a yes on segregation and a no on dictatorship? got it. so how is this segregation going to work. is it by neighborhood and city or by state or country? I’m assuming you will segregate the schools, but how about work? can you have black janitors? black mechanics? or would that be allowing them too much knowledge or position?
            like what would you do with Ben Carson?

          • John Smith

            Move them all to Mississippi and Alabama.

          • mike

            not the worst real estate in the world. they would have access to the gulf and the Mississippi. it might be a little cramped though. you are going from less than 8 million people to almost 40 million. maybe you best throw Georgia in the mix. no wait, I’m in Florida, that won’t work for me. how about you through in Arkansas and Louisiana?

          • Samuel Hathaway

            Please don’t send them this close to home.

          • IBWHITE

            You preach about freedom but know nothing about it.

          • mike

            ok. explain it to me. doesn’t freedom mean being allowed to make your own choices in life. doesn’t it allow for citizens to move around the country?

          • IBWHITE

            Well let me give you a hint. One form of freedom is being able to do what you wish with property that you purchase – as long as it does not endanger anyone else. My purchase of 100 acres and opening a White’s only theme park is freedom. People like yourself would deny me that right even though I am harming no one. Egalitarians, like yourself, only want to allow your limited version of freedom and then ridicule and scorn people who disagree.

          • mike

            wow an egalitarian, I’ve never been called that before. if it is an open to the public for-profit park you aren’t free to do that. all freedoms have limits. you can however have a private park which you only let in whites. look at Augusta, they didn’t let blacks in until the 90s and that was do to social pressure, not the government. they didn’t allow women until 2012.

            do you think there are any blacks in the Klan. we have organization here that don’t take black members.

            “limited version of freedom and then ridicule and scorn people who disagree” what scorn and ridicule have I espoused?

          • IBWHITE

            You earlier accused another poster of wanting a license to rape so don’t try and play innocent. Look, I think you are a fool and a typical leftist. I’m bored with the same old tired song and dance routine and will look to better conversation with others on this board.

          • mike

            yes, that was a ridiculous response to a ridiculous comment. the post made no sense.
            lol. I’ve never been called a leftist in my life. a fool, I get that a lot, usually from leftist.
            so if I don’t support your ‘right’ to discriminate I’m a leftist. Christ most everybody must be left of you, save john smith and Dwight. at least they have the balls to come out and say what they want and not pussyfoot around it with straw men.

          • listenupbub

            Freedom is not necessarily a good thing in and of itself. That is why the concept leads to seemingly no definite policy. It is like a scientific theory that can predict nothing.

            I prefer to argue on the basis of survival and the fulfillment of natural desires. Arguing with freedom of association is an interesting brain-teaser, but it is really a big maze.

        • CM732

          Segregation is an idea only pushed by those with no imagination of another way. We should follow the example of the Jews who have maintained their identity within other cultures.

          • anony

            That hasn’t always worked out too well for them.

          • CM732

            It will be a struggle. Maybe it will take us 2000 years to get our freedom back too. Are you up for it?

          • anony

            For sure, but we’ll have to become extremely tribal to accomplish it.

          • mike

            tribalism is bad. I say that often, especially when talking with muslims. looks like y’all are a lot like the muslims.

          • anony

            Who is y’all, keemosaby?

            Perhaps “tribal” was not the best word choice. Let’s put it this way: we’ll (that’s Whites) have to develop much more racial cohesiveness if we want to be as successful as the Jewish people. How’s that?

          • mike

            you and Dwight and howaboutthis and others here. you know, you all. white nationalists.
            you might want to aim a little higher than the jews. you do know there are only like 15 million jews in the world. and few of them are actually from the ‘tribe’. the Semitic jews are few and far between do to intermarriage with European jews. kind of ironic, isn’t it.
            talk about culture vs race, the jews are a culture of many races.

          • anony

            First of all, I don’t buy the 15 million number; I think it is higher. And yes, I understand a lot about the Jewish people and their racial makeup.

            Not sure what you mean by White nationalist. I am a race realist which means I acknowledge that race exists, acknowledge that different races have different and distinct attributes, and acknowledge that the vast majority of members of any race prefer to live amongst their own kind.

            Do you understand what this web site is about?

          • mike

            no I do not understand what this website is about. some are saying they want a law against interracial marriage. some say they want segregation.

            so you don’t want to create a white only nation?

          • David Ashton

            Put into the mix the books on the Jews by Richard Lynn, Shlomo Sand and Karl Kautsky for starters. “Semitic” is a linguistic term.

          • anony

            Perhaps Arab Muslims who are tribal, but not all muslims are as tribal as Arabs. There are a myriad of differences between Whites and Arabs not the least of which is IQ.

          • mike

            true, some tribes are more tribal than others. but the ummah is the world wide tribe of islam. and islam has rules against marrying non-muslims, at least for the women. the idea being that the male and by default his culture will dominate the family.

          • anony

            You’re mixing word usage. Typically, the word “tribe” is used to define a rather small group of people who are genetically closely related to the point of familial connections. So the ummah, being world-wide, would hardly fit the word “tribal” unless you’re speaking of the diaspora Jews, for example.

          • mike

            yes I am using the word tribe loosely. aren’t you? aren’t you considering whites to be a tribe?
            some of my comments are in moderation? do you have any idea why? are some words banned here? length? links?

          • mike

            so are you a white nationalist? you voted up Dwight’s comment that said, “Separation, not segregation, is what we need. We need our own nation with a new constitution. Segregation means that large numbers of non-Whites are still in our nation but forcibly kept apart from us. As noted by Arthur Kemp re South Africa, that will not work for long. Separation is the only solution.” sounds like the definition of a white nationalist?

          • David Ashton

            This generally correct regarding the religious community, but the Islamic religion has racial correlates, including the subcultural differences between the Arabs, Iranians, Bangladeshis and Malayans.

          • CM732

            Tribal is good but if we treat other groups badly or try to segregate ourselves we will be crushed (and we will deserve it). We need to educate our children to love their ancestry, developments made by their race, the uniqueness of their genetics and realize that these characteristics are great and it would be a loss to the world if it were eradicated.

            In short I want to belong to a group of White people who try to advance the world while respecting their background.

          • John Smith

            Identity is one thing, but criminal behavior by minorities is another great reason to separate them from us.

        • dmxinc

          How about just a right to associate and to exclude?

          Kind of like the world always used to be. Kind of like it still is in most non-White countries.

      • Dwight

        Absolutely.

        • mike

          so you are for the government telling the ‘ignorant’ people what to do for ‘their own good’?

        • CM732

          You are either a troll or totally against freedom.

        • Jason Lewis

          I think fathers disowning their daughters has been the biggest factor in stopping misegenation. Laws are useless.

      • CM732

        No way. I want everyone the freedom to be with anyone they want and to identify as they like. I am white and want to have white children like me. I have always felt this way. I know not everyone else feels like this and they deserve the freedom to choose as they please.

        • mike

          sounds perfectly reasonable to me. you only want to marry a Scandinavian, a German, an Italian, whatever, so be it.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            Oh, crap. I guess I messed up. You forgot to mention the Asian inspired Poles.

          • throttler

            What asian inspired Poles?

    • This may help sum up some of what is important. We need to exercise our ethnic rights under International law. We have as much right to exist as any other people on this planet. All who oppose White-existence, are the real-racist.

  • how about this

    “…Brazil now has an official policy of leaving untouched tribes alone if that’s at all possible. People living in the stone age should have the choice of staying there if that’s what they want.”

    This is a very important point. I was taught in school that a duty toward other races called the White Man’s Burden was an outdated 19th century attitude, but today many people seem fanatically in favor of it. Why should we interfere in other cultures, regardless of our intentions? Would we want them to try to “uplift” us? Even on Star Trek, a show which was full of pro-diversity material, they expressed this attitude as the Prime Directive. Do people now consider Star Trek racist?

    • mike

      yeah but kirk ignored the prime directive all the time. we don’t contact the primitive tribes because of concern for the introduction of species.
      and they are cool to study, it’s like looking a thousand years into the past.

    • GrahamSeibert

      It is a nice theory, and the Brazilians do a fairly good job of trying. The problem is human nature. Once the Indians have seen a shotgun, they don’t want to go hunting with clubs any more. Once they have seen a fishing pole, ditto catching them by hand. Even worse, they become as captivated by handheld, battery-powered digital games as anybody else.

      How you gonna keep ’em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paree?

  • Rurik

    Save the Whales? Save the White Males!

    • propagandaoftruth

      Shave the whales?

      Yeah, no White males, no welfare! See President Camacho elsewhere on this web site.

      Yo, representin’ in Souf Krakalaka…

    • Alden

      I used to have a pin that said that. I wore it for years until the plastic peeled off the metal.

  • Cecil Broomsted

    Bravo, Jared. One of your better pieces. This crystallises it for me. These are my concerns as well. The only real obstacles in our path to preserving our own kind are our own kind.

    And so there is not one politician in America–even among the ones who claim to be deeply conservative–who says he wants to conserve the founding stock of this country, who wants to conserve a majority-white United States.

    Yes, not one. You nailed it right there. This will have to be overcome, and I believe it will be. The only question for me is how much suffering/diversity will be required before we make our stand.

    • Trevor Pilsbury

      Exactly. The antidote to altruism is suffering. Altruism flourishes in times of plenty.

      • SevenSamurandwiches

        Why do you care? Are you not capable of planting your own seed? A seed, no matter how small, is far more important than a community that has great infighting by its own nature. Nothing wrong with the white people you care so much about; but, if they cannot congregate in a manner to your own satisfaction, why care? Herd mentality? Personal insecurity? DNA is King!!!

        • listenupbub

          We care because ideology is not as important necessarily as preserving the many other unique parts of our race.

          It is however true that whites are 1.5 times as “racist” based on ideology than on actual race.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            So, within your pattern of thought or world-view, ideology is less important than the other unique racial/physical parts? I just wanted to state that myself to be certain I understand from where you are coming.

            I don’t know, there are different types of people – some concerned with their physical structure, from hair color and eye color to even skull shape I would presume; and, others who would rather share an understanding of the world around them regardless of physical attributes; and, yet others who would prefer to preserve whatever institutions might be important to them – history, philosophy, religion, etc. I certainly understand that people gravitate toward those that they consider “like”; yet, not to sound too relativistic, that “like may know like” takes many different forms – physical, cultural, ethnic, ideological, spiritual, etc.

            I really don’t mind anyone preserving who “they” are, real or perceived. The interjection of hatred and discrimination, especially through politics, is what can get to me.

          • listenupbub

            I can talk all day about this stuff, but it might not be the time or place. I would love to present the reactionary ideology to you though in personal messages. It is an ideology not restricted to only whites. It works for all peoples.

            I promise I will not be intolerant or impatient like other commenters.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            Well, maybe one day we’ll find a more neutral ground than those that we ourselves seem to frequent. Too bad Disqus doesn’t have direct messaging. Oh, well. Take care and all that.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            By the way, I do have an anonymous e-mail: [email protected]

            Please feel free to create an anonymous e-mail for yourself if you wish, and do feel just as free to send me a note. I’ll override this reply in just a couple minutes so that I’m not bombarded.

          • listenupbub

            Okay that’s cool

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            I’ve edited above – just so you know.

    • Sparky

      I was somewhat amused at an article I read today about Australians being a little upset about a group of Muslims meeting in a nearby town and suggesting that non-Muslim women (meaning white Australian women) should wear hijabs in order to combat Islamophobia in Australia. The slightest thought of stopping Muslim immigration never occurred to them. Never crossed their minds at all.

      .

      • Irish

        I swear on a stack of bibles I saw a woman and her adult son taking a picture in front the entrance to Disney World last weekend dressed exactly like that..All one could see was her brown eyes..It was all I could do to not stop and take a picture of them it was so strange..It got to 87 degrees that day so as you can image myself, wife, kids & nearly everyone else I saw at the park was dressed in shorts

        • SevenSamurandwiches

          So? Apparently the woman in question can endure harsher conditions than others. Good for her – and, especially so if her apparel is a part of her cultural heritage. Yes, I’d be in shorts and a t-shirt too; however, I’m me … she is her.

          • Irish

            Have you heard the expression “When in Rome, do as the Romans”… Her culture is repugnant and facist.. There are thousands of websites you can go be provocative at, go to one where you’ll find like minded people..

          • mike

            I hear that a lot myself. ironic.
            but why do you want to be in an echo chamber? what fun is there in that? don’t you want to prove your point?

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            I suspect you are asking me to leave. If you are, I will. I was simply looking for a conversation this evening. But, if I’ve crossed some line or other, I will leave. Take care.

          • Alexandra1973

            Now it’s when in Rome, make them do as you do.

          • Dwight

            Or better, don’t allow them into Rome to begin with.

          • Samuel Hathaway

            … or London, or Paris..,. two formerly wonderfully classy European cities now falling under the Islamicists,.

        • mike

          yeah the Saudis are nuts. but at least the men grabbed the white robes and left the women in black. although not much funnier than men in white robes.
          unless of course you are actually in Europe.

          • throttler

            Thanks for pointing out that they are anti-female swine.

          • anony

            Or in the Vatican.

          • throttler

            Thank you for pointing out that they are anti-female swine.

          • mike

            I wouldn’t call them swine. that is insulting to pigs. pigs are smarter than Wahhabist. and they are more than anti-female. they are anti-anything that isn’t isalmic. there are muslim supremacists. they not only want to segregate the genders but the religions. they believe they have the greatest culture on the planet. they believe they know the law of god. I mean how arrogant can you be, right?

        • Sparky

          This is a sight I have never gotten used to. It’s creepy and doesn’t belong in the West. It is as alien as the people who brought it with them.

          Separation is the only path to peace.

      • mike

        I’m no fan of islam or the niqab, but you do know muslims were in Australia before the british? not really sure who is ‘invading’ who here?

      • Jason Lewis

        They should eat a ham steak to be more like us.

        • Samuel Hathaway

          Or maybe chase them all off by setting up a hog farm in the neighborhood.

          • Jason Lewis

            Like the guy in Texas? That was great. He had pig races on the weekends and invited the public out and sold pork hot dogs and ribs.

          • Samuel Hathaway

            We should all be Texans, then.

  • Usually Much Calmer

    Oh. I stopped reading this one 1/3 of the way through, too. I respect Mr. Taylor, but this is a reactive piece, and I do not agree with his framing at all.
    Conservation is NOT a universal good. No one wants to conserve castrati performances or, more recently, film photography ‘for it’s own sake’- it is very expensive in many ways. They do not teach phlogiston theory in college to expand your mind to other possibilities. If the western white way of life is not fit, I will not cry. It IS fit, we are making a mistake in egalitarianism in particular and altering our environment based on that mistake. By the time we collectively realize that mistake for what it is, it make be too late to reverse.

