America in 2034

Paul Gottfried, American Renaissance, June 10, 2014

A real break from the leftist revolution.

Every weekday for two weeks–from June 9 to June 20–we are running essays by race-realist commentators on the future of American race relations. Specifically, we have asked them to imagine what America will be like 20 years from now. The ten contributors to the series, whom we will publish in alphabetical order, are:

John Derbyshire, Paul Gottfried, Gregory HoodJoseph KayPaul KerseyTom KuhmannGavin McInnesFred ReedRichard SpencerJared Taylor.

It is our pleasure to present our second contributor, Paul Gottfried.


Gottfried

Paul Gottfried

Any discussion of how race relations may develop in the US in the next 20 years must focus on a number of variables. The two that I intend to stress here are the demographically still-dominant white race and the Cultural Marxist alliance of which non-whites are now an integral part. If whites continue to act as they generally have since the 1960s, and if the alliance of antibourgeois forces that now controls our media, educational establishment, popular culture and both of our national parties in varying degrees hangs together, present trends will continue to unfold. By this I mean that a relatively traditional white society, as I remember it from my childhood, will continue to suffer death by a thousand stabs; and its onetime members and their descendants will either acquiesce in this process of disintegration and transformation (into God knows what) or complain that the disintegration isn’t going fast enough to suit their moral passion.

What started out as an adversarial force is penetrating every nook and cranny of the society it professes to despise. Nothing, it seems to me, is being left outside the purview of the post-Marxist Cultural Left, not even private communications, as we’re now discovering from the punishment of those who hold politically incorrect telephone conversations or send politically insensitive tweets. And unlike the garrison-state socialism practiced by old-fashioned Marxist-Leninist regimes in other parts of the world, the culturally radical Left is thoroughly denaturing Western societies. Back in the 1950s, we mistakenly believed Communism was our worst nightmare. Indeed nothing more pernicious–it was imagined by postwar conservatives–could arise on the Left as a deadly threat to the “Christian West.” Little did these zealots realize that a thorough cultural and social revolution would take place on their own turf!

Moreover, the indigenous revolutionaries presented themselves as advocates of a “moderate” solution to the persistence of prejudice and discrimination in their own society. Their revolution has been incremental, and moved from an all-out crusade against white racism to subsequent struggles against xenophobia, sexism, and homophobia. This war against the human past, as a creation of white Westerners, is getting increasingly grim and has met with noticeably little effective resistance. It has also gained momentum by absorbing new victim groups, such as women perpetually aggrieved over gender distinctions, and often well-heeled homosexuals who want everyone to celebrate their sexual practices.

What must be noted, however, is how well this cooptation has worked and how pitiably weak the establishment opposition has become. Whether by internalizing revolutionary values or by trying for career reasons to remain part of the political conversation, the allowable opposition on the Right more often than not sounds like the Cultural Marxists it pretends to be resisting. Any serious opposition, like this publication, has been relegated to what one neoconservative journalist described as the “fever swamps,” presumably the only location that is kept open to what is regarded as political pornography.

Conceivably these controls could break down in one of two ways. One, the white Christian majorities in Western countries might just get sick of multicultural indoctrination and the social problems and suppression of free thought this situation has brought. They could then rebel against the PC dictatorships they’ve submitted to and try to get back to the order of things that existed before the revolution began. In Europe, the white, onetime Christian majority may even find ways to send back their swelling Islamic proletariat and restrict the educational and cultural reach of the gay movement. I’m not sure how far this reaction would extend, but speaking as a profoundly disgusted senior citizen, I can only say “bring on the counter-revolution!” if there is one in our stars. As I’ve proudly announced to my friends and family, I am a Leninist of the Right. In elections that count, I vote for the most leftist and the most emphatically anti-white candidates. The crazier the better! Let the majority population groan under the added misery until they react. If they don’t, then they fully deserve what they get.

Yet I doubt the desired reaction will come, if it ever does, until the misery index grows a lot worse. Most people in Western countries enjoy a standard of living and creature comforts that never existed anywhere in the past. If white male heterosexuals are being forced to speak to each other in PC gobbledygook, a detached observer might ask: “Why should these people care, so long as they can watch sports on high-definition TVs while munching on a wide variety of snack foods?”

The more hopeful sign that the regime may eventually collapse is coming from the hegemonic alliance and from the way its parts relate to each other. This alliance seems inherently fragile and may only last as long as certain conditions are met. The participants in the bloc must be paid off, and they have to continue to have a preferred enemy to hate, which is white, male, (usually) Christian and heterosexual. Absent either condition, the cohesion of the ruling alliance may be in trouble.

Perhaps I lack the imagination to do so, but I just can’t see Jewish feminists, homosexual restaurateurs, black power advocates, Chinese mathematicians, and Amerindian Aztec nationalists locked in any kind of permanent alliance against what they imagine anachronistically to be the WASP establishment. Their enemy has become diffuse and milquetoast, while the contenders for power and gain have at least as much that divides as unites them. I have every reason to believe these anti-WASP, anti-bourgeois activists don’t like each other very much even if they think they can use each other in a power struggle against an enemy that doesn’t show up. Over the years I’ve noticed the pervasive anti-Semitic prejudice among blacks, the revulsion for gays among blacks and Hispanics, and the escalating struggle for favor from government bureaucrats among blacks, Hispanics and Asians. The question is when these contradictions will overwhelm the system. I’ve no doubt they will in the end.

But unfortunately even if the groups in power start fighting for advantage, nothing significant can change unless there is an accompanying push from the Right. Such a push has nothing to do with “punishing” the Democrats by voting for their Republican doppelgänger. And it has even less to do with endorsing some technocratic manipulation of the kind that the neoconservative-GOP media advocate as an answer to racial frictions (say charter schools or enterprise free zones). The change I have in mind would have to be a definitive break from the real leftist revolution, the one that the Western white population inflicted on itself in the 1960s and which is still gathering momentum.

Topics:

Share This

Paul Gottfried
Paul Gottfried is the author of many books on European social and intellectual history and on the rise of the democratic managerial state, including Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt and Conservatism in America
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.
  • 1. From a PR perspective, I despise the fact that Gottfried just might be right in that it’s going to take some sort of collapse or severe protracted recession to depression to slap white people out of their slumber. The reason I despise it is because it promulgates the notion that white ethnonationalism is the province of losers. I wish ours was a movement that could win in any economy.

    2. I’m also not fond of the “it has to get worse before it gets better” school of practical politics, in that Gottfried votes for the craziest most anti-white leftist candidate possible in order to bring the system down. But the more I think of it, the more I’m resigned to the fact that that’s also going to have to happen, and the reason for that is what he said in his last paragraph. The official right is just as thrown into cultural Marxism as is the left, but it just reacts in different ways. The official right is going to have be made to lose over and over again, no matter what pandering tricks it tries, in order for it to get the message that race pandering doesn’t work; the last thing we need is for the official right to get it in its wee little brain that pandering works and yields political wins. We need to get the official right un-addicted to the opiates of ideological cults of neo-conservatism and libertarianism, stat; as long as it is, the official right will be useless “opponents” to the left.

    • Daniel Schmuhl

      Functionally, Libertarianism serves the left. Libertarianism cannot come to fruition in a demotist society, so really it just destroys right-wing social capital and serves as a distraction. This is why progressives allow libertarians a place at the table (even if they are below it and begging for scraps), it’s not dangerous to them.

      The economist, Bryan Caplan, gave talk on public opinion that you can find on Youtube. If you look at public opinion, almost no one is really a Libertarian. They will agree with it in the abstract, but if you ask them on specifics (Should we privatize fire departments?), they are Statist.

      Libertarians in practice aid progressive causes and damage the real right.

      • The older I get and the more I see, the more I think the real purpose of the libertarian cult (i.e. the purpose in the eyes of TPTB) isn’t for it to win, but to keep the official right away from populism and ethnonationalism, to keep populism and ethnonationalism away from the ability to be part of the public policy formation and law enforcement process, and to keep the official right so neutered that even if it does win, the left won’t really lose much if any real ground.

        • Dave4088

          An argument could be made that libertarianism was devised (by you know who) to denature whites, transform us into economic man and lead us into genetic oblivion. The emphasis on economics and de-emphasis on race is inimical to our long term survival survival.

          On one end of the spectrum you have communism with its hyper collectivism and economic determinism via central state planning and on the other, libertarianism with its hyper individualism and economic determinism of laissez faire.

          • I kinda roll my eyes at such theories, that the YKWs 150 years ago deliberately came up with a set of ideas just so they could sandbag the politics of one white country 150 years into the future.

            I do think that a lot of things that the YKWs and similarly-inclined non-YKWs do are things that happen to fall out of the sky, fall out of the design, are almost pure accidents. It’s just that libertarianism, a perfectly good ideology for the 19th century, isn’t so good in the 21st. But the ideas still exist, and the ideas of libertarianism today happen to serve certain people with certain kinds of power in a Machiavellian sense, as I explained above.

            I don’t read anything necessarily pernicious or suspicious into the fact that the YKWs had a big hand in the development of libertarian ideology. Because of the nature of things, the YKWs had a hand in the development of many of the abstract ideologies and worldviews going back, say, a century to a century and a half. It doesn’t mean that all those ideas are wrong (or right), and it doesn’t mean that all those ideas are part and parcel of a vast Jewish conspiracy to goose and sandbag politics on behalf of the Jews.

            I do think we have to get out of habit of worshiping ideologies as if they were cults and religions in their own right, and into the habit of looking at given ideas and asking: Is it good for white people? Is this idea better for white people than that idea? Of all the given ideas, which is the best for white people? I’d be saying that even if all of our available ideas and ideologies were developed only and entirely by non-Jewish white people. And I won’t assume that every idea thought of my a non-Jewish white person is good for non-Jewish white people just because non-Jewish white people thought ’em up.

          • 1stworlder

            AH did say that France would be overrun with blacks in 50 years if nothing was done. He might have been off by a few decades but the same game plan has been going on in all white nations. Also many of the scams that Martin Luther wrote about in his book about them are still being done today, and those that are not are only because tech prevents them

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Sections of England will surely become “Little Africas”. The UK may break apart politically, or Whites may flee to White enclaves elsewhere. Canada may see the coming tide of Negro sociopathy, and restrict Negro immigration completely. This would probably be supported and bolstered by a strong Canadian Asian immigrant community. In such case, we will see, in Canada, if a White/Asian alliance is realistic.

          • Dave4088

            I never claimed libertarianism was devised in the 19th century specifically to destroy America – those are you words. If libertarianism is an accident of history then I guess Brown vs. the Board of education and the black civil rights movement were spontaneous occurrences with no coordination and planning, malice aforethought and no ulterior motives. Ditto for the Bolshevik revolution.

            Libertarianism originated in Europe around the same time as communism and from a circumstantial evidence perspective, was probably intended as another one of many survival strategies in the diaspora. Notice that libertarianism scarcely exists in Israel because it offers no survival value in their own ethnostate and thus, is not good for YKW.

          • Raymond Kidwell

            Libertarianism is actually original liberalism. Small government, decentralized power, as much freedom as practical etc. But it will never be implemented. Every since the south lost the war states are basically subjects of a centralized empire (was once the Fed but now is a New World Order of Global Government). So they will never give power back to the states/local regions. No politician is going to become president and start handing power over to states en mass. There might be some small scale movement towards a tiny amount of more local power, then another push towards more central power etc. but this idea of a bare bones federal government which the founders intended will not happen. Instead so called “libertarians” will just cut taxes on the rich, cut programs that benefit the poor (but have huge spending and bail outs for the rich). It’s really more of a pipe dream. If there were some sort of new nation being formed or some revolution maybe something close to libertarianism could occur.

            But you notice they always talk in absurdities. Like cut all government programs or legalize everything. They make it sound absurd. Instead of the idea that the minimal amount of power necessary be given and power be decentralized whenever possible. To do this states would have their own standing armies first of all instead of the national guard being controlled by central power. A lot of fundamental structural changes would have to occur which isn’t happening.

          • DonReynolds

            You will see a much smaller government as soon as this one runs out of money…..which it will, because it is unsustainable in the long term.

          • whatalife1

            I don’t think that it is correct to say that libertarianism is the same as original liberalism. It has only a passing resemblance to Locke or Smith. It is a freakish festish of self which they would not recognise.

          • Raymond Kidwell

            Libertarianism is supported by billionaires like the koch brothers because its an excuse to lower taxes on the rich and cut social programs/privatize schools etc. It weds right wing small government with a more popular/extremist idea of legalizing weed etc. making it more “cool” for people who think outside of the box. It’s really just a variation of the republican party.

          • Sangraal

            I think both your own and Dave’s positions can be easily reconciled. The juif factor in libertarianism need not be a consciously coordinated, malign conspiracy, but a natural path to follow for a people with a vested interest in taking the ethnic/populist component out of right-wing politics. I doubt they consciously have this in mind when they write, but their particular subjectivity comes into play, even if they don’t acknowledge it. I believe this is the same process at work in the phenomenon of ‘implicit whiteness’, wherein even race-denying mainstream conservatives display a kind of knee-jerk, almost instinctual tacit pro-white sentiment, even if they would never frame it in this way, even to themselves.

