.
SYNOPSIS: Many people who promote multiracial & multicultural societies often mean well in that they feel they're creating a more peaceful world. But they ignore the lessons of history and thus are laying the seeds for unimaginable future conflict and bloodshed.
Multiculturalism within a nation leads to internal tension and eventual violent conflict... 6,000 years of human warfare/conflict proves this (i.e., roughly 85% of all wars throughout recorded history are entirely rooted in racial/ethnic/religious conflict; the other 15% are purely ideologically-based). All races and ethnic groups are "tribal" & separatist in nature - these innate characteristics of human nature must be accepted and public policy should be implemented with such characteristics in mind. Hence, racial/ethnic homogeneity should be encouraged by public policy makers in each country. Pursuing racial/ethnic homogeneity in each country is the most humane way to organize the world's various peoples. The Nation-State remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony.
Any realistic humanitarian (such as myself) understands this reality of human nature and works within its framework.
I don't have anything against Mexicans.... in Mexico. I don't have anything against Nigerians... in Nigeria. Mexicans should remain in Mexico. Nigerians should remain in Nigeria... and so on. Further, I hope Mexicans, Nigerians and all peoples of the world live healthy and productive lives in their respective countries. I do not wish ill or misfortune on any peoples in the world.
The next point I will make is a central concern of all people on the political far-right. As established by the United Nations Charter in 1945, each people/ethnicity/racial group should have their own geographic area on Earth (i.e., a bordered country) in which to exercise their right to self-determination as a unique people/ethnicity/racial group. The UN essentially follows this policy for nearly all non-White peoples of the world. However, the UN pressures White nations to maintain (and even increase) their multiracial/multicultural policies. The UN essentially demands that White nations continue allowing millions of non-Whites to immigrate into White nations. Is this a double standard? Of course.
Whites make up a mere 13% of the world's population and this percentage is shrinking with each passing year. White nations are under attack ---> a rapidly increasing rate of attack which is often called demographic warfare on the West (i.e., radical demographic change via massive non-White immigration into the Western World). At current 3rd world immigration rates into White nations, White people will become a minority in each White nation by 2028. And by 2043, Whites will make up 20% - 25% of each (historical) White nation.
The White Western World is gradually being erased - and - once the West is gone... its gone forever. Approximately 3,500 years of Western Civilization is on schedule to be reduced to scattered pieces. Shockingly, this epic and colossal transformation will have occurred in a mere 100 - 125 years. It began in the 1950's and will likely be complete around 2050 - 2075 ... unless something can stop the global elite from carrying out the West's destruction (and yes... without a doubt... it is the global elite who are orchestrating the West's demise - the reason has to do with the global elites push for global government).
Just ponder this for a moment: a White baby born today will witness a future France where only 20% - 25% of France is White. And Sweden? Same story. Italy? Same story. And it'll be the same in America, Canada, Greece, Germany, Holland, Australia, New Zealand... every single Western nation. No Western nation is immune.
Many liberals and leftists actually relish in the ongoing destruction of White Western Civilization. These people, even if they are White themselves, absolutely hate the West and White people... they especially hate White men. They've been indoctrinated with violent contempt toward all things Western and White. They blame Whites for every problem in the world. Such liberals actually believe that when Whites are eventually eliminated or at least reduced to far below 50% in the West, the world can then 'finally' be reconstructed into a peaceful egalitarian Marxist utopia. Such liberals single out Whites even though every race has (since the dawn of time) engaged in war, conquest, enslavement, and so forth. Brutality is, unfortunately, a characteristic of humans of every race, not just Whites.
Such White-hating liberals & leftists ignore the monumental accomplishments of the White race. With regard to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine, Whites have contributed more to the world than every other race combined. Despite this, Whites are being demographically crushed in their own nations. This can only be called one thing: the ongoing genocide of the White race. Listed in this video are some White accomplishments... accomplishments which benefit all of global humanity of every race...
Some people have dismissed my concerns by saying, "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries to make it look like they're being targeted" or they say, "human migration is part of history, get used to it." First, as to the latter, "human migration is part of history...". Yes, indeed it is. But it's necessary to focus on recorded history (i.e., roughly the past 4,500 years). Thus we should only consider the world beginning (more or less) with the formation of the Nation-State. Human migration which occurred many millennia ago is irrelevant and those who include ancient human migration patterns into this debate are generally (and often intentionally) trying to confuse the ill informed, or, they naively bought into the feel-good slogan, "there is only one race, the human race" in an attempt to gloss over measurable biological differences between the world's various races and ethnic groups.
As to the first comment I often hear (i.e., "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries..."). I say to them, yes, indeed, many countries have an immigration policy. However, such policies are restricted to, 1) a handful of diplomats and their families, 2) a few rare cases of political asylum, and 3) perhaps even a small guest worker program which is carefully monitored to ensure the workers return to their home country upon completion of work. Only White Western countries have official immigration polices which result in the racial/ethnic demographic transformation of entire cities and eventually their entire nation. Can you identify a single non-White country which has a similar immigration policy (again, a policy resulting in massive racial/ethnic demographic transformation of that country)? There isn't one. Only White nations are de facto committing demographic suicide via endless 3rd world immigration.
The multiculturalizing of the Western World began shortly after World War II. Each White Western nation adopted a primarily non-White, 3rd world immigration policy; this legislative process began in 1954 and was complete by 1972 (see this article, point #12). Initially, only a trickle of non-White immigrants were allowed in. But within a few years the quotas were increased and have accelerated ever since. Within the next 40 - 50 years, the White Western World will essentially be erased from the Earth, never to come back. And not through guns, bombs, and great armies. But rather by way of massive immigration, mostly from the 3rd world. This is called "demographic warfare" - it is... for all intents and purposes... the gradual conquering of White nations by flooding them with 3rd world immigrants.
Whites are intimidated into submission through politically correctness. For decades Whites have been told to "be tolerant" because "diversity is our strength." This liberal slogan is a huge lie; history proves its a lie. The truth is that diversity is a cancer on any nation. Racial/ethnic diversity within a Nation-State typically leads to tension, then conflict, which is often violent and bloody.
Whites who complain about 3rd world migrants are called "racists", "xenophobes", "haters", "bigots", "Islamophobes", etc. Such outspoken Whites are often screamed at and shamed into submission, even though their country is being demographically transformed (and eventually erased) right before their eyes. Sadly, some weak minded Whites would rather watch their country destroyed than be called a "racist." However, the fact is that everyone regardless of their race is a racist... at least to some degree. I'll say it again: every person is, to some degree, a racist (Black, White, Asian, Hispanic, etc). I am a racist. And so is everyone I know. It's human nature to occasionally say or think racist things; every human being on Earth does. And anyone who piously tells you, "Not me!!! I'm absolutely NOT a racist!!!" ... well... they're lying.
Most liberals believe the feel-good slogan, "diversity is our strength" as gospel ... multiculturalism is like a religion to them. On the other hand, the global elite who have been (for decades) orchestrating the destruction of Western Civilization, know that the slogan "diversity is our strength" is merely propaganda meant to deceive the general public. The global elite have used the media & Hollywood to brainwash Whites into believing this propaganda.
A corollary to my Ethnic Nationalism worldview (also called ---> the advocacy of the Ethno-State concept for each and every distinct ethnic peoples on earth) is the following --> I'm 100% opposed to imperialism and empire building... either carried out by European-derived peoples or carried out by any peoples of any race/ethnicity. Further, as a person who is part of the political far-right (and like nearly everyone on the far-right), I have been against the U.S. led Middle East wars from day one. In short, the United States has no business being in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere in the Middle East.
Global humanity works best when the world is divided into nation-states where each nation-state has racial/ethnic homogeneity (i.e., the Ethno-State concept). Nations can trade (i.e., fair trade, not so-called "free" trade), have diplomatic relations, compete in the Olympics, etc. And, of course, there should be tolerance between nations. However, when we start mixing VERY different peoples in the same country, what generally happens??? History tells us that trouble brews and internal violent conflict results - this is not a humane way to organize the world's peoples.
Global humanity has enough difficulty maintaining peace between nations. We don't need to make matters worse by creating, via official government policy, multiracial countries which ALWAYS gravitate towards internal conflict and violence (again, as history clearly illustrates). Thus, pragmatic humanitarians (like myself) who are realistic about human nature, believe FIRMLY in racial/ethnic separatism (i.e., they believe FIRMLY in the Ethno-State for each distinct ethnic peoples). On the other hand, those pushing for multiculturalism are actually (unknowingly) anti-humanitarian. Why? Because they are (I'll say it again ---> unknowingly) laying the seeds for future internal national conflict (via their promotion of multicultural/multiracial nations) even though they naively think they are "building a better world."
The above is the core of my racial-realist/humanitarian philosophy.
.
aa
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Israeli Rabbi Says Jews Should Rejoice That Europe Is Losing Its Identity
.
The "good" rabbi stated, "Jews should rejoice at the fact that Christian Europe is losing its identity as a punishment for what it did to us for the hundreds of years we were in exile there."
A Israel-based newspaper reported these and other hate-filled words of Baruch Efrati, a prominent Israeli rabbi. The bulk of the article follows...
a
.
As concerns grow over the increasing number of Muslims in Europe, it appears not everyone is bothered by the issue, including an Israeli rabbi who even welcomes the phenomenon. Rabbi Baruch Efrati, a yeshiva head and community rabbi in the West Bank settlement of Efrat, believes that the Islamization of Europe is actually a good thing.
Rabbi Efrati was asked to discuss the issue by an oriental studies student, who inquired on Judaism's stand toward the process Europe has been going through in recent years. Following the election of a hijab-wearing Muslim woman as the mayor of the Bosnian city of Visoko for the first time in continent's history, the student asked the rabbi on the Kipa website: "How do we fight the Islamization of Europe and return it to the hands of Christians and moderates?"
Efrati wrote in response that the Islamization of Europe was better than a Christian Europe for ethical and theological reasons – as a punishment against Christians for persecuting the Jews and the fact that Christianity, as opposed to Islam, is considered "idolatry" from a halachic point of view.
"Jews should rejoice at the fact that Christian Europe is losing its identity as a punishment for what it did to us for the hundreds of years we were in exile there," the rabbi explained as the ethical reason for favoring Muslims, quoting shocking descriptions from the Rishonim literature (written by leading rabbis who lived during the 11th to 15th centuries) about pogroms and mass murders committed by Christians against Jews.
"We will never forgive Europe's Christians for slaughtering millions of our children, women and elderly… not just in the recent Holocaust, but throughout the generations, in a consistent manner which characterizes all factions of hypocritical Christianity."
"And now, Europe is losing its identity in favor of another people and another religion, and there will be no remnants and survivors from the impurity of Christianity, which shed a lot of blood it won't be able to atone for."
He added, however, that Jews must pray that the Islamization of most of Europe will not harm the people of Israel.Such views are held by most Jews, to one degree or another. However, most Jews will never openly state their hatred for Christianity nor their hatred for White Gentiles. It is important to understand that Europe's historical persecution of Jews was largely retaliatory in nature. Through the centuries, Jews would settle in some area of Europe and typically meddle with the local customs and trade practices (in many cases subvert or pervert them). The native Europeans of [fill in the blank] European nation would become justifiably angry and thus retaliate. Jews would then typically be evicted from whichever European nation where they were troublemakers. Jews have been thrown out of more than 150 nations during the past 1,000 years alone. And regarding the grossly exaggerated and lie-filled "Holocaust" story - this was also rooted in the same type of social/political situation. I urge you to read my article, What Was The Holocaust... What Actually Happened?
a
.
Monday, February 6, 2012
It's Been A Month Since Andrew Adler (A Jewish American Publisher) Wrote An Op-Ed Proposing That Israel Should Assassinate Obama. Any Punishment?
.
ANDREW ADLER RECENTLY PROPOSED THAT ISRAEL SHOULD ASSASSINATE PRESIDENT OBAMA
It's been a month since the above "American" Jew openly proposed that Israel's MOSSAD (an Israeli agency like our CIA) should assassinate President Obama. The Secret Service paid him a visit but nothing came of it - no arrest, no jail time, no charges filed, etc.
Adler denied being an Israel-Firster (one who puts Israel's interests first, even if pursuing those interests harms his/her own country) though nobody in his/her right mind buys Adler's claim. Let's just say Andrew Adler is about as patriotic as Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were.
Adler later apologized but only after he got a slap on the wrist from his Jewish brethren (who most likely forced him to apologize). Mr. Adler's only crime in the minds of his Jewish brethren was that he (Adler) publicly wrote what many Jewish elite surely talk about amongst themselves in private. Further, to create an illusion of formal censure against him, Mr. Adler resigned "under pressure" (wink) from his post at the Atlanta Jewish Times.
Did the mainstream media cover this story?? Barely. Outside of Atlanta, Adler's call for Obama to be assassinated was, for all intents and purposes, ignored by national media outlets. But just for a second imagine if a Muslim American did the same thing? Or imagine if a White Christian American did this? It would be front page news from L.A. to New York. But, a Jew does it and he gets off with a simple apology.
Q: What does this tell you about the power structure in the United States?
A: Jews run this country, every institution, from top to bottom.
Article Link:
Major Media Suppressing Obama Assassination Story
Andrew Adler's Op-Ed In The Atlanta Jewish Times:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/284979-ajt.html
.
ANDREW ADLER RECENTLY PROPOSED THAT ISRAEL SHOULD ASSASSINATE PRESIDENT OBAMA
It's been a month since the above "American" Jew openly proposed that Israel's MOSSAD (an Israeli agency like our CIA) should assassinate President Obama. The Secret Service paid him a visit but nothing came of it - no arrest, no jail time, no charges filed, etc.