    • BlueSonicStreak

      Er. People have gone to some length to preserve the few recordings that still remain of castrati performances. And there are still enthusiasts of old film photography, I’m sure – the old methods took real skill, after all.

      Just…I don’t know if those were the best examples to make your point.

      • Usually Much Calmer

        I refer to the castrati performances themselves, not recordings.

        You can still buy film and film processing chemicals, so I believe people are still practicing film photography. However, I am unaware of any movement to ‘save film photography’.

        I think my examples served my point. But I appreciate your feedback, BSS.

        • BlueSonicStreak

          Amusingly enough, there IS such a movement re: film photography.

          Nevertheless, I think I now understand a bit better what you were driving at – last night I was not grokking it at all, as your examples didn’t make much sense to me.

          Correct me if I’m wrong again, but you are saying that if Western society is not good enough, then it SHOULD be replaced by an improved version…? And our mistake here is that there is no improved version to replace it with?

          I guess I would ask how we determine fitness in this case. Why would we not argue, for example, that hunter-gatherers are more “fit” because they come into conflict with the rest of the natural world less often?

          • Usually Much Calmer

            If there is a movement to ‘conserve the practice of film photography’ (Oh! Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the silver nitrate!) rather than just some people who still practice film photography, that’s pretty stupid. I’d be interested in a link if you have one.

            I don’t know what ‘good enough’ means. I like the west, but I’m biased, it’s MY culture. Fit, as used in the evolutionary context, is value free and simply means thriving or at the very least surviving in an ecology. Whites can dominate any environment on earth and can survive in space. We are earth’s apex predator. We have developed technologies for coping with all climates. Tsunamis, earthquakes, tornadoes are dealt with, not mastered, true. But these are all local events. There is no question that whites are ‘fit’. We will not lose out to other subspecies in an evolutionary struggle for a niche because they are more fit than we are.

            Our mistake is egalitarianism, charity, and a failure to understand that it requires WORK to keep entropy at bay. Remove whites and the world becomes Hobbesian in short order, except for the prehistoric isolated tribes. Witness Zimbabwe and South Africa. Or the Chinese harvesting organs from prisoners while they are still alive or selling each other baby formula that is simply chalk water from which infants die.

            Nothing last forever. There is no reason why whites or the west should last forever. So I reject that kind of argument. But there is absolutely no reason why we should be committing suicide right now either. That’s the argument to make, as I see it.

            I hope that explains my position. Thank you for asking about it

  • De Doc

    Regarding Mr. Taylor’s comment about Indigenous New Guinean contributions to the world, do penis gourd body prostheses count?

    • Irish

      I do think they’ve given up on the cannibalism, but I shan’t be flying over there to find out definitively.

      • John Smith

        Too late for Michael Rockefeller, but one less of the liberal elite isn’t a bad outcome in the scheme of things.

      • GrahamSeibert

        Aren’t they still picking bits of Michael Rockefeller out of their teeth? I’m with you. Save the airfare.

  • puffdaddy

    DO you really think people are waking up and by the time they do, won’t it be too late?

    • Jason Lewis

      I’m afraid so.

  • SevenSamurandwiches

    Jared Taylor,

    You clearly wish to preserve that which you call your own. Most folks do. In my view, “Your own”, or “Our own”, or “Their own” is largely a matter of perspective, which you don’t seem to wish to permit definition by individual determination. Rugged individualism is but a memory – nonetheless, some of us still live by that notion – if only because we reject the herd, those that might drag us further into the depths of shortsightedness. I am not a crocodile – nor, as an American, am I pure white. I do trust that you wish not to incite some sort of whack race war; however, some of your followers are so impassioned that they, themselves, just might not mind such an event – but, rather that they’d invite it. How can we parse here? To each his own? DNA is king. Let us all just place our seeds where we wish to place them. Conservation concerns many. Let the many do their thing. Those who might be more concerned with paternal or maternal, or even autosomal, DNA – why not let them do their own thing without governance? Just a simple question for you.

    Thanks.

    • Irish

      Taylor isn’t looking for some theorised government intervention to keep White peoples, and White-Western culture together..He’s hoping to awaken White folks up to the importance of our survival, and saving ourselves.

      • mike

        sounds to me like he is asking for “government intervention”. doesn’t he want to return to what he claims to be early pro-European immigration laws?

        • Irish

          They were not early..They were changed for the first time ever in 1965..America was a White Nation state until then. A extension of Europe as it were.

          • mike

            well he says this: “It’s well known that the very first immigration law, passed by the very first congress that was called after the ratification of the Constitution, restricted naturalization to “free white persons.””
            of course that isn’t an immigration law.
            but anyways, when America was declare in 1776 how many white do you think were on the continent?
            so if it was an extension of Europe, why does Europe get to extend? there were people already here. should the go extinct? you know, the Navajos? I’m in Florida, there are only like 12,000 Seminoles left. do you hear them crying about racial genocide?

          • Sparky

            You don’t understand history very well. You seem to be unacquainted with the realities of life hundreds of years ago. How do you suppose the various nations and territories were carved out? Did the various indian tribes sprout out of the ground in their own territory or did they slaughter each other for domination over the best lands?

            You are way behind the curve with your learning. A good place to start is right here where you will learn a thing or two about Amerindians and how life really was …..

            http://www.counter-currents.Com/2014/10/columbus-day-specialindigenous-peoples-day/

          • John Smith

            Look at what the Iroquois did to their neighbors starting in the 17th C. “Beaver Wars,” or wonder how the Sioux came to move from the woodlands near the Great Lakes onto the plains.

          • Dwight

            That’s right. People don’t realize that as “savage” as whites seem to have been back in the colonial times, they were remarkably civilized compared to any other race of people. It was whites who brought civilized living standards to the planet. Whites were the first race in history to outlaw slavery etc. etc.

          • mike

            of course Indians conquered each other. were did I say they didn’t. the Iroquois conquered neighboring tribes to become a large ‘nation’. the Pawnee and the Sioux in the northern planes. the Comanche down in texas. they were the reason the Mexicans invited in white settlers into texas and the development of the 6shooter was the main reason the whites were able to take texas from them.
            so how many whites do you think were in the western hemisphere in 1776?

            and what does the ‘right of conquest’ have to do with American immigration law?

          • anony

            “so if it was an extension of Europe, why does Europe get to extend? ”

            Europe “got to extend” because it could. Full stop.

      • SevenSamurandwiches

        OK, thanks. Apparently I’ve misunderstood. Does this mean that he has any understanding of, or concern for, those that may disagree – or at least do not align with him in thought. That is the part that I’m most lost on.

        • Irish

          He’s had a keynote speaker at American Renaissance Conventions married to Asian women if that answers your question. .He wants the lies egalitarians tell exposed for what they are. The peoples of this globe are different in myriad ways. People prefer to live among their own. Diversity causes conflict, and is certainly not a advantage.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            People absolutely do prefer to live among their own – no doubts about that whatsoever. I’m not an egalitarian – I’m a selfish capitalist. Have I misunderstood your point? If I have, please clarify – I’m new to this arena. Color/melanin means little to me – quality of life and immortality through spawn means a great deal more … at least to me. Nonetheless, I suspect I’ve missed your point. I’m quite happy to discuss this.

          • John Smith

            Genetics and morphology are linked. Color/melanin content don’t mean anything by themselves, but the traits necessary for the development of civilization are shared to a greater extent among the less-pigmented peoples of the Earth, like Asians and whites. Blacks seem to possess them to a far lesser extent. Primary among these traits is intelligence, which is higher for whites and Asians and significantly lower for blacks, on average (and excluding the atypical example to “prove” that an exception is the rule).

          • Dwight

            “Color/melanin means little to me”

            And therein lies your lack of understanding. For you, race is merely a social construct, nations are merely social arrangements in which to conduct business at maximum profit. You have no racial identity other than the “human race.” All people are basically interchangeable and all differences can be ironed out by simple discussion. Right. The brainwashing is deep. Hang around awhile, try not to offend the regulars, and with time, you might find yourself enlightened by the reality of racial truths.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            Dwight, I get your point. I am an odd-ball who thinks that race is not a social construct. White means little to me, however. White is not a race. We must reduce much further. Somehow, someway, the Italians and Greeks have become white. WTF? The Italians and the Greeks, nor most of the Spaniards are White. WTF?

          • Irish

            If Skin tone meens little to you, and immortality through offspring mean a great deal. Than with apologies you truly have “missed the point”..

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            I do miss the point. I’m selfish like that. I thought I was asked to leave. I have no problem walking away. Should you wish to continue a conversation I will. If not, I’m OK with that too.

          • Irish

            It was late last night and I needed the rest..You are apparently totally unfamiliar with White racial nationalism. As well as the decades of scientific research done on racial differences..It strikes me as nearly impossible that one can be both concerned about their posterity, but yet unconcerned with race & ethnicity.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            Irish, I’m not totally unfamiliar with White racial nationalism. I get it; but, I don’t get it. I’m an American mutt. I don’t care if someone wishes to promote or advocate for their own however they define that, really. I get it; but, I don’t get it though. That’s on me. My genes in little ones provides me a particular immortality that others might not understand. I’ve permitted the continuation of my paternal line. Pretty short, pretty simple – that’s me. Like it, don’t like it – I likely cannot please you in these regards … and, that’s OK by me. We disagree – oh well.

          • Irish

            The modern world with all that that means was almost wholly invented by people of European ancestry. Look around, take a simple inventory, and attempt to refute it.. That’s what the IT , is about.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            I’m not certain that I understand your statement. I don’t know what the “IT” is. Either way, hadn’t you asked me to leave this thread last night? I’m happy to do so. I don’t want to troll. I don’t wish to appear to be a troll. I’m happy to try to understand your thought if I can. I’m happy to try to let you understand my thought if you may. I do think I was asked to leave. I don’t wanna mess up a thread.

          • SevenSamurandwiches

            Irish, ask me away again – I will leave. Don’t ask me away, I’ll talk – whether or not we come to any understanding or agreement. I don’t want to troll you and/or others here – though it may seem otherwise. Trolling is not my gig.

    • Sparky

      Try fighting a war with your “rugged individualism.” A bunch of scattered individuals and who think as such are no match for those banded together for their own common interests. If you ever have the misfortune of seeing the inside of a prison, see how far your “rugged individualism” will get you.

    • listenupbub

      There are a few issues:

      1. Cultural. Multiculturalism causes a massive death in culture. For example, Asians in America simply cannot seriously celebrate their holidays, such as Chinese New Year, without feeling dumb. Likewise, whites do not really even talk about Easter anymore.

      The loss of culture means the loss of many cultural activities, which means the loss of happiness. It seems to me that different races have different emotionalities, which means that you simply cannot get any old white person to start acting like black people and expect them to like it. It is not the way we are. It seems that cultures which organically arise in genetically similar people are best at making the people happy, whereas any “culture” that arises (though this doesn’t happen) in a multicultural atmosphere will not hit our buttons correctly.

      I, for example, love the way whites play the fiddle in folk music. I also love celtic music. I doubt many Asians or blacks do. There is little probability that either of these music styles will ever gain enough ground in our country to really develop to their full potential.

      2. You want us to “live and let live.” So, for someone like me, who wants white descendants, how do I make sure my bloodline does not get absorbed into the amerindian and black bloodlines if I do not live in a white country?

      Add to this the unfortunate truth that whites are the most desirable of all races.

      3. As far as people who want to race mix (a.k.a. blacks who want to have a chance to screw as many white girls as possible), that is fine. I would suggest you have a small multicultural homeland for multicultural people like yourselves who want to race-mix, and let people like me have a homeland. However, there is no more white homeland.

      Even better, people could get mail-order spouses/prostitutes. That way, every country could enjoy their unique culture, and the black men who cannot stand living without white p**** can find some way to get a white girl to meet their needs.

      • SevenSamurandwiches

        Wow, that’s too much for me to absorb tonight. I’ll re-read as I find time.

        Small note though: Yes, I want people to live and let live, to each his own – part of my own cultural heritage directs me to that end. I think you’re all good in having white descendants. I would think in doing so, and instilling your beliefs in your children, you’d have a pretty good chance of having many generations of white descendants.

  • It is rather amusing to speculate on what would happen if droves of whites began settling in and demographically transforming Mexico.

    It happened once; they revolted away from Mexico City and pledged allegiance to Washington. That territory was and is called Texas.

    The loss of so much of their land must have been worth the culturally enrichment for Mexico.

    • mike

      “The loss of so much of their land must have been worth the culturally enrichment for Mexico.” that doesn’t make any sense.

      • It’s sarcasm.

        • Jason Lewis

          The cartels would be pushed out of our areas. Mexico would be safer and more prosperous.

    • John Smith

      They don’t allow foreigners to own property, just lease it.

      • mike

        I don’t think that is true. foreigners can’t buy property in the ‘restricted zone’ not the entire country. the restricted zone is within a certain distance of the coast line. it is either 500 feet or a mile or maybe even 5 miles.
        anyway, that is being reviewed right now. the new government wants to eliminate that law.

  • mike

    look, there is no doubt that the white race, if you define that as a lack of melon in the skin, will most likely disappear. not sure why that is problematic? or maybe if Africans move north, they will evolve to adapt to the climate and lose melon. so if you actually believe in evolution, that races are distinct due to adaptation to environment, the white race will forever ‘re’-evolve in the north.
    not really sure what the beef is?

    • LaQueefa Matumba

      Water rises to it’s own level

      • mike

        yes, so perhaps the idea of natural selection is to create one successful race, and not a myriad of them.

        • anony

          And perhaps not.

          Mixing the races will reduce the average IQ of humanity. We need more intelligence not less of it.

          • mike

            why would it reduce the average?

          • anony

            Simply study, just a little, the bell curve of IQ for the different races, and it will become clear to you.

          • mike

            I read ‘the bell curve’ when it came out in the 90s. so if Asians have an average IQ of 105 and whites 100 and blacks 85, how does inter breeding lower the average?
            if an Asian marries an African and they have a child, if you presume the dna from the Asian and African mingle to create a child that is averaged between them, and I’m not too sure that is how it works. then the child’s IQ would be 95. the same average as the two adults. 105 +85 = 190 divided by 2 = 95.
            and there are a lot more Asians then there are African, so the average would be raised over generations. if the next Asian marries a mixed Asian/African you will start with 105 and 95 so the average would be 100 now. than the next full Asian breeds with the 3/4 Asian 1/4 African and you get to 102.5
            it’s going up not down.

          • anony

            I wasn’t referring to the book, but to the actual bell curves of IQ for different human populations.

