politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements


Most people can watch television or movies for hours on end, and never even suspect they’re being indoctrinated. They mindlessly stare at commercials, sitcoms and talk-shows in the belief that all they’re absorbing is the surface message each program is ostensibly designed to impart; it never occurs to them that repetitive exposure to deified black males, and denigrated white males, can possibly have an effect on their psyche.

Ignorance can be bliss. The ability to remain oblivious means that they do not own their own minds, and that their opinions are tainted and compromised. On the other hand, they escape the stress that the rest of us experience when exposed to such mind-control techniques.

My blood-pressure is typically as perfect as can be. In fact, it’s amazingly consistent. I recently had to wear a HAZMAT suit as part of emergency training. After spending almost half an hour in that cumbersome suit, not being able to turn my head, not being able to see properly, having to breath through a special apparatus and being subject to heat and humidity – my blood-pressure remained exactly as it’s always been.

This morning I had a doctor’s appointment. It was a routine physical and I wasn’t stressed in the least when I walked in. But I had to sit in the waiting room for about twenty minutes. In this waiting room was a television, which was playing one of those mindless pop-TV shows. They were interviewing a black basketball player and otherwise wallowing in the superficialities of celebrity culture. The television was not even visible to me, but I heard it loud and clear.

I was not in my element – and directly thereafter, when the attendant took my blood-pressure, it read considerably higher than normal. I had him remeasure it just to make sure. At the end of my visit, over an hour later, after various unpleasant tests and having my blood taken, I had the doctor take my blood pressure again. This time, it had returned to normal. I’m convinced that exposure to the television show had raised my blood pressure.

The mind is a sensitive thing. With today’s media tools, it can be easily manipulated. But we pay a price even when we’re able to avoid the primary damage.

Some people are just crazy; it doesn’t take much to provoke them into committing acts of violence. Most of us need a lot of provocation before we resort to bloodshed; everybody has his snapping point.

I don’t claim to know whether Frazier Glen Miller is a natural-born psychopath. Unlike the $PLC or the ADL, I don’t claim to be an expert. But, according to the Washington Post:

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a respected activist organization that tracks hate crimes and racist activities, said the man arrested and identified by police as Frazier Glenn Cross is actually Frazier Glenn Miller. Miller, the SPLC said, founded and ran the Carolina Klan before he was sued by the SPLC “for operating an illegal paramilitary organization and using intimidation tactics against African Americans.”

He later founded another Klan outfit, the White Patriot Party, which put him in violation of the terms that settled the suit brought by the SPLC. He was found in criminal contempt in 1986 and served six months in prison. He moved underground while out on bond and was caught in Missouri with other Klansmen with a reserve of weapons, the SPLC stated.

The next year, he pleaded guilty to a weapons charge. He was indicted for plotting to obtain stolen military weapons, and for planning robberies and the assassination of the SPLC founder Morris Dees. As part of a plea deal, he testified against other Klan leaders and received a five-year sentence. He served only three years, the SPLC stated.

Considering the history of black violence against whites, it’s absolutely necessary to defend ourselves against blacks. Firearms are a crucial component of any such defensive measures. There is nothing unreasonable or hateful about this; it’s a matter of survival – and this appears to be what Miller was doing (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).

But this is not acceptable to organizations such as the $PLC. The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is an anti-white organization, and Miller was (at least in his own mind) a pro-white activist. The $PLC has a lot more money, and political power, than Miller – so it set about persecuting Miller. It would appear that Miller was hounded by this anti-white hate-group for years.

The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is largely Jewish. So is the ADL. Both organizations had caused Miller a lot of grief over the years, and now this bitter 70-year-old man chose to go out with a bang and take his revenge against “The Jooz.”

It’s a pity that Miller, his murderous mind now shrunken with age, didn’t focus his attention on the real culprits: The $PLC and the ADL. Had he eliminated some of them, we might owe him a debt of gratitude. Instead, he chose a soft target and murdered 3 innocent people.