            It’s just a case of asking the ‘is it good for X?’ question you mention, but on an implicit, almost subconscious and instinctual level.
            Note also the Israeli right, which has no particular attachment to right-wing economics (in the American, libertarian sense), because in Israel, there is no need to deracinate right-wing politics, so ethno-nationalism is given free rein.

          • whatalife1

            Although the real underlying issue is radical utopianism per se, I suggest that the YKWs are a catalyst and a cultural carrier for said radical utopianism and hence that they are in some sense critically responsible for its systemic spread in the West. I also note that the principles of universalism and individualism serve the group interests of the YKWs and that this has exacerbated the problem.

            There has been a lot of talk about the world being sucked into a Western cultural paradigm or narrative – Enlightenment and / or Marxist – which first caused the world to be colonised and then sucked into the European wars of the 20th century. I suggest that the West is now being sucked into a globalist Middle Eastern paradigm (primarily that of the YKWs but also of the Muslims) – and this is a victimological and eschatological worldview based upon moral (almost Biblical) narratives or stories – and that we are also being sucked into their wars and conflicts.

          • Sick of it

            Consider that libertarian socialism was the vehicle through which Russia was transformed into the Soviet Union. Voline himself had a very different goal, very different ideals, but his ideas weakened the Russian people so that they could be overthrown by a foreign racial elite.

          • WR_the_realist

            There is no such thing as “libertarian socialism”. That is an utter contradiction in terms.

          • Sick of it

            That’s what Voline called like-minded people. Or that’s how it is translated, in any case. Modern libertarianism showed up much later.

          • Sangraal

            Left-Anarchists are libertarian socialists. ‘Libertarian’ has come to refer to (mainly in the US) a specific political/economic movement, but the term itself does not imply free market economics, capitalism, etc. It’s just about the role and extent of the state.

          • WR_the_realist

            Left-Anarchists are a contradiction in terms too. The left wants big government. Anarchists want no government. Anybody who identifies himself as a left-anarchist should check in with a psychiatrist for treatment of multiple personality disorder.

          • Sangraal

            I used to see right-Anarchism as contradictory. These days I think they’re both equally sophistic.
            Not all socialism/leftism is ‘pro big government’. The polarisation of left and right along pro- and anti- (big) government lines is a very American conception.
            I could go into this, but I’m not interested in playing devil’s advocate for the left, and I think we all have better things to do than discuss purely hypothetical political theories…

          • WR_the_realist

            The only way in which I ever see the left wanting smaller government is that they want to be allowed to use whatever drugs they want. Then, if they become addicted, they want tax payer funded drug rehabilitation programs. At least the libertarians have a more consistent position on this: Use whatever drugs you want, but if you become an addict, tough sh*t — you made your bed, lie in it.

          • LHathaway

            Anarchists are generally considered part of the left. Noam Chompsky might be an example of an anarchist. Some of the former marxists could be called anarchists. It could almost be a platform from which to take a ‘holier than thou’ stance criticizing even liberalism.

          • Raymond Kidwell

            you mean liberal socialism?

          • Sick of it

            Again, I’m talking about one of the founders of libertarianism…pre-Rand. I’m talking about a guy who was involved in the Russian Revolution.

            “Libertarian socialism (sometimes called social anarchism, left-libertarianism and socialist libertarianism) is a group of political philosophies that promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic society without private property in the means of production. Libertarian socialists believe in converting present-day private productive property into common, while retaining respect for personal property, based on occupancy and use. Libertarian socialism is opposed to coercive forms of social organization. It promotes free association in place of government and opposes the social relations of capitalism, such as wage labor. The term libertarian socialism is used by some socialists to differentiate their philosophy from state socialism, and by some as a synonym for anarchism.”

          • Mergatroyd

            “The emphasis on economics and de-emphasis on race is inimical to our long term survival.”

            Disagree. Strongly. It will come down to race, to tribalism which is the normal and natural condition of every human society on earth, past, present and future.

            Every other race enjoys strong bonds to one another based on racial grounds except the White race because showing any affinity for the White race is disallowed in White homelands.

            Not all Whites are worth saving. When resources become scarce or are denied to us because we are at the mercy of non-White overlords it will either be fight or die. Fight or Die. And it will break along racial lines. Period.

            It will come down to this: Whites are either pro-White or pro-White genocide. There will be no other choice.

          • Jacobite2

            I agree with this. The problem with economics is that it concerns a marginal aspect of human behavior ( the voluntary exchange of goods and services) which proceeded just fine long before Adam Smith. The worst aspect of economics is the ‘Homo economicus’ fantasy, and the accompanying fantasy of the win-win exchange. Humans are social animals. They normally live only in societies. Societies, animal or human, are all dominance hierarchies. Dominance is a rare thing — a perfect example of a zero-sum game. One group wins — everybody else loses. Tie this in with another rule of social animals: that membership in the group is based on the blood-tie, and you understand how insane the application of economic laws to social behavior is. Today in the US, many, many societies exist, all in zero-sum competition with each other for dominance. The WASPs have retreated back into Transcendentalism or something. A dominance-vacuum now exists in the US. Normal white people form one society (European, Christian, English-speaking, Western Civ, etc.), while other societies of other peoples compete with them. The point is, there can be only one winner here. This is the ultimate truth that the anti-‘American’ social groups want suppressed. Obviously, the resistance to alien domination will be much fiercer if those people realize that if they lose, they’re going to be dominated by alien peoples, not allowed to go off and do their own thing someplace like Idaho. The photographer and the baker who got cross-wise of the Gay Mafia are perfect examples of this fact.

          • Einsatzgrenadier

            Yes, there is Homo economicus and Homo sociologicus, but Homo biologicus is far more important than either. What you have outlined are the dangers inherent in any ideology of immigration-fueled multiculturalism. People only associate with those who are most related to them genetically. When these imported foreign populations increase in size through massive third world immigration, they form dominance hierarchies along ethnoracial lines and then fight among each other, along with the host population, for access to scarce resources.

            The leftist totalitarians know full well that ethnies monopolize resources within a demarcated territorial area in order to maximize parental investment through minimization of out-group competition. This ensures that each generation is able to successfully reproduce and pass on their genes to succeeding generations. This is why the end result of any immigration-fueled multiculturalism is always race war.

          • Jacobite2

            I guess these are the people who went to grade school when nobody kept score in any of the games. As Darwin pointed out, individuals are not the modes of evolution; that is the breeding population, or deme. But what did Darwin know? He didn’t even realize that, although it continues everywhere else, evolution among Homo sapiens stopped dead in the water 60,000 years ago. It’s also interesting that Asians, blancos, and African-Americans all have distinctive reproductive strategies — completely different, as a quick visit to your local inner-city will demonstrate..

          • DonReynolds

            Win-win exchange is not a fantasy.
            If both parties do not believe they benefit from exchange, then there should should be no willing trade.
            I do it all the time when I see something I find interesting, but I am not willing to pay the asking price.

          • Jacobite2

            I’m not interested in the pure theory of economics. In real life, one can almost always identify the party who came out better on any trade. Just because the other guy thought it was a fair trade doesn’t make it so. We don’t pay much attention to ‘sciences’ that operate on a subjective basis. In any event, economics is a tiny, unimportant area of human behavior compared to the struggle for dominance and social rank. And dominance is a zero-sum game. In fact, you can create dominance matrices easily. If cultural anthropology was anything more than Leftist BS, researchers would spend most of their time doing so, and really learn something.

          • DonReynolds

            Thanks, Jacobite2.
            I am sure there is nothing subjective about the struggle for dominance and social rank.
            Who knew that all we needed is a short course in dominance matrices?
            But I am glad that you think economics is a tiny, unimportant area of human behavior.
            Have you read anything about “conquering from below”?

          • Jacobite2

            Nope, what’s it about?

        • connorhus

          I sometimes feel kinda the same way QD. It seems too often Libertarians use the name as a political rest area. They see the problem but are too afraid to travel that road to it’s inevitable end so they stop off at the rest area and pretend they made it.

      • Kenner

        Your analysis of Libertarianism’s role is stunning. I’m sitting here with a cartoon lightbulb over my head.

      • LHathaway

        I don’t know. I make a crazy prediction for a return of the far-right. Perhaps this will only be in Europe or perhaps this will only be in a white state in the Pacific Northwest. If so, it will be tea-party ‘intellectuals’ who’ve ‘carried the torch’ and helped uphold this banner until such a time arises. Personally, I tend to be a social conservative and not a libertarian, but I’m OK with any political movement winning elections at this point, even the left or far left. With the far-left in control the issue would be forcing them to uphold the same ‘non-discrimination’ and ‘non-hatred’ ideology they claim to espouse and uphold that towards whites too (something they don’t do now, quite the opposite). I’m OK with every political philosophy, they each would seem to have their own good points. At a certain age one doesn’t care so much anymore? I’m genuinely OK with all of them as long as whites eventually get their own nation. At that point, in the words of Jared Taylor, their culture would develop ‘in whatever form it would naturally take’.

        A more than excellent essay by Mr. Gottfried.

        • WR_the_realist

          Why do people always assume that a white ethnostate will be created in the Pacific Northwest? Sure, it’s overwhelmingly white. But so is New England and like New England it always votes progressive. When I look about me in New Hampshire, where I have one Democratic senator with an F from numbersUSA, one RINO Republican senator with a D+ from numbersUSA, and one Democratic representative with a D- from numbersUSA, I realize what the problem is: This place is like America in 1960, and people here assume that the Democratic Party is what it was in 1960 — you know, the friend of the working and middle class, fairness, etc. Hell, John Engleman seems to think that today. The reality: The Democrats don’t give a damn about the white working and middle classes. Their top two priorities are gay marriage and illegal immigrant amnesty, and greatly increased legal immigration. Secondary to that but still important are to move more blacks into white middle class neighborhoods and to instruct children about white privilege in our public schools.

          I know that some people think that the “solution” is to flood New Hampshire or Oregon with enough of the diversity to force the whites there to wake up to reality. But that will just make those states like California is today — it doesn’t matter how the whites vote, the diversity swings the elections. In any case we know that the Republicans are phony opposition. On the crucial issues that matter they always cave in and vote like Democrats.

          So we are screwed. Whoever comes up with the most disastrous prediction for 2034 will be proven an optimist.

          • DonReynolds

            You are more correct than you think.
            Any white ethnostate would only be created where whites feel threatened…… they must be conscious of the fact that they are white and the threat is not white. In all-white areas, they have no such consciousness and they do not feel threatened. Any white ethnostate would be created, not by agreement, but by conflict and victory. Yes, it will only happen where whites know the stakes and are willing to be proactive in their own self-defense.

          • 1stworlder

            With how news hides the race of crime, it will be down to the internet to inform people

          • LHathaway

            called voting?

          • LHathaway

            Even when whites are threatened, they seem to feel a moral obligation to pretend they are not, living by the golden rule, perhaps. A small number of them pay for it with their lives. In the past, our leaders just sent out more homesteaders. As our numbers drop there are less of us who can be sent as a buffer between them and ‘diversity’.

          • DonReynolds

            I have been really shocked when certain white individuals are the victims of black predations and they come out saying they forgive their attacker. Fortunately, the dead ones cannot do that.
            Time for the cavalry to come to the rescue of the wagon train and the frontier settlers.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Exactly. The key word is “Threatened”. Income and Education do not magically make Negroes into Whites. Wealthy Black enclaves are much more violent than wealthy White enclaves. When wealthy Blacks are the dominant group, non-Negroes will be targeted for violence, and will flee for safety reasons. These neighborhoods will be Al Sharpton and Obongo’s dream neighborhoods, or a place that a despot dictator of an African country would enjoy.

          • Raymond Kidwell

            Again I guess these are childish fantasies. Why do people talk about forming their own nation when a few of them can’t get together and build a successful business or even a fund to help whites?

          • Brady

            The solution is to organize politically at the local level, and after years of work fruit will be borne. That’s how all those working class towns in France that used to be strongholds of the Communist Party turned toward the FN. The only political organization in the US that is even attempting that is Council of Conservaive Citizens.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Rural sections of the Midwest are destined to become White ethnostates. Michigan North of the Bay City/Muskegon line, Appalachian Ohio, and the Ozark Mountains of Missouri/Arkansas. Former White city/suburban folk have escaped to these sections for years. As affirmative action abuse by Negroes intensifies, and nicer city neighborhoods/burbs are invaded by these Negro affirmative action abusers, these rural areas will receive an influx of fleeing Whites. These fleeing Whites will be racial realists ready for secession, to lay claim to White ethnostates. Many a White Leftist will become a racial realist when educated Blacks destroy their quiet suburban neighborhoods. Education and money do not change the temperament of Negroes.

        • Mergatroyd

          Then those “tea party intellectuals” had better have the means to defend themselves with deadly force against military weaponry.