            Additionally, you should learn a little something about “regression to the mean”, which is a statistical concept.

          • mike

            ah yes, regression to the mean. but the ‘variable’ is not to an extreme it is in fact the average. I didn’t take someone with a 185 IQ and pair them with someone with an average IQ. I took two averages, hardly defined as an ‘extreme variable’.
            not sure that concept is applicable here.

          • anony

            You conveniently left out the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans which hovers between 65 and 70. There are a lot of sub-Saharans. In addition, we need to add in the Australian Aboriginals, which average is even lower than the sub-Saharans. Go figure.

          • mike

            go figure. lol. it makes perfect sense that people who live in more primitive societies don’t have as high IQ’s. when all you have to learn is how to make a spear, your IQ isn’t going to rise very much.
            let me ask you this. if I have identical twins and I put one in the crib and never have any more then minimal interactions with it than feeding and such. but the other I read to and play with an give it building blocks and talk about shapes and colors and numbers. I send the one to school and the other I make work the fields, say pick cotton. do you think their IQ would test the same at age 6? 12? 20?

          • anony

            Twin studies abound. IQ measures innate ability. The nature/nurture issue has been resolved.

          • mike

            so they would test the same? have the same IQ?
            so which is it? nature or nurture?

          • anony

            The studies I had in mind were the ones wherein the twins were separated at birth yet over the years displayed remarkably similar proclivities. And yes, I think the evidence shows overwhelmingly that IQ is innate.

          • mike

            yes I understand there have been twins separated at birth. and yes IQ is innate. but our ability to measure it limited. and one’s ability to live up to their full potential is clearly affected by nurture.
            you do know there have been studies among Europeans that have seen an increase in IQ in like 20 years. the east germans under communism showed low IQ compared to the west germans. should that ‘tribe’ show the same IQ? then after reunification they leveled out with the west germans.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            You clearly DIDN’T read The Bell Curve, or you would understand that almost everything you’ve said here is wrong. IQ is not a measure of knowledge. It is a measure of innate mental ability, which does not depend on how much you know.

            Obviously if someone is deprived of basics like human interaction, that will stunt their IQ because their brain will not develop properly. No one is disputing that, and it is not relevant to the argument.

            Unz’s arguments have been debated here. Search the archives.

            Successful African immigrants here reflect Africa’s horrible brain-drain problem. They are not a random selection of the African population.

          • mike

            when did I said IQ is a measurement of knowledge. knowledge and intelligence are two very different things.

            most question on IQ tests are about spatial relationships and problem solving.

            “Obviously if someone is deprived of basics like human interaction, that will stunt their IQ because their brain will not develop properly. No one is disputing that, and it is not relevant to the argument.” of course that is relevant to the argument. it is germane to the argument.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            You said, “when all you have to learn is how to make a spear, your IQ isn’t going to rise very much.” That implies that increased knowledge raises IQ. There is no evidence that increased knowledge can raise IQ significantly.

            of course that is relevant to the argument. it is germane to the argument.

            No it isn’t, because the racial IQ gaps we are discussing are the ones that STILL exist between peoples who have not been deprived of basics.

          • mike

            “if someone is deprived of basics like human interaction, that will stunt their IQ because their”
            so does that not extrapolate out to a person you doesn’t exercise his brain or little is demanded of his brain, will also have a stunted IQ? early brain development is extremely important. a babies brain is like a sponge, literally. if the baby spend most of the day in a papoose strapped to mom’s back while she works the filed. it is reasonable to expect at age 6 the child will have a lower IQ to a child how was read to and played with block and different shapes and colors.
            anony was talking about Australian aborigines. what year study s/he was referring to I don’t know, but I expect it to be pre 70s.
            do you think people are getting smarter?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Nope, that’s not reasonable. Nothing about playing with blocks as a child raises your IQ. That is nonsense.

            A child who is strapped to their mother, receives much of her touch and care, and who is talked to throughout the day will likely reach their full potential. Blocks or no.

            As for the Flynn effect, I know there are articles here addressing why we’re supposedly getting smarter. I would suggest searching them up, as I can’t continue this. I have to go to work now.

          • mike

            ah yes, the Flynn effect. I’ve heard of it, not that familiar with it though. so you don’t think diet and social interaction can raise IQ? it is locked in the genes. you have heard of epigenetics, right.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            I said you will not reach full potential if things like diet and social interaction are not adequate. Can you even read? We are seriously wasting our time on Special Ed kid like you.

          • throttler

            Black people have been going to school in the US for a while now, and they are still not as smart as whites for the most part.

          • mike

            that is true. and that may be do to genetics or it may be do to their culture. many blacks put little emphasis on education and squander the opportunities that America provides. ironically, African immigrants, like many immigrants, often excel in school.
            so do you think the twins will test the same?

    • John Smith

      *melanin

      • mike

        yeah I tried to edit that like 3 times. didn’t take?

      • mike

        yeah, I tried to edit that like 3 times. didn’t take.

    • The Dude

      Today, there is no selective pressure anymore for populations in higher latitudes to “go white”. And that’s simply because no one is dying of vitamin D definiciency anymore.

      The white race is obviously not just people with pale skin. Europeans can also be distinguished from African through bone structure, lineage, as well as other cultural traits. And the desire of that millenia-old distinct race of humans to preserve itself is legitimate.

      • mike

        ok. so if there is no environmental pressure to be white, why worry about it? yes there is more to race than skin color, but that is the most obvious outward sign. so you are against high cheek bones? I have a brother-in-law who claims to be 1/16th native America. but his last name is McKinnerny. is he part of your white race or not?

        “as well as other cultural traits” culture and race are two very different things.

        • The Dude

          I worry about it because we’re in decline and being overwhelmed by other races.

          I’m not against high cheekbones. I just don’t want them to expand at my expense.

          I’m not a purist, so I guess 15/16th white is white.

          People generally transport their culture wherever they expand. Wherever Europeans (whites) expanded, they extended their European culture (or a subset thereof) with them.

    • anony

      Wow, I’m sure glad I don’t have melons in my skin.

      “not sure why that is problematic?”

      It’s problematic because race matters, and race is not just about melon (sic) in the skin, it goes to the very core of the bones and beyond, to the DNA.

      Civilizations and culture are some of the physical manifestations of DNA. I much prefer the culture of western Europe to Kenya or Uganda.

      I want my grandchildren to look like my grandparents. Most honest people do.

      Race matters.

      • mike

        yes race is held in the dna. why is it important to have your kids look like you? or your grand kids look like your grandparents? so if your parents have black hair you wouldn’t marry someone with red hair or blonde hair?
        yes, from what little I know of Kenyan or Ugandan, I too prefer western European culture. but culture and race are too very different things.

        • anony

          ” but culture and race are too very different things.”

          DNA = race = culture.

          • mike

            sorry, what was silly about that question? I’ve been thinking about an incident about 10 years ago. my oldest sister married a greek. we are of german descent. she had he house remodeled one summer and lived out on the beach for a couple of months. so I was at her house for a pool party and was sitting on the couch. this little boy was up on the swing set/play house thing. I couldn’t see his head and I thought to my self who is that black kid. my sister lives in a very white neighborhood. so I bent down to see out the sliding glass door at an angle so I could see his face. turned out is was my nephew. so I said to my sister, ‘you might want to get alex in out of the sun, I thought he was a black kid. she and my other sister who was sitting next to her started to laugh. and then she told us that he came home crying from school one day because another kid asked him what he ‘was’ and didn’t believe him when he said he was white. she said the boy said ‘I don’t know what you are, but you are no white boy’.
            the other funny thing is that my oldest brother is married to a Filipino. and his kids don’t stand out in the photos like alex does.
            and how does race = culture?

          • anony

            “and how does race = culture?”

            Now I know you’re being willfully obtuse.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Seems like your family does bed lower races. Filipino. lol, your family needs some racial indoctrination.

          • mike

            she is pretty short. not sure if that makes he a lower race? do you consider the greeks or the Spanish to be whites?

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Yes Greeks and Spanish are white, but you have to be careful about that because some could have negro blood and also arab blood. that is why Madison Grant did not want them immigrating to the US.

      • CM732

        Yes most people say that they want their descendants to look like them. Usually in hushed tones and with a slightly embarrassed look on their face. I have had this discussion many, many times.

        • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

          Not me. When a black girl asked me if I will marry a woman out of my race, I flatly told her that I do not since I do not want my kids wearing their pants down and having that awful dreadlocks and dorags.

          • Samuel Hathaway

            What kind of reaction did you get when you stated quite frankly that you would not marry out of your race?

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            She was a bit stunned and then she laughed because she knows that I do not like black culture and I have my standards.

          • Samuel Hathaway

            You’re bold in providing a direct, honest answer to that one. I never get drawn into those types of discussions, ever. Race is off the table in talking to blacks, as I have no interest in discussing anything with them at all unless very briefly on innocuous topics.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            I know this girl. That is why I was very candid with her. I hate travelling by bus because I feel I am in Africa and also disgusted seeing all these negresses pregnant with their welfare babies and tired of hearingbad language and cell phone convserations loudly next to me. With those negroes I would give a very diplomatic answer.

    • CM732

      I don’t want my race to die out. Why can’t you understand that? And I believe in freedom for everyone of every race. What is the problem.

      • mike

        I understand your position. but I don’t think the white race is in danger of dying out anytime soon. if you are saying that a ‘white america’ is in danger of dying out, then I would agree with you.
        but there has to be more whites on the planet then ever before, don’t you think?
        so you don’t agree with anony and Dwight, with their white nationalism? but you want your kids to look like you.

        • CM732

          I want my race to maintain it’s identity. We all have different ideas of what form that would be and everyone is entitled to their own opinion so I can’t say it is the same as anony or Dwights.

          • mike

            ok. why do you think the white race is going extinct?

          • Diversity Fatigue

            This is now a typical classroom in London ….

            .

          • mike

            right. but London is only one city in the world. as is New York.

            so how many whites are there in the world?

            “The 2011 census recorded that 2,998,264 people or 36.7% of London’s population are foreign-born making London the city with the second largest immigrant population, behind New York City, in terms of absolute numbers. The table to the right shows the most common countries of birth of London residents. Note that some of the German-born population, in 18th position, are British citizens from birth born to parents serving in the British Armed Forces in Germany”

          • Diversity Fatigue

            I think your main argument is that race doesn’t matter. That is exactly what our youth have heen brainwashed with in the schools and pop culture. I disagree with that. The evidence is that race profoundly matters. Compare the civilizations built by the different races. What meaningful advances in medicine and science have been made by the different races? How has civilization been improved for the betterment of all mankind and which races brought those things about? Which forms of government and legal systems do most people on the planet prefer to live under and which race devised such systems?

            For you, none of that matters. Congolese Africans could just have easily put a man on the moon as any Europeans. All the great scientists, writers, painters, and composers could have been Chinese or Korean. The marvels of modern medicine and the exploration of space, electricity, and splitting the atom were just around the corner for Guatemalans and Mexicans.

            Keep dreaming kid…

          • mike

            yes, race doesn’t matter. whether I have black hair and brown eyes of blonde hair and blue eyes, doesn’t matter. again you, like others, are conflating race with culture. culture is extremely powerful and important. medicine, science and governance has nothing to do with skin color or any racial trait.
            you have heard of the dark ages? were is it you think Arabic numbers came from. one hint, not the arabs.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Mike, change your name to Mkwame. Every race goes through the dark ages. Europe had great civilizations thousands of years ago and then it fell and had the dark ages and then it came back up and changed the world. You are using a computer because of a white man. If the Hindus as you claim invented the number system, then why are they not so advanced and their country is a hellhole like a third world cesspool is.

          • mike

            yes I’m using a computer because of a white man. whites have created the greatest scientific advancements in the world. and tesla was an immigrant. yes the hindus came up with the concept of zero. although 3 weeks ago I was visiting my brother and his low race wife and half breed kids, although they may actually have more European in them than many ‘whites’ in America. anyway he claimed the mayans came up with zero. I never did google it. thanks for reminding me.
            the Indians (sub-continent) also had the firs sewer system. I forget the civilization, began with an H I think. like you say, everyone has their dark ages. and I think the Mughal invasion from the Muslims and then the British empire set them back a bit. but no doubt India is a hellhole.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Mike, due to the British invasion, India became prosperous. It was a great civilization before that, but still a hellhole due to the caste system and widow burning. So if you like burning your women, then I guess you move back to the dark ages when India loves doing that. The Brits stopped that. They also introduced modern medicine and universities to the Indians.
            Looks like your brother has a low race mind. I too have heard that the Mayans came with the concept of 0 and other astrological stuff. Why aren’t you married??
            Stop living in America and move to a third world hellhole.

          • mike

            sati. yes, not only a hindu goddess but the tradition of the widow throwing he self on her husbands funeral pyre. and no doubt the caste system is bad. but then again having a high caste that doesn’t have to work the fields may have given them time to pursue more academic endeavors. kind of like European monks.
            i’ll tell my brother the next time I see him about his low race mind. I do own land in Belize. my days in America may be numbered.
            no white woman will marry me. and I don’t want to be a race traitor.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Well move to Belize and stay there. We do not need race traitors like you here. Also good for you for not bedding down with non whites.

          • Samuel Hathaway

            Some of us still like to refer to Beliz as, “British Honduras.”

          • mike

            yes it was. so do you still refer to America as ‘the colonies’.

          • 李冠毅

            The civilization you’re talking about is the Indus Valley Civilization, the area now known as Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan. And yes, that place was the most advanced civilization in the world at one time. The Hindus had the most advanced sewage system in the world at that time, the complexity of which would not be matched until ancient Roman times about a thousand years later. They also had the most advanced medicine in the world at that time. As early as the 6th century BCE, they had developed artificial limbs, bone fracture repair, brain surgery, Caesarean section, cataract surgery, ear surgery, plastic surgery, urinary stone removal, and perhaps even smallpox inoculation (see the Sushruta Samhita). In fact, Hindu medicine was so advanced that Hippocrates himself traveled to Indus Valley to learn from Hindu physicians. Yes, Hippocrates was not actually the father of medicine. The number zero and our modern concept of numerals originated in Indus Valley, though English speakers mistakenly call it “Arabic numerals” (as it was introduced to the West by the Arabs), technically it should be called “Hindu numerals”. The Hindus were also the first to document the theory of gravity, thousands of years before Issac Newton proved it.

          • mike

            yes, from wiki: “The ancient cities of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro of the Indus Valley civilization constructed complex networks of brick-lined sewage drains from around 2600 BC and also had outdoor flush toilets connected to this network.”
            and I googled zero. there is not a consensus on it, some claim the Babylonians came up with it first and it migrated down to the hindus. another guy says the Samarians actually had it 4 to 5,000 years ago. but they do say the mayans independently developed it. anyway, what you are saying is that the ancient whites learned from others? next you are going to try to convince me the Chinese invented stuff?