Perhaps the victims’ survivors should sue the $PLC and the ADL for pushing Miller over the edge. The “Southern Poverty Law Center” is probably the most significant source of fuel for Jew-haters world-wide. They most certainly have blood on their hands.

Unfortunately, Millers cruel rampage will feed the $PLC’s coffers even more. The beast will become ever more bloated, and generate even more hatred and bloodshed. And so the cycle continues.

jabba the hutt

 

 

A while ago I came across an article that really hit home with me: “Dating with Asperger’s.” Though my case is mild, it would be an understatement to say that this syndrome has hindered by relationships with the opposite sex.

But while walking up to people and bringing up random thoughts and facts relegates one to the realm of “odd” or “eccentric” in real life, this is not the case with blogging. In fact, it could be argued that this is what blogging is all about. I’d be willing to bet that a disproportionate number of bloggers have Asperger’s syndrome. I’ve been thinking about redefining Asperger’s to include blogging as one of its hallmark symptoms. That way, we can be more numerous and maybe even form our own special interest group.  We can even have our own “C.A.C.” – Congressional Asperger’s Caucus.

Full-blown autism is similar to Asperger’s in some ways. Of course, this varies with the individual. I do know that autistic men have challenges with the opposite sex; they tend to have challenges with other people in general. Do they make good bloggers? There are lots of blogs ABOUT autism, but who knows how many blogs, relating to other matters, are authored by autistic people?

I’ve always been capable of bringing up awkward facts, which fly in the face of social convention. Over time, I’ve even learned to enjoy it. It can be fun to watch people squirm, especially liberals. Is this one of my “Asperger’s traits” or is it just me? Is it even possible to separate the two? I doubt there’s any way of knowing; lots of non-Asperger’s people have natural personality traits that are often considered Asperger’s traits. This doesn’t mean they have the syndrome.

Autistic people, as well as asperger’s people, have trouble with convention. What tends to matter to us is if something is correct or incorrect, not whether it’s normal or not. Convention holds little sway over the autistic mind, until/unless that mind is trained to respect it. Learning to respect convention, in real life, is key to attracting females. In the blogosphere, however, there are few penalties for breaking with convention – but there can be rewards.

If you’re good at shocking people, you can gain a lot of attention – and attention is what bloggers thrive on. For people on the autistic spectrum, this can come naturally. But while those of us with Asperger’s can shock people with what we say, autistic people have fewer options; speaking is a challenge for them. Blogging does not present such a challenge – so some of them will unleash all their pent-up frustration (and desire to shock) through blogging.

On a related note, I’d like to comment on a blog called “Elderof Zyklon.”  The author of  ElderofZyklon’s (I’d originally thought he was autistic*) appears as if he’s compensating for what he cannot say in public. Despite his grotesquely anti-Semitic graphics (and the obviously-designed-to-shock name of his blog), I don’t consider him among the pathological anti-Semites. The pathological anti-Semites would get rid of, through murder or some other means, every single Jew on the face of the Earth if they could. For all their claims that the Holocaust is a hoax, they’d be the first to perpetrate it should the opportunity arise. They make no distinctions between individual Jews; as far as they’re concerned, there’s no difference between Noel Ignatiev and yours truly.

Does ElderofZyklon have a problem with Jews? Yes he does – just as I do. If anything, the fact that so many influential Jews are rabid, hateful, genocidal liberals bothers me more than it bothers him. But he’s made it clear that he bears no hatred toward all Jews; he reblogs a lot of my material and he comments on this blog sometimes. Do I find the name of his blog, and the accompanying graphics offensive? Absolutely. If he’d change those, he’d lose some of his shock value, but whoever he’s trying to convince would take him a lot more seriously. As for his anti-Semitic fans, their opinions are not going to change one way or the other; he’s been preaching to the choir.

