Why Racism is Evil
sfh9...@hotmail.com
The following comments are concerning the appending article by Thomas
Jackson. I like the articulateness and forcefulness of this article,
though I would counter it with the following points of views:
1. If going as the article suggests, our society would end up being
totally segregated again, with minorities hopelessly at the bottom,
possibly slaved again. The past hundreds of years have witnessed that.
And if you think this is the moral and conscientious thing to do, go
for it.
2. Let's just say there are differences between racial groups (A and
B) intellectually, with A being higher than B. These differences, even
based on the most radical estimation from some of the most radical
research groups, are NOT overwhelming and absolute, but only exist in
terms of arithmetic means, if they exist at all. What this means is
that even in your best estimation, it's impossible to claim that all
people in A have higher aptitude than all the people in group B; on
the other hand, it's easily demonstrated that you will find a big
chunk of group B(<50% but still big percentage) who have higher
aptitude than 50 percentile of group A. Thus, depriving B of access to
school, employment and immigration (of course more factors than the
simple aptitude need to be considered on issues of immigration)
results in a huge waste of human resources.
3. Negative impact on qualified candidates due of affirmative action
is limited as a whole. I am not saying that it's not painful if you
happen to be the one who is disfavored by an affirmative action
procedure. But with minorities being minorities, they represent a
small portion, and could well be tolerated at the moment. In fact it
should be tolerated due to 4.
4. It is likely that the article author is not the only one who holds
the views in the article; I would guess that a sizable (I hope not
more than 50%) portion of our society also hold more or less the same
views. So in spite of laws specifically prohibiting discrimination,
the effect of affirmative action is, in my belief, more or less
neutralized consciously or subconsciously in real life.
5. I do favor the ultimate phase-out of affirmative action, but not
now. The gradual phase-out could be moderately tied to how
representative the minorities are in school and workplace, and etc..
It's a bit surprising though to see that some of our majority, just
being slighted shortchanged (again I am not discounting the personal
loss if you happen to be the one affected) for just a few decades,
would overlook the almost 400 years of misery the minority went
through. Unfortunately we can't be just "left alone to enjoy
the fruits of their European heritage"; we have to be, collectively of
course, responsible for the some of sour fruits from the same process
as well.
6. The majority did and still does hold the power. In fact, in a
democracy, the minorities will always be, shall we say, at the mercy
of the majority. Almost all the political groups with exclusive
minority members we see today, came to existence precisely because not
all their voices are adequately heard by the majority; and without
majority's approval, their initiatives get nowhere; so they formed
groups in an attempt to ratchet up the volume. Rest assured though,
that the majority's voices are heard load and clear all the time. So
the comparison to exclusive minorities' political groups is misplaced
in the article.
Well, those are my two cents worth.
Original Article
by Thomas Jackson
There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" in greater
horror than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of
offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press
and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and
arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as
part of the inevitable texture of American life. "Racism" is never
shrugged off. For example, when a White Georgetown Law School student
reported earlier this year that black students are not as qualified
as
White students, it set off a booming, national controversy about
"racism." If the student had merely murdered someone he would have
attracted far less attention and criticism.
Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full
alert for it, newspapers and politicians denounce it, churches preach
against it, America is said to be racked with it, but just what is
racism?
Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the
word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic
stock
is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are
rooted in race. When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal
more than this. Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is
a
clue to understanding what Americans do mean. A peculiarly American
meaning derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are
equal. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been
declared to be equally talented and hard- working, and anyone who
questions the dogma is thought to be not merely wrong but evil.
The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If
blacks, for example, are equal to Whites in every way, what accounts
for their poverty, criminality, and dissipation? Since any theory of
racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation
for black failure is White racism. And since blacks are markedly
poor,
crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be racked with pervasive
racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.
All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic.
Any explanation for black failure that does not depend on White
wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of
racial differences. Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their
hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's Whites must have
oppressed them. If Whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they
must
oppress them Unconsciously. If no obviously racist individuals can be
identified, then societal institutions must be racist. Or, since
blacks are failing so terribly in America, there simply must be
millions of White people we do not know about, who are working day
and
night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves
no
room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some
fashion,
an indictment of White people.
The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to
believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White
racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on
welfare, or takes drugs, White society stands accused of yet another
act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-Whites is standing
proof that White society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For
precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly
the
same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and
oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange
conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be
committed almost exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black
congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black
mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White people can be racist.
Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State
Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she
explained that all Whites are racist and that only Whites can be
racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without
flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?
Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can,
perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been
forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White
oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable
and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not
an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would
surely be called racism when done by Whites is thought to be normal
when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true.
Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost
tedious to list them: When a White man kills a black man and uses the
word "nigger" while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and
the nation beats its collective breast; when members of the black
Yahweh cult carry out ritual murders of random Whites, the media are
silent (see AR of March, 1991). College campuses forbid pejorative
statements about non-Whites as "racist," but ignore scurrilous
attacks
on Whites.
At election time, if 60 percent of the White voters vote for a White
candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for the black
opponent, it is Whites who are accused of racial bias. There are 107
"historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be
preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically White
colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of... the same
thing.
To resist would be racist.
"Black pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but
anything
that could be construed as an expression of White pride is a form of
hatred. It is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect
school instruction and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas
for native Americans to ask them to learn English is racist.
Blatant anti-White prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is
now the law of the land. Anything remotely like affirmative action,
if
practiced in favor of Whites, would be attacked as despicable
favoritism.
All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses
are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club
or association expressly for Whites is by definition racist. The
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil
rights"
organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White
People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but
is said to be viciously racist.
At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action
have
set up student unions for Whites, analogous to those for blacks,
Hispanics, etc, and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently,
when the White students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found
themselves to be a minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club
like the ones that non-Whites have. They were turned down in horror.
Indeed, in America today, any club not specifically formed to be a
White enclave but whose members simply happen all to be White is
branded as racist.
Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality
of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to
dawn
on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of
Whites (and sometimes men), and never the other way around. No one
proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting
Whites, Hispanics, or Asians. No one ever suggests that National
Hispanic University in San Jose (CA) would benefit from the diversity
of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black
Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the
Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a
lack
of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to
celebrate homogeneity. And yet any all-White group - a company, a
town, a school, a club, a neighborhood - is thought to suffer from a
crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as
possible. Only when Whites have been reduced to a minority has
"diversity" been achieved.
Let us put it bluntly: To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we
are so often asked to do, is no different from deploring an excess of
Whites. In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an
excess
of Whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that
approximately 90 percent of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are
non-White. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the
country every year are virtually all non-White. It would be racist
not
to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is,
of course, only White nations that are called upon to practice this
kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any
other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.
What if the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated
citizens across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into
thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the
state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor Whites
who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on
celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even
if
they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs
and schooling?
Would Mexico - or any other non-White nation - tolerate this kind of
cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet White
Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians
entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are
supposed
to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling
numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be
hopelessly racist.
There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non-
Whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of
"hating" another group. Blacks can join "civil rights" groups and
Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots
and
hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can
come only at the expense of whites. They can demand preferential
treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are
"anti-white."
Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to
affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial
policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called
racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer
the
company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy
the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked
and hateful.
Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race
relations. All non-whites are allowed to prefer the company of their
own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct
from those of the whole, and to work openly for group advantage. None
of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, whites must also
champion the racial interests of non-whites. They must sacrifice
their
own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own
dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the
displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and
cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, White people are
cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and
cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.
Of course, the entire non-white enterprise in the United States is
perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to
love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and
El Salvadorans are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by
setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative
action preferences over native-born whites, but can they be blamed
for
accepting them? Is it surprising that they should want their
languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take
possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-
great
people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is
prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks
for
it, why should Mexicans and Cambodians complain?
No, it is the White enterprise in the United States that is
unnatural,
unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let
themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to
dispossession, much less to work for their own interests. Never in
the
history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to
strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens. Never before has a
people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in
surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in
history. Of all the races in America, only whites have been tricked
into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only
whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow
"hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their
own
kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their
families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they
hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear
no
ill will towards non-whites. They only wish to be left alone to
participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.
What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly
unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests
of other races and to ignore the interests of their own. This is like
asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his
neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."
What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary
is
likely to say. It is any opposition by whites to official policies of
racial preference for non-whites. It is any preference by whites for
their own people and culture. It is any resistance by whites to the
idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be
pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of
people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history
-
but only so long as the aspirations are those of whites.
Topaz
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
preserve the White race. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developments and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of
civilization is wholly dependant on such peoples. Should they perish,
all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the
grave."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the
originally creative race died out, as a result of the contamination on
the blood."
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science
and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost
exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact
fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded
a superior type of humanity"
"The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of the
native Japanese culture, although this characterizes the external
features of the country, which features strike the eye of European
observers on account of their fundamental difference from us; but the
real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the enormous
scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America, that is
to say, of Aryan peoples."
"A people that fails to preserve the purity of its racial blood
thereby destroys the unity of the soul of the nation in all its
manifestations. A disintegrated national character is the inevitable
consequence of the process of disintegration in the blood. And the
change which takes place in the spiritual and creative faculties of a
people is only an effect of the change that had modified its racial
substance."
"For in a world which would be composed of mongrels and Negroid all
ideals of human beauty and nobility and all hopes of an idealized
future for our humanity would be lost forever."
"It is especially the cultural creativeness which disappears when a
superior race inter-mixes with an inferior one."
"There may be hundreds of excellent States in this earth, and yet if
the Aryan, who is the creator and custodian of civilization, should
disappear, all culture that is on an adequate level with the spiritual
needs of the superior nations to-day would also disappear."
"We National Socialists know that in holding these views we take up a
revolutionary stand in the world to-day and that we are branded as
revolutionaries. But our views and our conduct will not be determined
by the approbation or disapprobation of our contemporaries, but only
by our duty to follow a truth which we have acknowledged. In doing
this we have reason to believe that posterity will have a clearer
insight"
"Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to the
State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do no
more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquility, so that
everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very high
mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of humanity
which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
pico
> 1. If going as the article suggests, our society would end up being
> totally segregated again, with minorities hopelessly at the bottom,
> possibly slaved again.
If that were to happen, the country who is enslaving would be innundated
with subversives who would exploit the disenfranchised for their
purposes and ruin the enslavers. THAT is what drove the wiser USA
government proponents of integration and equal rights; they were looking
to the welfare of the country.
Oh, BTW, blacks are a majority in central, critical centers of the USA.
So you can be sure that stepping on them hard will cause chaos that
nobody could imagine.
> 2. Let's just say there are differences between racial groups (A and
> B) intellectually, with A being higher than B.
I am smarter than you and I am in the B group. Your metrics are stupid.
[... snip one way too long article ...]
pico
> Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
> nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
> country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
> of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
> Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
> preserve the White race. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
Thanks very much for that, Topaz. You are now on the Hit Hit List. Asshole.
Day Brown
west end if the Island, Haiti, is 99% black DNA, the east end is only
85%, the rest being Aryan. And you can see the line from the air quite
clearly. Haiti is brown and devastated, the Dominican Republic is
green and lush.
But there is no need to rely on racial profiling. They are beginning
to identify the clusters of haplotypes that result in violent
aggression, and will no doubt begin to nail down those that relate to
talent and intelligence. Some of these have already been discovered in
trying to track schizophrenia. Likewise with depression. Many great
artists, Van Gogh to Fitzgerald, have had problems with addiction and
insanity.