          • Samuel Hathaway

            Speaking of the number 0, zero, Scientific American has some interesting commentary on the matter. I see above that the number zero orginiated in the Indus Valley. The first recorded use of zero was 3 B.C. in Mesopotamia, 4 A.D. in Mesoamerica (Mayan Indians) and India in the mid-5th century. Zero reached China in the 8th century but not to Europe till the 12th century.

            quite possibly zero originated in the Indus Valley as you pointed out, although the first recorded use of zero is documented in Mesopotamia.

          • Jason Lewis

            Somewhere in America this picture is giving someone a warm fuzzy inside.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            I had trouble believing this image, so I Googled for the demographics of London. Shocked to discover there’s now fewer whites in London than there is in America! LONDON, ENGLAND. What on Earth?!

            Amongst children, more than two-third are non-white now? Stomach-churning. England is essentially lost, at least for the time being.

          • CM732

            Because political correctness has stopped us from being allowed to identify as a distinct identity.

          • mike

            so it has nothing to do with population? it is simply a labeling issue? so the psychological studies cited here that asked high school kids to identify their race, and give them the option of ‘white’ aren’t allowed? the US census lists white as a race, doesn’t it? maybe they changed it to European but I don’t think so. Hispanics can identify as white.

          • CM732

            Are you asking a question or making a statement?

          • mike

            I’m asking a question. well multiple questions.
            1. does your claim of white identity being ‘eliminated’, have anything to do with population numbers?
            2. are you claiming white genocide because people aren’t ‘allowed’ to identify themselves as whites?
            3. were do you get the idea that whites can’t call themselves white?
            4. does the US census form not still have ‘white’ as a choice for racial identification?

          • CM732

            1. Yes the percentage of white people is falling in relation to the overall population.
            2. I am claiming white genocide as it is politically incorrect to identify as white and publicly state that you want your racial group to continue (unlike other groups).
            3. I understand that white people can call themselves white but even identifying as white in public is discouraged. This opinion is formed by daily interactions with others.
            4. The US census form does have white as a choice?

            I don’t think you understand my point that there are pressures that are media/policy driven that undermine white identity that do not exist for other groups.

          • mike

            you have very different daily interactions than I do then. I identify people as white in public all the time. I guess I’m not feeling the same pressure that you are. where do you live?

          • CM732

            I live in the same world as you.

          • mike

            yes I figured you were on earth. I live in tampa bay florida, and we identify people by race all the time.

          • CM732

            Thanks. I was wondering if you were on the same planet as me.

          • mike

            we are on the same planet. and so are your fellow white nationalists, or maybe you aren’t a white national. I still don’t get what you want. Dwight and john smith have clearly stated their desires for total separation. for the establishment of a ‘white only’ nation. anony has stated it quite explicitly, but has voted up some comments that would suggest agreement.
            do you want, as ibwhite said, a sizable portion of America carved out for whites only?
            do you want to be able to refuse service to blacks? rental units?

          • CM732

            No. I just want my race to live on (is this really to hard to imagine?). I want to have a family with a European background like myself and to teach them to have respect for their background.

            You seem to have a caricature in your mind of people like me. I personally despise whites who want to deny other races the freedom to live where they please and interact with whoever they choose. They should not complain when they are treated poorly by other races.

          • mike

            not hard to imagine at all. what caricature? what has been said, has been said. do you not read the whole page. clearly there is a ‘white nationalist’ movement. I personally didn’t think anyone took it seriously. then samuraadsanwiches commented about he WNs on another blog and I asked what WNs are. then he pointed out this blog. so here I am.
            anyway, just trying to ascertain how you mean to preserve the white race. others look to do it through force and coercion. so do you think you are more the rule or the exception in this movement. or do you not even consider yourself in this movement. this guy jarod taylor was mentioned on the wiki page for ‘white nationalists’.

          • CM732

            Looking at your comments I don’t think you got on this page by chance. I don’t identify as a ‘white nationalist’. I would say I am the rule from people I talk to but I don’t know anyone personally on here so I can’t really say. I think force and coercion would be fatal to keeping our race as an identity. We should do it through reasoned discussion.

          • mike

            I didn’t say it was by chance. samurandsanwiches linked it.
            ok. so are you a member in any organizations? like a society, you know, german American, polish/Italian/whatever.
            maybe you should try to work to get all the European American groups to unite?

          • CM732

            I don’t belong to organizations. I see everyones opinion on this as a matter of personal choice. I am just trying to put forward my views on a forum that talks about the issues I like to discuss.

  • Irish

    My history is just fine. prior to the 1965 “Family reunification act” Hispanics were a tiny percentage of the U.S. population. Our large minority was Blacks at 11% at the time..When farmers needed crops brought in, we brought in cheap Mexican labor. When the economy slowed down a bit we sent them home. Google “Operation Wet back” 200,000 were loaded on trains and shipped south in the 1950’s.

    • mike

      yes we have always deported illegal aliens, although sometimes with more enthusiasm then other. first in the 50s wanted them back. second I was talking about the illegal deportation of actual Americans during the great depression. and third, America wasn’t a ‘white nation’ until whites killed all the natives.

      • Irish

        Your confusing apples & oranges..The people who came to Colonial America and later made the Westward Expansion from Europe were Settlers NOT immigrants..They came to a very thinly populated land whose inhabitants were largely hunter gatherers..Ftr most Indians died of disease prior to ever seeing a White person, though I concede those diseases to which they had no immunity did come with us from Europe.

        • mike

          settlers/immigrants, six/half a dozen. so you think the Indians welcomed the settlers? did they think the land was ‘thinly populated’?
          yes, disease killed most western hemisphere natives. so does that make America a ‘white nation’? many Europeans where killed by the plague. half the population was decimated. does that mean that god wanted to kill the whites? do you believe in god?
          sounds like you believe in manifest destiny? yet, “irish need not apply”. funny at one point you were the unwelcome ‘settlers’.

          • throttler

            Sorry, but white people conquered the Indians. In those days the advanced people were not that interested in conserving primitive people.

          • mike

            yes the white people conquered the Indians. yes in those days the white Christians wanted to conquer, enslave, convert or kill the primitive people.

          • throttler

            You act like Middle-east Muslims would not have done that and that only white Christians would.You are riddled with white guilt that you should purge yourself of. There is nothing dumber than a white anti-white.

          • mike

            I’m not acting like that at all. of course the muslims conquered all they could. same with the Mongols. native American tribes conquered the weaker. the Aztecs, Incans, Mayans. obviously if any other group, like the Europeans, had managed to circumnavigate the globe they would have done the same thing. I don’t have these bit of white guilt. I understand times have changed. social norms have changed. the age of conquest is mostly behind us. obviously if you are big enough and strong enough you can still conquer land: see Russia and Crimea: China and Tibet. but if you are small and weak and the strong don’t want you to, you can’t: Iraq and Kuwait: the Falklands: Yugoslavia.

          • anony

            Basic rule: If you can take land and hold it, it’s yours.

            When Whites came to the Americas, they were confronted with stone-age peoples. They took the land, and put it to productive use. Nothing else needs to be said.

            “That’s life in the big city”, as they say. Don’t like it, tough.

          • mike

            yes I understand the concept of conquest.
            “Don’t like it, tough.” I’m not the one crying about being in the big city with the non-whites. times have changed in the big city. if you don’t like it, tough. lol.

          • anony

            Who is crying about being in the big city?

          • mike

            no one is literally crying about being in the big city. I was using your phrase. you say that is life in the big city referring to whites conquering Indians. I’m using it to refer to current immigration patterns. you don’t like it, tough.
            you don’t get that? you can’t in one sentence say that that is the way it is and if you don’t like it, tough. and in the next say, I don’t like the way it is, but I’m not crying about that. clearly you are crying about the way it is.

          • 李冠毅

            “Basic rule: If you can take land and hold it, it’s yours.”

            I don’t think that’s fair. By your logic, the non-Whites who have managed to gain a foothold in White countries have every right to remain there as any White person. You guys don’t want that, right? Likewise, I believe every race have a right to their native homeland, an area where they have adapted to live in for millenia.

          • anony

            “Fair” has nothing to do with the way the world works.

            Non-Whites have not “gained” a foothold. They are still in White countries because “traitors” to those White countries use the force of “law” to keep them in those countries.

          • LHathaway

            “When Whites came to the Americas, they were confronted with stone-age peoples. They took the land, and put it to productive use”.

            haha, they are now claiming White lands for use by sensitive people.

      • throttler

        All the Indians are dead? Why didn’t anyone tell me?

        • mike

          apparently there aren’t any whites left either, or at least they are endanger of extinction. I missed that news flash myself.

          • throttler

            Nobody said that there are no whites left. That is just dumb. Whites are a small percentage of the people on earth, though.

          • mike

            small percentage? how many groups are you dividing into races? whites are certainly near the top of the list.

      • UncleSham

        Most people throughout all history have naturally sided with their own people. If you are able to see things from this perspective it should all make sense to you. Thinking of yourself as just an individual that belongs to no group is a strange historical anomaly that you appear to be caught up in. The Indians did not want to be conquered by White people, but you (assuming you are White) do not mind being conquered by others. That is not a normal or healthy way of thinking for a human being.

        • mike

          yes the Indians didn’t what to be conquered by white people.

          “but you (assuming you are White) do not mind being conquered by others.” yes I am white. so who is conquering me? I’ve been enslaved by no one. no one has taken my land or killed anyone in my family.

          • UncleSham

            Indians did not have private land ownership, so Whites did not take their land in that sense. What we did was set up societies that conflicted with their way of life. Whenever different people with different cultures occupy the same land, one will have to dominate or you will end up with a hybrid of the two. Either way, someone will have their culture or people destroyed. White culture is far preferable to me than any other culture. Anyone who prefers another culture can move to a land that is more suitable to them. Why do you insist on having my culture destroyed?

      • throttler

        Stop saying that whites killed all the natives. It is untrue and just makes you look dishonest.

        • mike

          ok. most died from disease introduced by whites. either way, most the natives are dead. to claim America as ‘white land’ is intellectually dishonest to say the least.
          so how many native Indians do you think there were in 1700 and how many today? how many whites at those times as well?

  • RaySist27

    Fantastic article. I’m going to use some of the points Mr. Taylor made against the anti-whites I know.

  • Sparky

    PBS? A branch of Leftist indoctrination set up by the government? That is where you get your info? Hilareous.

  • anony

    Oh yeah! PBS is surely my first choice for reliable information. /sarc off/

  • CM732

    Who cares what people of other races and our own race think about the survival of our people? I do. I want to be able to say that I love people of all races but I want to have children of my own race and teach them to be wise, hardworking, inventive, funny, kind-hearted and proud of their identity like their ancestors.

    I have friends and family of other races. We need to start being honest about this with them. Maybe we need to start with little truths but don’t forget to be kind about it because most of them would love to be white like us. That is the truth.

    But we don’t need their support we just need to be tight knit and I know a group we can use as a blueprint to ensure our survival. We need to be like the Jews. They have survived for centuries as a minority in hostile environments.

    I hope that we can form a small unique group worldwide that fights for our survival and in addition to this strives to be a force for good in the world. We should fight for the fair treatment of all people but understand that our identity is unique and our unique characteristics are worth saving.

    In short I want to belong to a group of European peoples who try to advance the world while understanding the importance of maintaining their identity.

  • guest

    An interesting note re National Review and WFB, Jr.: In about 1983, an NR subscriber sent unsolicited a copy of a short hardbound book to Buckley at NR. His secretary responded in his behalf, clearly noting that WFB had read the book with favorable regard and wished to express his appreciation for having been provided the copy. The book? AMERICA’S BIMODAL CRISIS , written under the assumed name, “Stanley Burnham” . The initial “edition” of this book published by an ad hoc entity (“maybe using a bit of scholarly grant money???”) was BLACK INTELLIGENCE (i.e. “IQ”) IN WHITE SOCIETY. It was right at the heart of the Great Taboo. And in the same time frame of the early 90’s, there was equal gratitude from NR/ WFB for a copy of John R. Baker’s RACE and for a never formally published Xerox copy of “Letters in Defense of Rushton” representing written public letters in defense of Prof. J. Philippe Rushton’s cutting edge research into evolved racial differences
    (“maybe using a bit of scholarly grant money???”).
    Somewhere later, NR seemed to “get religion”. I refer, of course, to the PC gospels.

  • Konstantinos Fasouletos

    As a gay man i have lived in many different towns and countries and i have observed differences in behavior. White countries are more tolerant, more intelligent, more kind towards the old and animals and more generous with charity.
    I have yet to encounter another non-White area that is as tolerant as Whites ( Japan comes close ).
    So yes, i prefer to live in White countries. In order for the White countries to survive they need to limit and ban total immigration.
    Biological ecosystems as well suffer under the hands of non-Whites, i mean look at the people who are trying to stop species from going extinct. All White.

    • mike

      so you think these white nationalist are going to be tolerant to you as a gay man?
      tolerance in the white world has been hard fought and slow coming. it has been increasing at a rapid pace in since the 70s. but many white countries outlawed homosexuals up until the civil rights movements. you don’t see how your freedom is tied to others?
      as for japan, that is just baffling. they are known as on of the most xenophobic countries in the world. they may be very gay friendly, but they aren’t known for their tolerance.

      • tolerance in the white world has been hard fought and slow coming.

        Really? Perhaps you would like to enlighten everyone with all of the loving and accepting non-White societies that have given homosexuals and other minorities ample room to live and prosper. Please, by all means, start naming the races(and the countries where they have majority control) that are more tolerant to minorities and those with minority views.

        • mike

          does wiki get you held up in moderation?
          Brazil. India. South Africa. Thailand. and as he said Japan, at least for homosexuality. Ecuador. Uruguay. Columbia.

          • Any URL gets you held up in moderation. We have to check URLs to make sure they’re tinfoil free.

          • mike

            Got it. thanks boss.

          • John Smith

            How about a list of automatically approved domains, like wikipedia? For whatever other faults it has, it’s free of tinfoil. Major new sites too, like BBC, etc.

          • A great idea, but it’s not something currently supported by the Disqus system. The only things that can be whitelisted or blacklisted the last time I checked were users, IPs, email addresses and words.

            Even previously approved comments where a link was already approved get thrown right back into the moderation queue if you edit the comment. I tested it again and, yep, if one word or even one letter gets edited it’s back to moderation. The only choice an administrator has is to put any comments with links into the moderation queue or not put them into the queue.