Adler denied being an Israel-Firster (one who puts Israel's interests first, even if pursuing those interests harms his/her own country) though nobody in his/her right mind buys Adler's claim. Let's just say Andrew Adler is about as patriotic as Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were.
Adler later apologized but only after he got a slap on the wrist from his Jewish brethren (who most likely forced him to apologize). Mr. Adler's only crime in the minds of his Jewish brethren was that he (Adler) publicly wrote what many Jewish elite surely talk about amongst themselves in private. Further, to create an illusion of formal censure against him, Mr. Adler resigned "under pressure" (wink) from his post at the Atlanta Jewish Times.
Did the mainstream media cover this story?? Barely. Outside of Atlanta, Adler's call for Obama to be assassinated was, for all intents and purposes, ignored by national media outlets. But just for a second imagine if a Muslim American did the same thing? Or imagine if a White Christian American did this? It would be front page news from L.A. to New York. But, a Jew does it and he gets off with a simple apology.
Q: What does this tell you about the power structure in the United States?
A: Jews run this country, every institution, from top to bottom.
Article Link:
Major Media Suppressing Obama Assassination Story
Andrew Adler's Op-Ed In The Atlanta Jewish Times:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/284979-ajt.html
.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
The Two Jewish-led Globalist Camps... In Competition For Global Control
.
There are two distinct ideological globalist camps, both led by Jews -- each camp competes with the other for global control:
1) THE LIBERAL CAMP
2) THE NEOCON CAMP (often calling themselves "conservatives" ... although they actually aren't conserving anything... they're not conserving American jobs, they're not conserving the demographic/racial makeup of America, they're not conserving American culture and religion, etc).
First off, it is critical to understand that each ideological camp was created, developed, and fine-tuned by Jewish intellectuals. Without Jewish intellectuals, there wouldn't be a radical liberal school of thought (Communism, Socialism, Trotskyism, and all their supporting submovements/ideas such as feminism, gay rights, political correctness, etc.). Similarly, without Jewish intellectuals, there wouldn't be a Neocon school of thought.
The liberal Jewish camp is primarily led by Trotskyite Jews (or just fairly left leaning Jews) and their Gentile followers. They one day want to see something close to a borderless world or at least a world with weak/unenforced borders (like we see in the European Union today) with a global government based on the United Nations concept (or perhaps even the UN itself). The liberal Jewish camp also includes those who subscribe to Alter-globalism, a less radical leftist approach to globalism (at least when compared to Trotskyism). Anyway, both the Trotskyites & Alter-globalists are the "do-gooders" who naively dream of a John Lennon "Imagine" type world. They feel they can "love their way" to global power (though they can become violent against anyone who opposes their worldview). In the 1960's they were called the "New Left" (e.g., Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Max Horkheimer, Saul Alinsky, etc).
The Neocon Jewish camp (plus their Gentile followers) also want a borderless world but with a global government revolving around a NY-DC-LONDON-JERUSALEM axis. These are the exploitative-type Jews, the Super-Elite, who want 95% of global wealth in their hands and the rest of humanity in a "global plantation" type condition. They feel they can bomb their way to global power. Incidentally, the cold war Gentile warriors (e.g., Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., etc) and their Jewish globalist handlers (e.g., Henry Kissinger, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Milton Friedman, etc) fall in this camp.
Pick almost any influential Jew and they'll rather neatly fit into either the liberal camp or the Neocon camp. However, it should be noted that occasionally you'll find a Jew who is primarily in the liberal camp but with one foot in the Neocon/Zionist camp (out of "tribal" loyalty to Israel).
THE FOLLOWING IS A SMALL SAMPLING OF GLOBALIST JEWS, ORGANIZATIONS, PUBLICATIONS, ETC ... SHOWING WHICH CAMP THEY FIT IN
NOTE: Some people on this list are not Jews. However, they are often referred to as "Jew-think Gentiles," i.e., they subscribe to and advance the globalist Jewish agenda (knowingly or unknowingly); essentially they have sold themselves out to powerful Jewish globalist players and organizations.
NOTE: Many listed below are fully aware of the globalist agenda they are involved in. Others, however, are unaware and thus are simply "pawns", "tools", or "cogs in the machinery" of the globalist agenda they are (unknowingly) advancing. Or... they are aware and don't care since their participation advances their own quest for wealth and power.
LIBERAL GLOBALIST CAMP (JEWISH-LED) (in no particular order)
George Soros and his Open Society Foundations (Soros is probably the most powerful force in the liberal globalist camp)
David Miliband (far-left Jewish British politician; works closely with George Soros)
Jill Stein
Noam Chomsky
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton (and Bill Clinton... of course)
Clinton Foundation
Bernie Sanders (although he is against America's "free" trade treaties w/ China and other countries... I'll give him credit for this)
The radical elements of the Democratic Party (e.g., Dennis Kucinich, John Kerry)
Phyllis Bennis (Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies)
The Rockefeller Foundation
United Nations
Workers World
People's World
European Union
Any "Green" political party
Any Trotskyist, Marxist, Marxist-Leninist, Maoist, Stalinist, Luxemburgist, Hoxhaist i.e., any socialist/communist ideologue (of course)
Any radical "progressive" organization
International Committee Against Racism (and any anti-racist organization)
Any anti-Fascist organization
Any anti-Nationalist organization (of course)
All Hollywood film and television studios
Media Education Foundation
Nearly all U.S. and European Colleges & Universities
Organizations fighting Global Warming (but only the higher ups in these organizations are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Greenpeace (but only the higher ups in this organization are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Sierra Club (but only the higher ups in this organization are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Carnegie Endowment For International Peace
PBS (Public Broadcasting Service)
Michael Moore
Amy Goodman & the entire "Democracy Now!" lineup
ALTERNET
HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society)
Amnesty International
Human Rights Watch (and just about any human rights organization)
Norman Finkelstein (very critical of Israel, advocates for a borderless world, a lifelong Maoist)
Zbigniew Brzezinski
New World Foundation
Naomi Klein
The Pope & much of the Vatican
The entire MSNBC lineup
Any radical/militant feminist organization
Any radical/militant gay rights organization
ANSWER Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) - American Trotskyite organization
UAF (Unite Against Fascism) - British Trotskyite organization funded in part by George Soros
J-Street (with a foot in the ZIONIST camp but not in a militant way i.e., not in a "Likud-type" or "Kadima-type" way)
CODEPINK (radical feminist organization in the mold of militant, Anarcho-Communist Jewess Emma Goldman)
The Trilateral Commission (much debate surrounds the classification of this organization; I put it here)
L.A. Jews for Peace (each large city has a similar group)
ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center)
Foreign Policy (political journal/magazine)
New York Times
Los Angeles Times
Ford Foundation
Tides Foundation (funded in part by Teresa Heinz-Kerry)
et al.
NEOCON GLOBALIST CAMP (JEWISH-LED) (in no particular order)
Sheldon Adelson
Benjamin Netanyahu
Rothschild Family
Anne Applebaum
Mitt Romney
Alan Dershowitz (though a liberal on social issues)
Dennis Prager
Michael Medved
Most (or at least many) Clear Channel AM talk radio hosts
Bush Family
Dick Cheney
Henry Kissinger
Daniel Pipes
The 'hyper-warmongers/hawks/Israel-Firsters' of the Republican Party (e.g., John McCain, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, and many others)
Glenn Beck (talk radio host)
The Weekly Standard (political magazine)
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Times
Any publication by Rupert Murdoch
Foreign Affairs (political journal/magazine)
Freeman Center for Strategic Studies
JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs)
Saban Center for Middle East Policy
NATO (update: As of June 2016, it appears many top brass are now favoring Ethnic Nationalism due to the ongoing invasion of Europe by 3rd world refugees and migrants)
Pentagon
European Jewish Congress
Koch Brothers
Steven Spielberg (though a liberal on social issues)
Rush Limbaugh (edit: as of June 2016, Limbaugh seems to be waking up... just a bit)
Ayn Rand (particularly her economic ideology which amounts to nothing more than naive utopianism)
Gary Johnson and most top leaders of the Libertarian movement (they support free trade and open borders, thus making them tools or 'useful idiots' of the globalists)
Alan Greenspan
Ben Bernanke
Leo Strauss (known as the father of the Neocon movement)
Chaim Weizmann (key historical figure)
David Ben-Gurion (key historical figure)
AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee)
CFR (Council on Foreign Relations)
Hoover Institution
The CATO Institute
WTO (World Trade Organization) - the WTO facilitates tariff free trade, thus allowing for the use of wage-slave labor in the third world
TPP, NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA and all other "free" trade pacts
World Bank
IMF (International Monetary Fund)
AEI (American Enterprise Institute)
WJC (World Jewish Congress)
Simon Wiesenthal Center
Many anchors at FOX News (edit: as of June 2016, FOX News anchors appear to be waking up... just a bit)
David Horowitz and his FrontPage magazine (Horowitz is a former Marxist who later became a NEOCON; he's done some good work in smashing Political Correctness, but regardless, he's against Ethnic Nationalism except for Israel)
Pamela Geller (she's done some good work in smashing PC; regardless, she's against Ethnic Nationalism... except for Israel)
et al.
Lastly, to understand how the Neocon camp (often referred to as the "New World Order") uses the liberal globalist camp to carry out much of the necessary "trenchwork" for its NWO goals to be realized, please read my article, Anti-fascists Are VERY Useful To The New World Order.
ASIDE: These two competing ideological camps - when thought of simultaneously - are often referred to as the "left-right paradigm." Frequently, you'll hear political pundits use the expression, "the phony left-right paradigm." Let us consider the word "phony" as used in this expression. Is the left-right paradigm "phony?" Yes and no. Yes, it is "phony" in the sense that neither side (or "camp") offers anything beneficial to average people. On the other hand, no it is not phony, since the verbal battles between both camps are authentic. We often see each side arguing with the other (e.g., the Democrats -vs- the Republicans, MSNBC -vs- FOX News, etc). Some have wrongly suggested that such verbal battles are "phony," i.e., an orchestrated "show" for mass consumption to create the illusion that one side offers "solutions" whereas the other side doesn't. This idea of it being a staged show is totally false. There are indeed two sides, and they authentically do not like each other. For example, when you hear the Neocon Dennis Prager tearing into a liberal such as George Soros, this is not an "orchestrated show"; Prager sincerely despises Soros (and vice versa). Thus to summarize the point I'm trying to make -- there are two distinct camps/sides and they sincerely despise each other. The "phony" part applies when either side claims to be the "good side." The truth is that neither side is the good side since the average person gets a raw deal by both the left and right i.e., by both the Liberal camp and Neocon camp.
..
There are two distinct ideological globalist camps, both led by Jews -- each camp competes with the other for global control:
1) THE LIBERAL CAMP
2) THE NEOCON CAMP (often calling themselves "conservatives" ... although they actually aren't conserving anything... they're not conserving American jobs, they're not conserving the demographic/racial makeup of America, they're not conserving American culture and religion, etc).
First off, it is critical to understand that each ideological camp was created, developed, and fine-tuned by Jewish intellectuals. Without Jewish intellectuals, there wouldn't be a radical liberal school of thought (Communism, Socialism, Trotskyism, and all their supporting submovements/ideas such as feminism, gay rights, political correctness, etc.). Similarly, without Jewish intellectuals, there wouldn't be a Neocon school of thought.
The liberal Jewish camp is primarily led by Trotskyite Jews (or just fairly left leaning Jews) and their Gentile followers. They one day want to see something close to a borderless world or at least a world with weak/unenforced borders (like we see in the European Union today) with a global government based on the United Nations concept (or perhaps even the UN itself). The liberal Jewish camp also includes those who subscribe to Alter-globalism, a less radical leftist approach to globalism (at least when compared to Trotskyism). Anyway, both the Trotskyites & Alter-globalists are the "do-gooders" who naively dream of a John Lennon "Imagine" type world. They feel they can "love their way" to global power (though they can become violent against anyone who opposes their worldview). In the 1960's they were called the "New Left" (e.g., Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Max Horkheimer, Saul Alinsky, etc).
The Neocon Jewish camp (plus their Gentile followers) also want a borderless world but with a global government revolving around a NY-DC-LONDON-JERUSALEM axis. These are the exploitative-type Jews, the Super-Elite, who want 95% of global wealth in their hands and the rest of humanity in a "global plantation" type condition. They feel they can bomb their way to global power. Incidentally, the cold war Gentile warriors (e.g., Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., etc) and their Jewish globalist handlers (e.g., Henry Kissinger, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Milton Friedman, etc) fall in this camp.
Pick almost any influential Jew and they'll rather neatly fit into either the liberal camp or the Neocon camp. However, it should be noted that occasionally you'll find a Jew who is primarily in the liberal camp but with one foot in the Neocon/Zionist camp (out of "tribal" loyalty to Israel).
THE FOLLOWING IS A SMALL SAMPLING OF GLOBALIST JEWS, ORGANIZATIONS, PUBLICATIONS, ETC ... SHOWING WHICH CAMP THEY FIT IN
NOTE: Some people on this list are not Jews. However, they are often referred to as "Jew-think Gentiles," i.e., they subscribe to and advance the globalist Jewish agenda (knowingly or unknowingly); essentially they have sold themselves out to powerful Jewish globalist players and organizations.
NOTE: Many listed below are fully aware of the globalist agenda they are involved in. Others, however, are unaware and thus are simply "pawns", "tools", or "cogs in the machinery" of the globalist agenda they are (unknowingly) advancing. Or... they are aware and don't care since their participation advances their own quest for wealth and power.