So- we dont need affirmative action either. We can use the MMPI, IQ,
hormone levels in the blood, and haplotypes in the DNA to identify
those *individuals* who match the profile of success in some given
position. We can also use the FMRI, electroencephalograph, and even
Dr. Paul Ekman's techniques of microexpressions, recorded with high
speed video, to judge from the interview whether a candidate is
trustworthy.
And while we can expect some from every race to be appropriate, we
cannot expect every race to be equally represented. This is about the
rights of *INDIVIDUALS*, not races.
Mich...@gmail.com
that I am better then someone else based upon non-earned character
distinctions. Some folks try to link this to genetics, but the
genetics disparity between groups simply does not support
characterization of other traits (strength, intellect, propensity for
certain diseases) based upon skin color alone. {I read a really good
article about this in Discover magazine a number of years ago}
So racism is really just perception. I.E. I perceive myself (and my
group) as being better then someone else and their group.
For good or for bad (I think the former) our global world and global
interactions haver really marred the lines between the traditional
"races". In some of this worlds most diverse cultures (i.e. North
America and Western Europe) very few people can claim with authority
that their racial makeup is pure (all of one type). So who cares.
I imagine that within another couple hundred years that the worlds
population will become so racially mixed. That the worlds most ardent
"haters" will have moved on to other excuses for spewing their hate.
If you hate me, please be honest enough to have a reason for this
hatred that is based upon something more substantial other then just
the color of my skin.
By the way I'm blue.
Day Brown
> Let look at this from a basic level. Racism is, at its core, a belief
> that I am better then someone else based upon non-earned character
> distinctions. Some folks try to link this to genetics, but the
> genetics disparity between groups simply does not support
> characterization of other traits (strength, intellect, propensity for
> certain diseases) based upon skin color alone. {I read a really good
> article about this in Discover magazine a number of years ago}
> So racism is really just perception. I.E. I perceive myself (and my
> group) as being better then someone else and their group.
> For good or for bad (I think the former) our global world and global
> interactions haver really marred the lines between the traditional
> "races". In some of this worlds most diverse cultures (i.e. North
> America and Western Europe) very few people can claim with authority
> that their racial makeup is pure (all of one type). So who cares.
makes the suject think that the target of his aggression will be
either more or less acceptable. The willingness of people to believe
that unknown others are inferior or worthy based on trivial pieces of
information is remarkable.
But there is a problem with melanin; its on the same strand of DNA as
the other hormones, and will be associated with higher levels of
adrenalin and lower levels of dopamine and seratonin. Not that there
is not, within any given gene pool plenty of variation; its just that
as the average level of adrenalin rises in a neighborhood, so does the
rate of physical aggression.
No where is this more clear than the Greenland Norse. Diamond noted
the remarkably high rate of broken bones & busted out teeth in the
graveyards, and also the draconian law used to try to control the
violence. What he did not seem to know, is that there is a *RED* form
of melanin, and that what he's looking at are the descendants of Eric
the *Red*.
But as I say, we have the diagnostic tools to identify those
individuals, of whatever skin color, who are prone to violence. There
are some experiments to supplement the dopamine and seratonin levels
that may go a long ways twards reducing the violence levels in some
communities, and we'd do better to recognize that different gene pools
have different needs, and treat them. They are not all alike.
Part of what's going on here is Christian dogma which says that all
men are equally sinners and have a free will. they do not. There are
those who are so schizophrenic or whatever, that they will never
accept Jesus, yet nobody says they are going to hell. Christianity
itself has many of the characteristics of racism, maintaining that it
is the only way to live, and that every man should adopt their value
system. This mantra of equality permeates the social sciences,
blinding them to real racial differences.
Mich...@gmail.com
>
> Part of what's going on here is Christian dogma which says that all
> men are equally sinners and have a free will. they do not. There are
> those who are so schizophrenic or whatever, that they will never
> accept Jesus, yet nobody says they are going to hell. Christianity
> itself has many of the characteristics of racism, maintaining that it
> is the only way to live, and that every man should adopt their value
> system. This mantra of equality permeates the social sciences,
> blinding them to real racial differences.
Sure blame the Christians. We're an easy target.
Let look at this:
Everyone is equaly sinfull - (non racist)
God must punish sin (non racist)
God through love made a way of salvation available to everyone i.e. a
way to avoid his punishment of sin (non racist)
God puts no requirements upon his love and acceptance all we have to
do is accept his gift to us (non racist).
I would disagree with anyone who thinks that God is racist.
Although some people who claim to love God may be racist, I would say
they don't understand God's idea of love.
All of this to say, in my opinion, peoples attempts to use religion to
promote racist points of view are not the fault of religion.
sfh9...@hotmail.com
I see your point: The browner you are, the more underdeveloped your
society will be.
But let's shift our time back 2500 years, when Greeks and then later
Romans prospered. At that point, people in northern and western
Europe didn't even get the concept of agriculture. How do you
reconcile that?
You may argue Greeks and Romans are not brown enough, and are
essentially the same as western and northern kinds. Then I will come
up with ancient Egyptians, or even Babylonians.
All the feeling that we are naturally superior than others ultimately
comes from narcissism. There may be some psychological benefits of
having narcissism(Without it people may be more prone to suicide, I
guess). But pushing it too far is also dangerous for human kind, just
like the case of Hitler.
tooly
Multiculturism and the random mixing of 'disparate' peoples only creates
balkanized societies with each group politically and dimetrically opposed to
the majority. It is really social suicide if you want the truth [for whites
today].
We all have a natural genetic obligation toward our own ancesterage and
right of way in the world. It is a predatory nature we live within, and
though civilization is some escape from a more cruel predatory jungle, we
cannot entirely escape it. We should never lose sight of this greater
struggle of survival of kind.
The modern era has promoted several generations now removed from the
harshness of that cruelty this predatory nature exists upon, and 'sentiment'
has lost it's way to the higher responsibilities of personal existence. It
works ok for now, but we have set in motion social dominoes now that can
only have bad ends for Euro-descended people across the world. In essence,
we as a kind in this world, have served ourselves up as prey...socially,
culturally, and as of late, genetically. The only thing that saves us
perhaps is that we remain the majority [in most of our created
societies]...but in decline soon to be minorities and no longer in control
of the very societies we ourselves created. In fact, genetically we appear
to be recessive in nature, which means as we genetically entertwine, we may
someday actually cease to exist...counter to every rational understanding of
the nature of struggle by any creature in this world.
Some may argue that we just 'change', but as one observes the product
offspring, especially of black and white combinations, we see
'identification' of that offspring as the minority, again especially black.
The values, the sensibilities, the temperments...all usurped by the invading
minority upon our own.
There are many proofs in observation of outcomes since civil rights for
example. I always like the comparison of a certain annual high school board
from the year 1956 to that of 1986. In 1956, the worst problems quoted in
high schools of that district that year were tardiness and students not
emtying waste baskets. By 1986, that same annual report stated that main
problems facing that same district (now very integrated with multicural
values of diversity in full bloom) were 'drugs, teenage pregnancy, and gangs
bringing guns to school'. We decline as a unique people in all
ways...socially and genetically.
To date, liberal progressives are in the process of undermining western
civilization under what they consider as higher moral considerations toward
the species at large. But they do it with the 'values' gained only from the
victories and conquests of those peoples that have created the western
civilized condition, it's laws, and precepts. The higher moral ground is
lain to those with the intelligent insight to see 'forests' over the 'trees'
and the grand movements of the species over the conveniences of individual
'feel good' morality. And yet, such RESPONSIBLE voice has been all but
silenced politically in one of the most EVIL dynamisms ever to hit the world
under the guise of what we call 'political correctness'...which is really a
campaign to bring down white control of civilization, as the Thomas article
suggests.
No matter how one chooses to see this issue, we should all be very sober and
clear on this one point.
One poor humbled hard working Mexican means nothing...but millions mean loss
of culture, values, and the very sensibilities that have constructed the
very moral foundations that give sway to this liberal incursion upon the
world in the modern era.
No one wants any individual to suffer in this world, but there are higher
responsibilities and super structures to consider by which the greatest
number of 'individuals' may gain some release from their sufferings. Here's
a clue...only a very small and almost insiginicant portion of that suffering
has to do with wages and material trinkets. A 'way of life' involves
family, values, beliefs, and higher consciousness as redressed in
perceptions of higher domain. If one observes with a keen eye, it is that
higher domain by which Europe and western civilization found it's strength
to endure and excell that is being fervanlty attacked in today's world; a
domain by which we inculcated the very values that have allowed us some
measure of escape from the cruel harshness of the predatory nature of this
world. So much so, that once upon a time not too long ago, all our children
had to worry about was emptying waste baskets at the end of class. Listen
to your next rapper lyric to understand where they are now.
MOST EVERYTHING YOU SEE TODAY IS A LIE. And someday, like we observed in
communist USSR, lies have to be corrected and proper nature re-established.
Or...I guess we just die. NO good ends now...thank you liberal idiots.
Day Brown
missing the opportunity to do the good they say they want, but they
dont see what the good is because of their own dogma.
>
> Let look at this:
>
> Everyone is equaly sinfull - (non racist)
with violence. Steven Pinker, "The Blank Slate" and LeBlanc, "Constant
Battles" both blow the idea of the noble savage all to hell. The
graveyards of the yeoman farmers of Northern Europe have *5%* of the
evidence of violent trauma on the skeletons at seen in the graveyards
of tropical hunting tribes. When Diamond showed up among the New
Guinea Highlanders 25% of the men died in battle. The death rate for
soldiers in Europe, on both sides of WWII, was 2-3% The american
people are having fits over 3000 deaths out of 160,000 that have been
in Iraq.
> God must punish sin (non racist)
What you call "sin", I call mental pathology. It does not need
punishment but appropriate treatment, possibly meds. Dopamine &
Seratonin supplements look promising as a way to reduce violence among
males. Some gene pools have twice as many men with low levels of these
important hormones, and thus twice the rate of violence. The
punishment of prison doesnt work.
> God through love made a way of salvation available to everyone i.e. a
> way to avoid his punishment of sin (non racist)
Good for him. In the mean time, we havta deal with the ongoing
violence, and we need more effective methods.
> God puts no requirements upon his love and acceptance all we have to
> do is accept his gift to us (non racist).
I'm sure he forgives the murder as well. I dont have that attitude. I
want to identify the young men who pose this kind of threat, and we
have a growing list of DNA markers now to look at to do just that. And
then, we can determine what meds his mom should be giving him- before
he shoots anyone. Again, we'll find these markers much more common in
some gene pools. but I dont care what the rate is, we should be
seeking to identify and treat the problem on an *individual* basis.
> I would disagree with anyone who thinks that God is racist.
I dont giva fuck what you think god is. I worship the Goddess, aka
Gaia.
The history is obscure, but back when people worshiped the Great Earth
Mother, there was peace. This real easy to understand when you
consider the problem a demagogue would have trying to rile up a mob or
an army by claiming that *he* speaks in *HER* name.
Day Brown
misguided. But so are conservatives.
But rather than write of what I think should happen, let me lay out
what I see coming, whether we like it or not. Both liberal and
conservative frames of thot are too distorted to fit the facts.
Might still makes Right. but now, after 5000 years of the brave heart,
strong right arm, sword in hand, that just dont cut it any more. Smith
& Wesson guarantee equal rights for smart women. Most guys dont get
it.
But the other thing smart women have, is cunts. And they still work as
well as they ever did in getting guys to go along with whatever agenda
a smart woman has. And what the smart bitches are doing, is ignoring
the warriors, and fucking the geeks. Its the geeks who have the
innovative minds that is empowering their mutual ventures, and
allowing them to laff all the way to the bank.