            Disqus is a really good system because of its ease of use and implementation across various platforms, but it lacks some basic features that would make it more efficient from a moderation standpoint.

          • Disqus doesn’t yet have that sort of functionality.

          • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

            Moderator, you need to be a better moderator and not cut out good comments that are true.
            Now tinfoil free means against your beloved jews???? Come one, you need to be more of a white patriot here and support your own people, unless you are one of the jews.

    • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

      so you are saying that because you are gay you are a globetrotter???
      Since you are white, you need to give up your lifestyle and marry a white woman and have pure white kids. leaving your seed in a man’s butt will not help the white race.

      • Konstantinos Fasouletos

        True. Nothing stopping me from using artificial methods to have kids or pay some Eastern European to carry my children.
        My state has many of these artificial fertilization clinics which are funded by White tax dollars…..so why not use them.
        America and the West exist ONLY because of Whites who built it all.
        Diversity means chasing down the last White person…

  • Jared, if you can find a way to have other writers and figureheads in the pro-White sphere put more weight behind the idea that true racialism transcends any modern definition of what it means to be Right or Left or Conservative or Liberal, it could help advance the pro-White world more in the next few years than anything else that has supposedly helped in the last several decades.

    I’ve said for years and years that Racialism is NOT a singularity because you vote for the “right” vetted raceless political party and align yourself and your support with specific social issues. It’s a singularity because — and I mean ONLY because — Race trumps all other issues. Race is Family, and Family is Race. When faced with immediate danger and imminent threat of eradication, Race/Family is the only language that should be spoken. Everything else is just gibberish and nothing but an obstacle that wastes precious time. Unfortunately, Time is not something many seem to comprehend and/or value.

  • MikeofAges

    The issue grows out of the U.S. Supreme Court’s application of anti-trust law to the issue of group relations. One group is designated the monopoly entity and then is subjected to onerous punishment. The ultimate punishment is genocide. The a program of genocide largely does not involve mass murder, starvation, forced migrations, or any other thing that create immediate, palpable pain does not make it not genocide.

    Note how Christianity is treated as a monopoly religion. But those branches of Christianity which cooperate in administering the anti-white sanctions, that means Catholicism and mainline Protestantism, get relief from the sanctions in return. Meanwhile other branches of Christianity are subjected to sanctions, such as and for example, that graduates of their secondary schools being deemed not qualified to be admitted to certain universities, even some public institutions.

    Speaking of monopoly religion, Christianity is not the only religion in the world, by the extant legal definition, that worldwide is a monopoly religion. But try applying monopoly sanctions to that other monotheistic monopoly religion, the one with more than one billion adherents worldwide. Good luck. Or is a monopoly religion only a monopoly religion when some sufficiently large percentage of it adherents are of white European descent?

    Anytime you have a policy which has as its aim the extinction of some collective human entity identifiable culturally, let alone phyletically, you have genocide. Whether it hurts or not, whether it happens immediately or take generations, it remains genocide.

    Now, I have an answer though. We tell these rest of the world, “We will stop pillaging your resources, that’s how you think of it anyway. Then we will figure out a way to live with the resources we find on our own lands and provide for those who are different than us whom we have to provide for, in North America that means blacks and Native Americans.”

    A harsh and non-utopian solution. But if other peoples do not want to respect our right to exist and maintain our type, identity and fused contemporary culture, what then is a solution? What is so great about our fat materialism, fixation on the nuclear family and extreme individualism anyway? We have a heritage of religion, thought, literature, music, visual art, invention, culture, artisianship. Maybe it’s time for a new look at what we live for. As practical matter, then maybe ordinary people could live their lives staying in one community from birth to death. Be able to take a bus or a streetcar again, instead of having to own one motor vehicle for each member of the family. Be able to go to a live show at night instead of sitting being locked doors in front of a home entertainment center. Maybe people who do have to relocate for their jobs will be able live close to where they work, instead of facing a mind numbing commute just to be able to provide their children with safety and some cultural coherence.

  • mike

    good to hear you are against such a law. others here are not.

    freedom of speech is already protected. I don’t know what ‘persecution’ you are speaking of? you were fired for telling your kids to marry within their race? that doesn’t seem plausible.

    you want to be protected from name calling? you can’t be serious. that would greatly limit freedom of speech. that is a terrible idea.

  • Tarczan

    And the efficient culture, the effective culture was established by whites. The Publix had white management, the W-D, black. Guaranteed.

    • mike

      I think the management in both stores is white. i’ll check next time I go that way. although I’m not sure the Winn-Dixie is even still there.
      either way, there are blacks who are effective at publix. they are following the culture, not their race. so race doesn’t equal culture as anony claims.

  • Samuel Hathaway

    Winn Dixie. That was a great grocery store, now sadly, moved away from our area. But we do have Publix, and yes, they are very clean, well-run but a bit pricey.

    Rural Georgia has Piggly-Wiggly stores, one of which in McRae, GA. You may have those in Florida, too. The one in McRae is staffed by all whites, as far as I could tell, but virtually all employees appeared very young, around 25 and younger. Last July I stopped in and noticed three teenage girls congregating at register 3 with no waiting and no other registers open.

    After about 20 minutes, I was ready to check out, and the same three girls yapping it up at register 3. I interrupted, asking who is in charge of check out this a.m. One of the girls proceeded to scan everything with her head turned away, carrying on the conversation. Then she told me the total, turned her head away again, talking to her two friends while she had her hand outstretched to take my money.

    Then, before leaving, I interrupted their conversation one more time, saying, “Okay, this is part where you are supposed to say, Thank you for shopping at our Piggly Wiggly, have a nice day, and come back again. I’m not leaving until all three of you girls say that.” I wasn’t angry, just concerned that these white girls don’t know any better about how serious their jobs are. Then we all had a good laugh over it.

    • mike

      yes publix is a bit pricey, but the women love them. I was in jax a few weeks ago at my brother’s and they said publix has expanded all the way up to the Carolinas. I never did google it. they used to be only in florida. they have a huge distribution center and their head quarters is in Lakeland. anyway, I’m still kicking my self for not buying stock in the 90s. they got his with a sexual discrimination suit and had a 30 million dollar judgement against them. they paid it out of cash. couple of years ago they bought most the Albertson’s in the area. now they have two stores across the street from each other and they are booth packed all the time.
      there is only one pig in the area that I ever saw. in Clearwater off east bay and keene. I always thought it strange that there was this one lonely pig. my parents are from Wisconsin and I have many relatives who were butchers for the pig up there.
      anyway, yeah you let the girl stand around and talk they will do it, regardless of race.

  • mike

    have whatever offspring you want. or are you saying that a white woman must be forced to procreate with you? sounds like you want a license to rape.
    not a single thing you said makes any sense.
    if the natural desire for whites is only to breed with other whites, then what are you worried about?

    • IBWHITE

      “sounds like you want a license to rape.”
      You’re being ridiculous. He was pointing out, and rightly so, that most sane people want children that resemble them and no group should be forced onto another.

      • mike

        who is forcing anyone ON you? no one is forcing you to marry a black.

        • IBWHITE

          Are you serious?!! The federal government has done nothing but force groups on one another. They ignore our border laws, they push HUD housing in majority White area’s knowing full well that crime and violence will escalate. They push anti-discrimination in housing law forcing landlords to rent to undesirables and banks to loan them money. They pass hate crime bills and then state Whites aren’t covered under this law. They push affirmative action laws and actively sue anyone trying to sidestep it. There are entire industries set up to make money off of White’s who refuse to comply with these laws – look up Morris Dees and the SPLC. Buddy, you have to be blind, deaf and dumb or just plain stupid not to know this!

          • mike

            yes the boarder should be secured. ‘hate crime’ legislation is some of the dumbest laws I’ve ever heard of.
            I’ve owned rental properties. I know all about housing laws and anti-discrimination rules.
            so again you have now gone from ‘voluntary’ seclusion to forced segregation. if you don’t want to rent to blacks, don’t buy rental properties. you don’t want blacks in your amusement park, keep it private.
            but yes, by law you can no longer refuse service to someone based on race. with this I agree. as do the vast majority of americans. I would hope over 90% but I’m not sure.

          • IBWHITE

            Then YOU should support our right to separation. We can carve out a nice sizeable portion of the U.S. for our interests and your kind can get on with your rainbow and lollipop gatherings.

          • mike

            start buying land. hasn’t trump been buying up millions of acres for buffalo.
            I’ve never seen any black Amish, they seem to have managed to seclude themselves. there are like 10,000 Mennonites in Belize. I don’t think they intermarry with the mayans and the blacks. do you speak low land german? I’m sure you can learn.

          • IBWHITE

            That’s it dodge the question and play the fool.

          • mike

            sorry, I don’t see a question? what was the question?

          • David Ashton

            Question = issue.

          • mike

            what was is his question?
            what issue have I dodged?

      • mike

        “Man does not have the freedom to rob, rape, and murder?

        Why is it that man does not such freedoms?

        Because freedom must agree with the nature of man.

        The nature of White people is to remain White, hence the strong natural desire of people to have children and grandchildren that are like them.

        So freedom for White people is to not rob, not rape, not murder and not have non-White offspring.”

        this makes no sense. ‘freedom must agree with the nature of man’. why. aren’t you free to kill yourself? is that the nature of man?

        “The nature of White people is to remain White” so why worry about it. nature will prevent the extinction of white people.

        “So freedom for White people is to not rob, not rape, not murder and not have non-White offspring.”” so if a white woman has black offspring what would happen?

    • BlueSonicStreak

      MOST people instinctively prefer their own race. There’s an evolutionary reason for this – it increases your chances of passing on more of your genes because of the overlap between the genomes of the parents.

      But ultimately, the only real game is to procreate. Period. Animals (and we are, in the end, still animals) will have what is available.

      Take the example Mr. Taylor used in the above article: that of the Cuban crocodile. Here, let me quote the SciAm article on the subject:

      One of the world’s most endangered crocodilians, the Cuban crocodile, is facing a genomic identity crisis. The island’s rare, endemic species has been interbreeding with its more abundant cousin, the American crocodile, creating hybrid offspring and posing a threat to its survival. In each baby, a portion of the Cuban crocodile genome is replaced by American crocodile genes. With each subsequent generation, more and more Cuban genes are lost, and eventually the species could go extinct.

      I’m willing to bet that the Cuban crocodile probably would prefer its own Cuban croc pals to mate with, if absolutely given the choice. Ultimately though, the Cuban just wants to mate…like all species. And it is being surrounded by another type of croc that outbreeds it. The longer this goes on, the fewer and fewer breeding options the Cuban will have outside of the American crocodile. Interbreeding will continue until the rarer Cuban genome is essentially wiped out.

      Crocodiles on the whole will survive…but without the unique Cuban among them.

      Note, there was a point in time when the Cuban crocodile was abundant! And NO ONE would have imagined this happening. NOW it is so far past a tipping point that scientists fear it may be too late to save the crocs.

      Whites are very much like the Cuban crocodile. There are currently still enough of us (and we control enough resources!) that most people consider the idea of our disappearance a laughable concept that only “white supremacists” are worried about. Yet in almost every country dominated by white people, we have faster-breeding peoples moving in. Whites are being constantly exposed to the other “breeds” as mating options. Interracial relationships are slowly climbing, and have been for decades. That will likely hit a point for whites when it increases very suddenly and very fast, because white people will run out of white-exclusive mating options.

      Of course, we are not crocodiles. We, unlike the crocs, can consider the consequences of what we do. And IF most white people were racially conscious, we would resist invasion. The problem is, most people are NOT racially conscious…and all of our media and education right now is focused on keeping it that way.

      We too can be genetically swamped…and most people will not see it coming until we hit the sudden tipping point where our endangerment is very obvious. The same thing that happened to the Cuban croc CAN and WILL happen to us unless we move now to protect our “habitats” from invasion.

      This is what people mean when they say racial mixing is being forced on us. We don’t mean rape. We mean that our societies are being structured in a suicidal way that will result in our racially-asleep people being genetically swamped.

      And our objections to this are denounced by critics as “racist” to keep us silenced.

      Your individualistic way of looking at this (“have whatever offspring you want”) is blind to the overall picture.

      • mike

        “MOST people instinctively prefer their own race.”

        “The problem is, most people are NOT racially conscious…”
        these are diametrically opposed concepts.
        which is it?

        • BlueSonicStreak

          No, Mike. They aren’t.

          Look up the word “instinct.” Look up the word “conscious.” Repeat grades 5-9.

          • mike

            does not an instinctive decision override a conscious one?

            Instinct or innate behavior is the inherent inclination of a living organism towards a particular complex behavior. The simplest example of an instinctive behavior is a fixed action pattern (FAP), in which a very short to medium length sequence of actions, without variation, are carried out in response to a clearly defined stimulus.

            Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.[1][2] It has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.[3] Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe that there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is

          • BlueSonicStreak

            does not an instinctive decision override a conscious one?

            Possibly in you, I suppose.

          • mike

            so what is instinct?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Since you like Wikipedia…

            Any behavior is instinctive if it is performed without being based upon prior experience (that is, in the absence of learning), and is therefore an expression of innate biological factors.

            For example, more than one study has shown that people tend to be attracted to people who have similar facial features to them; and will even rate as more attractive a digitally created face that blends in some of the features of their OWN face. Do you think people consciously learn to behave like this? I sure don’t.

            But if that could not be overridden by conscious choice, absolutely no one would seek an interracial relationship.

          • mike

            “Do you think people consciously learn to behave like this? I sure don’t.” I agree. it is a conscious, learned behavior. you have contradicted yourself again.

            I’m a student of Locke, you know like Jefferson (who had sex with a black chic. all behaviors are learned: “Locke’s theory of mind is often cited as the origin of modern conceptions of identity and the self, figuring prominently in the work of later philosophers such as Hume, Rousseau, and Kant. Locke was the first to define the self through a continuity of consciousness. He postulated that, at birth, the mind was a blank slate or tabula rasa.”

          • BlueSonicStreak

            I specifically said that being automatically attracted to people who look like you it is NOT a conscious, learned behaviour. What do you get out of deliberately pretending I said otherwise? Does that give you some sort of stupid, perverse pleasure?

            We are not born blank slates. The evidence against this is absolutely overwhelming. Look up the studies done on identical twins raised apart sometime.

          • mike

            you said: “MOST people instinctively prefer their own race. There’s an evolutionary reason for this – it increases your chances of passing on more of your genes because of the overlap between the genomes of the parents.”

            “For example, more than one study has shown that people tend to be attracted to people who have similar facial features to them; and will even rate as more attractive a digitally created face that blends in some of the features of their OWN face. Do you think people consciously learn to behave like this? I sure don’t”
            so which is it? it’s instinctive or conscious? you are trying to argue opposite sides.
            and if there is in fact this powerful innate attraction to one’s own image or genetic genome, why are y’all worried about there being non-whites around?
            as for twin studies, have you seen any of the new ones on epigenetics?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Practically wrote a book to you explaining this. You are either stupid, or deliberately pretending to be for reasons that only make sense to you.