In other words, though Elderof Zyklon wears a facade of Jew-hatred and venom, I don’t believe he’s all that. Underneath the facade is a human being, with legitimate concerns, who is frustrated and just wants to be heard. Hopefully, he’ll refine his blogging communication techniques and focus more on facts than on shock value.

Am I being too trusting and generous? Perhaps, but it’s something that I’ve been thinking about for a while now, and I wanted to put it out there.

*I’ve edited this post after my error was pointed out.

Looking over the comments on an recent American Renaissance article, I saw one that claimed something to the effect that “blacks always get into universities for free, and they never enroll except to rape white girls.” I noted that such comments are not helpful and that they won’t sway opinions. The comment has since been removed, thankfully, from that page.

Unfortunately, comments claiming that “all bantus are lazy” or “every she-boon is obese and obnoxious” or “Mexicans always want to dispossess the white man” are all too common on the internet. I’ve written about this matter previously. At one point, I suggested that a lot of the moronic comments made by so-called racists are actually the work of leftists in disguise. That it’s part of a campaign to discredit pro-white sentiments.

But now I’d like to focus on blanket statements. They’re rarely accurate in this context; I can’t say they’re never accurate, because then I’d be contradicting myself – and I never do that…

For those of y’all who were born yesterday, and haven’t yet had the chance to get out and meet real people, here’s a piece of information for y’all: There are decent people who are Mexican. There are smart, hard-working, blacks. There are good Asian drivers and there are poor Jews.

Should all “Asians” and blacks be removed from Britain? I can think of one who should stay. Her name is Maria de Jesus-Lucungo, and she was born in Angola. I found her on m.vice.com. From the article:

Say hello to Maria de Jesus-Lucungo. Not only does Maria share a name with the benevolent oracle of the Christian faith, she’s also inherited some of his selflessness and eternal goodwill. Although she’s originally from Angola and doesn’t have fair hair herself, Maria has made it her life goal to campaign for the protection of the UK’s blonde population. She believes that England’s flaxen-haired brothers and sisters are under threat of extinction and that, if they disappear, “the world will not be so attractive in beauty any more”…

Through extensive flyering, an online petition and multiple letters sent to the British Prime Minister, Maria says that she hopes to establish a National Blonde Day to celebrate all things blond. I caught up with her to find out what else she wants to achieve…

VICE: Hi, Maria. When did you first realise that blondes need protecting?
Maria Jesus-Lucungo: It came all of a sudden a few years ago. They’re not breeding with each other. It’s good to have some blond in the white community to mix with everyone else so we can have a variety of complexions. Variety is nice—variety is the spice of life! If you go to Africa, you expect to see a black African. If someone from Africa comes to Europe, the first thing they should see should be a blonde. Blonde is the pure white before it gets mixed with everyone else.

Do you think the purest forms of all races need to be protected? Like if black Africans were becoming extinct?
Yes, but Africans aren’t becoming extinct. Go to Africa—you’ll see they have lots. If blondes disappear, then you will have to explain to your grandchildren that, once upon a time, we used to have another type of white people and the child might not believe it. This is what I’m trying to avoid; we don’t have to let it get that far.

In England, we need somebody to stand up for blondes in the House of Commons. It’s like if you have a garden and one flower is dying out, then the gardener will do something to revive it. His concentration will be on that particular one. So my focus is on this particular one, but it doesn’t mean that I don’t like all the others. I like everyone all the same.

Maria may come across as somewhat simplistic in her views, and it’s unfortunate that they chose to bring Hitler into the conversation – but how many pro-white keyboard warriors can honestly claim to be as publicly active as Maria? My guess is that she gets more people thinking outside the box than 99.99% of racialist commenters on the internet. Of course, she’s exempt from accusations of racism by virtue of being black. This, in itself, adds another layer of credibility to her work; it makes the double-standard even more obvious.