The geeks invented the internet and the hardware that puts this
message in front of your face. But it is the women who ran the offices
and kept track of the inventory, and... increasingly, they see they
can get along without the high cost of CEO male management.
Smart women have also seen that the men of their station who they'd
consider as husbands, are already married to sexy bimbos. So, they are
going to fertility clinics, selecting among thousands of the most
promising Y chromosome lines on the planet, and have already given
birth to some of the most talented young minds around.
They are, consciously or not, selecting fair haird Nordic lines way
more than all others, and giving birth to lotsa trophy blondes. These,
my friends, are the Uberwench. And they dont *have* family values.
They will, as we've already seen, fuck some lech for the last few
years of his life, then inherit his empire.
I see "lesbians" moving in with each other, and likewise using
fertility clinics. I've also see witches host a safe sex orgy, and
then noted how a warrior type forgot everything he knew about weapons,
and only wanted to do whatever he could to advance their agenda. I
also filled my freezer with venison shot by a witch. She dressed it
out in her bathtub. She can shoot as well as you can, but the demand
for her sexual services are waaaaaay ahead of yours. You have friends
to help you move. She has friends to help her move bodies.
All this Nazi racist bullshit is pissing in the wind. The Uberwench
will overwhelmingly select Northern European sperm donors, so their
demise has been premature, and exaggerated. They will also be
accepting women from whatever race, into their ranks so long as the
ladies in question are talented enuf. They have a bottom line, and
they want as much talent as they can find. They will no doubt find
some from every race, but the East Asians will be much more common.
But the more mysogenistic a culture has been, the stupider the women.
smart women figured out how to get out.
sfh9...@hotmail.com
the majority. It is really social suicide if you want the truth"?
This was exactly the sentiments expressed by some of the then-
majority(English German sorts) about one hundred to one hundred fifty
years, when Irish, Polish and Italian immigrants came here in big
numbers. So go figure...
tooly
<Mich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188587938.0...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>>
>> Part of what's going on here is Christian dogma which says that all
>> men are equally sinners and have a free will. they do not. There are
>> those who are so schizophrenic or whatever, that they will never
>> accept Jesus, yet nobody says they are going to hell. Christianity
>> itself has many of the characteristics of racism, maintaining that it
>> is the only way to live, and that every man should adopt their value
>> system. This mantra of equality permeates the social sciences,
>> blinding them to real racial differences.
>
> Sure blame the Christians. We're an easy target.
>
> Let look at this:
>
> Everyone is equaly sinfull - (non racist)
> God must punish sin (non racist)
> God through love made a way of salvation available to everyone i.e. a
> way to avoid his punishment of sin (non racist)
> God puts no requirements upon his love and acceptance all we have to
> do is accept his gift to us (non racist).
>
> I would disagree with anyone who thinks that God is racist.
>
> Although some people who claim to love God may be racist, I would say
> they don't understand God's idea of love.
Innocense is luxury, I have to admit. Keep it and live happily. Love is a
state, not an idea...though ideas are spawned from the state.
I'd like to repeat this as I think it is important and I'm trying to help
out..."Love is a STATE...not an idea, though ideas are spawned from the
state". Think of it as the egg and chicken conundrum, ha.
Within that state, I agree...love's grace is profoundly universal where
objects no longer exist 'seperate' but as a measure of God's personage in
all things. Christ's love was universal...no doubt about that. But God's
church is an artifact...something that needs archetecture, plans, strategy,
and an deep understanding of the foundations where it is be constructed, how
maintained, all sorts of worldly considerations. In other words, worldy
understanding of the predatory nature that exists here [we are all part of a
food chain remember]. All preachers and priests and any adminstration are
all very human, worldly, and having to devise strategies however they think
might work, inspired by God's direction or not. Analgous...we live under
freedoms gained only by the grandest of evil...war. Wresting foundations
from the crust of a wild planet can be monsterous, enlisting what later
generations might deem 'immoral'. The dropping of Abombs on Hirshima and
Nagasaki might be two examples...at the time, an allied world celebrated
where there was no doubt a great and GOOD thing had been accomplished [and
it was when you consider what forces were in struggle for world domination
at the time]. Today, we forget those forces and see only people as they are
NOW...not then...and the act becomes a vile monstrocity. Imagine...dropping
Abombs on people!!!
Too often, I think we take Christ's invocation too 'selfishly'. I was like
that once upon a time...so easy too; wow...to live under that Grace...under
that sublime existence of 'state'. I once even felt so intensely that I
thought I actually had will over my own heartbeat...my own core muscle by
which I exist...and energies unresolved in my own body, but connected across
space. Ha...sounds flaky perhaps...but I remember. Love surely is heaven.
But the mind wanders on, and whatever ideas I conjured virtue at the moment,
gave way to new thoughts and ideas...and holding virtue is a very hard thing
to do for any length of time. WE do have our moments of course...and we
carry away the residuals of memory and the effects of Love's virtue upon our
thoughts and actions from then on. We aspire.
Thought is a reconjuration perhaps. Think virtuous things and virtue itself
is rekindled like breath upon campfire embers. But I make the
differentiation very markedly between what is STATE...the actual condition
of BEING...and what is only an idea. It is often a struggle to use my ideas
to reconjure virtue's fire anymore in a world gone so cold of virtue and my
own tether stretched [to God]. But again, I remember.
>
> All of this to say, in my opinion, peoples attempts to use religion to
> promote racist points of view are not the fault of religion.
"They know not what they do".
That's ok. Sacrifice somehow gives my existence meaning...and what greater
sacrifice than to take on the yoke of the devil's mask [to others], in
servitude of the thing one holds most dear. It may be the greater challenge
and I hope, resource of the greater rewards. But...to be hated, reviled,
shunned by the very others one serves. Now that would be a challenge. But
also a certain calm too. To have no man as my master, to act in 'no'
accordance to the sublminal desires of acceptance in myself, but to be
responsible only to God. Ha...most would say that is formula for the loony
bin of course. But then, our greatest leaders have come from such insanity,
so invoked by God's measure [or of natural state whatever], that they walk
boldly in full knowledge that they do not just what is 'right', but like the
wind, without recourse but to blow. It is MY expression of life, and I
express as I will and no other. It leaves me SINCERE...and in that
sincerity I have found virtue that is the universal ember that can light all
fires under God's personage in our thought. I can't help but believe that
perhaps that is how Christ Himself approached his maker...only naked,
unadorned...totally and unequivicably...SINCERE.
I understand a good spirit when I see one. I can only hope you keep your
eyes and mind open to such as well...and a friend who only wants to help.
The world is in trouble in know. More importantly, God's church in the
world is being dismantled.
Race? It is part of the equation. Oppressing that 'fact' is pushing the
world far off the path that leads to higher virtue...and thusly, God's
institutions across the world are now threatened. Of course, many who
believe in an afterlife of some sort may think that is this all temporary
anyway. But I believe in this world and it's potential as worth saving.
Regardless, I know wrong when I see it...and most of what is going down
these days under the auspices of 'diversity' and 'political correctness' is
all political and 'wrong' [not just to me, but all the things I hold dear].
Race...the very idea, the word itself, is now used as a weapon for mind
control and to implement this political onslaught...to SILENCE OPPOSITION TO
THAT WRONGNESS.
-Phil Clemence
<sfh9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188600368....@l22g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
Conservativism is the parent - liberalism is the child
Topaz
current flood of multicultural and multiracial propaganda. Due to its
steady infusion into American society, egalitarianism has achieved a
religious status.
In fact, if you were to ask an average White man or woman about
multiculturalism they would probably tell you how great it is for our
country, or what a joyous experience it is for our children to grow up
learning to love people of different races and cultures. What they
won't tell you is that the United States was founded on European
genius, creativity, and hard work. Her laws and system of government
were created specifically for Europeans and their posterity. This is
the reason America blossomed into the world's greatest superpower. And
until a half century ago, she was a country still loyal to those
founding peoples.
Whites were proud of their heritage back then. They did not experience
the guilt imposed on today's White population by the controlled
mass-media. Instead, they lived their lives in the way that came most
natural to them, without any foreign influence. Our ancestors did not
let the so-called "television reality" become their reality like so
many people of today. Our ancestors' culture, perspectives, and
beliefs came from their own real-world experiences.
Their reality was based on logic, facts and observations, and not on
blind and illogical emotionalism like so many of the current "TV
generation". Show these emotion-based people a film that tugs at their
heart-strings, and you have an open door to impose any belief system
on them, whether rational or not.
The belief system that has found its way into the hearts and minds of
so many European-Americans is that of miscegenation, multiculturalism,
feminism, and an overall anti-White agenda. The reasons for this can
be discussed at length, but for now I will acknowledge that this is in
fact the case.
Before there was a television in every household, which imposes
minority viewpoints onto the majority, people had only one reality --
the world they lived in and interacted with everyday. Today's average
person now spends most of their time in front of their television
sets. So much time, in fact, that they are merging reality with
fantasy. Fictional TV characters have become as real as their own
family members and friends.
If you pound an idea or image into somebody's head long enough they
will eventually believe it or accept it, no matter how absurd, and
that is what television is doing to our society -- along with
government establishments and our academic institutions. Even private
enterprise has joined the coalition pushing an anti-White agenda.
The reason this anti-White agenda is so important is because it shows
what type of power our opponents have over public opinion. From news
programs to movies, comedies to documentaries, programs can be
manipulated to portray anything. This fact has impeded our mission
more than anything else as the media vilifies everyone standing up for
the rights of Whites as crude and violent imbeciles that are "out of
touch". By turning some Whites against us, it makes our task of
creating a mainstream voice more important. The more mainstream we
become, the less fear the average citizen will have of listening to
our logic-based ideology, and the easier it will be for them to see
through the nonsense that has been fed to them for most of their
lives.
Fortunately, there are some individuals who have seen through this
egalitarian illusion, and understand what is really happening to our
country. The Internet has helped tremendously in creating a positive
voice for these truth-tellers, but it won't be long before free speech
is regulated on-line as well. So, we in the White Nationalist movement
can serve our people best by organizing our efforts. Alone we are
merely complainers with no political muscle, but together we will
eventually be a force that the anti-White establishment must deal
with.
However, a possibly greater threat than the barrage of political
correctness and its ever present anti-White agenda is our own people.
If decent men and women sit back and do nothing while our genes are
slowly eliminated, then there is no hope for our nation, or a future
for our children.
Biological Differences
Many people today have grown up believing that the different races are
the same except for the color of our skin. They are told this
repeatedly -- enough times that they do not even question it; they
just accept it. Even most biologists and geneticists are too afraid to
state the obvious, and the few that do are either harshly condemned or
their voices are silenced. There are literally thousands of studies
showing the intellectual, biological, and behavioral differences of
the races. Most of them are peer-reviewed studies that have received
acceptance in the scientific community, but many people are still
oblivious to their existence.
For example, scientific research has shown that genetics is a
considerable factor in behavior and intelligence. Recent studies
indicate that identical twins separated at birth have a correlation of
.7 or greater in IQ even though they were raised in separate
environments. A correlated score of 1 would indicate that the twins
were exactly the same. The near exactness of the IQ scores of
genetically similar children shows that environment plays only a minor
role in intelligence.
IQ has been shown to better predict a person's success in life than
does an individual's socio-economic status, meaning that economic
disadvantages are merely obstacles and not deterrents of success. Of
course there are other factors that affect success as well, such as
motivation and personal choice.
In light of this, genes still play a large role in everyday behavior,
and in how we live our lives. In other words, genetics lay the
foundation for an individual's tendencies. People do not always act on
these genetic tendencies in every situation, but their reactions and
habits are influenced by them.