          • mike

            well I comment on several site so I may have lost track of this conversation. I am getting old and my memory isn’t what is used to be.
            so you are worried about the white race dying out, or the white culture dying because we are surrounded by non-white. but at the same time you say whites instinctively want to marry whites.
            you seem to equate race and culture, or was that someone else? so name 5 things that define culture.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            so you are worried about the white race dying out, or the white culture dying because we are surrounded by non-white. but at the same time you say whites instinctively want to marry whites.

            Simply put, I am NOT explaining all of this to you AGAIN. My comment which begins, “MOST people instinctively prefer their own race,” addresses this. Check your Disqus inbox and read it again if you’re confused.

            I just absolutely do not have the time or patience to repeat myself over and over. I wrote you 12 paragraphs JUST on this topic, and it is insulting that you expect me to try again without offering any evidence that you tried to understand my points the first time.

            so name 5 things that define culture.

            What is the point of this question? Seems like a really Soc 101 idea that you could define culture with “five things.”

            Here’s something for you, name an aspect of culture which you think is not influenced by a people’s genetics.

          • mike

            lol. I said five or ten or more originally. you choose to ignore it.

            you said “”MOST people instinctively prefer their own race,”” there is no way of knowing this. this is a false premise. you would need a population of people who were raised without seeing any interaction between spouses or having seen their own reflection to determine this.

            I grew up watching my white mother kiss my white father before he went to work every work day as long as I can remember. I look in the mirror and see a white face and a small nose. I don’t think of my self as ugly, but attractive. so obviously I’ve been taught to be attracted to white women. that is not an instinct, that is a learned behavior.

            anyway, AGAIN, if you are right and whites INSTINTIVELY will gravitate to breeding with whites, what is there to worry about?

            “Here’s something for you, name an aspect of culture which you think is not influenced by a people’s genetics.” language, dress, diet, architecture, math, science, government, philosophy….pretty much everything.

          • BlueSonicStreak

            Why do you think you’re attractive just because you see yourself every day? What logical reason is there for you not to have decided you’re repulsive, and so are people who look like you? If you’ve been taught we’re all equal, shouldn’t you find all people equally attractive?

            anyway, AGAIN

            AGAIN, go back and reply to my earlier comment if you have some sort of question regarding my explanation.

            language, dress, diet, architecture, math, science, government, philosophy

            Several of those things are directly influenced by intelligence, which varies by race.

            Diet and dress often have more to do with climate and availability of resources, yet you will still see genetic influence. As an example, a highly collectivist culture is going to have more uniforms. Collectivist behaviour is affected by genes.

            Languages reflect all sorts of genetic differences. Less intelligent hunter-gatherer peoples may not have language for any abstract concepts, for instance.

            So pretty much nothing.

          • mike

            “If you’ve been taught we’re all equal, shouldn’t you find all people equally attractive?” who said we are all equal? what are you talking about?
            so you are saying that genetic traits lead to philosophy and mathematics, not cultural advancements. so hunter-gather cultures don’t have philosophies, not because they are hunter-gathers, but because they are genetically inferior. so why have the genetically superior races been hunter-gatherers at one time?

          • BlueSonicStreak

            That’s like asking why New York City didn’t spring fully formed from the ether.

            Honestly, I don’t know what you’re doing here. No one could honestly be this stupid. You’re clearly trolling, but I don’t understand why you apparently think this is funny.

          • listenupbub

            I applaud you for arguing with this idiot. That takes some patience.

          • David Ashton

            Generally people mate with compatibles. In some colonial situations if the white settlers had no white women as companions they would have “sex” with colored women (e.g. the Cape population). There have however been strong post-WW2 pressures – social, educational, entertainment, residential and legislative – to encourage race-crossing, with scientific study of possibly adverse consequences virtually outlawed from the later 1960s.

          • LHathaway

            Can I give you 10 thumbs up?

          • David Ashton

            Locke, Hume, Rousseau and Kant have all been identified as “racists”. The idea that the mind is a blank slate needs to be qualified by post-Lockean modern research into the effects of genes and hormones. Spencer was a minimal government libertarian, but supported legislation against miscegenation which he saw (with some justification) as counter-evolutionary,

  • Alexandra Ormsby

    I can only guess that all of your readers know that Caucasians (Northern Europeans or Whites) comprise only (approximately) 8% of the world human population. That leaves 92% who are not white, or are, at best, mixed parentage. So why is it amazing that we might want to be considered ‘threatened’? Once I began opening my eyes to how heavily Hispanic my home county of Los Angeles is (over 50%, with some communities — such as Commerce — being 98% Hispanic), I became alarmed. My own community of Whittier is now 65% Hispanic. People — look around you!!! Check out your community’s demographics on Wikipedia to get a ball-park figure! You’ll choke! So, we have every right to be ALARMED, BUT NOT RACIST! How dare anyone say we are racist when we are declining worldwide.

    • Susannah

      We are declining precipitously, in America and worldwide. All demographic projections, including the Census Bureau, indicate this. Whenever this situation is reported in the media, it’s not even as a neutrality, but as a positive good that everyone should gleefully celebrate. I have three White male children under the age of ten, and I don’t have a good feeling about any of this. Not at all.

  • Dainos Marijos

    “If the Navajo were dwindling in numbers or losing their culture, no one would say they didn’t have the right to do something about it. No one would ever ask the Navajo: Why do you care about surviving as a people? Why do you need a homeland? Why not just fade away? If a white person asked those questions it would be the height of racism.”

    It’s because the New World was created by white invasion and disturbance of other peoples, some of whom were wiped out and some of whom face extinction.

    White people went all around the world, interfering and dominating and trying to push its sense of what is right on everyone.

    Of course, things have changed and now whites face the danger. But the legacy of white expansion, power, and domination goes back very far, and it’s difficult for people to see whites as ‘victims’.

    And the elites who this country are not white gentiles. They fear any discussion of white power and unity because they think it might to be directed against their own power.

    • MBlanc46

      I don’t care if non-whites don’t think that whites are victims. I just want whites to begin to defend themselves and their way of life.

      • Samuel Hathaway

        Our problem as whites is always worrying about how we will be perceived by nonwhites. They cannot save us. Only serious race discussions in a white context will yield positive results.

      • TrueNorthFree

        Your quote: “I don’t care if non-whites don’t think that whites are victims. I just
        want whites to begin to defend themselves and their way of life.”

        Amen!!

    • Samuel Hathaway

      This will go over your head but the invasion of Mexico by Hernando Cortez and the defeat of the Aztec Empire was an excellent example of “White people went all around the world, interfering and dominating and trying to push its sense of what is right on everyone.

      And it’s a good thing Imperial Spain, did get rid of the Aztec Empire, and it’s brutal, brutish, blood-letting cult that butchered the beating hearts out of its victims, squirming and screaming in horror. This is the kind of culture you think should have been left intact?

    • Hank Richter

      Can you name me any civilization that didn’t expand and try to force it’s ways on others? I’d say the only thing unique to whites was technological advances. Let’s go back and give Attila the Hun a few M-16’s and see what would have happened.

  • mike

    “The natural desire for White people is to not mate with partners who are non-White” how do you know that? so Jefferson acted against his nature with sally Hennings? white males have been mating with non-white women ever since they came across them.

    “Look around the world” ok, who around the world have laws against race mixing?

  • mike

    “The so-called “right” of an individual to “live wherever they want” isn’t real–” within the nation it is. all citizens, other than prisoners and maybe the military, have a right to move freely.

    you have the freedom to separate yourself as long as you don’t push me out of my space. see that works both ways.

    all rights are a modern abstraction.

    “And in any case, individuals are not more important than groups.” but the rights of the individual is just as important as the rights of the ‘groups’. an American is an America.

    “Freedom of movement under United States law is governed primarily by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution which states, “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” As far back as the circuit court ruling in Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), the Supreme Court recognized freedom of movement as a fundamental Constitutional right. In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the Court defined freedom of movement as “right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them.””

  • The foundation for your premise is faulty and has already been addressed. As Mr. Taylor alluded to, a very large percentage of White people most certainly think survival of their race/culture is important. There wouldn’t be such a thing as White Flight if that weren’t the case. But I guess you would have us believe that White people just so happen to almost always find the Whiter areas to live in when they believe it’s time to pack up and find greener pastures? All these years and decades of brainwashing people into believing the lies of multiculturalism and unchecked diversity, and the overwhelming majority of White people still just so happen to surround themselves with people that look and even act a lot like them. Coincidence, right?

    The only distinction that can be made is that there is still a small number of White people who are vocal, visible and unapologetic when it comes to their preferences vs a larger number of White people who are still trying to hide their preferences behind a facade of color blind universalism.

    Why are many of the medium-sized bastions of Liberalism just as segregated and pristine White as the more Conservative ones? I think it’s because it is extremely easy to consider yourself a beacon of multiracial utopianism when you just so happen to live around mostly White people, while never much coming into contact with all of the “diversity” you claim is so wonderful and is the bedrock of society.

    Why — if racism and the people who would support racialist politics are such a tiny and shrinking minority — has there been an explosion of Nationalist and “far-right” people and groups across the planet who aren’t hiding their views or identities?

    • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

      Well said. I totally agree with you. However I agree with annoymous’s comment that fruit farmers do not really care about the end result of having non whites pick their produce for cheap labor. They worry about the money they can make to ensure that their kids have a good life in a majority white community, but couldn’t care less about other whites suffering because of these third worlders.

    • how about this

      Less White areas in the US (assuming we are not talking about East Asian populations) are often high-crime, much more so than White areas. Just that factor alone would be enough to explain White flight in my opinion. Concern for their own survival does not imply concern for their race’s survival.

      • If increase in the crime rate is part and parcel of living in areas that are less White, and if White Flight is presumed to be mostly about crime rates, then how on Earth can you really claim that White people aren’t attaching their own survival to the survival of their race? You mean to tell me that they are smart enough to intentionally avoid the black areas because they know those areas are always going to be more dangerous than the Whiter areas, but so stupid that they can’t comprehend through simple deduction that less White people around means less safety for their family? Either they don’t care about their survival or they do care, which is it?

        I surmised and you took that and condensed it — a small minority are vocal and upfront, while a larger majority still hide their preferences while giving lip service to the positive benefits of diversity and multiculturalism. But both end up trying like crazy to insulate themselves from black people. I can prove that White people find White areas to move to when they have the choice. Now I want you to prove that White people aren’t using “crime rates” as a convenient(albeit fairly accurate) way of segregating themselves.

  • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

    Dainos, go back to tacoland.

  • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

    Mike , are you gay????

    • mike

      no. but there are a lot of gays in my neighborhood.
      there is some greek guy who made a comment who is gay. why are you looking for a date?

      • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

        Nope, but you sound like one and you are anti white just like a gay guy.

        • mike

          that is hilarious.

          • Even if you are homosexual, we’re not Muslims, so you don’t have as much to be concerned about as you seem to think.

          • mike

            what makes you think I’m concerned?

  • how about this

    Don’t get hysterical, dear.

    • throttler

      Are you trying to lose a woman realist?

  • TrueNorthFree

    I was one of the brainwashed, but no longer. I was awakened by the interviews on Red Ice radio, a podcast that originates in Sweden, a country in which whites are being very aggressively ethnically cleansed by insanely high levels of Muslim immigration. In a few short generations Sweden will no longer be a white majority country and their white children will eventually be bowing submissively to Mecca every day. It is astonishing what is happening to western countries and whites and I for one want to know who is behind it.

  • propagandaoftruth

    Most modern “feminism” is axe grinding Marxist harridanry, that the vast majority of university feminists are gyno-Marxist abominations who want for all women not what all women want for themselves, but what Marxist Harridanry wants for all women.
    In 1917 the Marxist Bolsheviks took over Russia, fought a brutal civil war the next half decade. Russia became the Soviet Union, harbinger of a brave new Marxist determinist world. Eventually, guided by the mass murdering hand of Joseph Stalin, the specific synthesis of Marxism and Russian culture was called “Marxism-Leninism”, the official ideology (atheist religion) of the former Soviet union. Carlos the Jackal was a devoted Marxist-Leninist, for example, and there’s an excellent Netflix piece on him, by the way.
    Boiled down, whatever specific form it takes, Marxism boils down to this.
    1. No God, everything is materialist and materialistically determined. There is, however a mystical formula that explains everything. All people are quantifiable products of their environments and differentiated only by economic “class”.
    2 Life is naturally good and suffering is unnatural. When suffering occurs, it is caused by evil and/or incompetent persons or preferably “classes”. Rich people are rich because they are evil and exploit poor people, who are good and nothing more than the result of the godlike machinations of evil rich people. The middle class, as always, is inherently screwed.
    In 1963 Prezzy Kennedy – perhaps the last non-crypto-Marxist democratic president, got his head almost blown off and soon after the substantial sums of targeted KGB funds began to become evident in our educational, political, and public sectors. I date the beginning of the American stealth Marxist revolution as about 1963, its end around the Nixon resignation and the Manson trials.
    The ideology of American style Marxism, once disguised as or underneath the umbrella of “Liberalism”, eventually found its own name – PROGRESIVISM. Sure, another hijacked term in the American context, but also a constantly reappearing meme in Marxist thought and ideology.
    IE: Marxism-Leninism is related to the Soviet Union in regard to Marxism as Progressivism is related to the United States in regard to Marxism.
    And “feminism” as defined by Progressives therefore falls under the umbrella of Marxism. “Feminism” is largely defined by Progressives, therefore “Feminism” is a form of Marxism.
    Not that there are not a few Hawksian feminists out there who get this, who are not actually Marxists. Few and far between though. Most women just want to be left alone and pursue happiness, not unlike men.

  • UncleSham

    Why do we see feminist White women dating Muslims? It seems that a lot of women want to be oppressed, although they would never admit it. As for White men being perceived as misogynist, compared to who? What group of men treat their women more like equals than White men do? If non-Whites take over our countries I can guarantee that feminism will be a thing of the past. The vast majority of White men want to treat our women with fairness, but equality is up for debate for a reason. Things haven’t exactly gone so well for our race since we instituted universal suffrage.

    Feminism is definitely high on the list when it comes to causes for low birth rates. It is a problem when women think that they can delay child birth until their thirties or even later. I’m not just blaming the women, because the men are just as bad. However, it is a biological reality that women leave their prime reproductive years earlier than men.