          Because that is what our enemies plan for us: total annihilation of the White race. Non-Whites are being primed 24/7 as foot soldiers against Whites by the media, government and schools.

          This is why it is critical that we secure a homeland and resources for Whites and the ONLY way we’ll do this is to band together as a RACE. Without a homeland and resources defended with deadly force, there will BE no White race.

        • Zaporizhian Sich

          Those who cannot be named and their accomplices have pushed the pendulum as far to the left as they could. At any moment, some trigger event will send it violently swinging the other way, and they will be swept aside when that happens. Their hold on power will be broken, and many will be killed in the resulting civil and probably world war that will result. The masses are going to have a stark choice, get out of the way then get with the program, or be swept aside. The far right is rising under their feet like magna surging upwards under Yellowstone. The Left can only blame themselves for this, because people have a much longer memory than they think. They forget that for every action there will be a reaction, some immediate, others delayed. The Left did not learn from WW-II, push people and they will return the favor. The Left massacred millions of my ancestors, the survivors of which returned the favor against them. We are seeing this already in Ukraine, in the form of Right Sector who are Ukrainian nationalists who back their words with bullets.

      • JohnEngelman

        Libertarian economic policies only benefit those who have reason to be confident in their ability to earn a good living. In an increasingly competitive economy that is a shrinking minority of the American people.

        • DonReynolds

          Very good John. Giants might insist on a Libertarian society because of their ability to enslave (or at least prevail over) all the others. Alpha males may like the idea of being the village tyrant, but the best places for them to live is either in prison or crowded together on their own reservation.

          • BillMillerTime

            We know what makes for a good society. Private property rights, rule of law, free trade, asset-backed currency instead of debt-backed currency, freedom of contract, freedom of association, a federal government whose powers were limited and few. When our country embraced these things during the 19th Century, our people experienced the most stunning rapid rise in standards of living *ever* witnessed in world history.

            The last 100 years have seen a steady march towards statism, empire, fiat money, central reserve banking, cartels, police state, perpetual war, subsidizing failure and pathologies, and evisceration of property rights. We have two parties that are in reality one party. Every four years we get to elect the dictator of our choice.

            I know, let’s blame the blame those who have no political power and whose ideas are out of fashion. Dang those libertarians…

            Both the liberals like Engleman and the national socialists on this
            board hate libertarian ideals. How dare someone be free to live his own life? Can’t have that; must have a national plan, and a national purpose…

          • JohnEngelman

            What you describe included child labor. It included twelve hour work days in dangerous factories and mines for subsistence wages. It included food and medicine that was contaminated with bacteria and dangerous chemicals.

            That is why what you describe has been rejected by the voters throughout the twentieth century.

          • My paternal grandfather worked in a Kentucky coal mine – down in the pit – starting at the age of 13, and then he joined the US army at 15. Child labor, child slavery and child soldiery is common even here.

          • DonReynolds

            Your grandfather’s life would make a great movie…..much better than what we get these days.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            The Democrats were good before JFK and Lyndon Johnson, a consummate Negro worshipper, shifted the focus to trying to make Negroes equal to us. The Democrats are the mortal enemies of working Whites now. We need a Merlin Miller or Jared Taylor in the White house. We sorely need a George Wallace or Strom Thurmond to emerge in this day and age.

          • JohnEngelman

            Good for him.

          • DonReynolds

            It seems the Libertarians miss the frontier experience. It was an important part of this country’s history.

      • DonReynolds

        I am so glad that someone else is not fooled by the most recent development of Libertarians claiming to be conservatives, or patriots, or even Republicans. (All it proves is Republicans will accept votes from anyone.)

        Libertarians are the modern reincarnation of the hippies we all knew and have more in common with the Occupy movement than anything else. Today, Libertarians sell their bill of goods to young people, promising to legalize drugs, but not mentioning they support open borders.

        I like it when Libertarians claim to support Capitalism and free enterprise. I like it when they wax at great length about the merits of prices and markets. I am a capitalist too, but capitalism relies on limited government…..not no government. Libertarian is the new name for anarchist.

      • Charles Martel

        This is a very good point. As a matter of fact, the Cato Institute just did a Podcost explaining how bad the recent “far-right”wins were for liberty in some of the European nations.

    • WR_the_realist

      Whenever the “official right” loses it always reaches the wrong conclusion. It always assumes that its defeat was because it was not enough like the left.

      • JohnEngelman

        Many Republicans think John McCain and Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama because they were not conservative enough.

        If one feels something strongly one tends to overestimate the number of people who feel the same way. One tends to underestimate the difficulty of converting others to one’s persuasion.

        • WR_the_realist

          There are two ways the Republicans should be more like the left: By being more against war and more for the Bill of Rights. That’s why Ron Paul, in his 70s, was the only Republican who could get any traction with voters under the age of 35. John McCain was a disaster on both issues. Romney was taking the obligatory “tough on Iran” stance, but with Mr Etch-a-Sketch who really knows what he would have done?

          • JohnEngelman

            Ron Paul is a libertarian. Libertarian economic policies only benefit those who have reason to be confident in their ability to earn a good income in the private sector with no help from the government. In an economy that is becoming more competitive that is true of a declining percentage of the American people.

          • WR_the_realist

            I think the federal government makes a very lousy mom.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am sorry that you feel that way, but I can understand how and why you do. By the time Franklin Roosevelt had been in office as long as Barack Obama he had demonstrated that the government could benefit ordinary Americans. Obama has not done that.

            There have been times in the past when there were major increases in economic inequality. I am thinking particularly of the last quarter of the nineteenth century, and the 1920’s. However, most people advanced economically somewhat.

            Currently, average wages are declining, while the rich get richer. An economy like this does not nurture a healthy society. A genuine conservative should find this troublesome.

          • DonReynolds

            I agree, John. The Republican party has been particularly annoying with their pre-occupation of holding down wages and cutting the taxes of the wealthy. The irony is the fact that so many Republicans claim to be anti-French, yet they love the economic policies of the French Physiocrats…..which made the French Revolution inevitable.

          • WR_the_realist

            Pat Buchanan does find this troublesome. But he’s a social reactionary so you wouldn’t vote for him.

          • JohnEngelman

            On some issues I am a social reactionary myself. I have always disliked the sexual revolution. I like manger scenes in front of country court houses, and stuff like that.

            I have become disenchanted with the civil right movement, but I an not in favor of repealing the civil right legislation, I am only in favor of interpreting it narrowly.

          • antiquesunlight

            I agree about war, but I’d say most Republicans/Conservatives strongly advocate the Bill of Rights.

            McCain is a doofus.

          • WR_the_realist

            No politician who voted for the TSA, or who at least doesn’t try to get rid of it now that he can see what it is, supports the Bill of Rights. That includes nearly all Republicans and nearly all Democrats.

          • JohnEngelman

            During the Cold War Republicans/Conservatives favored First Amendment restrictions on the ability of Communist Party members, Communist sympathizers, and Marxists not in the American Communist Party to express their opinions.

            These restrictions included loyalty oaths, black lists, and witch hunts.

            During the Cold War it was dangerous to criticize capitalism, advocate socialism, or defend Communist governments abroad.

          • WR_the_realist

            Those McCarthyite black lists were less severe than what happens to anybody today who comes out with explicitly pro-white positions.

          • JohnEngelman

            It would be interesting to do a study of that. Black lists did keep people from working on Hollywood.

            During the early 1960’s the Hootenanny television program which featured folk music blacklisted Pete Pete Seeger, and a few other folk singers. What was it afraid of? Did it think Pete Seeger would send coded messages to the KGB?

        • DonReynolds

          Political resolution to conflicting values requires voting majorities and I do not believe any amount of missionary work is going to convert the heathen and savages. I have tried it myself, teaching economics for twenty years. If someone does not value something, it is very difficult to convince them that it is important, or at least important to someone else.

    • John_HD

      I’m also not fond of the “it has to get worse before it gets better” school of practical politics, in that Gottfried votes for the craziest most anti-white leftist candidate possible in order to bring the system down. But the more I think of it, the more I’m resigned to the fact that that’s also going to have to happen,

      Yeah, it seems obvious that as long as most whites can still sit comfortably on their couches and consume video games and football, while being able to remain sufficiently removed from Vibrant dysfunction, they’ll not rock their still comfortable boat. If the boat’s rapidly taking on water, they’ll be forced to take action. From a demographic perspective, the worse before it gets better scenario should be a sooner the better prospect, in that if it doesn’t bottom out soon enough, there may be relatively too few of us to effect the sort of change we’d like for our progeny.

    • coco bongo

      Jared pretty much said the same thing about things, hopefully, not having to get worse before they get better. But I don’t see any other way at all. We’re too fat and lazy. Once whites really begin to suffer and deeply feel the sting of diversity, then I think we will begin to act. I also think many of those sitting on the fence will join us, leaving the ultra-left isolated and vastly outnumbered.

    • Raymond Kidwell

      You just need to think more like a Jew. I mean simply learn to win in any situation. Learn to win as a minority or a majority. Have your own little tribe of racially aware whites and don’t worry about those outside of the tribe too much. The flaw in online WN thinking seems to be “the whole world has to be perfect in order for me to be happy/succeed etc.” The world will never be perfect. You have to fix yourself, your own family, your own group etc. more than worry about the whole nation. I’m content to find a small group of similar people and work together for friendship, survival etc. And to me that is where the loser mentality comes to play. Why do you see your success as so far outside yourself? Why is national policy a top priority? I understand these things are important but it seems like priority should be put on more personal things. That’s where most successful white people are. There are white people living quite well in Brazil or even in parts of Africa, Mexico and so forth. They marry other whites etc. It’s the poor white person who has no real power to change his environment and is the victim of national policies. I’m a victim myself, but I see the best way to improve my situation is not to hope the whole world changes but rather to just change my own situation or form my own immediate group.

      • JohnEngelman

        Raymond,

        That is an interesting comment. Thank you for posting it.

        Jews are good at succeeding against the odds. So are Chinese immigrants. That is part of the reason I admire them.

        • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

          Right on the money John. Jews have succeeded due to stubborn determination. Stubborn determination is an excellent trait when it is matched with a strong moral fabric. Kidwell, though, shows how short sighted he is when he describes a pervasive character trait amongst Northern Europeans as being Jewish. Interesting thoughts from a guy who quite recently objected to racial realism. Now, if he can learn to stop worshiping Negroes, he will be getting somewhere. He certainly bristled at my racial realist musings on the Negro race a few days ago.

      • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

        Stubbornness is an excellent trait. It is also a pervasive trait amongst Northern Europeans. Mated with a strong moral fabric, stubbornness makes one immune to degeneracy. I’m pleasantly surprised at the wisdom you reflect in this post. Are you now prepared to embrace the tenets of racial realism?

  • Publius Pompilius Quitus

    Like the Muslim/Hindu coalition in India broke up after India was granted independence, ultimately resulting in the spitting of the country into India and Pakistan, the Rainbow Coalition will also dissolve when we WASPs are vanquished. The cultural left will have a civil war—Muslims versus Jews; Blacks versus Latinos; homosexuals versus feminists; and so on. It’s a multi-universe theory: once Cultural Marxism no longer needs to wear a mask, any number of outcomes is possible.

    • David Ashton

      Was “Cultural Marxism” a conviction, or an instrument?

      • Publius Pompilius Quitus

        I can’t say, but it never lasts. The proverbial barbarians always turn on each other when there are no one Roman cities to loot.

        • Cid Campeador

          La Historia se repite.

        • Mergatroyd

          Exactly. Cultures that are built on packs of lies, like this sick sick sick one eventually implode. I suspect the American economy to go down before that time.

          The Soviets tried the same thing, to built a “new Soviet man” that had no nationality, race, religion or ethnicity (party bosses were exempt). Russians were exported into satellite states to dilute the native population, as in “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” Anyone who didn’t go along with the Central Plan got a bullet in the back of the head or shipped off to a Soviet gulag.

          Problem is, humans are tribal by nature and prefer living with their own kind. After the USSR fell, various warring tribes wanted their territory back and bloody warfare broke out across Eastern Europe.

      • JohnEngelman

        Cultural Marxism is a derogatory term for social liberalism. Social liberalism is not a cause. It is certainly not a conspiracy. It is the way most people in the West have come to behave and to feel about the behavior of others.

        • David Ashton

          As usual you just repeat verbatim what has been refuted again and again with political documentation you ignore also as usual. “Cultural Marxism” is a (derogatory) term for the notions and policies advanced by the New Left (e.g. Marcuse) and Critical Studies (e.g. Stuart Hall). It is simply not worth trying to argue with a gramophone record.

          • JohnEngelman

            I have known quite a few Marxists over the years. They were not shy about calling themselves “Marxists.”

            In addition, those who followed Mao Tse Tung called themselves “Maoists.” Those who followed Leon Trotsky called themselves “Trotskists.”

            You mention the New Left. The Students for a Democratic Society used to have a publication called “New Left Notes.”

            Where is there a publication named “Cultural Marxist Review/”.

            Where is there an organization of people who call themselves “Cultural Marxists?”