It is clear that genetic studies show differences between the races,
and in my opinion, no person can claim to have an educated opinion on
race until the existing scientific evidence is reviewed.
For the purpose of this speech I will not merely restate all of the
scientific evidence that can be found in many other writings. I will,
however, state my opinion on how this evidence lays the groundwork for
our cause. The fact is that having light skin is not the only thing
that makes you White.
A person's European identity is evident in every gene in their body,
affecting everything from intelligence and behavior, to appearance and
personality. To assume that thousands of years of geographic
separation between the races only produced genetic differences in skin
color is completely absurd.
When a species evolves through environmental adaptation, it evolves in
many different aspects. For example, the examination of human brains
has shown that the Negro brain is significantly less developed in the
frontal lobe than the brain of Whites. Biologists and psychologists
have defined this region as the area responsible for abstract thought,
problem solving, planning, and delayed gratification. Many scientists
attribute this to the more demanding environment of the North where
Whites evolved. The beneficial characteristics of enlarged frontal
lobes would have been a necessity for survival.
Such examples of evolution are seen in nature time and again. One good
example is the various breeds of dogs. Humans deliberately bred dogs
for different features and personality traits until an entirely new
breed was created. They are still the same species (meaning they can
still mate with other breeds), but they have different traits. Some
dogs are more intelligent, physically stronger, or show higher signs
of aggression than others.
The evolutionary processes that have created different species among
animals, is a process that affects all of Nature's organisms -- even
humans. Unlike dogs, however, selective breeding among human races
occurred through natural geographic isolation and not deliberate
manipulation.
Even when two subspecies are very close genetically, with only a few
visible physical differences, they still can be vastly different. They
both, however, will possess survival skills to ensure their species
survival. But, even if their geographic isolation was relatively
short, adaptive differences can still be documented.
Each of these closely related subspecies chooses different habitats
that are more suited for them, thus producing behavioral shifts for
better environmental adaptability. One interesting thing to point out
is that no matter how closely related two subspecies are they will
almost never inter-breed if a mate of their own species exists. This
natural phenomenon is seen throughout the animal kingdom.
Nature has created a variety of organisms to serve a specific
evolutionary and environmental purpose. Organisms naturally oppose
inter-breeding because to succumb to it would subvert Nature's Laws
and lead to the disintegration of their unique population -- a
population that has been specially formed over thousands of years. To
interfere would defy the Laws of Nature and the natural order that it
was created. For humans to assume that the Laws of Nature and
evolution have not affected them is ignorant to say the least.
The quality of a civilization is also directly related to the
population's gene-pool. Before the colonization of Africa by
Europeans, no Black society had produced anything more than simple
mud-hut housing, and spears for hunting. The bow, wheel, bridge, or
any written language had never existed in any African society -- not
to mention the architectural and cultural marvels that have become the
norm in White societies.
Why it Matters
One may argue that worrying about a decaying civilization is
unwarranted because America is still predominantly White.
Unfortunately, proponents of this idea fail to realize America
diminished from 90% White to 70% White in the course of a few decades,
and the international statistics are even worse as Whites comprise
only 8% of the world's population. Our numbers are fading fast.
Within the next few decades Whites will be a minority in the U.S.
Non-Whites will be able to out-vote us, and who will look out for the
interests of our people? Mestizos have already proved that as a racial
group their numbers are strong enough to sway U.S. politicians. This
was evident in the last presidential election where neither candidate
would take a stand for what most Americans wanted -- a secure
U.S.-Mexican border. Whatever power we have remaining will not be lost
overnight, but why wait until it's too late to start doing something
about it? Why let our country and her institutions continue to decay
when we can change things before they get too bad?
The idea of genetic racial differences is the key concept that we need
to disseminate to White-Americans. We are not advocating White
supremacism, but we do acknowledge that genetic and biological
differences exist, which science has proved on numerous occasions.
Indeed, genetic differences have evolved over time based on the need
for environmental adaptation. Different environmental conditions have
produced different genetic traits, which evolution created as a result
of voluntary and involuntary segregationist breeding over long periods
of time.
The media has long accused Whites who stand up for their racial
integrity as "haters" -- nothing is farther from the truth. We have a
healthy innate pride, a purpose, a common goal, and a common love.
Although we feel angry when we see what our country is becoming, we do
not at all "hate" for the sake of hating.
In fact it isn't about hate at all. We simply understand genetic
racial differences. The best alternative to the current madness of
multiculturalism is racial separation, whereas each race can pursue
its own interests and its own goals. Every race should be able to live
in accordance with their genetic potential. But, when races live
together the consequences are damaging to each race.
We have a much broader scope than what the media is always suggesting.
Many think our passion stems from the differences in such things as
crime or culture, but in fact, it goes far beyond that. By preserving
the White race we are preserving a unique species of humankind that
has taken thousands of years to develop. By allowing ourselves to
racially mix, or to allow our numbers to diminish, we are destroying
what Nature has created. When this happens there is no going back. It
is permanent. The genetic makeup of the people that has created the
greatest societies and innovations of human history will be forever
lost.
By having a negative attitude of "how does it affect me" or "there is
nothing we can do," will assist our civilization to slowly devolve.
The truth is that it affects all of us because by allowing the influx
of non-Whites into our country, America's unique genetic inheritance
is being eliminated - replacing an advanced civilization with one from
the Third World.
Hopefully, I have shed a little more light on what we in the National
Alliance are trying to accomplish. We are not motivated by hate, but
by science and facts. I believe that everyone needs to start
questioning the controlled media's version of multiracialism, and to
not be ashamed if their findings are in stark contrast to "popular
opinion". The truths of our beliefs are found in science and history,
and not television or biased news coverage. I urge all of you to
question the norms that have been created for us by an alien minority
and enshrined in the society we live in, and see if they are in accord
with Nature."
Kevin Johnson
Topaz
>
>I see your point: The browner you are, the more underdeveloped your
>society will be.
>
>But let's shift our time back 2500 years, when Greeks and then later
>Romans prospered. At that point, people in northern and western
>Europe didn't even get the concept of agriculture. How do you
>reconcile that?
The most obvious answer is probably the right one, it's a lie. The
Jews control the media and all the do is lie.
>
>You may argue Greeks and Romans are not brown enough, and are
>essentially the same as western and northern kinds. Then I will come
>up with ancient Egyptians, or even Babylonians.
"Queen Hetop-Heres II, of the Fourth Dynasty, the daughter of Cheops,
the builder of the great pyramid, is shown in the colored bas reliefs
of her tomb to have been a distinct blonde. Her hair is painted a
bright yellow stippled with little red horizontal lines, and her skin
is white."
Coon, Carleton Stevens. The Races of Europe. New York City, Macmillan.
1939, p.98
The tomb of the wife of Zoser, the builder of the first pyramid in
Egypt, has a painting of her showing her with reddish-blond hair.
Heyerdahl, Thor, The Ra Expeditions, Garden City, Doubleday, 1971,
p.249
The mummy of Rameses II has yellow hair.
Egypt: Land of the Pharaohs, Time-Life books, Alexandria, VA 1992 p.8
"A funerary mask with the attributes of the goddess Isis shows a
vivid blue-green color of eyes.
A General Introduction to the Egyptian Collections in the the British
Museam. London, Harrison and Sons, 1930, p.49
The mummy of the wife of King Tutankhamen has auburn hair.
Carter, Michael, Tutankhamun, The Golden Monarch, N.Y. 1972 p.68
Red-haired mummies were found in the crocodile-caverns of Aboufaida.
Tomkins, Henry George, Remarks on Mr. Flinders Petries Collection of
Ethnographic Types from the Monuments of Egypt, Journal of the
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Vol. XVIIII,
1889, p.216
The mummy of Rameses II has fine silky yellow hair.
Smith, G. Elliot and Dawson, Warren R. Egyptian Mummies, London,
George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1924 p.99
A blond mummy was found at Kawamil along with many chestnut-colored
ones.
De Lapouge, G. Vacher, L'Aryen, Sa Vie Sociale. Paris, Pichat, 1899,
p.26
Amenhotep III's tomb painting shows him as having light red
hair.
National Geographic Society, Ancient Egypt, Discovering its
Splendors,1978 p.103
An Egyptian scribe named Sakkarah around 2500 B.C. has blue eyes.
Strouhal, Eugen, Life of the Ancient Egyptians, Norman, Oklahoma,
University of Oklahoma Press, 1992, p.53
A common good luck charm was the eye of Horus, the so-called
Wedjat Eye. The eye is always blue, and the word "wedjat" means "blue"
in Egyptian.
Queen Thi is painted as having a rosy complexion, blue eyes and
blond hair.
Hamy, E.T., "Races Humaines de la Vallee du Nil" Bulletin de la
Societe d'Anthropologie de Paris, 1886, p.739
Paintings from the Third Dynasty show native Egyptians with red
hair and blue eyes.
Pijoan, Jose, Historia del Arte Vol III, Madrid, Espasa-Calpe, 1932,
plate XI
The god Nuit was painted as white and blond.
Champollion, H., Le Nil et la Societe Egyptienne, Marseille, Musee
Boreby, 1973 p.94
A painting from Iteti's tomb at Saqqara shows a very Nordic-looking
man with blond hair.
Westendorf, Wolfhart, Painting, Sculpture and Architecture of Ancient
Egypt. New York, Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1968 p.65
Time-Life books recently put out a volume called Rameses II The
Great. It has a good picture of the blond mummy of Rameses II. Another
picture can be found in the book X-Raying the Pharaohs, especially the
picture on the jacket cover. It shows his yellow hair.
A book called Chronicle of the Pharaohs was recently published
showing paintings,scuptures and mummies of 189 pharaohs and leading
personalities of Ancient Egypt. Of these, 102 appear European, 13 look
black and the rest are hard to classify. All nine mummies look
European.
The very first pharaoh, Narmer, also known as Menes, looks very
European, The same can be said for Khufu's cousin Hemon, who designed
the Great Pyramid of Giza. A computer-generated reconstruction of the
face of the Sphinx shows a European-looking face.
Egypt: Land of the Pharaohs, Time-Life books Alexandria, VA 1992 p.67
It was once painted sunburned red.
Silverberg, Robert, Before the Sphinx; Early Egypt N.Y., N.Y., T.
Nelson 1971 p.168
The Egyptians often painted upper class men as red and upper
class women as white; this because the men became sunburned or tanned
while outside under the burning Egyptian sun.
The information above is part of the information compiled by
Phillip Bonner and was printed in The Barnes Review, 130 Third Street,
SE, Washington, D.C. 20003
>
>All the feeling that we are naturally superior than others ultimately
>comes from narcissism.
No, it's the truth. And all your feelings come from your Jewish
controlled media.
> There may be some psychological benefits of
>having narcissism(Without it people may be more prone to suicide, I
>guess). But pushing it too far is also dangerous for human kind, just
>like the case of Hitler.
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:
"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.
In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.
Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.
To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."
galathaea
!! Well Tooly, I appreciate your passion, and agree that Liberals are
!! misguided. But so are conservatives.
!!
!! But rather than write of what I think should happen, let me lay out
!! what I see coming, whether we like it or not. Both liberal and
!! conservative frames of thot are too distorted to fit the facts.
!!
!! Might still makes Right. but now, after 5000 years of the brave heart,
!! strong right arm, sword in hand, that just dont cut it any more. Smith
!! & Wesson guarantee equal rights for smart women. Most guys dont get
!! it.
!!