  • CM732

    I agree with you. We should become a small community within host countries, just as the Jews have done. We should work together to gain power and influence and use it to protect ourselves and to promote the great ideals of fair play, hard work and free thinking that we have brought to the world. We will slowly gain respect and admiration from other communities if we remain loyal to one and other and act as a force for good in the world. Any attempt to take back a country or treat others unfairly is doomed to fail and even I would want it to fail. I am white and like most of us believe in fair play.

  • 李冠毅

    Take a look at the comments here. Its clear as day that the people here are seriously biased. If a comment proposes the superiority of Whites and Western civilization, it tends to get upvotes like there is no tomorrow, whether its true or not. But when proven to be false, the comment that did the debunking tends to get very little, if any, upvotes. Take for instance the two comments I have listed below. As of the writing of this comment, the first comment I have listed has received three upvotes, while the second comment has only received one upvote, and that one’s from me.

    I understand that everyone’s biased to some extent, but at least I try to be balanced and fair. I upvote any comment which I think reflects the truth, whether I like the comment or not. I have upvoted many comments which say bad things about my race and culture if the comment appear to be true; and I have refrained from upvoting many comments which praise my race and culture if the comment appear to be false. Have any commentator here done the same? I guess very few.

    ==========

    “tolerance in the white world has been hard fought and slow coming.”

    Really? Perhaps you would like to enlighten everyone with all of the loving and accepting non-White societies that have given homosexuals and other minorities ample room to live and prosper. Please, by all means, start naming the races(and the countries where they have majority control) that are more tolerant to minorities and those with minority views.

    ==========

    well we can start with what he said as far as gays are concerned, japan. Thailand is known for it’s tolerance of homosexuals and transsexuals.

    en[dot]wikipedia[dot]org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_South_America

    south Africa, after eliminating white rule but in protections for non-heterosexuals.

    India just passed a law last year extending protections against discrimination of transgendered people. something some America states are yet to do.

    • BlueSonicStreak

      I actually find the example of homosexuality a really funny one for someone to have tried to use. This is the same forum on which people have tried to argue that homosexuality is alien to the Western world, is it not? Isn’t this the same place where throwing in “transgender!” automatically make a comment hysterically funny? (Or so I’m led to believe.) Isn’t this the place where people say that Rome and Greece lost their power positions in the world because they were having gay sex?

      But oh, let’s mention how tolerant the West is of queers when convenient…

      • Which people said this? You actually think that every pro-White person is a clone of those that are more vociferous opponents of homosexuals? Hmmmm….. isn’t this also the place that gave a platform to an open homosexual? Funny, non?

        Actually, the West has been at least as tolerant as most of the rest of the world in its attitudes and freedoms given to those with dissenting views. The West isn’t a monolithic entity, even though you are trying to pretend that it is. France has a pretty good track record of more liberal attitudes toward sex(including homosexuals). Isn’t France part of the West? I can never remember.

        I don’t know what jacked up version of history and pro-White attitudes you’ve been reading up on, but a good majority of those that I’ve seen cite reasons for the downfall of Greece and Rome list the primary reasons as a general loss of identity/culture, inability of city-states to fully unite, and, finally, the introduction of Christianity. I’m sure you can find plenty who will specifically blame “queers” as being the reason. But that has very little to do with the West and its attitudes toward homosexuals as it compares to the rest of the world.

        • BlueSonicStreak

          I think you missed my point. No, pro-whites aren’t clones; but the narrative amongst white nationalists about homosexuality vacillates wildly depending on how it serves the argument.

          • It varies depending on what website you happen to be using for the generalization. Has AmRen ever taken an official position on homosexuality? If you think it has, then how many degrees away is it from the official positions of other pro-White or White Nationalist websites?

            I assure you I didn’t miss your point. You are saying that, more or less, we tend to be opportunistic and only pretend to hold certain views if we believe it will benefit our arguments. I just don’t see that as being true. Those that have more anti-homosexual attitudes continue to be that way, and they make it perfectly clear. Those that are indifferent or don’t have anti-homosexual views continue to be that way, and they will usually let you know that, too. There’s no waffling going on. If you can show where someone specific espoused anti-homosexual attitudes and then turned right around and pretended to not be that way, then I’ll concede my position. Well, I will at least concede that said person is being manipulative and deceitful. Otherwise, I’ll have to leave you with a little play on a quote:

            Do we contradict ourselves?
            Very well, then, we contradict ourselves.
            We are large, we contain multitudes.

    • Take a look at the comments here. Its clear as day that the people here are seriously biased.

      You are visiting and commenting on a little island oasis that is surrounded by nothing but predators. Many of the people who inhabit this island don’t have many options. They have been the victims of a vicious anti-White pogrom that lies, manipulates, deceives, ridicules, slanders, libels, attacks and tries to stamp out their existence simply because they just so happen to have not swallowed the poison of multiculturalism that was being force fed to them. Many here can attest to the fact that the very second you let down your guard and try to become a paragon of truth and “fair and balanced” attitudes toward those that wish you nothing but death, it will be used against you. Practically every White country is being swamped with non-Whites because they were unbiased, tolerant and tried to be “fair and balanced” when they really shouldn’t have been.

      ……..and yet you are surprised that many people here are biased toward their own kind? Hello! I’m reality. Nice to meet you.

      • 李冠毅

        For the record, I have never considered my race to be superior. Unlike some people, who only bothered to read up on the achievements of their own culture and then simply assume that others have done nothing, I am aware of the greatness of ancient Egypt, ancient Europe, and the Indus Valley Civilization. I was just trying to give everyone a fair representation.

        As a wise AmRenner said, if Whites try to claim that their race invented the majority of everything, if not everything, then they become no better than the Blacks who try to claim ancient Egypt, and the Arabs who try to claim Byzantium. This “our race are responsible for almost every worthy accomplishment in history” attitude is clearly being display here.

        To be fair, I understand that Western accomplishments are being downplayed or outright stolen from you guys (see Black Invention Myths). I’m not trying to say that Whites are the most stupid people in the world, as many like to claim nowadays; I’ll be happy to point out to those who don’t know that Whites have been responsible for many magnificent achievements (the Antikythera mechanism, concrete, the earliest accurate calculation of the circumference of the Earth, the modern classification of animals and plants, and so on). It’s just that I am trying to give everyone, regardless of their race, a fair representation here, and to give them credit where credit is due.

        ———-
        “Many here can attest to the fact that the very second you let down your guard and try to become a paragon of truth and “fair and balanced” attitudes toward those that wish you nothing but death, it will be used against you.”

        ———-

        Though like you said, it’s a shame that in order to fight the bigots, you have to become a bigot yourself.

    • Samuel Hathaway

      Accepting the truth about our own racial shortcomings is difficult, but if you want to change that, it begins with you. As for the Chinese, there are things admirable about the Chinese, such as the discipline to build the Great Wall of China, the colorful festivals, the invention of gun powder; those things are unique to them that they can call their own.

      Democracy, republicanism, human rights, technological and medical advancement are chiefly advances of European/white thought and culture, though not without its drawbacks. I think the drawback is not those ideas, but the mistaken assumption that those ideas are universally compatible in other cultures with no traditions of western ideals. So, with multiculturalsm, we accept non-westernized immigrants who bring their third-world ways with them and don’t assimilate to western ideals.

      Mexico is another example. I like some things about Mexico despite being very critical of Mexican people. I like the history of the Mayas, the piramids the incorporation of zero in mathematics, the Spanish architecture of the buildings all over Mexico; however, the Mexican people seemingly are very apathetic to animal cruelty, evdienced by bullfighting and cockfighting. And there is seemingly no urgency to solve the thousands of murders that have taken place by the narcos since 2000. And with open borders, the violence we see in Mexico is now taking root in this country.

  • The Skeptic

    Mr. Taylor, I disagree with some of your points, but I respect you for your unfettered search for the truth, and support for freedom of expression. Owing to how well entrenched philosophical orthodoxy has become, and the decline in critical thinking, any open discussion of race will send most of the public into apoplectic shock. So, in order to achieve your policy ends, you should focus on questions of culture & economics. If you tell a Dutchman “don’t let Mohammad in because he is not white,” you will receive a negative response, because they almost certainly known a good, reasonably secular, well-integrated Muslims. But, if you tell him “Islamic culture is not compatible with a free and modern society, that grants rights to women and gays…hence we have to carefully screen all potential immigrants…” a reasonable Dutchman will seriously consider policies that would have the end result of reducing Muslim Immigration. The same goes with economics, if you emphasize that high level immigration of uneducated families exacerbates economic inequality, strains the safety net and even has a negative effect on the environment, you may be able to even reach some liberals. This would fall short of your goal, but will help push the public towards a reasonable reduction of immigration, and a focus on individuals who hold the greatest potential to economically, socially and culturally integrate into the west.

    • TrueNorthFree

      You make a good point. There has been a great deal of diversity (anti-white) brainwashing over the past few decades and often whites are raised to feel self-loathing simply because they are white. Many whites believe that they are somehow “racist” simply because they were born with white skin.

      In order to “reach” many of these people (and I was one of them!!) it is important to speak their language and bring them around slowly.

      • Spikeygrrl

        I wish I could agree.

        But in my experience, it usually takes a shock to the system.

        Are you old enough to remember this joke:
        Q: What do you call a liberal who has been mugged?
        A: A conservative.

        In the same vein:
        Q: What do you call a White integrationist who has suddenly had to actually live and/or study and/or work among Negroes?
        A: A racial realist.

  • BlueSonicStreak

    Thanks for this comment. It was excellent, and on-point.

    Of course, as always happens when women venture to post something like this, the only response is deflections and buck-passing.

  • LHathaway

    “Well, strictly as biological artifacts, white people are at least as valuable as Cuban crocodile, if only for aesthetic reasons”

    I’ve been waiting to say this, maybe for a decade or longer, and surely this is not the right time, after such a nice article that stands on it’s own.

    I’ve been waiting for the right time to say this, and for just the right time or comment, but that time just never came up. It’s likely not the right time is now. Survival, yes, every creature wants to do that more than anything, so we are told. Unless you really like White girls, what exact aesthetic (outside of preserving oneself) is so important? But I can’t help recall the late Leonard Nimoy, with his daughter appearing with him on a few TV commercials a generation ago or so. If you might remember, she looked so much like her father. She’s very attractive in her own way but she resembles her father so much; sure, they may have been made up to look more alike but the resemblance truly is uncanny. Just seeing them together, and maybe thinking about it, is more than anything I could ever write in favor of preserving Whites or assuring some Whites survive.

    • IstvanIN

      The “This isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile” campaign.

      • LHathaway

        I didn’t remember the ad. Just the two of them together (and admittedly some other people commented on it). Leonard Nimoy wasn’t my favorite character on the show, although he was certainly a nice man, but that affected me more anything I could say here.

    • Spikeygrrl

      I have always looked SPOOKILY like my beloved late father and the rest of his clan. Everbody who met us both remarked on it. The only problem with that is: I’M ADOPTED! ROTFL!!!

      The moral of this story is, appearances can be deceiving.

  • ricpic

    There is no answer, no legitimate reasoned answer to the question Mr. Taylor poses. That’s why I am convinced the Left will attempt to exterminate all those who visibly vocally oppose its war on whites. The camps are coming.

    • mike

      what question does he pose?

      • ricpic

        Read the article again. CAREFULLY. And then follow up not by asking a brain dead question but by TRYING to make sense, difficult as that is for you.

        • mike

          I read the article. he tries to equate the Cuban crocodile, which doesn’t even occupy all of cuba, to the white race, which occupies almost an entire continent (Europe) and more.
          his premise is totally wrong.

          • ricpic

            G’bye, fool.

          • mike

            ok boss. you have a good day.
            don’t let the Cuban croc get ya.

          • TrueNorthFree

            Regarding the white race, check the demographics, friend.
            Massive third world immigration into supposedly “white” Europe will lead to zero white homelands in a few short decades.

          • mike

            I’m fairly familiar with demographics. there are many countries in Europe and beyond that are white majority.
            I don’t know what you mean by a ‘white homeland’.

          • TrueNorthFree

            Every race on this earth has a homeland. Asians have Asia.
            Indians have India. Africans have Africa, etc. Whites have Europe, until the traditional white racial population of overrun with third world immigrants, which is what is happening very fast in Sweden right now, for example.

          • LHathaway

            Well, the premise is correct in my opinion (I’ll take Mr. Taylor’s word that there are Cuban crocodiles and that their continuation is somehow endangered by other crocodiles) you seem to be arguing about the scale (even as you seem to be promoting non-whites moving into White areas [while the opposite and reciprocal action is not happening in non-white areas]). If the scale of activity is all that is important, you will note that it is vastly a one-way colonization.

          • mike

            yes, I’m very much arguing about scale. just as the ‘Cantonese’ person argued that the language is in danger of disappearing, even though there 70million speakers.
            I’ve never promoted non-whites moving to ‘white areas’. not sure you can call America a white area, but that is another discussion. I’m arguing that race is not equal to culture as some here have said.
            few people want to go to ‘non-white areas’. no doubt it is mostly a one-way migration. so what?

          • LHathaway

            You’ve brought up native Americans, with quite a bit of seeming pleasure, 10 times or more perhaps. This leads me to believe it is a big deal to you, at least when native american’s were displaced. And in something close to your words, all of them were killed.

            I agree with you. Race and culture are completely separate things. What is the point of saying ‘race creates culture (likely absurd or at least easy to poke fun at)’? There’s no purely White culture left to take credit for. At least I want no credit for modern day America. Being proud of a culture engaged in ‘White genocide’ makes no sense at all. They’re under some delusion they’re ruling, I guess, when they can only post on some site like AmRen. And also, for good or for bad, Whites have already been contaminated and their cultures are no longer ‘pure’.

            I would say, up to now, this has even been been a positive thing. Feminist want to blame the past ‘success’ of White cultures on feminist change. White racists want to blame it on their White genes, apparently. Why not blame it on multiculturalism itself? A critical mass of White supremacist feelings, or delusions, all engendered by being exposed to ‘poor people of color’, somewhere know to them, propaganda, (only poor ‘blacks’, ‘gays’, ‘jews’ suffer in this world – so shut up, sit down, and get back to work – you luck guy) why not blame this, or ‘racism’ itself for the ‘ascension’ of the West?

            With populations so mixed up at this point there is no proof of the idea ‘race equals culture’. To prove that, the races would need to be further separated, something which might lead to another competition all it’s own.

            I would separate culture from economics. I’m not a Marxist. I can do that – I’m the last one alive!

            What is your view?