So next time you’re seething with anger, over the latest black-on-white atrocity, think before you write. Think about Maria de Jesus-Lucungo and choose your words carefully.

blondes

Some of y’all may remember a story, published in American Renaissance last month, about a small group of people trying to establish an all-white town in North Dakota. Black supremacists can take over Jackson, Mississippi and the corporate-owned media is silent about it, but when a handful of whites want to stake out a place of their own, all hell breaks lose.

The leader of that white group, Paul Craig Cobb, was recently interviewed on the Trisha show. This is what Opposing Views had to say about it:

Craig Cobb may be planning to open an all-Caucasian village in North Dakota, but after a DNA test on a talk show exposed him as part black, he may be excluded from his own property.

Cobb was a guest on the “Trisha Show,” and had agreed to submit a DNA test. Host Trisha Goddard, who is African-American, announced the results onstage.

According to the test, Cobb is 14 percent sub-Saharan African. However, he dismissed the results as just “statistical noise.”

Watch the video there. Both the host, and her leftist audience, got some jollies from Cobb’s DNA results. Cobb could have handled it much better. He could have clapped his hands with joy, accepted Trish’s “high five” and announced that now he can get into a college of his choice with a full scholarship, enjoy preferential treatment in the job market, qualify for government set-asides and even have his choice of hot mudsharks to date (should he be so inclined). That would have been my reaction.

But back to the black supremacist mayor of Jackson, Mississippi. This is what he looks like:

lumumba

He sure doesn’t look 100% African to me. As a matter of fact, I’d say he’s at least 50% European. When will we be treated to an interview with him – exposing his non-African heritage?

Incidentally, I recently got my own ancestry.com results back. Apparently I have no negro blood in me. I’ll be honest; I was a bit disappointed. Ashkenazic Jews are supposed to have from 3-5% African blood. I was looking forward to proving this, then running with it. Alas, I’m 93% “European Jew” (whatever that means), 4% Eastern European and a tiny bit British and Italian. No African. I feel cheated!

I just watched the following Youtube video by David Duke:

I couldn’t find part two, but I had a few quick thoughts on the matter I wanted to share with y’all.

First of all, nobody alive today should be apologizing for American slavery. Just as whites needn’t apologize for the long-ago actions of a few, so too should Jews not have to.

Taking Duke’s statistics at face value, I can think of two reasons that slave ownership would have been higher among Jews:

1) Jews were wealthier and more of them could afford slaves

2) Jews have a moral defect that persists to this day

I think it’s a combination of these two factors. Speaking from personal experience and my own observations, the Jewish moral defect is actually two defects. The first is a more general moral defect that afflicts religious people of all faiths. When people are given a code to live their lives by, over time they equate adherence to that code as “morality” and violation of that code as “immorality.” That is to say, any action would surely have been prohibited by God if it were truly immoral. The fact that Scripture endorses slavery must mean that there is nothing wrong with it. In this worldview, there is little room for moral scruples outside of what has already been condemned by the word of God. We find a similar attitude in today’s America regarding the law. So many new laws have been passed that there is often an assumption that anything that is legal must also be moral. If it were truly immoral, “they” would surely have already passed a law against it. In either case, it’s a childish way to live one’s life. I think this is the moral defect that was at work in the times of slavery.

Some rabbis recognized this problem and tried to address it. The result was the Musar movement in 19th century Eastern Europe. Books of musar are studied in yeshivas to this day. In a sense, they serve as an artificial conscience and I think they are helpful. I don’t think they can make a bad person good, but they do serve to remind those on the edge that there is a wider morality. Had the musar movement taken root among the wealthy Sephardic Jews of early America, it’s likely that they would have been less active in the slave trade.

The second Jewish moral defect is more relevant today. Judaism served as our moral compass for many centuries. When that compass was taken away, but the moral compass of the dominant, Christian, majority had not yet had time to take root, it created a moral void. This is one reason Jews have been so prominent in the more trashy aspects of Western culture, including the movie industry. We often find ourselves living in a moral no-man’s land. The first half of the 20th century saw millions of Jews being estranged from their ancestral culture. This is also the time when secular Jewish debauchery reached its peak, with those who had reached leadership positions lingering to this day. Today, even though the root cause of the darkness has diminished, we still suffer from a new status quo that it created. Liberalism has imposed its own infantile form of morality upon society, a “morality” that brings more harm than good. Meanwhile, traditional morality feebly struggles to find its footing again. Hopefully, a meaningful moral code, other than Islam, will assert itself before the damage is too great.