!! But the other thing smart women have, is cunts. And they still work as
!! well as they ever did in getting guys to go along with whatever agenda
!! a smart woman has. And what the smart bitches are doing, is ignoring
!! the warriors, and fucking the geeks. Its the geeks who have the
!! innovative minds that is empowering their mutual ventures, and
!! allowing them to laff all the way to the bank.
!!
!! The geeks invented the internet and the hardware that puts this
!! message in front of your face. But it is the women who ran the offices
!! and kept track of the inventory, and... increasingly, they see they
!! can get along without the high cost of CEO male management.
!!
!! Smart women have also seen that the men of their station who they'd
!! consider as husbands, are already married to sexy bimbos. So, they are
!! going to fertility clinics, selecting among thousands of the most
!! promising Y chromosome lines on the planet, and have already given
!! birth to some of the most talented young minds around.
!!
!! They are, consciously or not, selecting fair haird Nordic lines way
!! more than all others, and giving birth to lotsa trophy blondes. These,
!! my friends, are the Uberwench. And they dont *have* family values.
!! They will, as we've already seen, fuck some lech for the last few
!! years of his life, then inherit his empire.
!!
!! I see "lesbians" moving in with each other, and likewise using
!! fertility clinics. I've also see witches host a safe sex orgy, and
!! then noted how a warrior type forgot everything he knew about weapons,
!! and only wanted to do whatever he could to advance their agenda. I
!! also filled my freezer with venison shot by a witch. She dressed it
!! out in her bathtub. She can shoot as well as you can, but the demand
!! for her sexual services are waaaaaay ahead of yours. You have friends
!! to help you move. She has friends to help her move bodies.
!!
!! All this Nazi racist bullshit is pissing in the wind. The Uberwench
!! will overwhelmingly select Northern European sperm donors, so their
!! demise has been premature, and exaggerated. They will also be
!! accepting women from whatever race, into their ranks so long as the
!! ladies in question are talented enuf. They have a bottom line, and
!! they want as much talent as they can find. They will no doubt find
!! some from every race, but the East Asians will be much more common.
!!
!! But the more mysogenistic a culture has been, the stupider the women.
!! smart women figured out how to get out.
sex magick is a battlefield these days
and i do not think any strain will survive the process separably
hybrid vigor is observed and measured regularly
i think that reason is why
topaz
tooly
the infamous 71 bigots of alt.politics
the actual historical nazi's
and their influence today
have very flawed goals
it is why the magicians turned
that late night in the winter when it was decided
fundamentally
it is a magick that fails
the reason is
heterosis is beneficial
and inbreeding depression only harms a culture
there can be no master race
because it will be the end of the human race
it will make us frail
homogeneity festers and fails to innovate
that's why america has been so successful
it has always been one of the most heterogeneous populations
many great men and many great women have lived before
from many different races
all our ancestors are our inheritance
all learning
all clever little new behaviors that brought us to this verbal age
the capacity for greatness is found in all places of the world
because it is a learned topology in our neurodynamics
greatness
as you know, day
is a linguistic phenomenon
effort with potential
..
among magicians there is a deep conflict on miscegenation
it was always crowley stirring it up
playing with the wotanists and their bloated sense of importance
this was
ultimately
why leah hirsig cried
^,.^
this can even been formalised mathematically
inbreeding depression is a well known consequence
of the magnification of homozygous deleterious genes
and hybridisation provides control robustness
gaia
in her eukaryotic avatar
has learned several "suppression dynamics"
which through possible involvement of epigenetic neolamarckian mechanisms
has found ways to prevent expression of genes that do not become fit
when a gene or epigene that is fit is present
undergrad genetics course speak of "dominant" and "recessive" genes
but the dynamic is more general and complex
the expression suppression mechanism
allows dynamics which move the fitness of a population
to the fitness near the intersection of their selection events
given two strings S1, S2
we can define a measure of distance d(S1, S2)
( eg. levenshtein )
inbreeding depression is a result of:
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Theorem: The metabolic dynamical structure will likely have a fitness F
that is decreasing as the epigenetic span distance d(P) across a population
P goes to 0.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
the most basic derivation is pretty standard and mathematically very simple
but there are tangents necessary to fully formalise
which genetic alphabet is "dynamically relevant"
which means that we don't look at string of nucleic acid compounds
but functionally relevant codons to translation
and
at any position x in genetic space G
we can consider the collection of stimuli or events K(x) for which that organism
would be selected before procreating
with variation in a population
there is some likelihood to be some subpopulation fit to a stimulus
and in general
the existence of a difference between two genetic loci x and y
can (with some extra preconditions) imply | K(x) - K(y) | > 0
defining a fitness F is basically defining a measure space
over which the K form a lattice
of course those tangents are where the full intracacy of the theory develops
but even remaining with this simple framework
there are many purely empirical systems in which the effect is commonly measured
corn
for example
and hormesis is synergetic with heterosis
so there is a good deal of universality in this phenomenon
%%%%%%%%%%..$$$
the problem is
the racial purity virus accomodates the private man
ashamed and hiding, eager for justification in their position and peers
there are always plenty of weak men unable to display themselves
often called macho because of their aggressions when reveal is immanent
the neophilia virus requires a man strong enough to know his weaknesses
and take full adult responsibility to learn
the geeks who do not assert with arrogance
but progress through plans
and handle well when plans fail
the cunts of some women are shaved in neotenic defense
refusing to face adulthood
cultivating their defensive men in paranoias and obsessions
some cunts
though
proceed to a natural fur
comfortable with its mammalian intensions
these differences may seem slight
but the spells take wildly different paths...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
galathaea: prankster, fablist, magician, liar
Day Brown
indicative lesson from History I know of is that of Kucha, The pre-
eminent city of the Silk Road, a few hundred miles WNW of the hegemony
of China & the Jade Gate.
For at least 1500 years, until over run by the Mongols on their way to
sweeping across most of Asia, Kucha retained a matriarchic system that
occassionally was garissoned by Chinese troops with the velvet glove
to help put down banditry.
They were Aryan, as was proven by the DNA of the natural mummies still
being found in their graveyards. But among them are some Chinese,
buried in Aryan clothes with Aryan grave goods. But both The Chinese
and the Tocharians despised the barbaric Tibetans, Zongnu ( who became
the Mongols), and the "arrogant sakyas" (the mysogenistic warlords who
still run lots of central Asia.
Part of what was going on, is that the Silk Road was mostly a string
of independent city states, and no matter how each was run, a talented
person could, and did, vote with their feet to wherever the government
was honest and less tyrannic. At the top of that list was Kucha. There
were no slums. The grave yards dont have the lavish graves of kings or
chieftains, but grave after grave of well dressed middle class men &
women.
Like the ancient Silk Road, the modern global economy will always have
a place where talent could make a go of it. And while anyone from any
race may succeed, those with the innate talent to actually do so will
be mostly from Aryan or East Asian genetic lines that evolved over the
course of the last 10,000 years in yeoman farming cultures.
The economies that do best will be those that neither ascribe talent
where it does not exist, nor block talent where it is from its
aspirations. We can expect to see more successes like Tiger Woods or
sen Obama, but most of the successes in the global market economy will
be from Aryan, East Asian gene pools, or some hybrid.
The sexy attributes we see now in these women we've seen before in the
matriarchies of the Silk Road. Its perhaps instructive to consider
that the 'Tantric' Taoist texts were composed when Kucha was a great
Taoist center. If men shave faces to look like boys, then why cant
women shave cunts to look like girls? Nobody pretends that men with
shaven faces are actually boys. Unless, I guess, you are a right wing
politician.
And if clean shaven faces are nicer to kiss, then why not also clean
shaven cunts? Since I'm already 68, I'll never find out, but we may
see some reports on this question from those who've tried it.
We all know what Buddhas look like, little smiling bald headed pot
bellied dudes. But at the temples at Sibushi, 12 miles north of Kucha,
the Bodhisattavahs all have long black curly hair, thin waists and
broad shoulders, and finger pearls worn over the neck down to their
exposed navels. Kucha's idea of a Buddhist saint is a stud muffin.
And damn they were rich. The reason the "Silk Road" ends at the "Jade
Gate" was that that was where Jade came into China, the one thing the
Chinese wanted from the outside world. Jade from the mines north of
Kucha. And like the Global Market now, they had the money to import
books from the rest of the world. Kucha was like a college town, with
Buddhist, Confucian, Taoist, Zororastrian, Nestorian, Manichean, etc,
scholars.
They also exported magicans. We know the "Magi" came from "the East".
Well, this is *that* East. And in China, the texts say that the great
wizards came from "the West". This is *their West*. Kucha exported
magicians, astrologers, & musicians to the Chinese court, and to this
day, a band from Kucha gets top billing in China. Everyone loves their
dancing girls. Some who, to this day, are so western looking, with
lighter hair & green eyes, they would pass on the streets of Europe
without notice.
(Lisa See looks like a Tocharian throwback, but I dont think she knows
it.)
Another point the global market may consider, or may already have in
place without us knowing it, was that Kucha exported the priciest call
girls to Xian. You could always tell when there was going to be a
palace coup when the Kuchi left town.
I too have tried to explain to "topaz, tooly, the infamous 71 bigots
of alt.politics" what was coming down, but they are all in denial. Not
that it matters if they did understand. They cant change any of it.
For me, the big awakening was seeing the original "Girls Gone Wild"
*documentary* filmed at Mardi Gras. I usta live in Nola (til I read
the hydrology report & got the fuck outta town), so I'd been to lotsa
Mardi Gras events. So, I was not surprised that girls would flash
their titties at the camera. But then the film crew asked, if they'd
do that, would they drop their drawers for a moon shot? Well, yes they
would. Well ok. If they'll do that, will they show off the bushes?
Yep. Ah huh. hmm. How about bending over for a clear shot at the cunt
from behind? No problem.
These are not porn stars. they werent being paid. This was just a
random grab off the streets! Now, more recently, they've repeated it
at NOLA, Lake Tahoe, Acapulco, etc, and even filmed girls fucking on
the stage at Spring Break. There's been a cultural revolution, and
these right wing nuts dont even know it. Course, they aint gettin laid
either.
ZerkonX
> What whites in America are being asked to do is therefore utterly
> unnatural. They are being asked to devote themselves to the interests
> of other races and to ignore the interests of their own.
I do not disagree with some of what you have said. I am not sure if this
feeds your idea or what but consider this if you will....
One of the most mind twisting events in the telling and teaching
of American History is the Civil War. As it is told, on the one hand it
was about slavery, on another it is not. As it usually does, the truth
is found to include both rather than excludes either. That said, there was
an undeniable element of a "civil rights" movement that occurred before
and during this period.
John Brown, considered mad and so made into a minor historical player, was
a radical and violent dissenter to slavery and he died as a result of it.
He was white.
The history of "Bloody Kansas", which I have always thought very
underplayed in modern history's description of the American character, was
in violent turmoil for years over the issue of slavery.
What whites AND blacks AND a lot of others have been 'tricked' into is
seeing difference and only difference. Most whites have been growing up
for at least two generations now believing that they have racism as an
original, near genetic sin. Most blacks have grown up exactly the same
except they are told that they have been so victimized by whites that
unless they are, they really are not "black". It is insipid and loathsome.
If this is being done by design, through stupidity or just to sell
more commercial ad space (hate sells!) on "serious" news *Shows*, I really
do not know. Maybe, the truth is, it's a combination.
One thing for certain. It prevents a lot of white people and black people
and brown people from looking at the green people!
tooly
"Day Brown" <dayb...@hughes.net> wrote in message
news:1188629880....@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
I find your explanations and comments interesting.