LIBERAL GLOBALIST CAMP (JEWISH-LED) (in no particular order)
George Soros and his Open Society Foundations (Soros is probably the most powerful force in the liberal globalist camp)
David Miliband (far-left Jewish British politician; works closely with George Soros)
Jill Stein
Noam Chomsky
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton (and Bill Clinton... of course)
Clinton Foundation
Bernie Sanders (although he is against America's "free" trade treaties w/ China and other countries... I'll give him credit for this)
The radical elements of the Democratic Party (e.g., Dennis Kucinich, John Kerry)
Phyllis Bennis (Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies)
The Rockefeller Foundation
United Nations
Workers World
People's World
European Union
Any "Green" political party
Any Trotskyist, Marxist, Marxist-Leninist, Maoist, Stalinist, Luxemburgist, Hoxhaist i.e., any socialist/communist ideologue (of course)
Any radical "progressive" organization
International Committee Against Racism (and any anti-racist organization)
Any anti-Fascist organization
Any anti-Nationalist organization (of course)
All Hollywood film and television studios
Media Education Foundation
Nearly all U.S. and European Colleges & Universities
Organizations fighting Global Warming (but only the higher ups in these organizations are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Greenpeace (but only the higher ups in this organization are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Sierra Club (but only the higher ups in this organization are aware of the globalist agenda, the rank-and-file are well-meaning tools)
Carnegie Endowment For International Peace
PBS (Public Broadcasting Service)
Michael Moore
Amy Goodman & the entire "Democracy Now!" lineup
ALTERNET
HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society)
Amnesty International
Human Rights Watch (and just about any human rights organization)
Norman Finkelstein (very critical of Israel, advocates for a borderless world, a lifelong Maoist)
Zbigniew Brzezinski
New World Foundation
Naomi Klein
The Pope & much of the Vatican
The entire MSNBC lineup
Any radical/militant feminist organization
Any radical/militant gay rights organization
ANSWER Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) - American Trotskyite organization
UAF (Unite Against Fascism) - British Trotskyite organization funded in part by George Soros
J-Street (with a foot in the ZIONIST camp but not in a militant way i.e., not in a "Likud-type" or "Kadima-type" way)
CODEPINK (radical feminist organization in the mold of militant, Anarcho-Communist Jewess Emma Goldman)
The Trilateral Commission (much debate surrounds the classification of this organization; I put it here)
L.A. Jews for Peace (each large city has a similar group)
ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center)
Foreign Policy (political journal/magazine)
New York Times
Los Angeles Times
Ford Foundation
Tides Foundation (funded in part by Teresa Heinz-Kerry)
et al.
NEOCON GLOBALIST CAMP (JEWISH-LED) (in no particular order)
Sheldon Adelson
Benjamin Netanyahu
Rothschild Family
Anne Applebaum
Mitt Romney
Alan Dershowitz (though a liberal on social issues)
Dennis Prager
Michael Medved
Most (or at least many) Clear Channel AM talk radio hosts
Bush Family
Dick Cheney
Henry Kissinger
Daniel Pipes
The 'hyper-warmongers/hawks/Israel-Firsters' of the Republican Party (e.g., John McCain, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, and many others)
Glenn Beck (talk radio host)
The Weekly Standard (political magazine)
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Times
Any publication by Rupert Murdoch
Foreign Affairs (political journal/magazine)
Freeman Center for Strategic Studies
JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs)
Saban Center for Middle East Policy
NATO (update: As of June 2016, it appears many top brass are now favoring Ethnic Nationalism due to the ongoing invasion of Europe by 3rd world refugees and migrants)
Pentagon
European Jewish Congress
Koch Brothers
Steven Spielberg (though a liberal on social issues)
Rush Limbaugh (edit: as of June 2016, Limbaugh seems to be waking up... just a bit)
Ayn Rand (particularly her economic ideology which amounts to nothing more than naive utopianism)
Gary Johnson and most top leaders of the Libertarian movement (they support free trade and open borders, thus making them tools or 'useful idiots' of the globalists)
Alan Greenspan
Ben Bernanke
Leo Strauss (known as the father of the Neocon movement)
Chaim Weizmann (key historical figure)
David Ben-Gurion (key historical figure)
AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee)
CFR (Council on Foreign Relations)
Hoover Institution
The CATO Institute
WTO (World Trade Organization) - the WTO facilitates tariff free trade, thus allowing for the use of wage-slave labor in the third world
TPP, NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA and all other "free" trade pacts
World Bank
IMF (International Monetary Fund)
AEI (American Enterprise Institute)
WJC (World Jewish Congress)
Simon Wiesenthal Center
Many anchors at FOX News (edit: as of June 2016, FOX News anchors appear to be waking up... just a bit)
David Horowitz and his FrontPage magazine (Horowitz is a former Marxist who later became a NEOCON; he's done some good work in smashing Political Correctness, but regardless, he's against Ethnic Nationalism except for Israel)
Pamela Geller (she's done some good work in smashing PC; regardless, she's against Ethnic Nationalism... except for Israel)
et al.
Lastly, to understand how the Neocon camp (often referred to as the "New World Order") uses the liberal globalist camp to carry out much of the necessary "trenchwork" for its NWO goals to be realized, please read my article, Anti-fascists Are VERY Useful To The New World Order.
ASIDE: These two competing ideological camps - when thought of simultaneously - are often referred to as the "left-right paradigm." Frequently, you'll hear political pundits use the expression, "the phony left-right paradigm." Let us consider the word "phony" as used in this expression. Is the left-right paradigm "phony?" Yes and no. Yes, it is "phony" in the sense that neither side (or "camp") offers anything beneficial to average people. On the other hand, no it is not phony, since the verbal battles between both camps are authentic. We often see each side arguing with the other (e.g., the Democrats -vs- the Republicans, MSNBC -vs- FOX News, etc). Some have wrongly suggested that such verbal battles are "phony," i.e., an orchestrated "show" for mass consumption to create the illusion that one side offers "solutions" whereas the other side doesn't. This idea of it being a staged show is totally false. There are indeed two sides, and they authentically do not like each other. For example, when you hear the Neocon Dennis Prager tearing into a liberal such as George Soros, this is not an "orchestrated show"; Prager sincerely despises Soros (and vice versa). Thus to summarize the point I'm trying to make -- there are two distinct camps/sides and they sincerely despise each other. The "phony" part applies when either side claims to be the "good side." The truth is that neither side is the good side since the average person gets a raw deal by both the left and right i.e., by both the Liberal camp and Neocon camp.
..
Monday, September 5, 2011
What Is Fascism?
.
Political radicals often shout, "Fascist!", "Fascist!" at anyone who doesn't agree with their views. The term is especially popular among college students. But do such people actually know what Fascism is? Have they studied it?
Unfortunately, Fascism has an undeserved bad reputation. Regardless of this reputation, Fascism is a very sensible economic and social ideology. There are a few different "flavors" of Fascism, but basically they all come down to the following.
First and foremost, Fascism is an economic system in which a nation's government plays a central role in monitoring all banking, trade, production, and labor activity which takes place within the nation. Such monitoring is done for the sole purpose of safeguarding & advancing the nation and its people. Under Fascism, the government will not approve of any business activity unless that business has a positive impact on the nation as a whole and the people of the nation - this is the axiom which determines everything within the economic aspect of Fascism.
In other words, the government asks, "Is XYZ Enterprises good for our nation and our people?" If yes, it's approved. If no, it's not approved. When they ask, "Is it good?", they mean, "Is XYZ Enterprises good for the workers, do they pay a fair wage, do they produce a product or provide a service which advances our nation & our people technologically, morally, spiritually, health-wise, etc???" For example, a pornography company would not be allowed because pornography corrupts people generally and exploits & degrades women particularly. Also, "free" trade agreements (such as what the U.S. has with China) would never be allowed because such trade agreements result in companies sending jobs overseas (where labor is dirt cheap). Such an activity, of course, would undermine a nation's labor class. This is entirely unacceptable and thus not allowed under a Fascist economic model.
Fascism is based on free enterprise - but with constraints (the primary constraint being, "Is the particular economic activity in question good for our nation/people?"). Also, a businessman can become wealthy in a Fascist country, and the government has no objection to this (this is in stark contrast to Communism). Fascism also encourages private ownership of property (again, in stark contrast to Communism where private property is not allowed).
In a nutshell, Fascism basically tells entrepreneurs, "Go ahead and start a business, earn a lot of money, be successful, but don't produce any products or services which damage our nation and our nation's people... and make sure you treat your workers fair and pay them a living wage. If you don't follow these rules, we'll shut you down."
With regard to banking, usury is not allowed under Fascism. The government tightly controls all aspects of monetary policy, including terms of lending. The government issues/prints money and lends it interest free, as needed, to grow the economy and ultimately serve the citizens.
The above is the economic aspect of Fascism. There is also a cultural/social aspect to Fascism as well. Under Fascism, government plays a key role in monitoring: film, theatre, art, literature, music, education, etc in order to maintain a high moral standard, keep things clean and respectable, promote a strong sense of patriotism and honor, and prevent the dissemination of depraved filth which corrupts society.
With regard to political legislation introduced by a Fascist government, the same criteria is applied - "Will this proposed law benefit the nation as a whole and the people of our nation?"
A few other things to mention. Fascism encourages respect for the environment as Fascists understand that nature is the giver of life and thus must be preserved. Contrast this environmental philosophy with that of Capitalism which too often takes the short term view with regard to natural resources and foolishly believes that pollution is a necessary byproduct of profit. Also, and somewhat related to environmental issues, Fascism holds very progressive views with regard to animal rights.
Also, under Fascism, if a person doesn't like things, he/she can leave the country. Contrast this with Communism where if you don't like things, you better keep your mouth shut. And, of course, there is never an option to leave the country. You will submit or else be sent to a re-education camp where you'll be brainwashed to accept the Communist system. And if you still resist, you'll probably be killed. Again, there is no leaving. Submit or suffer the consequences.
Further, Fascism holds women in very high regard. Women are the carriers of new life. They are expected to be educated, worldly, and well read. Women are encouraged to pursue their interests and have a career but only if a career won't interfere with their family's needs; family comes first, always. Women are encouraged to be strong yet feminine. Consistent with these ideas, Fascist art often portrays women as heroic and even goddess-like.
In short, Fascism is a form of government & social system which authentically serves the interests of the people and nation as a whole. The word "Fascism" comes from the Italian word "fascio" meaning "the group" or more specifically, "in consideration of the group." Fascism is rooted in the notion that people must stay true to two mental concepts throughout their lives: 1) the individual's needs (themselves) and, 2) the group's needs (their nation)... always evaluating how their individual actions affect the group. Thus Fascism rejects the self-centered "me me me" mentality so common under Capitalism. For example, in a Fascist nation each person is expected to maintain a healthy diet & lifestyle. For if not, they may become seriously ill and thus require expensive health care; this would negatively impact the group (i.e., they'd become a financial burden on the nation).
Continuing this line of thought, under Fascism all people of one's ethnicity are considered the greater family of that person. Hence, a Fascist nation is thought of as one giant family of several million people. Therefore, just as one must not do anything to hurt their brother or sister in their immediate family, under Fascism one must not do anything which would hurt the nation/group (i.e., the greater family). This is the essence of Fascism: individualism balanced with a strong consideration of the group.
During the German Third Reich, the NSDAP (i.e., the "Nazis") followed all aspects of the above described Fascist system. And, for the most part, Mussolini's Italy did as well.
ASIDE: Although the economic aspect of Fascism is free-market based, Fascism is NOT Capitalism. Many on the political left wrongly equate Fascism with Capitalism. Again, Fascism is NOT Capitalism. Allow me to briefly explain: the primary goal of Capitalism is profit. On the other hand, the primary goal of Fascism is the well being of a nation's citizens and well being of the nation as a whole. In a 'purist-type' Capitalist country (i.e., Super-Crony-Capitalism) nothing may interfere with maximizing profits - not workers, not the environment... nothing. Even when a Capitalist country starts out with tight government regulations, it invariably drifts toward Laissez-faire economics (i.e., Super-Capitalism) by way of less and less government regulation. Human greed drives this transformation and ultimately the working class suffer via lower wages or loss of employment altogether if their job is, for example, transferred overseas (e.g., to China) where labor is dirt cheap. Capitalists (falsely) believe that the immense wealth at the top will "trickle down" to the masses i.e., that everything will magically work itself out. A certain amount of wealth does "trickle down"... but, far too often... the workers and the environment suffer. As just one example, tens of millions of American manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas during the past two decades (Capitalist so-called "free" trade policies have allowed for such outsourcing of jobs). Of course then, just as Fascists completely reject Communism, they also completely reject Capitalism.
FINAL POINT: Many liberals and leftists incorrectly accuse the United States of being, "a Fascist nation since the government is 'in bed with' (i.e., in collusion with) American business and industry." Yes... there presently is a very close relationship (collusion) between large American corporations and Washington D.C. politicians. However such collusion is ONLY for the benefit/profit of American corporations at the expense of the average American worker; this is called Crony Capitalism. Under Fascism, there is also a close relationship between government and business/industry but for the single purpose of primarily benefiting the average citizen and worker. This distinction is huge and therefore cannot be emphasized enough.
aa
Political radicals often shout, "Fascist!", "Fascist!" at anyone who doesn't agree with their views. The term is especially popular among college students. But do such people actually know what Fascism is? Have they studied it?
Unfortunately, Fascism has an undeserved bad reputation. Regardless of this reputation, Fascism is a very sensible economic and social ideology. There are a few different "flavors" of Fascism, but basically they all come down to the following.
First and foremost, Fascism is an economic system in which a nation's government plays a central role in monitoring all banking, trade, production, and labor activity which takes place within the nation. Such monitoring is done for the sole purpose of safeguarding & advancing the nation and its people. Under Fascism, the government will not approve of any business activity unless that business has a positive impact on the nation as a whole and the people of the nation - this is the axiom which determines everything within the economic aspect of Fascism.