            Where are there political writers of any prominence who describes his philosophy as Cultural Marxism?

            Unless you can answer these questions, you are the gramophone record.

            Those who complain about Cultural Marxism and the Frankfurt School do so because they want to blame a popular social change they dislike on a conspiracy. Their implication is that if only all these Cultural Marxists had been silenced the growing approval of gay marriage and interracial marriage would not have happened.

            These alarums about Cultural Marxism remind me of Jerry Falwell’s complaints about secular humanists. He implied if he did not outright say that a conspiracy of powerful and strategically placed but small in number secular humanists were responsible for the fact that fewer Americans were going to church, and more were having sex with folks they were not married to. Secular humanists according to Jerry were forcing the moral majority of Americans to behave immorally.

          • David Ashton

            Think and say what you like, I just can’t be bothered to go through all this largely irrelevant stuff yet again, and I expect more than a few readers of our various posts on these subjects over a long period will grant me their sympathy.

          • JohnEngelman

            Again I say: Unless you can answer these questions, you are the gramophone record.

          • David Ashton

            “Again I say” (you’re joking!)

            Just look back at the documentation I provided, get off your bum and order some books from the library.

            “Again I say…you are the gramophone record”. Again, again, again, again, again….it’s stuck – again.

          • Martel

            None of those questions make sense. Is there no such thing as “political correctness” because there is no “Politically correct Review”?

            Is there no such thing because there is no politician who calls himself a “Politically Correct Politician”?

            People with little interesting to say always go for semantics.
            Go order an import bride, the loneliness is clearly starting to get to you.

          • JohnEngelman

            You share David Ashton’s inability to answer my questions.

            Who uses the term “Cultural Marxist?” It is not those on the left, but those on the right. Why do they use it? To derogate those they call “Cultural Marxists.”

            “Cultural Marxist” is a term like “racist.” These terms are not used to describe in ways that advance a civil discussion of important issues. It is used to condemn.

          • Martel

            I already told you, its to describe a set of political concepts which cannot be described by the term “Social Liberalism”. If I am wrong, explain to me how Social Liberalism in its purest form is the sole reason of the political issues which bothers me, such as “Political correctness”.

            Do you also believe “political correctness” does not exist, because there is no movement calling itself “Politically Correct”?

            Please answer my questions. Actually, I have one more. Do you have nothing better to do?

            You know what you say makes no sense. There is no requirement for a movement to label itself a certain term for me to label them a certain term.

          • JohnEngelman

            You raise an intriguing issue. I think of political correctness as lying on behalf of social harmony, and pressuring others to lie.

            Nevertheless, you have done nothing to refute my claim that “Cultural Marxism” is a derogatory term, rather than the name of a self conscious political movement. Indeed, you have substantiated my claim.

            Calling someone a Cultural Marxist is like calling someone a racist. It is an ad hominem attack, and an appeal to emotion. As such it has no place is a civil discussion of controversial issues.

          • Martel

            I don’t consider it a derogatory term, I use it because there is no other term to describe the aforementioned political concepts I oppose. if you propose and defend another name, I will certainly consider adopting it.

            I have not substantiated your claim in any sense. You have not defended the silly notion that I should name a certain group of political movements the same name they have adopted for themselves.

            Very few Fundamentalist Muslims call themselves as such, there is no movement I’m aware of which calls itself “The Fundamentalist Muslims”, but even if, it includes far more Muslims (millions and millions more) who do not officially include themselves as members to such a movement. Should I stop using the term “Fundamentalist Islam”?

            No, silly argument. We are talking about nothing.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            The only good Marxist is a dead and decomposing one. And the destructive changes in western societies are definitely the work of criminal conspiracies, the proof of that is abundant.

          • JohnEngelman

            Once I took a fascinating seminar on Das Kapital given by the American Communist Party. My father, who was an economist, was impressed by the reading list for the seminar. He said the man leading the seminar was well versed in economics.

            However, he was a physicist, and one of the most intelligent men I have known in my life. He could become fluent in a language in a few months.

            He learned about capitalism while growing up in a slum in New York city.

          • Martel

            Why should there be a magazine named after “Cultural Marxism”?
            Is there a “Neo-Conservative Review”?

            If several political movements promote similar political concepts, but for whatever reason do not claim to adhere the same philosophy, it makes sense to name the movement regardless. The vast majority of Jihadis would dismiss the term “terrorist”. Are we somehow forced to label a movement as it labels itself?

          • JohnEngelman

            Introducing the concept of terrorism is a use of the red herring fallacy.

            ——-

            A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to “win” an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:

            Topic A is under discussion.

            Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).

            Topic A is abandoned.

            This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

          • Martel

            No its not a red herring it all. Explain it in your own words why this is supposedly a red herring., I’m quite familiar with this logical fallacy, no need to copy paste a standard explanation.

            A Jihadist doesn’t need to call himself a terrorist or a Muslim Fundamentalist for me to call him this. A cultural Marxist doesn’t need to call himself a cultural Marxist for me to call him this. What rule demands this and where is it written?

            You are clearly unable to answer my questions, because you are defending nonsense.

          • JohnEngelman

            Again you are resorting to personal attacks.

            It is a red herring because those you think of as Cultural Marxists do not advocate or use violence.

          • Martel

            Its not a red herring, and violence had nothing to do with my comparison.. I stated that there is no reason why I cannot label a political movement, if the movement does not label itself or if the label used by the movement is impractical. This demand makes no sense at all. You either have nothing better to do, or you are to childish to admit when you are wrong.

            If you are unable to provide a better term to describe these political concepts, then I don’t know why you are still arguing. That old and you cannot admit when you are wrong?

          • JohnEngelman

            You have nothing to do but chase me around and make negative comments to me.

            My basic point is that Cultural Marxist is a derogatory term like racist. It is not the name of a self conscious political movement.

            You have done nothing to refute that.

          • Martel

            I did refute it completely, I also generously provided you with an answer when asked, yet you are unable to do the same for me. Cultural Marxist is not a derogatory term, its a term used to label a set of political concepts, where no other term suffices. You claimed its only used by the ”right”(another label, you hypocrite), while its also used by leftists such as Dennis Dworkin,who like me, doesn’t consider it a pejorative.

            How long do you want to play this game?
            Your demand that I cannot label a movement something it doesn’t call itself, makes no sense, you are also unable to propose and defend an alternative.

          • David Ashton

            My reply has not appeared on this thread, so I shall try just once more for the very last time.

            The groups described by their opponents as “Cultural” Marxists were self-identified Marxists or ideologists who combined Marxist ideas with Freudian and other ideas; some followed the Trotsky tradition. Their works are legion, and their influence on Anglo-American academe, and “political correctness”, have been, and remain, powerful. You have been given documentation before, which, typically, you disregard.

            In brief summary, many of them called themselves “the New Left”, or “Western Marxists”, partly to distinguish themselves from the reputation of Soviet bureaucratic tyranny. Their main thrust was not “social change” in sexual morality, though it had its links. They were concerned mainly with egalitarian political revolution based on “race, gender and [later] disability” issues (as well as “class”). The CPUSA has now followed the “lead” of the SWP, IS &c. Their prime obstacle was the comfortable white working class traditional family with its bourgeois values of patriarchy, patriotism, defense and religion.

            Their opponents (e.g. Bill Lind) have called them “cultural” Marxists because they aimed first at controlling the cultural “superstructure” rather than transforming the economic “base”, thus developing the recommendations of Marxists like Gramsci.
            The Wikipedia entry “Cultural Marxism” provides a reasonable summary which has survived the leftist re-editing that has wrecked other informative articles.

            But if you can ever bring yourself to read a real book (other than the Bible, Hoffer, Hitler and Mao) get from the library Professor Dennis Dworkin’s “Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain” (1997) for details which cannot be summarized her for your sedentary convenience.

          • JohnEngelman

            Thank you for this information. Too much computer memory had been devoted to this. If you want the last word, take it.

        • I don’t think so. It’s possible for “rightists” to buckle to cultural Marxism, and it’s possible for social liberals not to be cultural Marxists.

        • Martel

          Semantics. You are as interesting as usual. You are clearly unfamiliar with the history of cultural marxism as social liberalism is a different animal. The term social liberalism doesn’t cover the political concepts promoted by “cultural marxists”. How they are labeled, cultural marxist or otherwise, is irrelevant. However,social liberalism is a misnomer.

          • JohnEngelman

            As soon as you find someone who declares that he is a Cultural Marxist, please introduce us.

          • Martel

            Why does someone needs to describe himself as an adherent of a certain political philosophy for me to ascribe to his views a certain political philosophy. Social Liberalism doesn’t cover the political concepts which I oppose in cultural marxists.

            Are you saying social liberalism is the reason people get fired for making a “homophobic joke”, that you and I are not allowed to criticize blacks or discuss the reality of race?

            If Social Liberalism in its purest form is the cause of these trends, then we should both oppose Social Liberalism?

          • Martel

            If a young male espouses Nazi Ideals, but he doesn’t call himself a Nazi, can’t I label him a nazi?

            Why am I sometimes called an Anti-semite while I don’t consider myself an anti-semite?

            Again, you argue semantics, because you have nothing interesting to offer.

          • JohnEngelman

            If I say nothing that is interesting, why do you find it so difficult to ignore me? Also, why are you resorting to a personal attack?

            However, getting back to your first question, if someone espouses Nazi ideals I do not call him a Nazi, I discuss the merits of the ideals.

            If someone condemns Jews I do not call him an anti Semite. I point out that the condemnations are inaccurate.

            Any kind of name calling detracts from a rational debate.

          • Martel

            Because I defend the right of others not to be bored by you. Your explanation doesn’t make any sense. If hundred thousands of individuals who espouse ideals similar to Nazism, but do not give themselves any name, how should I call them?

            If they commit a terrorist attack, how should a news agency label them?

            Your claim that you suddenly do not require a label is a cop-out, impractical and nonsensical.

            Every movement must be labelled, if several movements are similar but do not regard themselves as such, there is no reason to not give them a name. You made up this weird rule that people cannot name a movement unless the movement agrees to try and win a debate. According to which authority is it that I don’t have the right to call a certain movement “cultural marxist”. Is there a better name?

            No.

            If you are interested in reading the reason why I use the term “Cultural Marxism”, you should read Cultural Marxism by Dennis Dworkin,

    • Cid Campeador

      As a White Italo- American Catholic I infer that
      you expect that White Catholics will not stand with you during the anti-Christian “POGROM”. We will then experience the Civil War of which you speak. We will stand together on the sidelines and let the leftist annihilate each other. We will then come in and clean up the trash.

      • DonReynolds

        I remember that plan. Charles Manson…..Helter Skelter.

    • Mergatroyd

      That split in India was violent and bloody.

  • Adolph Hitler represented a total paradigm shift from degenerate leftism to national socialism (see youtube video Babylon Before Hitler–15 minutes approx). There were 250 Hitler followers in Berlin vs 250,000 communists, but within a year of two of the arrival of Hitler’s men a major shift had taken place and a few years later a total transformation had taken place. Was Hitler a one-time historical event, a surd, a non-replicable historical entity?

    For that matter, Putin is like Hitler in many ways, all good. His rejection of the slimy Western culture is an inspiration to free men everywhere. The US psy op to demonize him as the new Hitler is going nowhere fast. Obama or his successor may have to nuke Russia to get rid of Putin!

    I don’t think Putin or Hitler are surds, outliers for those of you who don’t know the word surd. For every action there’s a reaction. The Cultural Marxists have pushed things to the point where we are living in a surreal, absurd stage play. And they show no signs of taking the play in a different direction. The wild card is the huge number of degenerate Mexicans pouring into the former USA, a people incapable of advanced, sophisticated thinking. They see MAGIC in everything, including the economy. Vote for Marixism and get a box of Cracker Jack with a prize inside is how they think.

    Another wild card is our young women, who have totally embraced the slut culture, thus pushing them into noncritical thinking about ALL issues. They hold no willingness to criticize anything, calling a legit criticism “shaming,” as in slut shaming, etc. Exactly how to sabotage that manner of thinking is open to debate, but it’s interesting to see young females who have been “saved” by Jesus.

    Just as things happened unexpectedly and quickly in Germany and Russia, so it may play out here.

    • Sick of it

      Hitler’s rise to power was funded by our enemies. Don’t expect that to happen again.

      • Löwenmensch ᛟ

        For over 10 years Hitler campaigned for NSDAP to gain power in Germany, money was not what made him.

      • ThomasER916

        Why not? All we need is someone who is just as good a liar as they are but recognizes them for who and what they are. If Whites don’t miscegenate I’m sure the West is full of geniuses who could figure them out. If Whites do miscegenate that disappears into a cesspool of Turd World DNA.

    • JSS

      While I use the phrase White extinction every once in awhile Russia gives me hope that their will always be Whites in the world. Slavs don’t seem to have the suicide gene like we do. One of the best videos I ever saw was of some young Russian men throwing paint in those vile “pussy riot” creatures faces while they were of course eating at mcdonalds. One of the young men then told them to “go to America we don’t want you here”.