          • mike

            I didn’t bring up Indians, someone else did. he wanted to equate whites to Indians, quite the stretch I know, but that is the truth. no the red Indians aren’t a big deal to me. but it is risible to compare white americans to American Indians.
            yes, race and culture are separate things. economics is an important part of culture. that is going to be the demise of America, the pushing left of our capitalistic economic system.
            it’s got little to do with the color of your skin.

          • LHathaway

            I like comparing Whites in the US to Jews – White men. I don’t often, but I gather in Nazi Germany there laws that only effected one group. In Nazi Germany it was official ‘education’ policy that Jews were responsible for all evil in the past, all evil in the world in their present day, and would presumably be responsible for all evil and all that was wrong going on into the future. That’s pretty much each piece of the puzzle here in the US. Individually, it’s just a ‘history lesson’. Taken together the message is that White men are guilt of all things in the past and all people on this Earth suffer because of them. Even the tiniest creatures on the Earth suffer because of White men or White conservative men and their great. Even the rocks and trees suffer because of our greed. Maybe that wasn’t official education policy in Nazi Germany, I don’t know, but that may as well be official policy here.

            It’s pretty rare I make this comparison but I have a time or two before. Heck, in today’s world, even Whites saying they are victims of racism is considered to be White racism.

          • mike

            yes, lots of people want to blame whites to all the world’s ills.
            that is truly intellectually dishonest of them.

          • LHathaway

            You have a point, but I think the comparison is, if colonialism and NA’s being displaced was such a horrible thing, and indeed our entire universities seem based on this idea, how can we not condemn the current ‘colonialism’ taking place now, indeed even cheering it on, as Whites are being displaced?

  • LAGERTHA

    Beautifully stated, Jared. Let there be NO DOUBT that we have the survival instincts to CRUSH OUR ENEMIES.

    • CM732

      We won’t crush anyone. We are on our knees if you hadn’t noticed.

      • LAGERTHA

        Nobody is on their knees, FOOL. Your rhetoric is what will crush our spirit. This is not the time to bemoan our demise, but rather to engage the strength of our conviction. We will NEVER bow to a lesser. Nothing is off the table. Simple as that. STEEL yourself and do it!

        • CM732

          Any violent opposition is useless. We need an ideological revolution.

          • LAGERTHA

            I agree with the primary need for an ideological revolution, however I would never take brute physical force off the table. Sometimes, that is what’s needed to propel the concept into awareness (as shocking as that may be). The strength of a White man fighting for his destiny knows no match. (IMHO)

          • CM732

            Violence will only cause us to lose public support. Our enemies will be very thankful for anyone who resorts to this.

            Violence is being used by Islamic Terrorists and has been a P.R. nightmare for their causes (Free Palestine, Sharia Law).

            If we want our ideas to fail then we should resort to violence (the socialists will be very happy if we make the same mistake as other groups. We need to be smart about this.

          • LAGERTHA

            By no mean do I advocate for violence, or any type of behavior that resembles what you speak of. We are Whites, and do not behave in that manner. My point is strictly that White men need to be given permission to defend themselves. I see nothing wrong with promoting physical triumphs over adversity(in the day to day sense, as well as the general). Our men need validation right now. They are hungry for a mission. My personal feeling is that we would gain far more by supporting their instinctual need for self-preservation in this manner, than to hedge all our bets on the long hard slog of “racial awareness”.

  • CVB

    The American conservatives of today, were the moderates of yesteryear. There has been a gradual leftwing shift since the 1960s and the hippie generation.

  • CVB

    Jared Taylor claims that people can have wildly different opinions on almost everything, and still unite on a collective sense of “white solidarity”.
    I dispute this notion to the fullest. It is well know for instance that the homosexuals in society are extremely liberal and support all the liberal policies. A few token homos who break this rule does not prove anything.
    By the way, this assumes that people value the “whiteness” of an individual, over everything else. I for one do not.

    • David Ashton

      Depends how you regard what Le Pen Snr recently called the “people from the northern forests”. Skin color is only one factor and loose indicator. What matters is to preserve the race that produced our civilization.

    • BlueSonicStreak

      A few token homos who break this rule does not prove anything.

      Of course it does. It proves liberalism is not inherent to homosexuality. (Not that it wouldn’t be ridiculous to think anything else.)

      Homosexuals are overwhelming liberal because liberals promise gays a future largely free from violence and persecution and conservatives do not. That’s the only reason. Full stop. The liberal platform that equates all minorities, and leads GLBT folk to believe they maybe have some sort of spiritual solidarity with other oppressed people is an ideological soft-shoe to expand the liberal base, and can change amongst all but the true believers.

      There was an article here not too long ago about homosexuals joining France’s nationalist Front National – the party now has support from a greater percentage of queers than it does heterosexuals. Why? Because homosexuals realize that Muslim immigration into France is putting them in danger, and liberals are doing nothing to stop it.

      When a similar realization hits homosexuals in America, trust, gays will abandon liberalism in droves.

      Outreach on the part of nationalists would speed that process up; but I’m not holding my breath for most nationalists movements to be as wise to that as France.

      By the way, this assumes that people value the “whiteness” of an individual, over everything else. I for one do not.

      Outside of rejecting criminality, why not? Ideological purity on unrelated issues like homosexuality and religion will kill us. Mr. Taylor is completely correct to try to draw people together despite differing opinions.

      • redpill99

        many homosexuals are involved in interracial relations as well, and lesbians feminists.

        • BlueSonicStreak

          That’s really just reinforcing what I said about falling in line with the liberal platform.

          But I would point out that liberals actually lament a lot of “racism” in the gay community. Quite a few white homosexuals actually don’t date interracially, or exclude particular races (blacks especially). Check Huffpo’s Gay Voices for posts on “racism” – they are mostly about gay men’s refusal to date interracially, and/or disapproval of interracial relationships among homosexuals.

        • IstvanIN

          Here in NJ you don’t need to look for gay interracial couples, just go to the supermarket. I am astounded, just this Monday I saw a Chinese girl with a black male. Ugh.

          • redpill99

            Chinese girl with a black male. doesnt sound gay

          • IstvanIN

            I didn’t mean to imply that they were gay, just that nowadays you can find just about any kind of interracial couple you can think of.

  • anony

    No, I’m not.

  • HJ11

    Put Whiteness before and above all else. No exceptions. No compromises. If it’s White,it’s alright. If it’s not, it’s worth less than snot.

    • Spikeygrrl

      You’d better do the 23andme[dot]com gene test before you go spewing that around anymore. Almost nobody in America is PURE White. Wait until you get your results before you insist upon “no exceptions, no compromises”; you may in fact find that you have booted yourownself out of the majority-White culture you claim to value so highly.

      (I’m still waiting on my own results. I LOOK as white as a box of socks…but as an adoptee I’ll never really know until I chase it down scientifically.)

  • HwitazManwaz

    Such beautiful words that ring true. I am very new to the ethnically aware European-American community. I was born, raised, and brainwashed/mind-raped by leftist anti-whites in my S.F. bay area city since daycare. I have spent the past year trying to break my conditioning to be an atomized hyper-individual with no ethnic identity or ethos. A.R. and commentators have helped me a great deal. The truth is moral. I am so happy that these words are being said. Thank you for helping me discover the truth.

    • BlueSonicStreak

      Good to hear from other people who have spent a long time on the left, as it proves leftist whites aren’t necessarily all a “lost cause,” and may be won to a positive white identity in the future.

  • LHathaway

    “So, why do conservatives quote the words of a plagiarist, adulterer, communist sympathizer, whom contemporary conservatives called a “rabble rouser”?”

    Some conservatives liked King very much. Charlton Heston marched with him, I do believe. But true, conservatives were slower to get on the bandwagon, for the most part, as they normally are.

  • Donald

    “As one scientist explains, “the two crocodile species interbreeding may
    pose a major threat to Cuban crocodiles. In a worst-case scenario, one
    crocodile lineage can cause the extinction of another.” Scientists are
    fretting about how to prevent this tragedy.”

    If White people were polar bears environmentalists would isolate us and do everything they could to build our numbers up to previous levels.

  • Baltasar Mesquita

    Cuban-Americans are probably the only “hispanic” group that isn’t too happy about immigration from Mexico/Central America. That’s why the Left misses no opportunity to denigrate them. My 92-year old Cuban mothere doesn’t care.

  • Harry Savannah

    Well, guess what? Even though they don’t admit it, almost all whites feel the same way I do.

    Ironically, revoltingly, non-whites as well feel as you do, i. e., they prefer to be around whites, but with a twist: they want to ensconce themselves in the midst of white nations, in the midst of their civilizations, their cultures, what they have created and provided – to profit from them, to parasitize them, to seize them, all the while shutting themselves up to their own race socially and demanding their own cultural enclaves. This is the outrageously immoral and insolent mentality of the invaders of this once white, Christian culture and country. And so recent was that country I was born into, that place, for I am not yet an “old man.”

    So, why do conservatives quote the words of a plagiarist, adulterer, communist sympathizer, whom contemporary conservatives called a “rabble rouser”?

    Here goes…it is because the source, the idea, the spark was Jewish “critical theory” and the tinder was WW2 and ts fallout which encompassed an overthrow of all the foundational notions of European racial hegemony, private covenants, and the like. All things spearheaded by Jewish anti-white/Gentile/Christian hostility and money-power. That is the short of it.

    • TrueNorthFree

      Good post, thoughtful and intelligent.
      Most people do not understand the profound negative impact that ivory tower “critical theory” has wrought upon our white people over the last few decades.

      • Harry Savannah

        Years ago I heard an anecdote of shoe stores (earlier still) providing (perhaps this is apocryphal, but serves to make the point in any case) X-ray machines so that buyers could actually see through the shoe to the structure of their feet as fitted in the shoes. The story-teller said as kids they would “play” with the device, repeatedly X-raying themselves as it was a compelling novelty. You may easily guess the “rest of the story.”

        Cancer analogies are often cogent means to drive-home a point. A healthy individual is subject to a contingent cause of death. If he is completely unaware of the cause he dies in what should have been full vigor-of-life. He dies never knowing that there was a completely avoidable cause. This is a stunningly fitting analogy for America. There is more than one cause for America’s terminal cancer but one or two are puissant enough to serve for an “explanation.” That America has, over the last 100 years and coming into completeness over the past 50, been re-made into a Jewish creation, may serve as that explanation. The once-healthy America (viewing the same as a single individual) is that one who is terminal with that X-ray exposure but is insensible of its being the cause. Not one out of a hundred Americans fundamentally understand why their “country” increasingly resembles a tumble-down pigsty. And it is certain not one-in-a-thousand have even heard of “critical theory.” Jared Taylor may eschew what I’ve just said. This is inexcusable for someone of his seasoning, intelligence and cosmopolitanism. But not only am I compelled by personal experience and the vast evidence for the above charge, but countless Jewish leaders themselves have admitted, even boasted of their fundamental alteration of America. At least in this…they are believeable.

  • Jon

    If white people go extinct then modern society will return to the stone age or worse because who will maintain it so that way the Left will get its wish by seeing society ground to a halt. It is true that anyone other primitive tribe is treated like a caged animal and told to be left alone but whites are told to they do not deserve to thrive but the fact is we were not watching the back door with this dangerous brainwashing took root. The non-whites love to benefit from society they never built and will in the end consume the society just like any invasive species does in the wild.

    • IstvanIN

      If White people go extinct, fine, let society collapse, my concern is for the small number of Whites who have to live as a minority among the savages.

  • Jon

    I do agree that survival is more important than any politics and it was politics that has put whites at each others throats for yrs and had us fighting these horrible wars against our bothers for Whites to Unites we need to transcend politics and have something that will unite us racially. U would think marriage and family would be enough but who knows what the answer will be.

  • Spikeygrrl

    “These same women don’t think anything of their friends dating black men.”

    Don’t be so sure. I was informal “den mother” in my most recent house-share; without doubt the #1 topic upon which housemates pestered me for advice was romantic/sexual relations. When our youngest housemate came to me for advice about her burgeoning relationship with the ONE non-white in our orbit, I gave her the best advice I could…but then made the mistake of griping to another housemate, “Why can’t she just date a nice White guy?”

    Yowgolly did the fit hit the shan.

    The other housemates (except one) unanimously voted me out. Fortunately, my racial realist best friend/”little brother” and I were the legal leaseholders, and he got so teed off about the whole thing that he ran around roaring until everybody else moved out and it was just the two of us again. 😀

    The moral of this story is, BE CAREFUL WHO YOU SPEAK TO. Even people who have seemed sympatico can turn on a dime if you utter an opinion which is Politically Incorrect. They’re not bad people, they’re just brainwashed.

  • ViktorNN

    Barge is wrong.

  • Mr. Platinumberg

    I was raised as a Democrat, and actually voted for Hillary Clinton in the ’08 primary. I saw with the ascendance of Obama that the Democrat party has pretty openly become the party of non-whites.

    After Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election, the Republican party was doing all sorts of hand wringing over how they should reach out to minorities (at the direction of their media masters) I perceived this to be a mistake. The Republican party should be reaching out to whites, overtly and explicitly. Forget the media (and those who tend to control it).

  • Protecting the global ethnic-minority-White people, is the Anti-Racist thing to do.
    Anyone wishing harm to Whites, is the actual racist.

    • Rob

      I agree!

  • Tannenbaum

    Jared Taylor is a courageous man, to publicly proclaim that which was once taken for granted. But I would be very interested in knowing what kind of reception his remarks earned from his audience, both individually and en masse. That might be a useful indication of in which direction the wind is blowing among the intelligentsia.

  • TrueNorthFree

    I suspect that Mr. Taylor knows his audience very well, and his audience is primarily American whites.

  • TrueNorthFree

    I am one of those clueless former multi-cultists that Jared Taylor “speaks” to. I read the article in the link and while it is inspiring, I don’t think it is practical.
    Jared Taylor offers whites some practical long term strategies to survive and thrive the looming demographic tsunami in which we will become minorities in our own Western nations.
    God help us all and our descendants.

  • Richard_Lionheart

    Just found American Renaissance, thank you for the article. Time for some sober introspection for me and thoughts of how to do my part to reverse this in a positive manner. The thought that comes to mind is we must make an environment where whites choose to be unashamedly proud of our heritage and desire to keep and expand it. I do not believe fear and violence will produce the desired result although I am well enough prepared to protect my family and/or make a hell of go at it.

  • BlueSonicStreak

    Read this, and I have to agree with TrueNorth. Taylor’s type of argument made sense to me as a liberal, and part of the reason why I abandoned defense of multiculturalism to embrace nationalism.

    Had you told me, “white people should survive because white people are naturally dominant!” I would have skittered away in horror and run back to the arms of liberals.

    I don’t think this argument works on the unconverted, and I’m not sure it’s at all necessary to say to converts, either. There’s no shortage of ego about supposed white superiority in nationalism.