In other words, the government asks, "Is XYZ Enterprises good for our nation and our people?" If yes, it's approved. If no, it's not approved. When they ask, "Is it good?", they mean, "Is XYZ Enterprises good for the workers, do they pay a fair wage, do they produce a product or provide a service which advances our nation & our people technologically, morally, spiritually, health-wise, etc???" For example, a pornography company would not be allowed because pornography corrupts people generally and exploits & degrades women particularly. Also, "free" trade agreements (such as what the U.S. has with China) would never be allowed because such trade agreements result in companies sending jobs overseas (where labor is dirt cheap). Such an activity, of course, would undermine a nation's labor class. This is entirely unacceptable and thus not allowed under a Fascist economic model.
Fascism is based on free enterprise - but with constraints (the primary constraint being, "Is the particular economic activity in question good for our nation/people?"). Also, a businessman can become wealthy in a Fascist country, and the government has no objection to this (this is in stark contrast to Communism). Fascism also encourages private ownership of property (again, in stark contrast to Communism where private property is not allowed).
In a nutshell, Fascism basically tells entrepreneurs, "Go ahead and start a business, earn a lot of money, be successful, but don't produce any products or services which damage our nation and our nation's people... and make sure you treat your workers fair and pay them a living wage. If you don't follow these rules, we'll shut you down."
With regard to banking, usury is not allowed under Fascism. The government tightly controls all aspects of monetary policy, including terms of lending. The government issues/prints money and lends it interest free, as needed, to grow the economy and ultimately serve the citizens.
The above is the economic aspect of Fascism. There is also a cultural/social aspect to Fascism as well. Under Fascism, government plays a key role in monitoring: film, theatre, art, literature, music, education, etc in order to maintain a high moral standard, keep things clean and respectable, promote a strong sense of patriotism and honor, and prevent the dissemination of depraved filth which corrupts society.
With regard to political legislation introduced by a Fascist government, the same criteria is applied - "Will this proposed law benefit the nation as a whole and the people of our nation?"
A few other things to mention. Fascism encourages respect for the environment as Fascists understand that nature is the giver of life and thus must be preserved. Contrast this environmental philosophy with that of Capitalism which too often takes the short term view with regard to natural resources and foolishly believes that pollution is a necessary byproduct of profit. Also, and somewhat related to environmental issues, Fascism holds very progressive views with regard to animal rights.
Also, under Fascism, if a person doesn't like things, he/she can leave the country. Contrast this with Communism where if you don't like things, you better keep your mouth shut. And, of course, there is never an option to leave the country. You will submit or else be sent to a re-education camp where you'll be brainwashed to accept the Communist system. And if you still resist, you'll probably be killed. Again, there is no leaving. Submit or suffer the consequences.
Further, Fascism holds women in very high regard. Women are the carriers of new life. They are expected to be educated, worldly, and well read. Women are encouraged to pursue their interests and have a career but only if a career won't interfere with their family's needs; family comes first, always. Women are encouraged to be strong yet feminine. Consistent with these ideas, Fascist art often portrays women as heroic and even goddess-like.
In short, Fascism is a form of government & social system which authentically serves the interests of the people and nation as a whole. The word "Fascism" comes from the Italian word "fascio" meaning "the group" or more specifically, "in consideration of the group." Fascism is rooted in the notion that people must stay true to two mental concepts throughout their lives: 1) the individual's needs (themselves) and, 2) the group's needs (their nation)... always evaluating how their individual actions affect the group. Thus Fascism rejects the self-centered "me me me" mentality so common under Capitalism. For example, in a Fascist nation each person is expected to maintain a healthy diet & lifestyle. For if not, they may become seriously ill and thus require expensive health care; this would negatively impact the group (i.e., they'd become a financial burden on the nation).
Continuing this line of thought, under Fascism all people of one's ethnicity are considered the greater family of that person. Hence, a Fascist nation is thought of as one giant family of several million people. Therefore, just as one must not do anything to hurt their brother or sister in their immediate family, under Fascism one must not do anything which would hurt the nation/group (i.e., the greater family). This is the essence of Fascism: individualism balanced with a strong consideration of the group.
During the German Third Reich, the NSDAP (i.e., the "Nazis") followed all aspects of the above described Fascist system. And, for the most part, Mussolini's Italy did as well.
ASIDE: Although the economic aspect of Fascism is free-market based, Fascism is NOT Capitalism. Many on the political left wrongly equate Fascism with Capitalism. Again, Fascism is NOT Capitalism. Allow me to briefly explain: the primary goal of Capitalism is profit. On the other hand, the primary goal of Fascism is the well being of a nation's citizens and well being of the nation as a whole. In a 'purist-type' Capitalist country (i.e., Super-Crony-Capitalism) nothing may interfere with maximizing profits - not workers, not the environment... nothing. Even when a Capitalist country starts out with tight government regulations, it invariably drifts toward Laissez-faire economics (i.e., Super-Capitalism) by way of less and less government regulation. Human greed drives this transformation and ultimately the working class suffer via lower wages or loss of employment altogether if their job is, for example, transferred overseas (e.g., to China) where labor is dirt cheap. Capitalists (falsely) believe that the immense wealth at the top will "trickle down" to the masses i.e., that everything will magically work itself out. A certain amount of wealth does "trickle down"... but, far too often... the workers and the environment suffer. As just one example, tens of millions of American manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas during the past two decades (Capitalist so-called "free" trade policies have allowed for such outsourcing of jobs). Of course then, just as Fascists completely reject Communism, they also completely reject Capitalism.
FINAL POINT: Many liberals and leftists incorrectly accuse the United States of being, "a Fascist nation since the government is 'in bed with' (i.e., in collusion with) American business and industry." Yes... there presently is a very close relationship (collusion) between large American corporations and Washington D.C. politicians. However such collusion is ONLY for the benefit/profit of American corporations at the expense of the average American worker; this is called Crony Capitalism. Under Fascism, there is also a close relationship between government and business/industry but for the single purpose of primarily benefiting the average citizen and worker. This distinction is huge and therefore cannot be emphasized enough.
aa
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Monday, September 7, 2009
Liberals & Antifa Are Very Useful To The Globalist Elite (and this is why the globalist elite fund liberal/leftist activist groups)
.
If you follow the money you'll find that large well organized militant leftist organizations, so-called "anti-fascist groups" (examples: ANSWER Coalition in the United States & UAF in Britain) are funded by globalist front groups such as MoveOn.org, the Ford Foundation, and numerous other organizations. They are also funded by individual globalists such as George Soros.
People often ask themselves, "What's the connection between the globalist elite and radical progressive/leftist/anti-fascist organizations?"
Before I go any further let me state that most "anti-fascists" and "progressives" are generally seeking:
- Trotskyism (i.e., a borderless world based on global Marxism/collectivism)
- Intermixing of all races in which everyone will supposedly have respect for one another and universal justice will supposedly prevail
- Destroying Nationalism by destroying the very concept of a Nation-State (this is part of Trotskyism)
Such goals amount to what I call, "college utopianism" (i.e., hyper-naivety) and can never be realized except on paper (i.e., in theory). However, in working towards such goals, anti-fascists do much of the "trench work" towards:
- breaking down national borders
- promoting massive non-White immigration into the Western world (which acts as a nation-wrecking force on the West)
- promoting multiculturalism (which eventually tears a nation apart from within)
Interestingly, these are the same broad goals of the globalist elite. Hence, the globalist elite use radical progressives/leftists to do much of the trench work necessary for the globalists future "global plantation." This is a key point for people to understand.
Sadly, progressives/leftists have absolutely no idea they are simply useful idiots of the globalist elite. This is another key point to understand.
Anti-fascists & progressives/leftists are effective since they sincerely believe what they're doing is morally right. Their belief in their moral superiority is a powerful motivating force, propelling them to inflict much damage to society (in their quest to tear down the current order). They naively believe global justice will be realized when all nations are eliminated, all races live together, and similar utopian/imaginary goals are realized. Of course this is the old communist trick which they have fallen for. A trick? Yes, because as soon as such broad goals are realized or merely approached, the globalist elite's hammer will come down hard and a "global plantation" run by tyranny will reign supreme (think Bolshevik Russia). At this point progressives/leftists/anti-fascists will wonder, "where is the utopia we worked for?"
This is the same tactic top-tier Marxists have been using for 100+ years.
The bottom line is that communism is a scam used by elites to gain absolute power. Never forget that.
Here's an example of typical progressives/leftists/anti-fascists - these being in Russia - though they're the same in every nation they operate.
a
If you follow the money you'll find that large well organized militant leftist organizations, so-called "anti-fascist groups" (examples: ANSWER Coalition in the United States & UAF in Britain) are funded by globalist front groups such as MoveOn.org, the Ford Foundation, and numerous other organizations. They are also funded by individual globalists such as George Soros.
People often ask themselves, "What's the connection between the globalist elite and radical progressive/leftist/anti-fascist organizations?"
Before I go any further let me state that most "anti-fascists" and "progressives" are generally seeking:
- Trotskyism (i.e., a borderless world based on global Marxism/collectivism)
- Intermixing of all races in which everyone will supposedly have respect for one another and universal justice will supposedly prevail
- Destroying Nationalism by destroying the very concept of a Nation-State (this is part of Trotskyism)
Such goals amount to what I call, "college utopianism" (i.e., hyper-naivety) and can never be realized except on paper (i.e., in theory). However, in working towards such goals, anti-fascists do much of the "trench work" towards:
- breaking down national borders
- promoting massive non-White immigration into the Western world (which acts as a nation-wrecking force on the West)
- promoting multiculturalism (which eventually tears a nation apart from within)
Interestingly, these are the same broad goals of the globalist elite. Hence, the globalist elite use radical progressives/leftists to do much of the trench work necessary for the globalists future "global plantation." This is a key point for people to understand.
Sadly, progressives/leftists have absolutely no idea they are simply useful idiots of the globalist elite. This is another key point to understand.
Anti-fascists & progressives/leftists are effective since they sincerely believe what they're doing is morally right. Their belief in their moral superiority is a powerful motivating force, propelling them to inflict much damage to society (in their quest to tear down the current order). They naively believe global justice will be realized when all nations are eliminated, all races live together, and similar utopian/imaginary goals are realized. Of course this is the old communist trick which they have fallen for. A trick? Yes, because as soon as such broad goals are realized or merely approached, the globalist elite's hammer will come down hard and a "global plantation" run by tyranny will reign supreme (think Bolshevik Russia). At this point progressives/leftists/anti-fascists will wonder, "where is the utopia we worked for?"
This is the same tactic top-tier Marxists have been using for 100+ years.
The bottom line is that communism is a scam used by elites to gain absolute power. Never forget that.
Here's an example of typical progressives/leftists/anti-fascists - these being in Russia - though they're the same in every nation they operate.
a
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
I Am A Humanitarian Which Is Why I FIRMLY Believe In Racial Separation
.
SYNOPSIS: Those who promote multiracial/multicultural societies generally mean well in that they feel they're creating a more peaceful world. But they ignore the lessons of history and thus are essentially laying the seeds for unimaginable future conflict and bloodshed.
Multiculturalism within a nation leads to internal tension and eventual violent conflict... 6,000 years of human warfare/conflict proves this (i.e., roughly 85% of all wars throughout recorded history are entirely rooted in racial/ethnic/religious conflict; the other 15% are purely ideologically-based). All races and ethnic groups are "tribal" & separatist in nature - these innate characteristics of human nature must be accepted and public policy should be implemented with such characteristics in mind. Hence, racial/ethnic homogeneity should be encouraged by public policy makers in each country. Pursuing racial/ethnic homogeneity in each country is the most humane way to organize the world's various peoples.
Any realistic humanitarian (such as myself) understands this reality of human nature and works within its framework.
I don't have anything against Mexicans.... in Mexico. I don't have anything against Nigerians... in Nigeria. Mexicans should remain in Mexico. Nigerians should remain in Nigeria... and so on. Further, I hope Mexicans, Nigerians and all peoples of the world live healthy and productive lives in their respective countries. I do not wish ill on any peoples of the world.
The next point I will make is a central concern of all people on the political far-right. As established by the United Nations Charter in 1945, each people/ethnicity/racial group should have their own geographic area on Earth (i.e., a bordered country) in which to exercise their right to self-determination as a unique people/ethnicity/racial group. The UN essentially follows this policy for nearly all non-White peoples of the world. However, the UN pressures White nations to maintain (and even increase) their multiracial/multicultural policies. The UN essentially demands that White nations continue allowing millions of non-Whites to immigrate into White nations. Is this a double standard? Of course.
Whites make up a mere 13% of the world's population and this percentage is measurably shrinking with each passing year. White nations are under attack -- a slow, creeping attack often appropriately termed 'demographic warfare on the West' (i.e., radical demographic change via non-White immigration into the Western World). At the present Third World immigration rates into White nations, Whites will become a minority in each White nation by 2028. And by 2043, Whites will make up 20% - 25% of each (historical) White nation. The White Western World is gradually being erased... and... once the West is gone... its gone forever. Approximately 3,500 years of Western Civilization reduced to mere scattered pieces - and this colossal transformation will likely be accomplished in a little over a century. Just ponder this for a moment: a White baby born today will likely live to see a future, say, "France" where only 25% of that country is White. Or Sweden (same story). Or America (same story). Or Greece (same story), etc. Essentially then, the people who more or less invented just about everything (i.e., Whites) are being gradually eliminated. This can only be called one thing: the ongoing genocide of the White race. Here are just a few White accomplishments (which benefit all of global humanity)...