      • I agree! That was a totally beautiful sight to see those Russian men throw paint on those vile ‘pussy riot’ degenerates! When they said, “Go to America, we don’t want you here,” I was slightly offended by it at first. My patriotism got the best of me for a quick moment. But, sadly, it was the truth. Only in America is such filth and degradation celebrated and tolerated by so many. I’m ashamed of my once great nation.

        • Sick of it

          That nation was destroyed and replaced by this horrible modern construct. I say in 1865, with vestiges remaining for some generations thereafter.

          • Tom B.

            You are so right sir! Karl Marx saw Lincoln’s victory over the South as the beginning of communism in America. Every disgusting thing happening in this country today stems from that terrible war.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            World War I and II finished what the Civil War started.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Southerners don’t like to admit that Lincoln was a race realist. Honest Abe wanted to send every last Negro back to Africa. The North was also full of proud racial realists, after the war, who didn’t want Negroes moving into their states.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Southerners don’t like to admit that Lincoln was a race realist. Honest Abe wanted to send every last Negro back to Africa. The North was also full of proud racial realists, after the war, who didn’t want Negroes moving into their states.

        • DonReynolds

          Do not confuse your country with the government in power.
          This nation is soil and blood…..no matter what madmen run the government.

          • I haven’t confused the government with the people that comprise this nation. Sure there are folks like you and I who despise the current order of things, but there’s a significant low-information majority who care little about preserving our race and culture, who allow popular opinion to rule their thinking and practices.

            It was a huge mass of Americans who’ve allowed the Left to take such control over our nation, who did nothing while they advanced upon every institution, and who’ve allowed the level of degeneracy to increase over the past few decades.

            It’s not just the government who has pushed this destructive agenda, there’s a whole lot of people who are complicit and who support the downward direction this nation has taken.

          • DonReynolds

            Fortunately, this is not a democracy and if the majority of people want to shave their head, that does not mean that the rest of us must do likewise.
            If the majority decides they are communists, it does not mean the country will be too. (It means we have open borders and we have been invaded.) It may mean that we are incompatible peoples and we cannot share the same country……so either we split the blanket and get a divorce….or we resolve our differences the old fashioned way.

          • Uh, yes, but I think you’re again missing the point. The majority of the people in the nation that you speak of as “soil and blood” have done nothing to oppose the great ‘transformation’ that’s occurred for the past 50 years. The “soil and blood” nation that you speak of is a very small percentage of the American people (relatively speaking). Most U.S. citizens don’t even think in such terms. They wouldn’t even understand the concept. We have become so divided over everything that we can’t even find a semblance of agreement on basic issues – thanks to the Left and complacent whites.

            My allegiance and love is for the Old America, not the New Amerika. Sadly, the Old America has died, never to revived again in its original form. I am ashamed of the New Amerika for obvious reasons, and thus I have distanced myself from it as much as possible.

            I have no dream or hope that the current nation can be ‘reformed’ or ‘saved’ – at least not in its current form. We have went beyond the point of no return, and those who think they can still ‘save’ the U.S. fail to discern all that we face and the depth of the problems at hand. This will not be rectified by a vote or a conservative president.

            How this will all finally work out is anyone’s guess. Personally, I’m hoping we will pursue an amicable divorce. The other option is another bloody civil war which I pray we will avoid.

        • kikz2

          i really don’t want them here either….let them go back to whom ever financed them……soros probably….

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            They are members of the Tribe, and funded by the Tribe. Let them high five each other in Israel, surrounded by Muslims who have even less use for their “Pussy Riot” antics than we do. Vile does not begin to describe how I feel about these vedma.

      • 1stworlder

        Russia threw off the shackles of jewish Bolsheviks in living memory, there are not many alive in the US that haven’t been brainwashed.

    • Löwenmensch ᛟ

      Putin is not like Hitler, Putin isn’t even a Mussolini

    • WR_the_realist

      Hitler and his henchmen murdered enough Jews who were not Communists, and not white haters, that he guaranteed no one will ever vote for a man like Hitler again.

      White nationalists will continue to be thoroughly marginalized for as long as they make a fetish of Hitler.

      • DonReynolds

        The white nationalists do not make a fetish of Hitler….. none that I know of. The only steady diet of Hitler is the Jewish History Channel. I know of no American white nationalist that bothers to include Hitler history into today’s situation. If there are any…..I am sure they are NeoNazis, rather than white nationalists.

        • WR_the_realist

          Spend a few hours on the Stormfront,org web site if you think that white nationalists don’t make a fetish out of Hitler. And yes, of the many bad guys of the 20th century Hitler is the only one Jews obsess about, for understandable reasons.

        • LHathaway

          “white nationalists do not make a fetish of Hitler….. The only steady diet of Hitler is the Jewish History Channel”.

          Too funny. You had me laughing off and on for almost a minute.

          • ThomasER916

            I wouldn’t expect anything less from the likes of you.

          • LHathaway

            The likes of me? Please tell all about my likes and myself. . .

      • Sick of it

        So he murdered his half-Jewish soldiers en masse?

        • WR_the_realist

          Hitlerites love to point out that there were some half Jewish soldiers in the German Army. But that doesn’t change the fact that the Nazis wiped out most of the Polish Jews.

          • Sick of it

            #1 I’m not a fan of Hitler
            #2 Most of the Polish Jews settled in America

            They didn’t disappear…you see them in everything.

      • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

        If Hitler and his henchmen had been murdering Negroes instead of Jews, Detroit and Chicago would have violent crime rates resembling Wheeling, WV.

      • Junis

        The official narrative that 6 million Jews were killed by Hitler is a hoax. It was not logistically possible to kill so many people in such a confined place. Whites have a much higher regard for white Jews than they do for blacks and Muslims because they’re racist. The Jews (Neo-conservatives) have forced white Americans to pay 2 trillion dollars in taxes to destroy Iraq to protect ‘poor little’ Israel. White America seems to have no problem in bombing brown countries that are a potential to Israel.

        Now you know this, you can guess who really did 9/11.

  • ricpic

    I’ve begun to feel like a broken record predicting that nothing will change the current trend-lines drastically without a massive economic implosion first. But recently I see that prediction popping up everywhere. It seems to be becoming conventional wisdom. And that makes me doubt it will happen. Or if it does happen that the blow will be softened by some kind of internationally arrived at forgiveness of American debt. Yes, the United States will take a hit and the general standard of living here will go down. But is it in China’s interest or the Asian Tigers’ interest to have an imploded American (and probably European) market? So I think it is possible that a soft landing for America will be “arranged.” And if that will be the case then things won’t get bleak enough to precipitate a revolution against our corrupt culturally Marxist regime. Which may well continue in power indefinitely.

    • Martel

      You do not need an ”economic implosion”, a minor reduction in living standards would do. The ethnic tensions existing below the surface are highly inflammable.

      • kikz2

        just turn off sports…. that should do it…

    • LHathaway

      The economy will ‘crash’. We’ll read all about it on page 4. It makes white men feel better thinking that the economy just can’t function right without all that white-maleness everyone has turned their back on. Who said feelings don’t count?

  • dd121

    I don’t see any weakening of the left for their hatred of everything white and male. We’re they main whipping boy.

    • connorhus

      Until the gravy train runs dry then watch em turn on each other.

      • dd121

        One can only hope. The real scenario might be the white leftists raiding the whites for their last loaf of bread and giving it to the Bantus.

        • DonReynolds

          I do not doubt they would try, but I do doubt they would succeed.

          • dd121

            You on my left, JSS on my right. Won’t happen.

  • Geo1metric

    The status quo will continue until the main target, the White male and to a lesser extent Whites generally, starts to fight back; this will not happen until the “bread and circuses” stop.

  • John R

    I’ll make one prediction: As soon as Whites are a minority, watch how fast the Democratic Party drops the “women’s issues” and the gay agenda. It will just be non-Whites against us White people.

    • The reason I don’t think that would happen right away is that when white people become a political minority, it won’t be a situation where some other singular group is the majority. The other side will still have to keep its string bean KKKrazy Glue adhesive coalition together. But if one of the non-white racial groups becomes the political majority outright, then you’re right, Katie bar the door.

      • Ella

        When Whites become the minority at first and probably the ruling class as in Brazil, you’ll have a strong oligarchy. Many Whites are in denial about the very few rulers who will lead this country, and the bulk of Whites eventually will be cast off into poverty more like South Africa. Many Whites do not believe that they will succumb to this treatment.

      • kikz2

        i think it’ll be the muslims.. they’re very organized.. just look at britain.

    • Fair Dinkum

      I don’t think they’ll drop those issues, but they’ll probably put them on the back burners.

  • connorhus

    Mr. Gottfried is a smart man.

    I would only add one thing. It isn’t just the hatred for White Christian Men that unifies the Liberal-Femocrat-Conglomerate it’s easy spoils created from unrestrained debt AND the hatred of White Men.

    If the economy actually sinks and the Petro dollar becomes a thing of the past and no longer the worlds only reserve currency the Liberal-Femocrat Conglomerate will fall apart faster than an all Black Infantry unit in Korea.

  • JohnEngelman

    Some of the posters here seem to be looking forward to an economic collapse. They think the cause of white nationalism will benefit. I think the cause of social democracy is more likely to benefit.

    Since 1980 the United States has moved to the right on economic issues, but to the left on social issues. The rich have gotten richer while paying lower taxes.

    On the other hand, there is more approval of gay rights, gay marriage, and certainly interracial marriage. These attitude changes are easy to measure by public opinion polls. They indicate other changes as well, such as a decline in racial consciousness.

    Social liberalism – which white nationalists derogate as “cultural Marxism” – is not something the government forces on people. It is the result of changes in values and behavior in individuals. No one forces people to accept gay marriage or interracial marriage. Nevertheless, an increasing percentage of the American people have decided that these are no big deal. It is certainly the case that no one forces anyone to marry someone of another race. Nevertheless, the rate of interracial marriage has more than doubled since 1980.

    The increase in social liberalism is not really a political issue at all. Efforts to use political activism and government action to change attitudes about religion, sexuality, race, and ethnicity are almost certainly bound to fail. This is why the religious right was unable to restore the sexual and religious ethos of the 1950’s. It is why white nationalists are unlikely to restore the white male supremacy that prevailed back then.

    The growing income gap is an issue that is likely to benefit the economic left. In the United States median income adjusted for inflation declined 4.8 percent from 2000 to 2009. I have not been able to locate figures for this decade. I suspect that the decline has continued. I am confident that it has not been reversed.

    Nevertheless, per capita gross domestic product in current dollars grew from $36,467 in 2000 to $51,749 in 2012. This apparent anomaly can be explained by the fact that wealth is accumulating at the top while pay checks shrink. This in turn explains the growing popularity of socialism, especially among the young. For most Americans capitalism is not working anymore.

    • LHathaway

      “This is why the religious right was unable to restore the sexual and religious ethos of the 1950’s. It is why white nationalists are unlikely to restore the white male supremacy that prevailed back then”.

      You may call it white male supremacy but what was it Sam Dickson said in his recent video, ‘the good old days were anti-white too’?

      I might say myself, extinction has a way of getting in the way of grand socialist plans and these ‘inevitabilities’ you speak of?

    • connorhus

      Each of the social issues you point out are not new BTW. Increased acceptance of homosexuality, welfare etc come about when a population has increased leisure and cheap energy/resources to waste. An economic collapse will bring about an end to that set of circumstances.

      • JohnEngelman

        Welfare is a economic issue rather than a social issue. Nevertheless, when whites become aware that they can lose their jobs and not find anything else I suspect many change their attitudes about Section 8 housing, EBT cards, and stuff like that.

        Chronic unemployment is less likely to cause one to be hostile to gays, non whites and Jews, than it will cause them to become hostile to an upper class that keeps getting richer.

        • connorhus

          Well Chronic unemployment and economic collapse sure didn’t work according to your model in 1930’s Germany did it?

          • JohnEngelman

            The Great Depression gave Germany Hitler. Fortunately, it gave us Roosevelt.

          • connorhus

            I wouldn’t claim that as being fortunate and I doubt it would have happened had we already been “Die-Verse”.

          • 1stworlder

            Didn’t Roosevelt devalue the dollar by 40%

          • WR_the_realist

            Yes. Even though the Constitution actually requires that states make gold and/or silver coin their money, which would of necessity mean that people can own gold or silver coins, Roosevelt confiscated all gold and made it illegal to own it. Then he revalued gold upward, which is the same as devaluing the dollar. (Yes, that clause about states only using gold or silver coin as tender in debts is the most ignored part of the Constitution.) Some of the youngsters here may not realize it but it wasn’t until the mid 70s that it became legal for Americans to own gold again. For 40 years in the land of the free, home of the brave there was a nonradioactive element that Americans were not allowed to own. The bill to make gold ownership legal again was introduced by Ron Paul and Jesse Helms.

          • Alexandra1973

            I would say “unfortunately.” Seems FDR was a forerunner to Obama.