Not sure what you think I'm in denial of though. I have always said that
the changes in women's sexuality have been the essential 'power' behind all
the polical movement that has been going on since the 60's. It is funny how
I exist with a kind of inner calm even while I'm enraged. The great denial
is not about this world to me, but about something else. Is this calm a
matter of Truth? Resolve? Stupidity, ha? Not sure even myself. I think it
may have to do with what 'human' is and what 'animal' is...and where the two
part company. Animals can rape you, eat you, torture you, cause you great
harm...but still remain inferior to domain under humanity. Animals can be
owned...but the human spirit cannot be...or something like that.
If a woman bends over to show her cunt, I can only recognize a lost
soul...an idea that most here on this NG will scoff at. There is something
I know and my greatest life's exasperation not being able to articulate it
properly. I could show that same woman 'experience' where she'd drop her
head in total shame...not for anything I'd 'tell' her, but by inalienable
recognition of a spiritual context by which she has conspired.
I, myself, am willing to wallow in the mud only so far, for so long. You're
68 and sound like you have seen a good bit of this world, experienced a lot.
But from my view, not enough [in that you seem to accept things by the
nature of what you see as 'unchangable'...but fail to see that in so
accepting, you have changed the ONLY thing that is important...yourself].
samvaknin
The Merits of Stereotypes
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/stereotype.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/jews.html
More about narcissistic collectives, cultures, and societies - click
on
these links:
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/14.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/journal87.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/lasch.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/journal62.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/journal63.html
http://malignantselflove.tripod.com/faq47.html
Take care.
Sam
chazwin
> Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
> nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
> country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened.
That is NOT why Portugal failed as a world power. It was becasue of
the ascendancy of the British Empire you complete fuckwit!
It started with the French invasion under Napoleon which resulted in
the campaigns of Wellington. It was the British who crushed the
French: the British who were the Most racially mixed nation in Europe.
When the British Empire faded it was the USA that enjoyed the
ascendancy. I have to point out that the USA is the single most
racially mixed nation on earth, and HENCE the most successful. The USA
has grown and developed through the hybrid vigour only to be found in
mixed races.
The rest of your posting is utter shit.
chazwin
> Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
> nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
> country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened.
That is NOT why Portugal failed as a world power. It was becasue of
chazwin
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:04:36 -0700, sfh970...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >I see your point: The browner you are, the more underdeveloped your
> >society will be.
>
> >But let's shift our time back 2500 years, when Greeks and then later
> >Romans prospered. At that point, people in northern and western
> >Europe didn't even get the concept of agriculture. How do you
> >reconcile that?
>
> The most obvious answer is probably the right one, it's a lie. The
> Jews control the media and all the do is lie.
>
So it must be the Jews that are the most superior race becasue they
have done SO well in the face of adversity and 2500 years of
prejudice.
How does an arsehole like you account for the fact that Jews are far
more highly represented in the higher echelons of society?
Day Brown
one of the young women bent over to display her vaginal opening, and I
noted the characteristic epicanthic fold of virginity. Give that some
thot. I have.
Every so many years, I get a subscription to Playboy to see where they
think men are at. I thot they were so far behind the curve, I then got
a subscription to Hustler. Playboy is still advertising upscale
consumer items as if guys today make that kind of money. Hustler is
more realistic. And like "Girls Gone Wild" they accept, and display,
photos young women themselves have sent in.
They have no shame. But of what use is it to them? The men dont make
the money anymore to support them as wives, much less their children.
Women have always sought the responsible, reliable breadwinner. But
nowadays, that is the corporation that pays them and provides the
healthcare, and even the childcare. The next step in that process is
fertility clinic services for progeny who will be far more gifted than
anything they can get from the local stud pool.
And since the kids will be around for the rest of her life, but the
stud wont, that's where women are shifting their attention. And the
kids dont care whether momma displays her cunt in a magazine. Did
doing that pay for the icecream? The photos in Hustler show them
wearing lace stockings with garterbelts. [that's a period. no panties
to get in a wad.] We have seen this before.
The earliest example I know of is on page 163 of Gimbutas, "The
Goddesses & Gods of Old Europe". From Vidra, Northern Rumania, 7000
years ago. You can see the scalloped effect from the garter straps on
the top of her stockings. Kinda chubby for our taste. Her book also
shows us lotsa "Phallic Wands", but Tooly, I've seen porn flicks, and
I know dildos when I see them. Even if they are 7000 years old.
But what is the result of all this depravity? Only the most
outstanding era of technological innovation the world has ever seen.
The list is just mind boggling, but off the top of my head: Arsenic
bronze, the toughest of all bronzes. Which they used to make grain
sickles, and wood working tools for the kind of timber frame houses
that are still all over Europe. With chimneys. They found a timber
frame well casing near the Danube in Austria. Dendochronology says the
logs were cut in 5078 BC. Notched like a Lincoln log set, riven and
sawn. They used the wood working tools to build the worlds first plank
hulled sail boats. They used hemp to make the sails, which is why we
have the word "canvas" from "cannibis".
They also made bronze belt buckles, broaches, hair pieces. What's
missing? No weapons. Sometimes, it aint what you see, its what you
dont that gets your attention. I looked at artifacts from this culture
for months before I realized this.
They didnt have marriage. Men who dont own women, dont fight over
them, so they didnt have *war*. There's no sign in the tels of the
kind of general layer of burnt rubble that's always left after a place
has been sacked.
They pressed fabric on wet clay pots so we know they had twill. They
also wrote 4 lines of *script* on a platter from Gradesnica, near
Vraca Bulgaria. 5500 BC. 2000 years before the Egyptians and
Sumerians.
They left us lots of human figures. Only the women are in postures of
authority, but in any case, far more lifelike, in natural poses, than
the ritual rigid postures of the Egyptians, Sumerians, or Indians.
They were unstoppable, but it looks like Anthrax came in 5000 years
ago, and the whole region was abandoned. There are two ways to control
the behavior of men: sex or violence. Pick one. They used sex, and
since violence is so much more dangerous now, we are moving back
twards sex.
They lived in communal houses, something Lesbians are starting to do.
In house childcare, 24/7. With eyeballs on hand so that while a woman
is at work there wont be a stud muffin boyfriend fucking her
daughter. The Mosou of SW China still live like this, and it
scandalizes people, but their kids dont grow up to be neurotic wrecks.
The men in the house are selected by the grandmothers because of
mentoring skill. The women take whoever they want to bed whenever they
want. The rape rate is *zero*.
Communal housing means that the cost per capita is dramatically lower,
and developing world incomes can be comfortable. Their jobs wont be
outsourced or downsized. They dont make enough money for it to be
worth it. The American Nuclear family model is history. [that's a
period too] Just watch.
A communal household, with several women will invite an engineer, who
could make enuf money to support a wife to move in. Now, is he going
to want to go home to fuck a single wife, or half a dozen women
housemates? They get his money, the wife dont. Global Free Market
Capitalism at work.
Topaz
By Dr. William Pierce
If you've been listening to many of my broadcasts you will know that
the issue I talk about most often is that of media control. In nearly
every broadcast I have pointed out that the people who control the
mass media of news and entertainment are able to manipulate the
opinions and attitudes of about 95 per cent of the population. I have
pointed out
that the media bosses do this manipulation deliberately and in
collusion with one another, taking advantage of the compelling need
most people have to conform their ideas and their behavior to a
perceived norm.
The media bosses use their control over the mass media of
entertainment -- and to a lesser extent over the news media -- to
create an artificial norm that is presented to the public through
television, motion pictures, advertising, and other media, and this
artificial norm is the one perceived as real by most of the public.
Through their control of public opinion the media bosses also control
the democratic political process and governmental policy in a way that
is advantageous to them and disadvantageous to the White public. And
these media bosses are overwhelmingly Jews.
That has been the message I have presented over and over again in many
of these broadcasts. I have talked about different facets of Jewish
media control and have presented different specifics, different
details, in various broadcasts. I've discussed a number of different
Hollywood films or television shows as specific examples of the way in
which the Jews use their media control to brainwash the public, to
promote
fashions and styles and behavior that are harmful to our people but
that advance the long-term schemes of the Jews to further dominate and
exploit our society.
(Some of this may be outdated today, but it still explains why things
are the way they are)
I've talked about specific Jews who control various segments of the
mass media, and I've pointed out specific instances of the destructive
way in which they use their control. I've talked about the Jewish
media boss Sumner Redstone and his control of MTV and CBS and the
Hollywood film studio Paramount Pictures. I've talked about the Jewish
media boss Michael Eisner and his control of the Disney Company and
ABC. I've talked about the Jewish media boss Gerald Levin and his
control of Time Warner and CNN. I've talked about the Jewish media
boss Edgar Bronfman and his control of the largest segment of the
popular music industry and Universal Studios in Hollywood. And I've
talked about dozens of other Jewish media bosses and the media they
control and the specific ways in
which they use those media. In particular, during the past few months
I've talked about several recent Hollywood films which deliberately
target teenaged White girls and brainwash them with the notion that it
is fashionable for them to have sex with Black males.
And of course, I've talked about the Jewish control of the news media
as well as the entertainment media. In a way similar to their use of
the entertainment media to set popular fashions, the Jewish media
bosses distort and censor the news in order to give the public a
distorted picture of what is happening in the world. I've given
several very
specific examples of this Jewish management of the news in recent
months.
I've talked about the total blackout at the national level of the news
of the atrocious rape and massacre of Whites in Wichita, Kansas, by
Blacks last December, and I've talked about the almost total
suppression of the news of the Black racial attacks on Whites in
Seattle in the Mardi Gras riot at the end of February this year. I
also talked about
the downplaying of the racial aspects of the Black rioting in
Cincinnati in April of this year, about the failure of the news media
outside the immediate Cincinnati area to mention the deliberate
targeting of Whites, especially White women, by the Black rioters. And
I described the gross distortions in the news coverage of the racial
politics in York,
Pennsylvania, that led to the current White mayor of York being
charged in May with the killing of a Black during a Black race riot in
York 32 years ago.
I have pointed out repeatedly how all of this suppression of the news
and distortion of the news is aimed at creating and maintaining a
false picture in the public mind of racial conflict in the United
States. In this false picture Whites always are the aggressors, Blacks
or other non-Whites are the innocent victims, and the root of all
racial conflict
is White racism.
In a number of my broadcasts I've discussed at length why the Jews do
what they do: why they use their media control in such a deceptive and
destructive way, what their motives are. I've also talked about how
they collaborate. I've pointed out that their propaganda policies are
not formulated independently, but that they have a coherent party line
that
they all follow. I've given a number of specific examples of this.
Well, all of these things that I've talked about have not gone
unnoticed by the Jewish media bosses themselves. When people expose
their activities or their scheming they pay attention. In particular,
they have been paying attention to these American Dissident Voices
broadcasts and to the work of my organization, the National Alliance.
They read what's on our Web sites at natvan.com and natall.com and
resistance.com, and they talk about it among themselves. This shows up
pretty clearly in the uniform way in which their media respond to us.
Whether it's the Associated Press or Time magazine or the Washington
Post or a television news commentator anywhere in the United States,
they always use the same
phrasing in talking about us. They always use the word "hate" in
referring to us. They always say that the National Alliance is the
"most dangerous organized hate group" in America, despite the fact
that all we do is disseminate to the public the truth about what
they're doing. That's what they regard as "dangerous" and as "hate."
If you want to see a current indicator of the fact that they do think
about us, go to the Web site promoting Steven Spielberg's new
movie,A.I. There you'll see a parody of a part of the National
Alliance's Web site in the form of a page headed "Who Is the
Anti-Robot Militia?" It's obviously copied, almost word for word, from
the page "Who Is the National Alliance?" on our Web site. It's
difficult for me to understand what they hoped to accomplish with this
parody. Perhaps they believe that it will make people take us less
seriously.