Some people have dismissed my concerns by saying, "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries to make it look like they're being targeted" or they say, "human migration is part of history, get used to it." First, as to the latter, "human migration is part of history" ... yes, indeed it is. But it's important to focus on what's relevant today. Thus we must only consider the modern world (as defined by the formation of the modern nation-State). Human migration which took place centuries ago (or more) is irrelevant to the modern world and those who try to include ancient human migration patterns into this debate are generally trying to confuse the listener, or they naively bought into the Marxist slogan, "there is only one race, the human race." As to the first comment I often hear (i.e., "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries...) I say to them, yes, indeed, many countries have an immigration policy. However, such policies are restricted to, 1) a handful of diplomats and their families, 2) a few rare cases of political asylum, and 3) perhaps even a small guest worker program which is carefully monitored to ensure the workers return to their home country upon completion of work. Only White countries have systematic immigration polices which result in a demographic transformation of entire cities and eventually the entire country. Name me one non-White country which has such an immigration policy? There isn't one.
The multiculturalizing of the Western World began after World War II. Each White Western nation passed a liberal immigration policy during this period; this legislative process began in 1954 and was complete by 1972 (see this article, point #12). Initially, only a trickle of non-White immigrants were allowed in but within a few years the quotas were increased and have increased ever since. Within 75-100 years, the White Western world will be de facto erased from the Earth, never to come back. And not through guns, bombs, and great armies. Rather, by way of massive immigration, mostly from the third world. This is called "demographic warfare" - it is... for all intents and purposes... the gradual conquering of White nations by flooding each nation with 3rd world immigrants.
A corollary to my Ethnic Nationalism worldview (also called ---> the advocacy of the Ethno-State concept for each and every distinct ethnic peoples on earth) is the following --> I'm 100% opposed to imperialism and empire building... either carried out by European-derived peoples or carried out by any peoples of any race/ethnicity. Further, as a person who is part of the political far-right (and like nearly everyone on the far-right), I have been against the U.S. led Middle East wars from day one. In short, the United States has no business being in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere in the Middle East.
Global humanity works best when the world is divided into nation-states where each nation-state has racial/ethnic homogeneity (i.e., the Ethno-State concept). Nations can trade (i.e., fair trade, not so-called "free" trade), have diplomatic relations, compete in the Olympics, etc. And, of course, there should be tolerance between nations. However, when we start mixing VERY different peoples in the same country, what generally happens??? History tells us that trouble brews and internal violent conflict results - this is not a humane way to organize the world's peoples.
Global humanity has enough difficulty maintaining peace between nations. We don't need to make matters worse by creating, via official government policy, multiracial countries which ALWAYS gravitate towards internal conflict and violence (again, as history clearly illustrates). Thus, pragmatic humanitarians (like myself) who are realistic about human nature, believe FIRMLY in racial/ethnic separatism (i.e., they believe FIRMLY in the Ethno-State for each distinct ethnic peoples). On the other hand, those pushing for multiculturalism are actually (unknowingly) anti-humanitarian. Why? Because they are (I'll say it again ---> unknowingly) laying the seeds for future internal national conflict (via their promotion of multicultural/multiracial nations) even though they naively think they are "building a better world."
The above is the core of my racial-realist/humanitarian philosophy.
aa
SYNOPSIS: Those who promote multiracial/multicultural societies generally mean well in that they feel they're creating a more peaceful world. But they ignore the lessons of history and thus are essentially laying the seeds for unimaginable future conflict and bloodshed.
Multiculturalism within a nation leads to internal tension and eventual violent conflict... 6,000 years of human warfare/conflict proves this (i.e., roughly 85% of all wars throughout recorded history are entirely rooted in racial/ethnic/religious conflict; the other 15% are purely ideologically-based). All races and ethnic groups are "tribal" & separatist in nature - these innate characteristics of human nature must be accepted and public policy should be implemented with such characteristics in mind. Hence, racial/ethnic homogeneity should be encouraged by public policy makers in each country. Pursuing racial/ethnic homogeneity in each country is the most humane way to organize the world's various peoples.
Any realistic humanitarian (such as myself) understands this reality of human nature and works within its framework.
I don't have anything against Mexicans.... in Mexico. I don't have anything against Nigerians... in Nigeria. Mexicans should remain in Mexico. Nigerians should remain in Nigeria... and so on. Further, I hope Mexicans, Nigerians and all peoples of the world live healthy and productive lives in their respective countries. I do not wish ill on any peoples of the world.
The next point I will make is a central concern of all people on the political far-right. As established by the United Nations Charter in 1945, each people/ethnicity/racial group should have their own geographic area on Earth (i.e., a bordered country) in which to exercise their right to self-determination as a unique people/ethnicity/racial group. The UN essentially follows this policy for nearly all non-White peoples of the world. However, the UN pressures White nations to maintain (and even increase) their multiracial/multicultural policies. The UN essentially demands that White nations continue allowing millions of non-Whites to immigrate into White nations. Is this a double standard? Of course.
Whites make up a mere 13% of the world's population and this percentage is measurably shrinking with each passing year. White nations are under attack -- a slow, creeping attack often appropriately termed 'demographic warfare on the West' (i.e., radical demographic change via non-White immigration into the Western World). At the present Third World immigration rates into White nations, Whites will become a minority in each White nation by 2028. And by 2043, Whites will make up 20% - 25% of each (historical) White nation. The White Western World is gradually being erased... and... once the West is gone... its gone forever. Approximately 3,500 years of Western Civilization reduced to mere scattered pieces - and this colossal transformation will likely be accomplished in a little over a century. Just ponder this for a moment: a White baby born today will likely live to see a future, say, "France" where only 25% of that country is White. Or Sweden (same story). Or America (same story). Or Greece (same story), etc. Essentially then, the people who more or less invented just about everything (i.e., Whites) are being gradually eliminated. This can only be called one thing: the ongoing genocide of the White race. Here are just a few White accomplishments (which benefit all of global humanity)...
Some people have dismissed my concerns by saying, "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries to make it look like they're being targeted" or they say, "human migration is part of history, get used to it." First, as to the latter, "human migration is part of history" ... yes, indeed it is. But it's important to focus on what's relevant today. Thus we must only consider the modern world (as defined by the formation of the modern nation-State). Human migration which took place centuries ago (or more) is irrelevant to the modern world and those who try to include ancient human migration patterns into this debate are generally trying to confuse the listener, or they naively bought into the Marxist slogan, "there is only one race, the human race." As to the first comment I often hear (i.e., "every country has immigration, you're singling out White countries...) I say to them, yes, indeed, many countries have an immigration policy. However, such policies are restricted to, 1) a handful of diplomats and their families, 2) a few rare cases of political asylum, and 3) perhaps even a small guest worker program which is carefully monitored to ensure the workers return to their home country upon completion of work. Only White countries have systematic immigration polices which result in a demographic transformation of entire cities and eventually the entire country. Name me one non-White country which has such an immigration policy? There isn't one.
The multiculturalizing of the Western World began after World War II. Each White Western nation passed a liberal immigration policy during this period; this legislative process began in 1954 and was complete by 1972 (see this article, point #12). Initially, only a trickle of non-White immigrants were allowed in but within a few years the quotas were increased and have increased ever since. Within 75-100 years, the White Western world will be de facto erased from the Earth, never to come back. And not through guns, bombs, and great armies. Rather, by way of massive immigration, mostly from the third world. This is called "demographic warfare" - it is... for all intents and purposes... the gradual conquering of White nations by flooding each nation with 3rd world immigrants.
A corollary to my Ethnic Nationalism worldview (also called ---> the advocacy of the Ethno-State concept for each and every distinct ethnic peoples on earth) is the following --> I'm 100% opposed to imperialism and empire building... either carried out by European-derived peoples or carried out by any peoples of any race/ethnicity. Further, as a person who is part of the political far-right (and like nearly everyone on the far-right), I have been against the U.S. led Middle East wars from day one. In short, the United States has no business being in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere in the Middle East.
Global humanity works best when the world is divided into nation-states where each nation-state has racial/ethnic homogeneity (i.e., the Ethno-State concept). Nations can trade (i.e., fair trade, not so-called "free" trade), have diplomatic relations, compete in the Olympics, etc. And, of course, there should be tolerance between nations. However, when we start mixing VERY different peoples in the same country, what generally happens??? History tells us that trouble brews and internal violent conflict results - this is not a humane way to organize the world's peoples.
Global humanity has enough difficulty maintaining peace between nations. We don't need to make matters worse by creating, via official government policy, multiracial countries which ALWAYS gravitate towards internal conflict and violence (again, as history clearly illustrates). Thus, pragmatic humanitarians (like myself) who are realistic about human nature, believe FIRMLY in racial/ethnic separatism (i.e., they believe FIRMLY in the Ethno-State for each distinct ethnic peoples). On the other hand, those pushing for multiculturalism are actually (unknowingly) anti-humanitarian. Why? Because they are (I'll say it again ---> unknowingly) laying the seeds for future internal national conflict (via their promotion of multicultural/multiracial nations) even though they naively think they are "building a better world."
The above is the core of my racial-realist/humanitarian philosophy.
aa
Monday, June 22, 2009
The Four Forces Pushing For War With Iran
a
1 - ISRAEL AND AMERICAN POLITICIANS BOUGHT OFF BY THE ISRAEL LOBBY
The Israel Lobby (AIPAC) is working overtime to get naive Americans to fight another war on its behalf. Politicians who call Israel out (like Ron Paul) are accused of "anti-Semitism." Never forget that the Israel Lobby runs U.S. foreign policy.
2 - NEOCON GLOBAL IMPERIALISTS
The NEOCON goal is simply to expand the American empire. Controlling Iran is yet another step towards controlling the Middle East. Forty percent of the world's energy comes from Middle East oil. Thus if one can control the Middle East, one can control forty percent of the world's energy supply. Controlling Middle East oil means you can control much of the global economy.
3 - THE OIL LOBBY
There is big money to be made by tapping into Iran's MASSIVE crude oil reserves.
4 - MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (i.e., war profiteers)
War is big business, very big. War profiteers simply accuse their critics of being "unpatriotic" and "standing in the way of freedom and democracy" (yaaaaawwwwwwnnnn).
.
.
1 - ISRAEL AND AMERICAN POLITICIANS BOUGHT OFF BY THE ISRAEL LOBBY
The Israel Lobby (AIPAC) is working overtime to get naive Americans to fight another war on its behalf. Politicians who call Israel out (like Ron Paul) are accused of "anti-Semitism." Never forget that the Israel Lobby runs U.S. foreign policy.
2 - NEOCON GLOBAL IMPERIALISTS
The NEOCON goal is simply to expand the American empire. Controlling Iran is yet another step towards controlling the Middle East. Forty percent of the world's energy comes from Middle East oil. Thus if one can control the Middle East, one can control forty percent of the world's energy supply. Controlling Middle East oil means you can control much of the global economy.
3 - THE OIL LOBBY
There is big money to be made by tapping into Iran's MASSIVE crude oil reserves.
4 - MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX (i.e., war profiteers)
War is big business, very big. War profiteers simply accuse their critics of being "unpatriotic" and "standing in the way of freedom and democracy" (yaaaaawwwwwwnnnn).
.
.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Diversity Training Company Teaches Hatred Of Whites
.
EdChange is a well-known diversity training company based in St. Paul, MN. They offer seminars and consulting "services" to schools and companies. In other words, they "explain" to White school administrators and White corporate managers how they are "evil", "racist", and "oppressive" towards minorities. Take a look at the EdChange website to get an idea of the Marxist, America hating, White hating nature of this radical leftist organization:
http://www.edchange.org/
The following page lists a few of the schools and companies which EdChange has indoctrinated:
http://www.edchange.org/consulting_clients.html
EdChange also sells a wide range of radical leftist & White hating T-shirts including these two imprinted with "Cracker" and "Honkey" (click for larger image)...
What would happen if a diversity training company (or any company) sold T-shirts imprinted with "Nigger", "Gook", or "Spic"? Naturally there would be a public outcry via the mainstream media. But when Whites are mocked, the mainstream media is silent. Further, EdChange sells a wide range of other products imprinted with "Cracker" and "Honkey" (click on links)... everything from coffee mugs to baby clothes.
Here are two more examples of the type of derogatory T-shirts EdChange sells (click for larger image)...
The T-shirt "Whitey O. Pressor" is particularly disgusting. "Whitey" is an extremely offensive term, but to EdChange it's perfectly acceptable. This T-shirt further indoctrinates non-Whites into hating White people by claiming --> WHITES = OPPRESSORS. Feel free to check out the other T-shirts EdChange sells, all of a radical leftist nature.
a
.
.
EdChange is a well-known diversity training company based in St. Paul, MN. They offer seminars and consulting "services" to schools and companies. In other words, they "explain" to White school administrators and White corporate managers how they are "evil", "racist", and "oppressive" towards minorities. Take a look at the EdChange website to get an idea of the Marxist, America hating, White hating nature of this radical leftist organization:
http://www.edchange.org/
The following page lists a few of the schools and companies which EdChange has indoctrinated:
http://www.edchange.org/consulting_clients.html
EdChange also sells a wide range of radical leftist & White hating T-shirts including these two imprinted with "Cracker" and "Honkey" (click for larger image)...
What would happen if a diversity training company (or any company) sold T-shirts imprinted with "Nigger", "Gook", or "Spic"? Naturally there would be a public outcry via the mainstream media. But when Whites are mocked, the mainstream media is silent. Further, EdChange sells a wide range of other products imprinted with "Cracker" and "Honkey" (click on links)... everything from coffee mugs to baby clothes.
Here are two more examples of the type of derogatory T-shirts EdChange sells (click for larger image)...
The T-shirt "Whitey O. Pressor" is particularly disgusting. "Whitey" is an extremely offensive term, but to EdChange it's perfectly acceptable. This T-shirt further indoctrinates non-Whites into hating White people by claiming --> WHITES = OPPRESSORS. Feel free to check out the other T-shirts EdChange sells, all of a radical leftist nature.
a
.