          • JohnEngelman

            Unfortunately Obama does not have Roosevelt’s political skills. Roosevelt defeated the Republicans, pushed them out of the way, and did what he needed to do end the Great Depression.

          • WR_the_realist

            Hitler and Hirohito had more to do with ending the Great Depression. We didn’t get out of it until World War II.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            You wouldn’t think kindly of Roosevelt if you looked closely at who he associated with.

          • JohnEngelman

            Some were Communist sympathizers. Unless they passed classified material to the Soviet Union I do not see anything wrong with that.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            They were worse than communist sympathizers, they directly aided and abetted the murder of tens of millions in Eastern Europe.

          • JohnEngelman

            No they did not.

            The Soviet Union was an essential ally in World War II. Eighty percent of casualties in the German Army were suffered on the Russian front.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            I was not talking about the war, I was talking about how they aided and abetted the Bolshevik extermination of whole strata of the Ukrainian and Russian populations before, during and after the war in the Gulags and in numerous body dumps that are being re-discovered across both nations. Were it not for their accomplices in high places in the West, the Bolsheviks would have ended up like the skulls and bones in the photos at the hands of rightfully vengeful Slavs.

      • Martel

        Glad you brought it up. Its just history repeating itself. Many believe in the historical narrative influenced by the works of Karl Marx, where mankind slowly moves from a state of opression towards freedom for all classes and minorities. This inspires many male and female babyboomers, and to a degree even their offspring, but its historically incorrect. As you see Engelman also believes in mankind ”progressing”. In fact, the only relevant changes are due to capitalism.

      • kikz2

        the newest, the camp of the ‘infant’ saints is quite novel… sooner or later, if let run wild, the more geographically stable/dug in of the citizenry will take notice.

    • WR_the_realist

      “White male supremacy” — sheesh, you sound like our supporters over at the Daily Kos. That simply means the last time when most white women thought it appropriate to have children, stay home, and take care of them, while their husbands worked at some crappy job to make the money. It’s no accident that whites have been declining as a percentage of the population ever since.

      • JohnEngelman

        White male supremacy includes the time when blacks and women were excluded from positions they were qualified for. I am opposed to affirmative action. I am in favor of all careers being opened to talent.

        • LHathaway

          Please, give us an example of white male supremacy, and tell us about such a time.

          • JohnEngelman

            Well into the 1960’s newspapers’ help wanted adds were divided into two sections. There was “Help Wanted Men,” and “Help Wanted Women.” The jobs in “Help Wanted Men” nearly always paid more. Many capable women could have performed well in most of them.

    • Sangraal

      A growth in the popularity of socialism in no way precludes prospects for white nationalism. Ethnocentrism goes hand in hand with a more collectivist conception of your national community. The crux is whether this collectivism is particularised or universalised. Most European nationalist parties lean to the left economically. I understand that the US completely lacks such parties, but I mention this to illustrate that these sentiments converge.
      As for interracial marriage, that is indeed an obstacle for white nationalism. But it’s also a reason why WN is all the more pertinent.

      ‘Efforts to use political activism and government action to change
      attitudes about religion, sexuality, race, and ethnicity are almost
      certainly bound to fail. ‘

      You want to change attitudes about race as well, do you not? How would you envisage doing this if not through political activism and government action?

      • JohnEngelman

        I agree with much of what you say. On many occasions I have acknowledged that Social Democracy only works smoothly in countries where nearly everyone is white.

        • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

          If you want really good jazz, you need White musicians. Blacks are horrible instrumentalists.

  • IKUredux

    Whites invented Leftism. Whites invented political systems. Whites invented democracy. Oh, hell, Whites invented EVERYTHING! Whites also invented the concept of equality and egalitarianism. (Did you know that all African languages require NO dictionary? Everybody who speaks an African language, already knows ALL the words!). We Whites have actually decided to make up shiite to make it seem as though all the other races of the world have contributed. It is a lie. It is a Damn lie. We Whites have created the world in which we live. (H/T God). I for one, absolutely refuse to believe that the geniuses of the American revolutionary Founding Fathers, did NOT happen by some sort of “happy” accident. I fervently believe that these extraordinary men managed to come together by DIVINE intervention. How else to explain all these geniuses, at one place, at one time? This country has turned its back on God. God has turned his back on us. And, for all of you anti-Christians out there: Christianity was the impetus of most of the greatest achievements by Whites. Architecture, music, art. To denigrate Christianity, is to denigrate Western Civilization. They are inseparable.

    • Sick of it

      To deal with your last few sentences, atheists have systematically concocted a narrative explaining that various great men in history were not really Christians at all. Of course, we do not see great achievements coming from their ilk, but they keep pushing their garbage worldview nonetheless.

    • ThomasER916

      I agree to an extent with your last sentence, but Whites never put their official stamp on it to make it exclusively and explicitly White.

    • kikz2

      you’re going to be offended and i really don’t care…..

      ya know what is inseparable from Xtianity it’s genocide of heretics…….as soon as your beloved Xtians lost the power of life/death over people and killing ‘heretics’ over divergence of dogma in those lovely Inquisitions, Deists came out of the shadows…..and contributed much to Western Civilization, including the founding of the US. you labor under illusion if you think the US was formed by and for Xtians in exclusivity. Franklin, Ethan Allen, Jefferson, Paine, Washington, and many others would disagree.

      let’s go back a little further though shall we?…….care to enlighten us as to what was lost in that last burning of the Library of Alexandria by one your extremist Xtian mobs, hmmmm?

      you wanna talk denigration of Western Civilization? Xtianity ultimately put the West at least two thousand years behind were we should’ve been just with that one instance of its massive hubris.. if not for Arab Spain retransmitting us our own knowledge.. i shudder to think where the West might still be due to those lovely Xtian dark ages.

    • Laura Dilworth

      the u.s. was part of our evolution. the ancient greeks had a republic. the english had the magna carta. and so on and so on

    • Zaporizhian Sich

      Sorry, that is not true, our ancient enemy the Tribe invented Leftism, in all of it’s evil incarnations. Even though the Romans made some of the same disastrous mistakes the West is doing right now, they didn’t slaughter entire strata of conquered nations the way the Tribe drowned the soil of Russia with the blood of ethnic Russians. The photo below is graphic and shocking, but everyone must never forget that if we do not start fighting for our own interests, this will be our fate, or our descendants fate.

  • Löwenmensch ᛟ

    I hope the Yellowstone Supervolcano erupts by then.

  • BernieGoetzFan

    Glad you asked Prof. Gottfried to contribute. I have been reading him for over 20 years. He was one of the first to take a stand.

    • Geo1metric

      I recently read WAR AND DEMOCRACY by Gottfried; excellent book as most of his are.

  • DonReynolds

    I smell something, when reading this commentary….that I have smelled so often in the past. It is that sweet putrid scent of something that is dead but still manages to attract the attention of bees.
    This country….my country….is by no means dead, even as our enemies cast lots for our clothes. This country is able to brush away the false vision of a utopian future, that has never existed, and rise up on its hind legs. I do not doubt that some will. And that is my point.
    In our search for a political solution, we have become fixated on a bogus claim…..that the MAJORITY are in agreement with being slain. We need to quit thinking in terms of who has the most noses in their camp. What matters is who has the most patriots.
    During the American revolution, the patriots never numbered more than a quarter of the population. Those loyal to the British crown were even more numerous, and had the backing of British troops and foreign mercenaries. Roughly half the population just wanted to stay completely out of it entirely. That is what it will be like next time. A quarter of the population will support the restoration of freedom, half will hope they can stay out of it, and the Leftists (et al) will be the opposition. Our quarter is the most armed and includes the most military vets and we will fight to resist being slaves to the utopian Left.

    • Mike Lane

      Wonderful statement. I feel exactly the same. The primary fault with so many of us here on AmRen is the pessimism. What so many don’t realize is how EASY it is to fight back and WIN. All we have to do is spread well thought out, logical, coherent, and consistent ideas. I meet more and more people who share the general beliefs on this forum. All they need is a little push in the right direction.

      For everyone else reading this, one easy way to get the message across is through ART. The great thing about art (especially FILMS) is that it is able to channel the emotions of an audience toward something powerful without any “preachy baggage” that comes later. Great films include: 300, Braveheart, Fight Club, Conan the Barbarian (1982), the Patriot. These are just a few films that capture the essence needed to awaken so many potential allies.

      • LHathaway

        With the exception of Conan the Barbarian (surely a classic) those are all mindless cartoon like visions promoting violence, war and fighting. That’s not what I want white culture to be about. If you think MMA and UFC fighting, and bald heads, tattoos and piercings, are a great advance for western civilization, this would be at least one thing we would have to disagree on.

        • Mike Lane

          When did I say MMA/UFC was the future? I’m not a fan of either (so I don’t know much) but they always struck me as the stereotypical trailer trash who just happened to make it big.

          On the other hand you’re a fool if you actually think mild-mannered talks on NPR or a TV network are the future for our aims. The key to any successful movement is to walk to our own beat and never accept the grounds of an opponent. Part of this means being a man and teaching our sons the importance of honor and the will to fight. 300 is told in the format of a good ole fashion military campfire tale designed to inspire men on the battlefield. Other than 300 (which is based on a comic book) and maybe Fight Club, I don’t see how Braveheart or the Patriot are “cartoons”.

      • JK474

        Well, “pessimism” is just another word for “realism” and I’m WR the realist. Almost every problem we have is caused by optimists. Optimists believe debt doesn’t matter. Optimists believe that if we give 15 million illegal aliens amnesty they’ll become good Republicans. Optimists believe a bit more money will “close the gap” between the educational achievements of blacks and whites. Optimists believe that Muslims will love us if we invade their countries and replace their dictators with our dictators. Every war is started by an optimist, who believes the costs will be little and the rewards will be great.

        I agree we need great art, but we sure as hell have a different notion of what great art is.

        • Tom B.

          I agree with you. After all, a pessimist is just an informed optimist!

          • Martel

            A pessimist is politically irrelevant, it is someone who is so miserable that he can’t convince a single soul to agree with him.Have you ever seen a successful political movement filled with depressive pessimists?

            No.

            I’m optimistic because my world views are proved to be right everyday.I’m optimistic because I know a multi ethnic society will not last.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            All of us know that. What most of us do not know is how are whites going to survive the inevitable genocide and atrocities that will come when a multi-racial society inevitably blows apart like a runaway nuclear reactor.

          • Martel

            Not all of us know this, many are proudly pessimistic. I don’t foresee any large scale ethnic cleansing of any ethnic group because the political order would have relative success in preventing such events with all the technology that exists today. Violent riots will definitely occur frequently.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            When the country flies apart, there will be no stopping it. Look at what happened to Yugoslavia and now Ukraine.

          • Martel

            US corporations, US government, and all nations & foreign corporations would step in to protect the US market. Quite a different situation from Yugoslavia & Ukraine.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            Step in all they like, the no-limit elites are not going to be able to stop it any more than the operators at reactor number four were unable to stop the nuclear runaway they themselves started. Some things once started cannot be stopped. For one, the only way the country would be held together is the government killing tens of millions, and that will accelerate the break up, not stop it.

        • Mike Lane

          That’s where you are dead wrong. It’s not your observation about moronic liberal idealism that’s wrong, but your premise that somehow they’re the only ones with a monopoly on solutions.

          By ceding the title of “optimist” to liberals, you give them the moral/psychological high ground. No wonder America has been going downhill- the only people with solutions are liberals. At least liberals are willing to give solutions to our problems (even though they are the problem, and their “solutions” only make it worse). People like you just sit around and whine the whole time: “Poor me! Poor America! We’re doomed! The End Is Nigh!!!” To hell with that thinking.

          As far as I’m concerned, you’re no more a help to our cause than they are. How do you expect us to get anywhere when all we do is post articles simply talking about declining birth rates and mass immigration? These things are fine, but with no active/ coherent solution what good is it?

      • Martel

        You are absolutely correct. Optimists make a difference, pessimists never do.

    • connorhus

      While I admire your sentiments and agree in the end numbers will not matter so much, I disagree with a couple of your claims.

      For one thing the sheer numbers of volunteers that flooded the American militia right after Bunker Hill works out to a much higher statistical ratio of non-combatant supporters and overall population support than 25%. The number of actual men who volunteered would need a population support percentage in excess of 60%. Depending on the region and time you can make any claim as to the actual percentage of supporters for the War of Independence and make it stick. It varied greatly.

      The sheer numbers of minority immigrants in this country today mean that by and large the political battle is lost. No one is saying it is over that I see but more are admitting everyday there is no longer room for a non-violent solution and it is a bit too early for a military one.

      In the end the White Man will win this fight. White Men have been outnumbered since time began and no race operates better under pressure militarily than Whites. Yet the political solution is now beyond our means.

      • DonReynolds

        I am sure we agree more than we disagree.

        It is too late to talk our way out of this. There are no political solutions, since any political solution would require a majority of the votes.

        As bad as I hate it, the solution will be force of arms, and once it starts it will not end until it is completely finished. There will be no truce. But fortunately, we do not need the most guns or the most men in order to win.