Somewhat less quirky but much more directly deceptive are their
standard smokescreen responses. It used to be that whenever I would
raise the issue of Jewish monopoly control of the mass media of news
and entertainment during an interview or on a call-in program, I would
hear the response from a Jew or an apologist for the Jews: "What about
Ted
Turner? He's not a Jew," as if that negated everything I had said. Of
course, that response was used before Ted Turner's CNN was taken over
by the very Jewish Time Warner. And now that Ted Turner has been eased
out of all decision-making positions in the cable news network he
built and has been replaced by Jews, one doesn't hear the Ted Turner
response any longer.
The standard responses today, the ones I hear as often as I used to
hear the Ted Turner response, are the "it's the shareholders" and the
"it's the big bankers." Whenever I start naming names -- whenever I
begin talking about the control over the media wielded by Michael
Eisner or Sumner Redstone, for example, a Jew will pop up with the
response:
"Those guys don't control the media. It's the shareholders who control
the media. Eisner and Redstone are just employees. The shareholders
tell them what to do." A variation on this theme is, "Eisner and
Redstone don't own the media. It's the big banks that own all of the
media, and most of the big bankers are Gentiles."
Well, of course, that's not really true, and they know it's not true.
The big Jewish media bosses are mostly quite autonomous. Sumner
Redstone, for example, owns outright two-thirds of the shares in his
media empire. His personal fortune is more than 12 billion dollars,
according to Forbes magazine this month. I'm quite sure he doesn't
check
with any shareholders before he dreams up some new piece of
race-mixing filth for MTV.
As for Gentile bankers telling the Jewish media bosses what kind of
propaganda they must produce for the public, that's total nonsense. I
haven't yet done a study of the investment banking industry to
determine what percentage of Jews and what percentage of Gentiles are
involved in it, but one thing that's certain is that the Gentile
bankers would faint dead away at the thought of telling Jewish media
bosses such as Michael Eisner or the Sulzberger family or the
Newhouses or Sumner Redstone to cut back on the race-mixing
propaganda. Gentile bankers as a class are rich, deracinated capons,
whose only interest is money.
Every Jewish propaganda medium -- CBS or MTV or Time magazine or the
New York Times -- is staffed from top to bottom with Jews, and they
all know what they're doing. They work as a tribe, as a swarm of
termites gnawing at the foundations of our existence. There is total
agreement among the media Jews as to the general thrust of their
propaganda. They may disagree on many of the details -- they may even
compete against each other for a bigger slice of the media pie -- but
all agree on the general goals of degrading and subverting Gentile
civilization, of corrupting Gentile institutions, of mongrelizing our
race. Again, the Jews work as a tribe, and that is the source of their
strength and their success.
Gentile bankers, on the other hand, work only for themselves. They
would not dream of combining and using their financial strength to
protect our people from the Jews. They are terrified of the Jews, of
the media. The more money they have, the more selfish and the more
cowardly they are. The huge difference, the decisive difference,
between the Jews and our people is that they work as a tribe, and we
work as individuals. They
work together, rich Jews and poor Jews, for their common tribal
interests, against us, and until now we have failed to organize
effectively to defend ourselves against them.
Anyway, my point is that their defense against my exposure of their
activities and their power over our government is orchestrated - that
is, they've all gotten together and decided what their defense will be
-- and it's a deliberate lie. As I continue to expose the destructive
activities of the Jewish media bosses, you will continue to hear them
and their apologists respond that they really don't have any power,
that it's the Gentile shareholders and the Gentile bankers who control
the media. A lot of dimwits will believe that lie. A lot of couch
potatoes, a lot of soccer moms, a lot of baseball fans, a lot of
lemmings, will
believe that it's not the Jew Sumner Redstone who deliberately uses
MTV to corrupt White teenagers; instead it's some cabal of Gentile
shareholders and Gentile bankers who tell him what to do, and Redstone
is only an employee who follows their orders.
I think it's time for us to orchestrate our exposure of the Jewish
media. I think it's about time for the public, lemmings and all, to
begin hearing a uniform charge against them, a uniform statement of
our opposition to them. How about this: The Jews are our misfortune.
That's simple, and it's true, and it's easy to remember. Repeat after
me: The
Jews are our misfortune. Let's use that statement. Let's let everyone
hear it. Let's impress it on everyone's consciousness: The Jews are
our misfortune.
Of course, when I say the Jews are our misfortune, I'm not talking
only about the Jewish media bosses. I'm not talking only about the
Jews at the top, such as Sumner Redstone and the Sulzbergers and
Michael Eisner and the others who formulate and direct the propaganda
line against Gentile society; I'm talking about the whole tribe, and I
believe that message comes across in the statement, the Jews are our
misfortune. Let me tell you what the standard lemming response will be
to that statement, the response that they have been taught and will
parrot back.
First, from the religious lemmings it will be something like this:
"Oh, no, the Jews aren't our misfortune, we owe everything to the
Jews. Don't you know that Jesus was a Jew and God was his father? That
makes God a Jew. We must do what the Jews tell us. They are God's
people." I'm sure that argument is embarrassing to some of the more
sophisticated
apologists for the Jews, but many Christian Fundamentalists use it,
and I've heard it often.
From the secular lemmings it will be more like: "Don't you know that
Freud and Einstein and Salk were Jews? We wouldn't have a space
program if it weren't for Einstein. We wouldn't have a cure for polio
if it weren't for Salk. The Jews are our fortune, not our misfortune."
Well, of course, our space program has practically nothing to do with
Einstein or his Jewishness. Gentile thinkers envisioned it and
pioneered both its theoretical basis and its practical development.
The German theoretician, Hermann Oberth, and the Russian, Konstantin
Tsiolkovsky, were two of the Gentiles who independently demonstrated
mathematically the feasibility of space travel in the early years of
the last century. The American rocket pioneer Robert Goddard and the
German Wernher von Braun designed actual rockets and built the
vehicles which were the precursors of today's space ships. Jews didn't
become involved until it became glamorous and profitable. And the
development of a polio vaccine hardly would have missed a beat if
Jonas Salk had gone into the garment business instead of medicine. He
was one of a team, and he got the credit for the work of others as
well as for his own work.
The reasons we hear these silly and groundless claims in the first
place about how much we owe the Jews -- the reasons are Jewish media
control and Jewish tribalism, Jewish support for their own. Freud was
given the enormous buildup he received for his theorizing about anal
personalities and penis envy and the like because he was a Jew, not
because of any genuine merit in his theorizing. Other Jewish writers
recognized him as one of their own and propelled him to a position of
undeserved authority, and his theories ultimately did an enormous
amount of damage to the development of our understanding of psychology
and mental disease. Einstein was a competent mathematical physicist,
but a great deal of the publicity he received was based on the fact
that he was a Jew rather than on the merits of his work. As in the
case of Salk, Jewish publicists gave Einstein credit for the work of
others as well as for his own work.
What we must do is look at the balance sheet. Is the damage done to
our race by Karl Marx and all of his Jewish followers in the communist
movement -- the selective murder of more than 30 million of the best
of our people in Europe during the past century -- offset by whatever
contributions Einstein and Salk and other Jews have made -- even if
they did everything their Jewish boosters claim for them? Certainly,
there have been many other Jews who were competent and creative
engineers and scientists besides Einstein and Salk. Not every clever
Jew became a lawyer or a scriptwriter or a pawn shop owner or a
middleman. Some became chemists or mathematicians or physicists. But
can all of them together make up for the mass murders Lazar Kaganovich
perpetrated
aginst the Ukrainians, for the rapes and murders of German civilians
instigated by Ilya Ehrenburg, for the Eastern European girls still
being forced into sexual slavery on a huge scale today by Israeli
slave dealers?
I think not. And I have not yet put on the balance sheet what the
Jewish masters of America's mass media have done and are doing to us.
What can possibly compensate White Americans for the deliberate,
malevolent corruption of our young people by just one Jewish gangster
like Sumner Redstone and his MTV? The race-mixing, culture-destroying,
hip-hop filth churned out by Sumner Redstone's MTV seven days a week
is the single most destructive influence in American life today. And
of course, Redstone doesn't produce this filth all by himself. He has
thousands of Jews working for him at every level, not only in MTV but
also in CBS and in Paramount Pictures and in all of his other media
properties.
And although MTV, targeting White teenagers as it does, may seem the
most blatantly and maliciously destructive of the Jewish media, it is
hardly much worse than some of the filth being poured into the minds
of the American public by Michael Eisner's Disney empire: especially
by its Miramax films division under the Weinstein brothers. The fact
that much of the entertainment produced by Eisner's Disney Company is
relatively nnocuous does not compensate for the fact that some of it
is pure poison. The poison is being introduced gradually, more and
more each year, and it is having its effect. When the Disney Company
was entirely a Gentile company a few years ago, its output of
ntertainment may sometimes have been excessively bland, but none of it
was poison designed to corrupt White Americans.
And what can possibly compensate on our balance sheet for what the
Jewish news media are doing in their deliberate, calculated distortion
of the picture of the world seen by the American public. It is a
picture which has been designed to confuse White Americans, to
undermine their self-confidence, to induce feelings of racial guilt in
them. Just one example: the systematic suppression of the news of
Black crimes against White people and the exaggeration of the news of
every White crime against non-Whites is not a fluke. It is done
routinely by all of the Jewish news media: by the New York Times, by
the Washington Post, by Time magazine and Newsweek magazine, by CNN
and ABC News and CBS News and NBC News and all the rest. And
interracial crime is just one issue. The relations between the sexes;
immigration; the foreign relations of the United States with the rest
of the world, especially in the Middle East; and a hundred other
important issues are similarly distorted in their portrayal by the
media. This deliberate distortion of the public's view of the world
has done irreparable damage to the American system of government and
to American society. And again: the distortion has been deliberate,
planned, systematic, and intended to do harm to us. No number of funny
Jewish comedians, or successful Jewish entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley
or on Wall Street, or clever Jewish medical researchers can compensate
for this harm.
When we look at the balance sheet the conclusion is clear beyond any
doubt: the Jews are our misfortune. It's way past time for us to
accept this conclusion, to overcome our fears of being labeled
"anti-Semitic" for accepting this conclusion, to brush aside these
fears which have been instilled in us by the propaganda of the mass
media, and then to begin working to improve our fortunes.
Topaz
Here is a quote from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"The Jews had become the money lenders of Europe for quite
evident reasons. The Church sternly forbade all Christians to engage
in the pursuit...
"So the Jews became the money lenders of Europe. They developed
a great shrewdness and cunning in the one and only field of
opportunity left open to them. And with their shrewdness and cunning
they developed a certain cruelty and greed. That was natural. The
world was cruel to them, so when the chance was theirs, they were
cruel in return..."
The money system we have today is called the debt-money
system. It is evil and needs to be replaced. The only way money comes
into existence today is when it is borrowed. There is no freely
existing money supply, but only borrowed money that needs to be paid
back to bankers with interest. If all the money that was owed to
bankers was ever paid back there would be no money left in circulation
and this would be a great depression. What makes matters even worse is
that when money is created only the principle of the loan is created.
The money needed to pay the interest is never created. For this reason
it is impossible to pay back the principle plus the interest on all of
the loans that make up our money supply. The extra amount of money
needed to pay the interest was never created and does not exist.