.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
ACLU's Agenda ----> Pro-Mexican, Pro-Muslim, Anti-Family, Anti-White, Anti-America
.
The ACLU's main goal is to gradually deconstruct the USA while ushering in radical Socialism. The ACLU doesn't care about Mexicans, they simply view Mexicans (and illegal aliens in general) as a destructive force within the United States. Anything that hurts the USA, the ACLU supports. Anything that damages the social fabric of America and thus weakens it, the ACLU supports. This is why the ACLU attacks the boy scouts as well as anything related to the nuclear family, church, traditional values, WASP American culture, etc. Also, the ACLU defends Islam and Muslims because Islam is a negative force within the USA (Muslim culture and Western culture do not mix, clearly). The ACLU doesn't care about Muslims, they only see them as yet another tool to wreck this country and cause it to rot from within. This is why the ACLU and other leftists have cozied up to Muslims... because both the ACLU and many Muslims have a common enemy ---> the United States and, more generally, the White Western World. And let's not forget, the ACLU is primarily made up of secular Jews.
.
.
The ACLU's main goal is to gradually deconstruct the USA while ushering in radical Socialism. The ACLU doesn't care about Mexicans, they simply view Mexicans (and illegal aliens in general) as a destructive force within the United States. Anything that hurts the USA, the ACLU supports. Anything that damages the social fabric of America and thus weakens it, the ACLU supports. This is why the ACLU attacks the boy scouts as well as anything related to the nuclear family, church, traditional values, WASP American culture, etc. Also, the ACLU defends Islam and Muslims because Islam is a negative force within the USA (Muslim culture and Western culture do not mix, clearly). The ACLU doesn't care about Muslims, they only see them as yet another tool to wreck this country and cause it to rot from within. This is why the ACLU and other leftists have cozied up to Muslims... because both the ACLU and many Muslims have a common enemy ---> the United States and, more generally, the White Western World. And let's not forget, the ACLU is primarily made up of secular Jews.
.
.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Cultural Marxism & The Subversion Of Traditional Art
.
Compare the beautiful painting on the left (17th century Nicolas Poussin, French) to the trash on the right (Jackson Pollock, a heavily Jewish inspired American "painter"). Click on the image for a larger version.
Cultural Marxism is a Jewish movement which began in the early 20th century. It was developed for the single purpose of attacking the Western World by bringing about depraved cultural change to the West. One aspect of Cultural Marxism is the subversion (and perversion) of all Western cultural institutions (e.g., art, film, music, theatre, etc) in order to help cause Western societies to rot from within.
In the early 20th century, so-called "Modern Art" came into existence. Talent was no longer a requirement to be an artist. One simply had to randomly slop anything on a canvas and describe the "painting" in grandiose and esoteric terms... i.e., explaining the "deep" meaning of the "art." Anyone who dared criticize the so-called "painting" was labeled "backward" and a "simpleton."
Cultural Marxism is a Jewish movement which began in the early 20th century. It was developed for the single purpose of attacking the Western World by bringing about depraved cultural change to the West. One aspect of Cultural Marxism is the subversion (and perversion) of all Western cultural institutions (e.g., art, film, music, theatre, etc) in order to help cause Western societies to rot from within.
In the early 20th century, so-called "Modern Art" came into existence. Talent was no longer a requirement to be an artist. One simply had to randomly slop anything on a canvas and describe the "painting" in grandiose and esoteric terms... i.e., explaining the "deep" meaning of the "art." Anyone who dared criticize the so-called "painting" was labeled "backward" and a "simpleton."
In the art world today, there are NO standards. Anything goes. Anything is counted as "art." Any trash can find 'itself' in a big city museum. It also helps if an "artist" lives a drugged-out life, stays up all night and sleeps half the day, dresses in a bizarre manner, AND, this is the most important quality, subscribes to radical leftist politics. Finally, it's important for the "artist" to constantly complain, "how the world doesn't understand me because I'm so complex."
For more on how Jews have subverted the art world, read this article in the Occidental Observer.
.
For more on how Jews have subverted the art world, read this article in the Occidental Observer.
.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
How To Make A White Liberal Face Their Own Racism
.
Next time you meet a white liberal who praises multiculturalism and says we should "celebrate diversity", ask them the following question... "Are you a racist"? Of course they will say "NO!!" while giving you the dirtiest look imaginable. Next ask them, "OK then, if you're not a racist, tell me... would you prefer your children (i.e., WHITE children) marry another white person"? They'll typically say, "I want my kids to marry whomever they love". This is nonsense. Of course they prefer their (white) children marry another white person - it's natural. Just as blacks prefer their kids marry another black person, Asians prefer Asians, Hispanics prefer Hispanics, etc. This phenomenon is explained by Psychologist Philippe Rushton's Genetic Similarity Theory (i.e., the act of racial/ethnic preference) - it's a mild form of racism since it's a decision or preference based entirely on race/ethnicity.
If you meet a white liberal who is married, ask him/her...
"Before you got married, did you prefer to marry a white person"? They will usually say "no" followed by something like, "When I was dating, I didn't see race, I just saw the person". More liberal nonsense. About 95 out of 100 times, whites end up marrying another white person (even in racially diverse cities such as Los Angeles and New York).
If you meet a white liberal who is single, ask him/her...
"Would you prefer to marry a white person over a non-white person, if, hypothetically all characteristics were equal amongst possible mates"? When I ask this question, I find white liberals don't know what to say. Of course they would greatly prefer their ideal mate to be white, but they can't admit this due to political correctness.
The point is that EVERYONE, yes EVERYONE, is somewhat of a racist (or racial separatist). It's time we in society start to accept this. And frankly, there is nothing wrong with it. Yes, there is nothing wrong with having a personal preference to be with people who are like you, have the same ethnicity, language, culture, etc. This is why Americans in large cities tend to self-segregate into racial/ethnic neighborhoods: black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, Korean neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, Hispanic neighborhoods, Vietnamese neighborhoods, etc. Of course white multicultural enthusiasts overwhelmingly live in lily-white neighborhoods. Hypocritical? Of course.
In summary, whites overwhelmingly marry other whites and white parents always STRONGLY PREFER their children marry other whites. Blacks are the same; nearly all black parents prefer their children marry other blacks. Asians the same. Hispanics the same. And the same for Jews, in fact Jews are EXTREMELY insistent each of their children marry a Jew. All of this is normal, natural, and there is nothing wrong with it. But liberals, especially white liberals, will NEVER admit it.
.
.
Next time you meet a white liberal who praises multiculturalism and says we should "celebrate diversity", ask them the following question... "Are you a racist"? Of course they will say "NO!!" while giving you the dirtiest look imaginable. Next ask them, "OK then, if you're not a racist, tell me... would you prefer your children (i.e., WHITE children) marry another white person"? They'll typically say, "I want my kids to marry whomever they love". This is nonsense. Of course they prefer their (white) children marry another white person - it's natural. Just as blacks prefer their kids marry another black person, Asians prefer Asians, Hispanics prefer Hispanics, etc. This phenomenon is explained by Psychologist Philippe Rushton's Genetic Similarity Theory (i.e., the act of racial/ethnic preference) - it's a mild form of racism since it's a decision or preference based entirely on race/ethnicity.
If you meet a white liberal who is married, ask him/her...
"Before you got married, did you prefer to marry a white person"? They will usually say "no" followed by something like, "When I was dating, I didn't see race, I just saw the person". More liberal nonsense. About 95 out of 100 times, whites end up marrying another white person (even in racially diverse cities such as Los Angeles and New York).
If you meet a white liberal who is single, ask him/her...
"Would you prefer to marry a white person over a non-white person, if, hypothetically all characteristics were equal amongst possible mates"? When I ask this question, I find white liberals don't know what to say. Of course they would greatly prefer their ideal mate to be white, but they can't admit this due to political correctness.
The point is that EVERYONE, yes EVERYONE, is somewhat of a racist (or racial separatist). It's time we in society start to accept this. And frankly, there is nothing wrong with it. Yes, there is nothing wrong with having a personal preference to be with people who are like you, have the same ethnicity, language, culture, etc. This is why Americans in large cities tend to self-segregate into racial/ethnic neighborhoods: black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, Korean neighborhoods, Jewish neighborhoods, Hispanic neighborhoods, Vietnamese neighborhoods, etc. Of course white multicultural enthusiasts overwhelmingly live in lily-white neighborhoods. Hypocritical? Of course.
In summary, whites overwhelmingly marry other whites and white parents always STRONGLY PREFER their children marry other whites. Blacks are the same; nearly all black parents prefer their children marry other blacks. Asians the same. Hispanics the same. And the same for Jews, in fact Jews are EXTREMELY insistent each of their children marry a Jew. All of this is normal, natural, and there is nothing wrong with it. But liberals, especially white liberals, will NEVER admit it.
.
.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Europeans - Masters Of Music
.
Thank God for Europeans who gave the world a treasury of genius-inspired music, like this early 16th century composition by Frenchman Josquin Desprez. This piece epitomizes the greatness of Europe.
.
.
Thank God for Europeans who gave the world a treasury of genius-inspired music, like this early 16th century composition by Frenchman Josquin Desprez. This piece epitomizes the greatness of Europe.
.
.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
A Video By Dr. William Pierce Which Every White Person Should Watch
.
The late Dr. William L. Pierce was a Caltech graduate, a Physics professor, & White Nationalist... a true scholar and American patriot. In this 11 part Youtube video, Dr. Pierce examines the demographic and cultural changes afflicting White America and the greater Western world.
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 (after Part 3, the remaining parts play automatically).
.
.
.
The late Dr. William L. Pierce was a Caltech graduate, a Physics professor, & White Nationalist... a true scholar and American patriot. In this 11 part Youtube video, Dr. Pierce examines the demographic and cultural changes afflicting White America and the greater Western world.
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 (after Part 3, the remaining parts play automatically).
.
.
.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Palestinians And Israeli-Jews To Reach Equal Numbers By 2016
.
Demographics = destiny. Arab-Israelis have 3.1 times the birthrate of Jewish-Israelis. It's just a matter of time before the so-called "Jewish State" is no more. The fake, squatter "state" of "Israel" is the cancer of the Middle East. No Arab country causes even a tiny fraction of the problems caused by the warmongering ways of the Zionists. And the United States' mindless support for this parasitic leech "state" called "Israel" has done the USA tremendous damage.
Read the article here in Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper.
.
.
Demographics = destiny. Arab-Israelis have 3.1 times the birthrate of Jewish-Israelis. It's just a matter of time before the so-called "Jewish State" is no more. The fake, squatter "state" of "Israel" is the cancer of the Middle East. No Arab country causes even a tiny fraction of the problems caused by the warmongering ways of the Zionists. And the United States' mindless support for this parasitic leech "state" called "Israel" has done the USA tremendous damage.
Read the article here in Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper.
.
.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
To All Christian Zionists: This Is What "Israel" Has Done To Jesus' Baptism Site
I was recently in "Israel" where I attempted to visit Jesus' baptism site (located on the Jordan river). The site is in the Israeli-occupied West Bank (occupied since 1967). Well, the Jewish Israeli government has turned Jesus' baptism site into a minefield. How's that for respect?
You Christian supporters of "Israel" are being used. Jews mock you, laugh behind your back, and view you as "suckers" who are easy prey when it comes to fundraising for "Israel".
Click each picture for a larger image.
.
.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Political Correctness Demands That People Should Never Hate Others. But Is It Ever OK To Hate Others? Yes, If Their Actions Merit Hatred.
.
In our politically correct society, when one is accused of "hate" all rational debate ends the moment such an accusation is made. The person targeted by such an accusation is deemed to be mentally pathological. Hatred, we are told, is an irrational emotion i.e., a person "hates" simply because he/she likes to "hate." Hence, any rational debate as to WHY a person hates a certain group of people is avoided. But perhaps there is good reason to hate certain people. Let's look at two groups of people whom are more than worthy of hatred.
ILLEGAL ALIENS
Anyone who is highly critical of illegal aliens is branded by the left as a "hater"; they are said to be "driven by hate and fear." But what's not to hate about illegal aliens??? They have illegally entered the United States and thus violated our sovereignty, they steal our jobs, drive down wages, engage in identity theft, use billions of our tax dollars in social services and K-12 education for their anchor babies, bankrupt many of our hospitals, drive without license & insurance, fly foreign flags, and march in our streets DEMANDING amnesty. Illegals then have the nerve to call any American who wants our immigration laws enforced a "racist" and "bigot." Given all this, it would be absurd NOT to hate illegal aliens.
ORGANIZED JEWRY (AND MOST JEWS)
Anyone who is critical of organized Jewry (or Jews in general) is said to be "driven by hatred of Jews" (i.e., so-called "anti-Semitism"). But almost nobody hates Jews simply because they are Jewish. Rather, people hate Jews and, in particular, organized Jewry because of their anti-American activism. Organized Jewry (examples include the ACLU, AJC, Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL, WJC, JDL, etc) have for decades engaged in anti-Christian, anti-White, anti-American subversive activities. Jews have historically been the backbone of the radical left. Jews are 100% responsible for opening the immigration floodgates to the 3rd world (via the 1965 immigration act), tearing down the U.S. Constitution by twisting its meaning, promoting perversion & peddling cultural filth (via Hollywood), pushing the U.S. into needless Middle East wars, and trashing America's Christian heritage. Given all this, it would be absurd NOT to hate (most) Jews, particularly organized Jewry. Are there good & decent Jews? Of course. But unfortunately most Jews (especially those part of organized Jewry) are working against the interests of the United States and thus SHOULD be hated.
.
.