By the way, the text displayed on Duke’s video is from the Book of Esther. I’m not sure how that pertains to slavery; he should have used something more pertinent in my opinion – unless he’s equating himself with Haman (which would be rather funny).

Human Stupidity (he sends me a lot of stuff) recently sent me an article that deals with the frequent incompatibility between feminism, which asserts equality between the sexes, and human sexuality, which often favors inequality between the sexes. The Psychology Today article tells us:

Twice as many women as men report trouble getting turned on. Health professionals report that low desire is the most common sexual complaint they hear from women. Though several factors specific to the design of the female brain contribute to this problem, there is one important psychological factor that may be unique to modern democracies. This factor is one of the unmentionables of sexual science, but since our book is filled with unmentionables, we’ll whisper it here:

Gender equality inhibits arousal…

The majority of women have submission fantasies. From classic romance The Flame and The Flower to classic erotica The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty to Twilight BDSM fan fiction, submission themes are immensely popular in cross-cultural female erotica. The fact of the matter is that most heterosexual women are wired to find sexual submission arousing–and so are most female mammals…

Almost every quality of dominant males triggers arousal in the female brain: dominant scents, dominant gaits, deep voices, height, displays of wealth. Romance heroes are almost always high status alpha males—billionaires, barons, surgeons, sheriffs. Avon Books and Ellora’s Cave feature no heroes who are kindergarten teachers, accountants, or plumbers. Even though there’s been a trend away from the conspicuously rapey bodice-rippers of the seventies and eighties, women still want strong, dominant men.

“I think this is one of the problems we’re having in romance in general right now: our heroes have gotten a little too PC. We’re portraying men the way feminist ideals say they should be—respectful and consensus-building,” muses erotic romance (EroRom) author Angela Knight. “Yet women like bad boys. I suspect that’s because our inner cavewoman knows Doormat Man would become Sabertooth Tiger Lunch in short order. In fact, this may be one reason why EroRom is gaining popularity so fast–writers feel free to write dominant heroes with more of an edge.”

How many times have we wondered why liberals, who claim to support women’s rights, are so fond of Muslims and Africans? Both groups are well-known for their rape-cultures. For example, here and here. The facts are out there, and they’re not difficult to find – and yet a vast majority of the liberal establishment supports massive immigration from Muslim and African lands. No matter how many times we remind them that such immigration is bad for women’s rights (and gay rights), they pay no heed, their only response being yet more shrill cries of “racist!”

I believe that both liberal men and women are submissive. On a subconscious level, they actually WANT those rapes to occur. Just as so many women prefer a “bad-boy” over one who will treat them as ladies, so too do liberals prefer the bad-boy cultures of Islam and Africa. This is their way of living out their submissive fantasies – except that they don’t usually want the rapes to happen to them, or to their own daughters. Instead, they want them to happen to other people’s daughters. In this way, they can live out their fantasies in relative safety.

If we want to sway public opinion, and drive home the dangers of mass immigration from African and Muslim lands, we must learn to appeal to the emotional, subconscious, side of our audience. Reasoned arguments will have little effect, any more so than reasoned arguments will prevent a woman from preferring a bad-boy over a gentleman.  What they say and what they really want are two entirely different things. Like the old adage goes, “when she says ‘no’, she means ‘yes.’” When liberals say “No” to rape, what they really mean is “Yes.” We need to treat liberals as women, even the ones who are biologically men. Women respect assertiveness and force. In recent history, pro-white groups have displayed little of each. While the suit-and-tie pro-white activists may appeal to some, I don’t think their effect will be a large one. There’s something to be said of tattoos and belligerence – or better yet, act as the Muslims: Good cop, bad cop.