        • connorhus

          I am sure we agree on almost everything. The support thing is important to me personally because I think it shows where we have to be in general opinion (of Whites) to take this to the next level. Many people out there (not you) will claim the old 3% number in an attempt to prod people into taking some action that it is not yet time for and right now that is dangerous. We don’t need more incidents like just happened in Las Vegas.

          We have a few stages yet before this thing goes hot but I think it will. When it does once again the world will see why you do not push the White Man up against the wall. Cities evaporate and Continents tremble under marching feet when that happens.

          • 1stworlder

            Vegas was not us,, if they where actual white fighters they wouldn’t have killed white people. Do you really think there was no affirmative actions or illegals they could have targeted?

          • neverevrland

            The Vegas Killers were white trash meth-head losers who couldn’t stay out of jail. The fact that they murdered three white men in their sick (probably meth fueled) rampage should put the end to the notion they were “white supremacists.”

          • cherrie greenbaum123

            That of course will never be mentioned on MSM.

          • connorhus

            Who is the us you refer to? My guess is the couple in LV thought they were in an “Us” group of some kind. Unless of course you think it was a setup, which is possible. They were crazy that much is obvious but they did try and join the (you know) and were turned away. So someone or many someone’s did influence them… Maybe.

          • Pro_Whitey

            Very good point. When I hear of incidents like the alleged anti-Semite who managed to murder non-Jews in Missouri(?) and the “white revolutionaries” in Vegas who shoot white people, I think, note to self, when attacking the enemy, make sure you are attacking the enemy!

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            At least some of these attacks are bound to be false flags, the rest the work of people who really did go off the deep end. Whether or not they were abducted by government agents and worked over, OR they were a handful of fries shy of a happy meal, the alien controlled media will exploit every incident to the nth degree to make all whites look like terrorists, or worse.

        • JohnEngelman

          White nationalists cannot achieve anything by force of arms. There are already too many non whites and Jews in the United States. There will always be plenty of white Gentiles, like me, who will oppose the white nationalists.

          What you are expressing is a foolish and dangerous fantasy, like the foolish and dangerous fantasy of a Revolution that was held by the more extreme members of the anti war movement during the War in Vietnam.

          • DonReynolds

            I am not surprised you feel that way, John……but something is a “foolish and dangerous fantasy” only when another way is better. So far, the only other way is surrender, which I consider worse.

          • JohnEngelman

            Whites are not threatened by race displacement, genocide, or Cultural Marxism. Everyone on the left end of the bell curve is threatened by an economy that has less use for them than in the past.

            Many whites out there would rather blame race displacement and that other stuff for their problems, just as many blacks like to blame white racism.

          • DonReynolds

            Gosh, John. How can you keep it all straight if everyone is simply lying about what they feel threatened by?
            So to you, it is all about the below average half of each race, that is no longer needed in this economy and they feel threatened by it.
            You certainly have a unique perspective.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            You are threatened by Blacks gaining jobs they do not deserve by Affirmative Action, as are all of us Whites. Blacks claiming jobs at places where they should be cleaning the toilets is hurting all of us.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            I differ with you, ultimately if White Nationalism wins out, it will do so with the use of force, and all the death and destruction that goes with it. It will be those who cannot be named, the darkies and the Left who will make it that way. Violence can of course backfire, but eliminating those who offer aid and comfort to the enemy in any way will be the order of the day. There is no talking our way out of this one, sooner or later we will have to kill and be killed. White gentiles who oppose WN will be useful idiots, and useful idiots are killed when they are no longer useful.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            A White/Asian alliance, with Jews realistically included as Whites, but free of Blacks/Browns/Muslims, is not going to happen. A White homeland, with racial realist pro-White Jews and Asians who agree with our cause, may happen. Pro-White Jews are rare, though, and Asians have kept their own nations racially pure.

      • 1stworlder

        the immigrants are all low IQ waiting for handouts. Take out those that do the thinking for them and they will be as disorganized as any 3rdworld group.

        • connorhus

          I agree militarily speaking but I never considered those immigrants a threat in that way. They are simply another weight added to the loss of the political fight. Those immigrants do not fight as well as Whites but they certainly can vote just as well.

        • ThomasER916

          Look at the Turd World invasion and you’ll see the Cargo Cults. That puts it all into perspective. They can NEVER create. They only see the magic of the White man’s creation and believe that magic is denied to them. If they wear the mask of the White man or drink his blood they’ll gain his powers to make food, warmth and light.

    • 1stworlder

      Actually only 3% of the population actively fought the British.

      • connorhus

        I like that number III%. I appreciate the emotion it stirs and the abstract truth it pushes home but if you count all the militia men and state troops it does come out to a bit higher than 3% overall. I suspect the total number of those serving had more to do with the total number of Brits and Hessians than how many Americans were actually willing. Had Parliament allowed another few thousand troops be sent I am sure there would have been more Americans under arms.

      • ThomasER916

        I’ve pointed this out to many. If only 1% of White American males geared up and fought against the Culture of Critique and their Turd World we’d become an ethno-state in the blink of an eye. Over 56k militia per state would put 1k in every city and town. Only the largest cities would be left alone and we could just flip the switch. Everything is logistics at that point.

      • DonReynolds

        I am sure you are correct. The Continental Army numbers were small and at times there were more French regulars than Americans in the battles. Not many men are willing to fight against the British and their German mercenaries. The odds were very long.

    • jayvbellis

      Yeah, but these patriot militia types waste their time supporting the likes of fool, traitor rancher Cliven Burdy who just LOVES mass 3rd world immigration, thinks the millions of Central American Amer-Indians , Mestizos are “Spanish” with better work ethic and family values than we White Americans.

  • Peter Connor

    “Still gathering momentum?” The minute there is one crack in this Potemkin ideology, the whole thing will be swept away.

  • John R

    “Great balls of fire!”

  • Magician

    The advertisement for the Cisco WebEx (video conferencing application) popped up while I was surfing the Internet and I was moderately surprised that it used a black woman instead of a black man. Most high-tech products advertisements contain black men and if the ratio of black men – white men appearing on high-tech product advertisements were truly reflecting the racial ratio of the employees at those high-tech companies there would be about 50% black men working in high-tech companies.

    signup[dot]webex[dot]com/webexmeetings/images/lp-acquisition.png

    • 1stworlder

      Someone useless had to be sent to the photo op. It gave the other people more time to fix her mistakes.

  • MBlanc46

    Yet another depressing prediction. Not quite as unrelievedly gloomy as Derbyshire’s, but bad enough.

    By the way, “post-Marxist Cultural Left” is much more descriptive and accurate than the solecism “Cultural Marxism”.

    • LHathaway

      I actually remember that, for I knew actual communists, or at least An actual communist and some of his acquaintances (and who knew about them for sure). It wasn’t John Engleman. When the Soviet Union fell, and the American Communist party stopped running a candidate for president, it seemed to change a little bit into talk about ‘social justice’, and instead of economic justice it seemed to be a realignment with and a support of blacks and browns. Engleman pretends to care about working-class whites in an effort to work on our votes, haha. Can’t say for sure how big an influence ex-marxists had but most of them were at least a small part of the left after Marxism was discredited. Or should I say after ‘economic marxism’ was discredited? Many of them would seem to be very well-educated. And the left, of course, have no enemies on the left? We could learn a thing or two from them. Perhaps they can appear offensive but they seem to play the game better than we do. They live to take some kind of moral high-road. Imaginary or not.

      • MBlanc46

        By the time that I came of age in the 1960s, there were already very few Marxists left. I have known a few actual CPUSA Communists, but they were a generation or two older. I’m sure it’s the case that if many on the so-called left today had lived in the 1930s and 1940s, they would have been Communists, or Trotskyites, or some other flavor of socialist. But they didn’t and they’re not. For one thing, the Left before just recently were always a minority, both numerically and in terms of influence. The actually existing Left, if it’s not a numerical majority, certainly controls the major institutions of American and western European societies.

    • Martel

      Shame I am a nobody in this movement, and probably will remain so. There is no need for gloomy predictions, in terms of demographics there are dark days ahead of us, but this is already set in stone for the most part, which means there is no need to be depressed over these events. What will change, is the cohesion of white communities, who will break free from the chains of political correctness.

      • MBlanc46

        I keep waiting for the essay with an outlook that’s at-least-not-completely-negative. So far we’re naught for three.

        • Martel

          We already know the consequences of the demographic changes ahead of us, no need dwelling on them. Whites will no longer feel untouchable as a people, which will make them much more susceptible for people like you and I.

          • MBlanc46

            It is my feeling that whites are finally starting to wake up to the extent of black violence and of mass Latin American immigration.

    • JohnEngelman

      I like “post-Marxist Cultural Left,” but “social liberalism” is sufficient. Karl Marx’s exclusive concern was economics. He ignored cultural factors.

      • MBlanc46

        Not just ignored them, but maintained that they were secondary to class relations–even epiphenomenal. My problem with “social liberalism” is that “liberalism” is so ill-defined. Originally it meant absence of state control. Today it means pretty much the complete opposite. Of course, “Left” (and “Right”) are, if anything, even worse. How factions arranged themselves in the French National Assembly doesn’t do much to classify contemporary sociopolitical tendencies.

  • Martel

    Interracial marriages remain rare, and divorce rates are and will remain significantly higher then normal marriages. Since people prefer segregation as much as they did forty years ago, you keep arguing a point which you have already lost many times. You are unwilling or unable to factor in facts about segregation, which means you are either in denial or not interested in the truth.

    • JohnEngelman

      From 1959 to 2013 approval of marriages between blacks and whites has increased from 4 percent to 87 percent.

      “About 15% of all new marriages in the United States in 2010 were between spouses of a different race or ethnicity from one another, more than double the share in 1980 (6.7%).”

      De facto segregation between whites and blacks persists. However, as soon as Orientals have been here for a generation or two they move smoothly into white neighborhoods, and into American corporations.

      Already there are more Orientals with well paying high tech jobs in Silicon valley than whites working there.

      • Martel

        Ethnicity is a meaningless concept for defending ”interracial marriage”, naturally you will get much higher statistics. Even these meaningless statistics do not answer my claim that the divorce rate is significantly higher in interracial marriages. Approval ratings mean little, as I have stated before in debates where you didn’t offer a rebuttal.

        The oriental community has already shown that it prefers segregation, I see you still have not bought a copy of White Identity. Possibly because you don’t want to fill Taylors pockets. Short term integration is expected for immigrants and ethnic groups climbing the corporate ladder, but is in no way a sign for long term trends.

        • JohnEngelman

          Certain attitudes are difficult to test directly. The growing practice and approval of interracial marriage is a good indication that racial loyalty is declining.

          I have read Jared Taylor’s “Paved With Good Intentions,” as well as “The Color of Crime,” which I believe was partly read by Jared Taylor. I enjoy quoting both in order to explain my admiration of Orientals.

        • JohnEngelman

          Well, it seems to me that if there are two racial groups that can live side by side in harmony, it appears to be whites and Asians

          – Jared Taylor

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            The genocidal invasion of Eastern Europe by Asians since Atilla the Hun that left entire cities burned out and full of charred skeletons says otherwise. Nor does the horrific brutality towards whites on the part of Asians witnessed by my relatives bears that out.

          • JohnEngelman

            When I have lived with Orientals I was perfectly safe. When I have visited Oriental neighborhoods I was perfectly safe. When I have worked with Orientals we worked well together.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            My experience with them was quite the opposite, so do not assume that just because things worked out for you that it’s necessarily true for others.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am sorry you have had bed experiences with Orientals.

            I have had good experiences living with Orientals, and bad experiences living with blacks. Material I have found on American Renaissance and elsewhere tells me that in each case my experiences were typical.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            We’ll see how you feel about them when one points a shotgun at your head for grins and giggles.

          • JohnEngelman

            A white person is more likely to do that than an Oriental.

          • Zaporizhian Sich

            If you were in the same situation, you won’t be thinking that way.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Same here. Never had a problem with an Oriental. Negroes are pure annoyance.

          • JohnEngelman

            During my life I have had two close friends who were black. If they were typical of their race, there would be few racial problems.

            Some whites would still dislike blacks for the same reason that they dislike Orientals because they look different, but this would be a manageable problem.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Same here. Asians are oriented towards hard work like us, and don’t usually have contentious temperaments. They can be a little bland, but are sensible hard workers who are easy to be around. They are brutally violent, like us, when fighting for a cause, but seldom violent in the random fashion of Blacks/Hispanics. Zaph has to look at the here and now with the Asian issue. Asian minorities have not been a problem in White lands.

          • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

            Jared Taylor is right about this. Asians are only non-White group that is compatible with Whites to any degree whatsoever.

    • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

      I wish I could agree, Martel, but we are in the throes of a miscegenation epidemic in America. White women Mudsharking with Negroes used to be a rare site. These Mulatto children now being born are going to be a massive problem in 20 years. Remember, Obongo is a mulatto raised around few other Blacks.

      • Martel

        Those less sensitive to genetic differences, leave the white gene pool. This means the remaining Europeans who do not miscegenate are by nature more ethnocentric. Which is not a bad thing at all, those whites who leave the gene pool would do more damage then good.