In our politically correct society, when one is accused of "hate" all rational debate ends the moment such an accusation is made. The person targeted by such an accusation is deemed to be mentally pathological. Hatred, we are told, is an irrational emotion i.e., a person "hates" simply because he/she likes to "hate." Hence, any rational debate as to WHY a person hates a certain group of people is avoided. But perhaps there is good reason to hate certain people. Let's look at two groups of people whom are more than worthy of hatred.
ILLEGAL ALIENS
Anyone who is highly critical of illegal aliens is branded by the left as a "hater"; they are said to be "driven by hate and fear." But what's not to hate about illegal aliens??? They have illegally entered the United States and thus violated our sovereignty, they steal our jobs, drive down wages, engage in identity theft, use billions of our tax dollars in social services and K-12 education for their anchor babies, bankrupt many of our hospitals, drive without license & insurance, fly foreign flags, and march in our streets DEMANDING amnesty. Illegals then have the nerve to call any American who wants our immigration laws enforced a "racist" and "bigot." Given all this, it would be absurd NOT to hate illegal aliens.
ORGANIZED JEWRY (AND MOST JEWS)
Anyone who is critical of organized Jewry (or Jews in general) is said to be "driven by hatred of Jews" (i.e., so-called "anti-Semitism"). But almost nobody hates Jews simply because they are Jewish. Rather, people hate Jews and, in particular, organized Jewry because of their anti-American activism. Organized Jewry (examples include the ACLU, AJC, Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL, WJC, JDL, etc) have for decades engaged in anti-Christian, anti-White, anti-American subversive activities. Jews have historically been the backbone of the radical left. Jews are 100% responsible for opening the immigration floodgates to the 3rd world (via the 1965 immigration act), tearing down the U.S. Constitution by twisting its meaning, promoting perversion & peddling cultural filth (via Hollywood), pushing the U.S. into needless Middle East wars, and trashing America's Christian heritage. Given all this, it would be absurd NOT to hate (most) Jews, particularly organized Jewry. Are there good & decent Jews? Of course. But unfortunately most Jews (especially those part of organized Jewry) are working against the interests of the United States and thus SHOULD be hated.
.
.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
How The Holocaust™ Is Used To Prevent Whites From Organizing & Expressing Their Group Interests As White People
.
SYNOPSIS: In each Western nation, non-Whites are encouraged to organize around their racial identity. But Whites are, for all intents and purposes, not 'allowed' to do the same because the Jewish establishment claims, "that would lead to Nazism and another Holocaust." This is absurd... of course.
Every non-White racial group throughout the Western World is free to create organizations based on their racial identity with absolutely no social repercussions. In the United States we have black organizations, hispanic organizations, & Asian organizations... all socially acceptable. But try to create a White-based organization and watch the gates of Hell swing open! Any attempt at creating such a group brings about the following labels: "racist," "bigot," "hater," and "Nazi."
Beginning at the conclusion of World War II (1945), the White gentile world (i.e., the Western world) began undergoing a process of radical transformation due to a Jewish 'Sphere-of-influence' being imposed on the West. This was a consequence of International Jewry winning World War II (the Allied nations' leaders were puppets of International Jewry: FDR, Churchill, et al). In short, the West was usurped by International/organized Jewry (more on this here). More specifically, in the aftermath of WWII, Jews gradually took full control of all Western media, all major political parties, banking & finance, the bulk of foreign policy (especially Middle East policy), social agenda, & culture (through Jewish domination of Hollywood).
The long-term goal of International/organized Jewry is global government, which Jews plan to control (of course). By "long term" I mean perhaps 100 - 150 years (or more) in the future. International/organized Jewry envisions a global government and global system with: one global bank, one global currency, one universalist "religion," one consumerist/corporate-based economy, and one global Judaic flavored culture/ethos (related to this topic, please see this article). As political analyst Patrick Buchanan once pointed out1, the main obstacle standing in the way of the (eventual) goal of a (Jewish-run) global government is, collectively, all White gentile nations. Post World War II, this has been the impetus for why International Jewry has been actively working to reduce Whites to a minority in the Western World -- mostly through massive third world immigration into Western nations.
With respect to the demographic certainty that Whites will soon (by around 2045) be a minority in the Western World (due to immigration), White people will naturally revolt, start organizing, and begin working for their group interests AS WHITE PEOPLE. Organized Jewry essentially suppresses White resistance to demographic trends by defacto saying that any attempt by Whites to express their group interests (as White people) is akin to "Nazism" and another potential "Holocaust." For example, suppose a handful of White students at some American university simply proposed creating a White Student Union on campus. What would happen? The White students would be tarred and feathered with every imaginable pejorative: "racist," "bigot," etc.
Now then... and in light of the above, we in the Western World are endlessly told that the "Holocaust" is the supposed "greatest evil in human history" (Side Note: Nonsense - there were far greater "evils" and, further, the six million number is an absurd exaggeration - see my article here). Nevertheless, the Western World has been thoroughly indoctrinated (brainwashed) with "Holocaust" propaganda for the purpose of psychologically sensitizing Whites to shy away from thinking about and feeling any pride in their White/European ancestry. Such indoctrination works in two ways, 1) it causes individual Whites to feel shame if they entertain the idea of organizing around their group interest as White people and, 2) it sensitizes society-at-large to shame & berate any White people who do attempt to organize around their White social/cultural/political interests. So #1 causes Whites to self-censor themselves and, #2 acts as the enforcement mechanism against any Whites who act in defiance of #1.
In summary, by endlessly browbeating Whites with "Holocaust" indoctrination and "education," Jews psychologically intimidate and thus prevent most Whites from organizing around their group interests as White people.
###
1 "Global elites view the White Western world as the main obstacle standing in the way of a future world government. Multiculturalism is a tool used by such elites to dismantle White Western civilization."
Pat Buchanan (from a 2004 speech given in Falls Church, VA)
.
.
SYNOPSIS: In each Western nation, non-Whites are encouraged to organize around their racial identity. But Whites are, for all intents and purposes, not 'allowed' to do the same because the Jewish establishment claims, "that would lead to Nazism and another Holocaust." This is absurd... of course.
Every non-White racial group throughout the Western World is free to create organizations based on their racial identity with absolutely no social repercussions. In the United States we have black organizations, hispanic organizations, & Asian organizations... all socially acceptable. But try to create a White-based organization and watch the gates of Hell swing open! Any attempt at creating such a group brings about the following labels: "racist," "bigot," "hater," and "Nazi."
Beginning at the conclusion of World War II (1945), the White gentile world (i.e., the Western world) began undergoing a process of radical transformation due to a Jewish 'Sphere-of-influence' being imposed on the West. This was a consequence of International Jewry winning World War II (the Allied nations' leaders were puppets of International Jewry: FDR, Churchill, et al). In short, the West was usurped by International/organized Jewry (more on this here). More specifically, in the aftermath of WWII, Jews gradually took full control of all Western media, all major political parties, banking & finance, the bulk of foreign policy (especially Middle East policy), social agenda, & culture (through Jewish domination of Hollywood).
The long-term goal of International/organized Jewry is global government, which Jews plan to control (of course). By "long term" I mean perhaps 100 - 150 years (or more) in the future. International/organized Jewry envisions a global government and global system with: one global bank, one global currency, one universalist "religion," one consumerist/corporate-based economy, and one global Judaic flavored culture/ethos (related to this topic, please see this article). As political analyst Patrick Buchanan once pointed out1, the main obstacle standing in the way of the (eventual) goal of a (Jewish-run) global government is, collectively, all White gentile nations. Post World War II, this has been the impetus for why International Jewry has been actively working to reduce Whites to a minority in the Western World -- mostly through massive third world immigration into Western nations.
With respect to the demographic certainty that Whites will soon (by around 2045) be a minority in the Western World (due to immigration), White people will naturally revolt, start organizing, and begin working for their group interests AS WHITE PEOPLE. Organized Jewry essentially suppresses White resistance to demographic trends by defacto saying that any attempt by Whites to express their group interests (as White people) is akin to "Nazism" and another potential "Holocaust." For example, suppose a handful of White students at some American university simply proposed creating a White Student Union on campus. What would happen? The White students would be tarred and feathered with every imaginable pejorative: "racist," "bigot," etc.
Now then... and in light of the above, we in the Western World are endlessly told that the "Holocaust" is the supposed "greatest evil in human history" (Side Note: Nonsense - there were far greater "evils" and, further, the six million number is an absurd exaggeration - see my article here). Nevertheless, the Western World has been thoroughly indoctrinated (brainwashed) with "Holocaust" propaganda for the purpose of psychologically sensitizing Whites to shy away from thinking about and feeling any pride in their White/European ancestry. Such indoctrination works in two ways, 1) it causes individual Whites to feel shame if they entertain the idea of organizing around their group interest as White people and, 2) it sensitizes society-at-large to shame & berate any White people who do attempt to organize around their White social/cultural/political interests. So #1 causes Whites to self-censor themselves and, #2 acts as the enforcement mechanism against any Whites who act in defiance of #1.
In summary, by endlessly browbeating Whites with "Holocaust" indoctrination and "education," Jews psychologically intimidate and thus prevent most Whites from organizing around their group interests as White people.
###
1 "Global elites view the White Western world as the main obstacle standing in the way of a future world government. Multiculturalism is a tool used by such elites to dismantle White Western civilization."
Pat Buchanan (from a 2004 speech given in Falls Church, VA)
.
.
Monday, May 4, 2009
To Young Americans: Protest Our Crooked Politicians By Not Joining The Military (if you're thinking about joining)
.
- Why "serve your country" when your politicians are definitely NOT serving you in any sense?
- Why "serve your country" when your President is hell-bent on giving amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens and hell-bent on opening the floodgates to millions more Latin American peasants who will further destroy American culture, take jobs, and drive down wages?
- Why join the military when your politicians are selling this country out to greedy bankers, greedy corporations, and internationalists?
- Why join the military when your President refuses to secure our border with Mexico?
- How can there be a "war on terror" when our borders and ports have been left wide open... nearly eight years after 9/11? This fact alone clearly suggests that the "war on terror" is a scam. Iraq is primarily about oil (and doing the bidding of "Israel" which owns our Congress). It is extremely un-American to engage in a war for the purpose of getting access to another nation's resources.
The United States has been taken over by globalist elites who don't care about you and who are actively working to undermine the sovereignty of our country... why on God's Earth would you "serve your country" given all this? Don't join the military. Don't let our phony politicians use you to advance their globalist agenda. Don't be a sucker. Protest our crooked political leaders by NOT joining the military. When a military recruiter visits your high school, tell him "NO!" and cite the reasons above. Join the military when the USA is noble again, when it adheres to law and order, when it follows the Constitution, when it puts it's citizens first and not illegal aliens first, & when it doesn't engage in needless and immoral wars.
.
- Why "serve your country" when your politicians are definitely NOT serving you in any sense?
- Why "serve your country" when your President is hell-bent on giving amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens and hell-bent on opening the floodgates to millions more Latin American peasants who will further destroy American culture, take jobs, and drive down wages?
- Why join the military when your politicians are selling this country out to greedy bankers, greedy corporations, and internationalists?
- Why join the military when your President refuses to secure our border with Mexico?
- How can there be a "war on terror" when our borders and ports have been left wide open... nearly eight years after 9/11? This fact alone clearly suggests that the "war on terror" is a scam. Iraq is primarily about oil (and doing the bidding of "Israel" which owns our Congress). It is extremely un-American to engage in a war for the purpose of getting access to another nation's resources.
The United States has been taken over by globalist elites who don't care about you and who are actively working to undermine the sovereignty of our country... why on God's Earth would you "serve your country" given all this? Don't join the military. Don't let our phony politicians use you to advance their globalist agenda. Don't be a sucker. Protest our crooked political leaders by NOT joining the military. When a military recruiter visits your high school, tell him "NO!" and cite the reasons above. Join the military when the USA is noble again, when it adheres to law and order, when it follows the Constitution, when it puts it's citizens first and not illegal aliens first, & when it doesn't engage in needless and immoral wars.
.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Political Correctness - How It's Used To Counter Critics Of Third World Immigration Into The USA
.
In the early 1960's, the radical left (mostly Jews) set out to destroy the Western world as it then stood (i.e., White Christian dominated nations). In particular, the United States was their #1 target (Note: the left's agenda actually goes back 100+ years but the 1960's mark the beginning of their efforts in the modern era). Obviously the left had no military means to accomplish such a task. Instead they set out to destroy the West though demographic warfare - i.e., replacing Whites with non-Whites via massive 3rd world immigration. The left knew Whites would complain and even revolt over this onslaught from the 3rd world. To temper such predictable White revolt, the left employed the "political correctness" doctrine. The purpose of political correctness is twofold:
a
1 - Prevent Whites from complaining by intimidating them through shame and guilt (i.e., "White guilt"). The left would embark on a campaign which would constantly remind Whites of their past injustices (e.g., slavery, Native Americans, etc). For defiant Whites who still complained about non-White immigrants, the left would browbeat them with name-calling such as, "racist", "bigot", and "Nazi." Such name-calling would effectively humiliate most defiant Whites into silence. It would also act as a warning to Whites in general as to what they can expect if they dare criticize non-White immigrants (legal or illegal).
a
2 - The other end of political correctness deals with propaganda and indoctrination. Whites are told that masses of non-White immigrants are actually a good thing. As the media tells us, non-White, non-Western immigrants "enhance the human experience in the United States" and, "bring new ideas to our American culture" (Time Magazine, Feb. 1998). This is the doctrine of multiculturalism and we are lectured repeatedly on how glorious it is. American cities that are multicultural are touted as "cosmopolitan" and "sophisticated" whereas cities that are primarily White are portrayed as "backwards." As with any well-orchestrated propaganda campaign, multiculturalism has its own lexicon. Expressions such as "celebrate diversity" & "diversity is our strength" are designed not only to reduce White resistance to multiculturalism but to flip White thinking entirely i.e., towards embracing multiculturalism. Essentially then, such leftist propaganda is a method to trick Whites into embracing the very thing (i.e., multiculturalism) which will obviously lead to their demise in the West.
a
In summary, political correctness, as applied to third world immigration, is a leftist scheme (mostly Jewish driven) intended to counter Whites who object to massive non-White immigration (legal or illegal). Whites are falsely conditioned to believe that multiculturalism is a good thing and those Whites whom object are shamed into silence.