Not long ago I received a request from Avaaz.com to sign a petition for a Palestinian activist.  The petition states:

Days ago I went to Hebron in the occupied West Bank and met Issa Amro, a soft-spoken, Gandhi-quoting Palestinian. The Israeli government considers him a dangerous man.

So dangerous that he was locked up in March for joining Israeli and Palestinian women to peacefully protest a segregationist policy that bars most Palestinians from even walking down the main market street of Hebron, a Palestinian city. And this month, just as I arrived to meet him, he was taken away in handcuffs by Israeli soldiers and when he was released he was laid out on a stretcher, beaten and bruised.

Issa is dangerous because he’s committed to a dangerous idea: growing a powerful nonviolent movement for freedom that’s reviving hope in Palestine. And he isn’t alone. I met inspiring Palestinians across the West Bank who are standing up and choosing the path of nonviolence. But precisely because of their potential power, they are being attacked and imprisoned on spurious legal charges and they need our help.

The Israeli versus Palestinian conflict is a complex one and there are no simple answers. But let’s assume that Issa Amro’s goal is to set up a political situation that would threaten the existence of the State of Israel. I would expect Israelis to be alarmed about this even though Amro had renounced violence. Though he has thrown down his weapons, Amro is still very much at war.

To put things into perspective, let’s envision a world where black on white crime doesn’t exist, where Hispanic immigrants are as docile as sheep and where Islam really is the “religion of peace.” In such a world, should whites feel any better about being eradicated through superior birthrates and demographic dilution? Any white with a healthy sense of identity would still want to put an end to Hispanic immigration. He would still want to segregate himself from blacks and Muslims so that his children and grandchildren would carry on his genes and heritage.

Genocide is genocide, whether it’s achieved through mass executions or through “bedroom genocide.” On my previous post, baaltanit commented:

Thank you for your good work. We at wnthinktank are formally renouncing anti-Semitism. We still may not agree on many things, perhaps not even the definition of anti-Semitism, but we appreciate what you’re doing and would be interested in knowing your thoughts on how to bring the White Jewish and gentile communities more into accord. This is an olive branch for any Jews who wish to accept. If not, good luck in all of your endeavors. We wish you no harm, only the best.

Baaltanit’s original post on this matter, called “Love Panzer,” was reblogged by Mindweapons in Ragnarok.  I suspect that this idea will get some traction in the blogosphere, but I doubt many white nationalists would go so far as to marry Jews for this purpose, or convert to become rabbis.

Like the Israeli versus Palestinian conflict, this relationship is a complex one. Those who know me would not be surprised to learn that I feel a deep connection with the Palestinian people and Arabs in general. While most Jews have ceased being Semites in any meaningful way, the Arabs have retained some of our ancient traits – and even had the audacity to impose them on others. Yet I have no love for those who wish to kill me, and I have no affection for those who wish to destroy my people.

Of course I’ll accept the olive branch. This was never in doubt, since I was never at war with white nationalists to begin with. We can work together for the advancement of white people. But I have always condemned intermarriage and I’m used to being shouted down for this by liberals. If a few white nationalists join the chorus, then so be it.

What do I hope will come of this? I hope that baaltanit’s message spreads enough in the blogosphere that the outside world takes notice. I would be pleased to see newspaper headlines that read: “Neo-nazis* now encourage intermarriage with Jews in order to assimilate them to death.” This may get some young Jews to think about the consequences of marrying out. In other words, I hope it backfires. Is anybody surprised?

*Not a slur on my part; this is how the media would present it.

One of the more salient points, made by Craig Bodeker in his now famous “A Conversation About Race“, was that today’s political climate does not allow whites to be pro-white without being viewed as anti-everybody else. Personally, I try to keep this point at the forefront of my mind when I speak or write. It’s not always easy. People who identify as pro-white are very much aware of the ongoing atrocities being perpetrated upon whites and the glaring double standard imposed against whites. It’s easy to become an angry person but not so easy to channel ones anger to constructive ends. Sometimes it’s difficult to avoid becoming what our enemies say we are.