  • fgbrunner3

    Thankfully, liberals die, pass away and disappear. The anti-American white left of the 1960s will soon begin to pass away. Thank God.

  • Some very fine points. However, “I vote for the most leftist and the most emphatically anti-white candidates. The crazier the better!” will be interpreted as approving the policies of those subjugating, displacing and in some cases killing Whites. If this is White solidarity, I’ll take a pass.

    • WR_the_realist

      Clearly Gottfried subscribes to the principle that the worse, the better. Me, I just think that the worse, the worse.

      • Yes, ironically it reminds me a bit of the Marxists. ‘It doesn’t matter how many innocent bystanders are hurt or killed–as long as it speeds the revolutionary awakening!’

      • SlizzardAjeosshi

        I wholeheartedly agree

      • Agreed. Answered earlier. It was not intemperate, nor did it contain a web address, but I guess it was removed. Starting to have second thoughts about commenting hereabouts.

  • M.Magog

    if we could only make all people of color “queer”.

  • FozzieT

    One additional item to consider is that today’s white young people are being exposed to ethnic minorities on a scale unlike what us “older folks” experienced growing up.

    “Familiarity breeds contempt” is an idiom because it is true. There is a chance that our future leaders will not have the same illusions about the races that our generation had.

    • Martel

      I am definitely a product of this idiom, and I notice the same in many of my peers who also grew up in a multi ethnic society.

      • Sangraal

        Unfortunately, I’ve found the opposite. It seems to me that one of the biggest obstacles to any kind of white identitarian movement is that so many whites of a certain generation have grown up around non-whites. For urban whites these days, it’s almost impossible to avoid having non-white friends and colleagues (and in some dire cases, family). People won’t go near a movement that means excluding people they feel an affinity with.
        This was a big obstacle for me when I was first drawn to this movement, and I still wrestle with it sometimes. But I recognise that our people’s destiny transcends my personal affiliations. Most people don’t think like this however. They will take the immediate and the personal over the transcendent and the supra-personal.
        We have our work cut out for us.

        • SlizzardAjeosshi

          You are absolutely right, if it wasn’t for my personal circumstances i could be a white nationalist (even if i’m not really convinced of an alliance encompassing Germanic, Mediterranean and Slavic people but i digress) …and i’m not even young (pushing 40 this year)

          I think this is indeed a huge hurdle to overcome for a nationalist movement

        • Martel

          You bring up a good point, and one that has been on my mind since I started to define myself as a ”white nationalist”. Fortunately, the old nationalist guard did not have our experience, and even better, there are clear cut answers for this problem. There is really nothing new about multi ethnic societies, remember that. What region of the US are you from?

          • Sangraal

            I’m not from the US, I’m from England.

          • Martel

            Good, quite a few possibilities there.

          • Sangraal

            Eh, the grass is always greener from the other side…:)

          • Martel

            I’m from the Netherlands and quite familiar with the situation in England. I prefer the situation in my own country, but I see many favourable circumstances in your country too. The US will be one of the last countries to wake up, mainly because of geographic factors.

          • Sangraal

            Agreed about the US, despite what certain posters here think…

  • WR_the_realist

    The increasing popularity of socialism is no doubt due to the increasing economic inequality in this country. That is driven by two things — outsourcing of jobs, which Democrats will not do a thing to prevent, and insourcing of cheap labor through illegal and mass immigration, which the Democrats actively encourage. One of the very few things that would actually discourage outsourcing would be higher tariffs on imports. The only politician in recent memory to advocate that was Pat Buchanan.

    Socialism is the peculiar idea that politicians have both the right to take my money and the wisdom to spend it more wisely than I would myself. I am unconvinced.

    • JohnEngelman

      The Immigration Reform Act of 1965 made it easier for the oligarchy to import cheap labor. The North American Free Trade Agreement made it easier for the oligarchy to export good jobs.

      Although each of these were signed by Democratic presidents, a higher percentage of Republicans in Congress voted for them than the percentage of Democrats.

      • WR_the_realist

        On immigration you have to go back 49 years to find a case where Democrats were (slightly) better than Republicans. (And that was back in the days where there were still a fair number of George Wallace style southern Democrats.) On exporting jobs you only have to go back 20 years. Never have the Democrats lifted a finger to undo these two mistakes.

        When are you going to realize that the Democratic Party isn’t what it was in 1965?

        When it comes to outsourcing jobs, there isn’t a bit of difference between the two parties. Both listen to their globalist paymasters. On immigration, every Democratic politician is awful, just awful. Republicans are divided. There are good ones like Jeff Sessions and terrible ones like Lindsey Graham.

        • JohnEngelman

          The Democrat view of immigration is often more nuanced than you seem to realize. This is what my favorite columnist Paul Krugman wrote about the issue: “my take on the politics of immigration is that it divides both parties, but in different ways.

          “Democrats are torn individually (a state I share). On one side, they favor helping those in need, which inclines them to look sympathetically on immigrants; plus they’re relatively open to a multicultural, multiracial society. I know that when I look at today’s Mexicans and Central Americans, they seem to me fundamentally the same as my grandparents seeking a better life in America.

          “On the other side, however, open immigration can’t coexist with a strong social safety net; if you’re going to assure health care and a decent income to everyone, you can’t make that offer global.

          “So Democrats have mixed feelings about immigration; in fact, it’s an agonizing issue.”

          • WR_the_realist

            They may have mixed feelings but in the final analysis when to comes to the vote they vote for amnesty and increased legal immigration. Every time.

          • JohnEngelman

            What you say is largely true. Liberals have difficulty understanding that a high rate of immigration conflicts with nearly everything else they want to achieve.

  • Ella

    At the end every Liberal alliance group will get the shaft if they believe it or not except for the few leaders. Communists had a history of severe violence or Civil Wars until a dominant group emerges. An impending democratic collapse may take another 100 years as the misery continues.

  • WR_the_realist

    I am very much tempted to send that image to my Democrat voting sister, who would be appalled that I post to this site. Like John Engleman, she still thinks the Democratic Party is what it was in 1965.

  • jayvbellis

    Don’t support Prophessor Gottfried’s vote for the worst. There needs to be more specific objectives like supporting the worst Islamic extremist immigrants – this group is responsible for the rise of populist, nationalist , anti cultural Marxists in Western Europe. There is no way the alert can make nasty, ugly, 8th century Islamic extremists look cute and victim like.

    If you are really tired of waiting, convert to Islam, get dirty and hairy and start saying, doing outrageipuous things to gays, women, Jews – the Left. Have some fun out there.

    Join the War against Christmas in the Siuth, only from an Islamic immigration “we’re taking over” perspective.

  • Mr. Gottfried
    makes a lot of sense, but his idea of voting for hard left candidates is a bit short
    sighted. All it’ll do is expedite gun
    confiscation and the looting of personal assets and property. Two options will
    then remain open to those fighting to save white America: praying and more
    praying. Trying to galvanize what’s left of white
    America, hopelessly factionalized as it is, in the short time that’s left seems
    a daunting task.

  • DonReynolds

    ….and were law abiding citizens, honest, agreeable…..I agree…..if they were all good Boy Scouts, but so few are.

  • DonReynolds

    Optimization science is not economics.
    In a community, meaning more than one individual, it is impossible for all individuals to maximize their total utility, nor was it ever the goal in economics. In a Pareto optimal solution, no person could increase his own satisfaction without diminishing the satisfaction of someone else. That is what economics considers optimal. It does not mean that everyone is equal, or they get the same food, or has the same house. It means that no person can further improve their own total utility without decreasing the utility of someone else.

    Liberals are utilitarians and they (knowingly or not) subscribe to Jeremy Bentham in a thousand different ways. Optimality is often described as “the greatest good for the greatest number”, which completely ignores the individual.

  • Zaporizhian Sich

    Indeed, they must pay a very high price for what they’ve done, revenge is going to be a ***** when we get ours.

  • NoMosqueHere

    Will white liberals and leftists be denied citizenship in the so called white ethnostate? If not, it won’t be long before it implodes too.

  • Gottfried makes a lot of sense, but his idea of voting for hard left candidates is a bit short
    sighted. All it’ll do is expedite gun confiscation and the looting of personal assets and property. Two options will then remain open to those fighting to save white America: praying and more praying. Trying to galvanize what’s left of white America, hopelessly factionalized as it is, in the short time that’s left seems a daunting task.

    Maybe we can: Stop buying (as much as possible) from any egalitarian corporate
    entity. Never buy a mainstream media publication.Cancel all television cable subscriptions. Stop buying Movie DVD’s produced by major media With the funds saved from these sacrifices, buy guns.

  • Zaporizhian Sich

    Were it not from financing from western banks, AND willing collaboration from Washington, those Judeo-Bolsheviks would have got what they deserved, a brutal and violent death for their atrocities against my ancestors. This is not just something from a history book for me, this has affected me personally. They tore my father’s family apart, which has had a terrible effect upon my father, and hence me too. That is why if I got the chance, I would have gladly slaughtered “Commies for mommy.” Which is what the Ukrainians in the SS-Gallicia division and the White Russians during the civil war that lead to Bolshevism did. They killed every one of them they could find.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Gottfried is right that non-Whites will never form any type of alliance Blacks and Hispanics detest each other, and they both detest Asians as much, if not more than, they detest Whites. For Blacks, everything is about race, yet there is no serviceable group unity amongst Blacks. The minute Blacks have any money or education, their first move is to leave the Black masses behind. They hold anything they view as “ghetto” in total repugnance. They find an urban/suburban White Lefty neighborhood to invade. This invasion is going to be an intense problem in 20 years, thanks to affirmative action. Most of the types of Blacks I am referring to have no more moral fabric or intelligence than their ghetto cousins that they detest. As a result, I predict higher income Negro enclaves in various suburbs in 20 years, lower crime places than the Black ghetto, but nothing like the White suburbs we have known. The suburbs and wealthier neighborhoods of the present heavily Black cities are where these will be. White Libtards will stay until the Black percentage gets above about 20 percent, than they will start to see racial reality and flee. Smart Whites will depart for rural locales, or migrate to the Whiter regions of America. Many White folks who now spew Leftist rhetoric will convert to our cause after a chimp out from their originally welcomed “Black family” that moves into their pricy burb, and will support secession in a White section of America. Most Libtards are one rowdy upper income Negro neighbor away from racial realism. Thus, in 20 years, there will be far fewer White Libtards, and metro areas like Detroit will look more like South Africa as Whites flee. As White Libtards have racial awakenings, America will break into several different nations.

  • Ella

    ” Clearly, this White guy is in a state of denial – and wants to avoid
    engaging in any kind of two-way discussion about this topic.” At least, he has not asked you to quit discussing your political views. From experience, if he’s a senior, they just want to enjoy their retirement and not be bothered by the social and political changes over the last 50 years. I have had some positive reactions as seniors passionately stated that they tried to get these cronies out of office for 50 years supporting Goldwater to block Kennedy admn. Voting did not work and will never work with any administration.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Well said Tucker. Negroes and Mestizoes are competing parasites. This is to our advantage. Those two groups fighting with each other keeps their focus away from us.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Well said Tucker. Negroes and Mestizoes are competing parasites. This is to our advantage. Those two groups fighting with each other keeps their focus away from us.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Why would you waste your breath trying to reason with a Negro? It is impossible to have a logical conversation with a Negro. You might as well try to converse with an animal.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Why would you waste your breath trying to reason with a Negro? It is impossible to have a logical conversation with a Negro. You might as well try to converse with an animal.

  • OHDeutscheKlezmerRebel

    Whites prefer an economy that provides jobs. Blacks prefer a Government that provides hand-outs.

  • Jon

    It is sad but I also believe it will take a violent revolution or civil war to wake White people up because so many have fallen asleep or given up. With the mass of 3rd world people coming in and no telling how many could be sick, we could have new epidemics hitting the cities in the next 30 yrs or so. It always get worse before it gets better but I would have no doubt that this country will break in to 3 to 5 central govt’s at the end of this century because it is impossible for the state to keep control of that many people in the long run. Lets hope the revolt wakes up the white people of this country.

  • maxonepercent

    I couldn’t agree more, sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.

  • The only reason our PC bible is so powerful is constant reiteration by Western media. Since media is controlled by our elites, this can only mean structure of what’s allowed – anti-white gentile, pro-everyone else, constant demolition of traditional American culture, and economic corrosion of the middle class – is either supported, or, more likely designed by this elite class. Its message is given potency by draping it in ego-oriented, “catwalk” moral passion – classically “mile wide and inch deep” – and ridicule of argument or contradiction. But chink in its armor is growing cynicism and disaffection for media by Western populations. Despite expected hard sell, Americans nixed in poll after poll intervention in Syria last summer. The media, in its stridency and values growing more bizarre and unattainable, seems slowly strangling all its credibility before our eyes.

  • Junis

    Most non-white men are against homosexuality. Most people of color are against homosexuality. Most white guys are atheistic and rightly afraid of death.