.
In the early 1960's, the radical left (mostly Jews) set out to destroy the Western world as it then stood (i.e., White Christian dominated nations). In particular, the United States was their #1 target (Note: the left's agenda actually goes back 100+ years but the 1960's mark the beginning of their efforts in the modern era). Obviously the left had no military means to accomplish such a task. Instead they set out to destroy the West though demographic warfare - i.e., replacing Whites with non-Whites via massive 3rd world immigration. The left knew Whites would complain and even revolt over this onslaught from the 3rd world. To temper such predictable White revolt, the left employed the "political correctness" doctrine. The purpose of political correctness is twofold:
a
1 - Prevent Whites from complaining by intimidating them through shame and guilt (i.e., "White guilt"). The left would embark on a campaign which would constantly remind Whites of their past injustices (e.g., slavery, Native Americans, etc). For defiant Whites who still complained about non-White immigrants, the left would browbeat them with name-calling such as, "racist", "bigot", and "Nazi." Such name-calling would effectively humiliate most defiant Whites into silence. It would also act as a warning to Whites in general as to what they can expect if they dare criticize non-White immigrants (legal or illegal).
a
2 - The other end of political correctness deals with propaganda and indoctrination. Whites are told that masses of non-White immigrants are actually a good thing. As the media tells us, non-White, non-Western immigrants "enhance the human experience in the United States" and, "bring new ideas to our American culture" (Time Magazine, Feb. 1998). This is the doctrine of multiculturalism and we are lectured repeatedly on how glorious it is. American cities that are multicultural are touted as "cosmopolitan" and "sophisticated" whereas cities that are primarily White are portrayed as "backwards." As with any well-orchestrated propaganda campaign, multiculturalism has its own lexicon. Expressions such as "celebrate diversity" & "diversity is our strength" are designed not only to reduce White resistance to multiculturalism but to flip White thinking entirely i.e., towards embracing multiculturalism. Essentially then, such leftist propaganda is a method to trick Whites into embracing the very thing (i.e., multiculturalism) which will obviously lead to their demise in the West.
a
In summary, political correctness, as applied to third world immigration, is a leftist scheme (mostly Jewish driven) intended to counter Whites who object to massive non-White immigration (legal or illegal). Whites are falsely conditioned to believe that multiculturalism is a good thing and those Whites whom object are shamed into silence.
.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Conservative & Nationalist Americans Should Thank Hugo Chavez
.
Do you care about working Americans? If yes, then please read on. For the past several years, so-called "conservative" Americans have constantly berated Hugo Chavez. But does anyone realize that Hugo Chavez is indirectly doing Americans (especially working class Americans) a huge favor? How? Chavez is defacto acting as an obstacle towards the (Jew-run) United States government's plans to expand NAFTA into something called the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas).
Do you think NAFTA is bad for Americans? Well, you haven't seen anything yet. If the U.S. government gets it's way, we can "look forward" to the FTAA. Think of the FTAA as a Super-NAFTA (since the FTAA would expand NAFTA to include all Latin American countries). The FTAA will result in, over time, millions of additional Latin American peasants flooding into the USA (just as NAFTA has been a contributing factor towards Mexicans coming into the USA, though there are many other factors). Also, the FTAA would grossly undermine the sovereignty of the United States. And, of course, the FTAA would cause additional U.S. factories to close and move to Latin America where labor is dirt cheap (as in China).
Read this article:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-04/30/content_581021.htm
From the article above:
"Bolivia joined Cuba and Venezuela in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), an initiative promoted by Castro and Chavez in an attempt to thwart U.S. plans for the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)."
For information on the FTAA and how insidious it is:
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/CAFTA+fight+shows+can+stop+FTAA-a0135579388
For general information about the FTAA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Trade_Area_of_the_Americas
American "conservatives" get nervous because Hugo Chavez is a Socialist. I'm no Socialist; I'm about as far from a Socialist as one can get. But if Socialism is what the people of Venezuela want, that's their business, not ours. Further, Venezuela is no threat to the USA, in any sense. The GDP of Venezuela is a mere 1.6% the GDP of the USA. And militarily, Venezuela compared to the USA is like comparing a fly to lion.
Kool-Aid dispensing cable shows like FOX News attack Chavez constantly. Why? Because FOX News primarily represents Jewish globalist Super-Elites, many of whom are embedded in the U.S. government (i.e., the "free" trade enslavers who desperately want to see the FTAA realized). These Super-Elites see Hugo Chavez (and his Latin American allies) as an obstacle to an expanded "free" trade zone (i.e., the FTAA). Any person (such as Hugo Chavez) that impedes the implementation of the FTAA should thanked by all working Americans.
.
Do you care about working Americans? If yes, then please read on. For the past several years, so-called "conservative" Americans have constantly berated Hugo Chavez. But does anyone realize that Hugo Chavez is indirectly doing Americans (especially working class Americans) a huge favor? How? Chavez is defacto acting as an obstacle towards the (Jew-run) United States government's plans to expand NAFTA into something called the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas).
Do you think NAFTA is bad for Americans? Well, you haven't seen anything yet. If the U.S. government gets it's way, we can "look forward" to the FTAA. Think of the FTAA as a Super-NAFTA (since the FTAA would expand NAFTA to include all Latin American countries). The FTAA will result in, over time, millions of additional Latin American peasants flooding into the USA (just as NAFTA has been a contributing factor towards Mexicans coming into the USA, though there are many other factors). Also, the FTAA would grossly undermine the sovereignty of the United States. And, of course, the FTAA would cause additional U.S. factories to close and move to Latin America where labor is dirt cheap (as in China).
Read this article:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-04/30/content_581021.htm
From the article above:
"Bolivia joined Cuba and Venezuela in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), an initiative promoted by Castro and Chavez in an attempt to thwart U.S. plans for the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)."
For information on the FTAA and how insidious it is:
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/CAFTA+fight+shows+can+stop+FTAA-a0135579388
For general information about the FTAA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Trade_Area_of_the_Americas
American "conservatives" get nervous because Hugo Chavez is a Socialist. I'm no Socialist; I'm about as far from a Socialist as one can get. But if Socialism is what the people of Venezuela want, that's their business, not ours. Further, Venezuela is no threat to the USA, in any sense. The GDP of Venezuela is a mere 1.6% the GDP of the USA. And militarily, Venezuela compared to the USA is like comparing a fly to lion.
Kool-Aid dispensing cable shows like FOX News attack Chavez constantly. Why? Because FOX News primarily represents Jewish globalist Super-Elites, many of whom are embedded in the U.S. government (i.e., the "free" trade enslavers who desperately want to see the FTAA realized). These Super-Elites see Hugo Chavez (and his Latin American allies) as an obstacle to an expanded "free" trade zone (i.e., the FTAA). Any person (such as Hugo Chavez) that impedes the implementation of the FTAA should thanked by all working Americans.
.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Iran Has Called The USA, "The Great Satan"... Are We???
.
Americans are usually outraged when foreign leaders criticize them. For example, the former Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, once called the USA, "the Great Satan." The "conservative" writer George Will retorted, "the United States is the paragon of morality and virtue and Khomeini should look in the mirror," a statement which reflected the sentiment felt by most Americans. But have Americans looked at America lately? Is America a moral and virtuous nation? No, we are not. In fact, we are a decadent, immoral country. Let's look at the depraved modern day America. The following is a sampling of the problems with U.S. culture/society...
- A society which has the highest teen pregnancy rate in West.
- A society in which public schools freely distribute condoms and birth control pills, in some cases to middle school students (11 - 13 years old).
- A society which has the highest birth-out-of-wedlock rate in the West.
- A society in which 38% of American children are raised in single parent households.
- A society which has one of the highest divorce rates in West (about 52% of marriages end in divorce).
- A society which has an abundance of hardcore pornography (gay, straight, bi, transsexual, anything goes... no limits).
- A society which has openly gay-friendly cities.
- A society in which gay marriage is allowed in certain states.
- A society which was the primary incubator of AIDS due to rampant American homosexual promiscuity (a deviant sexuality which is "celebrated" by U.S. mainstream media).
- A society in which hundreds of thousands of abortions (i.e., murders) are performed each year.
- A society in which people dump their aging parents in old age homes (caring for their parents would interfere with their "career").
- A culture which promotes "outsourcing" of child raising to day care centers so the mother can pursue her "career."
- A culture in which sex-out-of-wedlock is completely the norm.
- A culture in which having ten or more sex partners before marriage is very common and even acceptable.
- A society which has the highest violent crime rates of any first world country (including many thousands of murders per year).
- A society which has approximately 1.2 million hard core violent gang members roaming our streets.
- A society whose popular culture (via TV, film, and pop music) is dominated by immoral filth.
- A society which has the highest illicit drug use rate in the Western world.
- A society which feeds off the slave labor of the 3rd world so it can have excesses of materialism.
- A government which is thoroughly corrupt on all levels: federal, state, county, and municipal governments. Politically the United States is, "government of the highest bidder" i.e., highest campaign contributor.
The United States lost the bulk of its morality beginning sometime in the early 1960's. Maybe Iran is correct, maybe we have become "the Great Satan."
NOTE: In the above, I point out the USA's immorality with regard to domestic/cultural matters. Regarding foreign policy, our immoral, war-mongering ways are another Satanic-like characteristic of the United States.
.
Americans are usually outraged when foreign leaders criticize them. For example, the former Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, once called the USA, "the Great Satan." The "conservative" writer George Will retorted, "the United States is the paragon of morality and virtue and Khomeini should look in the mirror," a statement which reflected the sentiment felt by most Americans. But have Americans looked at America lately? Is America a moral and virtuous nation? No, we are not. In fact, we are a decadent, immoral country. Let's look at the depraved modern day America. The following is a sampling of the problems with U.S. culture/society...
- A society which has the highest teen pregnancy rate in West.
- A society in which public schools freely distribute condoms and birth control pills, in some cases to middle school students (11 - 13 years old).
- A society which has the highest birth-out-of-wedlock rate in the West.
- A society in which 38% of American children are raised in single parent households.
- A society which has one of the highest divorce rates in West (about 52% of marriages end in divorce).
- A society which has an abundance of hardcore pornography (gay, straight, bi, transsexual, anything goes... no limits).
- A society which has openly gay-friendly cities.
- A society in which gay marriage is allowed in certain states.
- A society which was the primary incubator of AIDS due to rampant American homosexual promiscuity (a deviant sexuality which is "celebrated" by U.S. mainstream media).
- A society in which hundreds of thousands of abortions (i.e., murders) are performed each year.
- A society in which people dump their aging parents in old age homes (caring for their parents would interfere with their "career").
- A culture which promotes "outsourcing" of child raising to day care centers so the mother can pursue her "career."
- A culture in which sex-out-of-wedlock is completely the norm.
- A culture in which having ten or more sex partners before marriage is very common and even acceptable.
- A society which has the highest violent crime rates of any first world country (including many thousands of murders per year).
- A society which has approximately 1.2 million hard core violent gang members roaming our streets.
- A society whose popular culture (via TV, film, and pop music) is dominated by immoral filth.
- A society which has the highest illicit drug use rate in the Western world.
- A society which feeds off the slave labor of the 3rd world so it can have excesses of materialism.
- A government which is thoroughly corrupt on all levels: federal, state, county, and municipal governments. Politically the United States is, "government of the highest bidder" i.e., highest campaign contributor.
The United States lost the bulk of its morality beginning sometime in the early 1960's. Maybe Iran is correct, maybe we have become "the Great Satan."
NOTE: In the above, I point out the USA's immorality with regard to domestic/cultural matters. Regarding foreign policy, our immoral, war-mongering ways are another Satanic-like characteristic of the United States.
.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Organized Jewry Is Responsible For Multicultural America
.
In 1965 America was 90.5% White, 7.5% black, & 2% other. The 1965 Immigration Act changed all that "thanks" to organized Jewish efforts. Today America is only 65% White (and this percentage is falling each year). By 2040, Whites will be below 50% of the U.S. population.
Do you love multicultural America? I certainly don't. Although I enjoy traveling around the world and experiencing different cultures, I clearly understand that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster... a recipe for inevitable conflict (especially when immigrants are encouraged NOT to assimilate, as is the case in the U.S.).
Who can we "thank" for this demographic shift? Organized Jewry. Read this article (click here) for an explanation as to why Jews have historically lobbied so hard for open borders, amnesty for illegals, and unlimited 3rd world non-White immigration into the United States (and all Western nations). Another great article on this subject is here.
.
In 1965 America was 90.5% White, 7.5% black, & 2% other. The 1965 Immigration Act changed all that "thanks" to organized Jewish efforts. Today America is only 65% White (and this percentage is falling each year). By 2040, Whites will be below 50% of the U.S. population.
Do you love multicultural America? I certainly don't. Although I enjoy traveling around the world and experiencing different cultures, I clearly understand that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster... a recipe for inevitable conflict (especially when immigrants are encouraged NOT to assimilate, as is the case in the U.S.).
Who can we "thank" for this demographic shift? Organized Jewry. Read this article (click here) for an explanation as to why Jews have historically lobbied so hard for open borders, amnesty for illegals, and unlimited 3rd world non-White immigration into the United States (and all Western nations). Another great article on this subject is here.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