Powerful forces (some would say “The Jooz”) are using non-whites as clubs to pound whites into oblivion. So some pro-whites channel their anger toward the non-whites; toward blacks and Mexicans in the U.S. and maybe toward Asian Muslims in Europe. Others channel their anger toward “The Jooz”. As a Jew myself, I’d suggest a distinction between “The Jooz” and “Jews”. At any rate, I’ve vented plenty of venom at blacks and Hispanics myself. I try to put it in context and make it clear that I speak only in general terms. But I’ll admit that the following criticism applies to myself as well.

I was reading a recent American Renaissance article about the spread of cellular service in Africa. It’s an innocuous subject. If anything, it gives us a ray of hope; if Africa becomes a better place to live, we all benefit. But after reading the comments on that article, I became frustrated. I wrote:

I’m disappointed in a lot of the comments here. Is it our goal here to ridicule blacks or is it to inform the world that whites have legitimate interests and are being targeted for genocide? While doing the former may make us feel witty, or release some of our anger, I think we should ask ourselves, before pushing the “post” button, if our comments are going to actually help our cause.

Imagine you’re a young person fresh out of high school or college. You’re curious about pro-white movements and race-realism so you click on this article. What sort of impression would you get from reading the comments here?

My comment, before reading the others, was going to be something along the lines of “that’s great. I hope Africa does improve its lot; that would be better for all of us, because it would slow the flow of Africans out of Africa.”

I think a lot of pro-whites know, deep down, that I’m right. Some of them won’t admit it; their anger won’t let them. It’s a pity because, if our enemies can succeed in infecting our hearts with destructive hatred, then what hope is there for us?

This was not the first time I’d contemplated criticizing the content of the comments at American Renaissance. Months ago, I’d written:

Reading through the comments on American Renaissance, I’m struck by how many of them make blanket statements about blacks. The moderators seem to now tolerate the word “negro”, which does make sense. They still won’t allow the word “nigger”, which makes sense sometimes – and sometimes it doesn’t…

Perhaps the moderators at Amren should ask themselves the same question when deciding whether to let a comment remain or not. In my opinion, for what it’s worth, Amren should not be a site for angry venting of that nature. If people want to vent, and talk about “niggers and apes”, they can do so at niggermania.com or some other similar forum. Of course, if the moderators have had a change of attitude and don’t mind if Amren turns into another niggermania, that’s their prerogative. It would sadden me though.

I had allowed that post to remain a draft. It’s not for me to tell the folks at American Renaissance what sort of site it should be. It does bother me that I cannot direct friends or relatives to that site in the hopes of convincing them of the justness of our cause; they’d be too put off by the comments.

It’s hard to blame the people at American Renaissance for allowing anti-black tirades in the comments. A steady diet of black-on-white murders, beatings and rapes will do that to you over time – but only if you let it.

Thanks again to John Derbyshire for linking to me in one of his columns. This time, he’s coined the term “Dark Enlightenment” for the movement to recognize not-so-pleasant realities.  I like it.  But Dennis Mangan has already stated that he is unworthy of being listed among Derbyshire’s must-read blogs. If so, where does that leave me?

John Derbyshire, along with Steve Sailer, provide a valuable service. Aside from being exceptional writers in their own right, they provide a crucial link between a handful of widely recognized pro-white bloggers and a multitude of obscure bloggers. It’s an honor to be linked to by Derbyshire and, even more so, to be counted in his “essential reading” blog list. Especially considering that my posts have not been exactly stellar recently. Real life has a way of demanding one’s time and my writing is based in inspiration and available free time rather than necessity.

But fear not, loyal readers! I have vacation plans in the making and I’ll be off to exotic places in a few months. So stay tuned…

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 118 other followers