The United States government borrows money from the Federal
Reserve Bank. This bank is not federal but owned by private
stockholders. It is in the business section of the phone book, not the
government section. Other banks also create the money in our money
supply. They are allowed to loan out much more money then they
actually have. Thus they create new money. No one else is allowed to
create money, only bankers have this privilege. All of our money is
debt-money and it is all owed back to bankers, plus the interest.
In the U.S.A. money is created by the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing which is a unit of the treasury, but the orders to print come
from the Federal Reserve Banks. The money is created for and owned by
the banks. And the Federal Reserve Banks are not Federal, in spite of
the name. Privately owned commercial banks own the stock of the
Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Banks give the newly
created money to the government in exchange for government bonds. To
simplify: The United States does not make its own money. Bankers
create the money and loan it to the United States with an interest
charge.
The book War Cycles Peace Cycles puts it this way:
"If there is only $10 in existence, and you lend it to someone
under the condition that he repay $11, and if he agrees to this, he
has agreed to the impossible."
The book The Struggle for World Power put it this way:
"The Bank of England... was the first payment institution which
was legally empowered to issue state-authorized paper currency and ,
therefore, the Government itself became its debtor. Thus the State not
only renounced its monopoly on monetary emission, but also agreed to
borrow the privately-created money from the bankers...Not only the
thing being done, but even the very name was a deliberate fraud and
deception to conceal the essence of the deed. To create money out of
nothing is to make valid and effective claim on all goods and services
for no return, which is fraud and theft, made worse by the
circumstances that the money is lent out at interest...it follows that
those who have the power to 'create' out of nothing all the money in
each country and the whole world and lend it as stated, have total
power over all states, parties, firms, radio, press, individuals and
so on. Therefore the power of Parliament in general, and especially
with regard to money, is non-existent, and all the true sovereignty is
in the hands of those private individuals who issue all money"
Topaz
It doesn't take long to figure out what groups can be insulted and
what groups for which this is taboo. They made a movie called "Legally
Blonde", which of course I did not see. It's well known that you can
joke about blondes anywhere and it is accepted and you don't get
fired. If you joke about Blacks you do get fired. Blondes are fair
game because they are White and probably not Jews. Jews control the
media and the entire culture. Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the Press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
Women can only be insulted if they are blonde. It's actually White
men that the Jews really hate. In their show "Simpsons" they regularly
show all the men as stupid and all the women as smart. This is also
the Jewish show that said the French were "Cheese eating surrender
monkeys", for not going along with the Jews agenda. What if there was
a show calling Jews "money grubbing culture corrupters"? Of course
that would never be on TV. "Beavis and Butthead" are of course White
men.
The Jews also hate Arabs. They want to steal Arab land of course.
But they also hate people who are against the homosexual perverts and
the feminists. Look at any film of the Jews country and see how many
female policemen they have. Arabs are the opposite of Jews. Maybe they
are too extreme on the opposite direction. But they have traditional
values that the USA and other liberal, Jewish controlled countries
don't have. The spokesmen for the so-called "right" in America are
Rush Limbaugh, who is probably a Jew, (He once said on his show he
and his Jewish rabbi--Rush used the words, "My rabbi"- had traveled to
Israel and met there privately with former Israeli Prime Minister
Shimon Peres.) and other Jewish neo-cons. The TV can then truthfully
declare that they are unbiased and they appear neutral and fair
between the Republicans and the Democrats, since they are both firmly
in the Jewish play pen and are not likely to wonder out.
This quote explains what is going on in the Middle East:
Der Stürmer, #23/1944, What is Americanism
"The family ties between hundreds of thousands of German families and
their American relatives led many to think that America would never
join a second war against Germany. Now that that has happened, many
Germans still believe that America will never allow Bolshevism to
conquer and destroy Germany. Recent events have proven how false and
dangerous this idea is. One has to be foolish or irredeemably stupid
to believe that anything good can come to Europe from the land of
presumed opportunity. That that did not happen after the First World
War, and will not happen after the second. The Jews have made America
what it is today: a nation raped by the Jews , a nation whose
130,000,000 people of many colors and races have been forced into
helping the Jews achieve world domination!"
GatherNoMoss
You go way WAY to far in interpreting these peoples' existence.
It's all such BS I want to scream.
From a few 7000 year old pornographic trinkets you extrapolte all
this ?
You're just projecting you're own mind on it all.
We don't know anything about these people but we know YOU now !
This is the number one trap with historians....projection !
Topaz
"I was listening to a speech that he gave in Sweden. You can listen at
the
Url below if ya want. http://www.davidduke.com/
Anyway, the guy made an analogy that sums it all up.
He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest
crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.
He then went on to say: Haiti is rich in natural resources, they have
great weather, beaches etc.. Yet its a murder, rape capital of the
world. etc, etc.
He went on to say: If we were to take all of the people from Haiti &
Move them to Iceland, Well, they would soon die.
Take those from Iceland and move them to Haiti and within one
generation Haiti would be paradise on earth.
He explained it better than I did. But you should get the gist of the
Iceland / Haiti analogy. Better yet, listen to the Stockholm speech
and hear it for yourself.."
Tommy
Day Brown
> You go way WAY to far in interpreting these peoples' existence.
>
> It's all such BS I want to scream.
> From a few 7000 year old pornographic trinkets you extrapolte all
> this ?
>
> You're just projecting you're own mind on it all.
> We don't know anything about these people but we know YOU now !
>
> This is the number one trap with historians....projection !
authority as shown by Milgram, Bandura, & Zimbardo.
Had the officer corps merely read Zimbardo, Abu Gharib never wouldda
happened. Had they read the work of Dr. Paul Ekman on
microexpressions, and used high speed video, they would not have
bothered trying to use anything as obsolete as torture.
But all that was too far out of the box for them to think. Historians
are the same way. When Schleiman took Homer seriously, they all thot
he was a fruitcake, and that all ancient writing was pure myth other
than Christian scripture. Velikovsky, of all people, showed that
Oedipus Rex was based on the life of Akhnaton. Archaeology since has
supported him.
The same academic historians said that Amazons were myth, but now
they've found the graves of armed women with their horse tack in the
permafrost of Siberia. Castledon shows that the Island of Akrotiri
once had the city of At Lunus, and the ruins of a suburb, buried under
5 times as much ash as at Pompei, support him. Ryan & Pitman show that
the Great Flood actually happened in the Black Sea basin around 5600
BCE, and the fundies have really had shit fits over that.
Rural Tibet provided lotsa anthro reports of land being handed down in
the Female line. Of the heiress taking several husbands, and as
operations expanded taking additional "co-wives" into the business.
Tibetan Script did not come from India, but looks Sogdian, which was
in use in Central Asia when the Amazons were running the place. They
even found a valley with a population of 12,000 that speaks an Aryan
language.
We also know, that when the Mongols invaded, some people fled Khotan
and other Tocharian cities south into the Himalayas. And we know that
in the SE Himalayas, the Mosou are still here, and like the other
matriarchic Tibetans, living communally without marriage as we know
it, with everything owned by the grandmothers.
Did they invent this there, or did they bring it with them?
Anthropology would say the latter. And if we go up to the Silk Road
Towns from which they came, we find the bodies almost perfectly
preserved in the cold dry alkaline desert, like freeze drying. EW
Barber, a well known archeo-fabrics expert says that the DNA of the
wool comes from European lines of Sheep. Since she published DNA tests
have been done on the bodies themselves showing that they are kin to
the Slavs. Of the very same region where the dildos came from 7000
years ago.
The horse was domesticated 6000 years ago, and Barber says it took
them a couple thousand to wander East all the way to China. Their
fabric technology didnt catch on with the Chinese. But the Shang words
for horses, tack, wheels & carts, bronze & casting, are all loan words
from early Aryans.
Aryan history is never going to be entirely sorted out; its too
chaotic. It was certainly not 'pure blood' either. they kept picking
people, and their technologies up, and then passing them back down the
line wherever they went. But just as Aryans married into Chinese
culture and all but disappeared in the physical appearance, so also
individuals from China, India, & Persia got on the camel train and
were almost washed out amid the Aryans giving the appearance of racial
heterogeneity. With over 60 Y chromosome lines identified in the gene
pool so far, you'd think the racists would give it up, but they are
like the historians, can only think in ways that do not disturb the
sensibilities of their friends.
I dont have that problem. I live like a hermit in the woods, but
unlike all of my predicessors, I have a satellite dish with high speed
internat access as well as the time & money needed to buy books and
actually read them. Its an old habit. I read the Bible cover to cover
before I felt I could dismiss it as bullshit. I also read Gilgamesh
and the Egyptian Book of the Dead, and discovered all the plagiarism
in the Bible.
I make people want to scream when I talk about that too. You have
lotsa company. The sexual practices of the Aryans are particularly
disturbing. You can read the Brit reports about the rituals to Kali,
some of which still go on, and still make some people want to scream.
But if you read between the euphamism, you discover that girls went
into the temple and were given sacred dildos. The usual definition of
"virgin" gets seriously fucked with. The temples were equipped with a
range of sizes, whatever the girls felt comfortable with, so by the
time they started working with dildos made of meat and powered by men,
it was no big deal. This fucked with Victorian sensibilities big
time.
But whether Gaia or Kali, or any of the many other names, sexual
rituals were the name of the game. And among those in the temples of
Gaia, just as with Kali, there were sets of dildos. What else do you
do with a 4 inch dildo other than give it to a girl? Do you know any
historians that can even ponder the question? The white supremacists
cant deal with it either. But sexual ritual was such a huge part of
Aryan tradition, that there's no way to understand how the culture
worked without it.
sfh9...@hotmail.com
> The modern era has promoted several generations now removed from the
> harshness of that cruelty this predatory nature exists upon, and 'sentiment'
> has lost it's way to the higher responsibilities of personal existence.
I guess here you are sighing for our loss of sense on how cruel we
fundamentally are, and nowadays we have lost touch of our innate
savagery, and we should come back to our savage senses to assert our
existence.
It's true that if we are stripped off enough, we are fundamentally
cruel and savage. But let me quote a situation described by "Freedom
Fighter" in his "CONSERVATIVES VS. LIBERALS: THE NATURE OF THE BEAST"
to lead to my point:
"It all began a hundred thousand years ago on a ledge in front of a
cave. A female homo sapiens walked by, attracting the attention of
a male. The male stepped forward and smacked her over the head with
his club. WHACK! He then dragged the unconscious female into his
cave for sex.
One day there were two males standing in front of a cave when a
female walked by. The first raised his arm to club the female, but
the second male communicated to him that clubbing females over the
head to have sex was not nice. WHACK! WHACK! The first male stepped
over the unconscious second male and proceeded to rape the female."
I hope that it's not your intention, in the spirit of coming to our
predatory nature, to whack someone and then rape a female.
tooly
<sfh9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190073733.8...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
Funny example. >)
Substance and depth is what I was referring to...not savagery. The kind of
'right stuff' that a General Eisenhower may have been made of, or perhaps a
George Patton, or Robert E. Lee, or Abraham Lincoln, or any number of
venerable past leaders of history who adhered to enobling idealism while
understanding the cruelty of battlefields and human struggle.
The best case in point I always use is the idealism that the founders of the
USA had when forming this nation. Of course everyone believed in the
principles as put forth in the Declaration of Indpendence and then the
constitution...but if one studies the true cement that has bound this union
together for so long, they will see it was the underlying pragmatism and
'realist' view to install a system of checks and balances that has been the
real sustaining force through time.
Many women, IMO, are raised in protected atmospheres, never having to
experience first hand the true depth of struggle in this world. Few women
ever will know of the alienation, the need for sheer will to withstand the
rambling hordes, the mental toughness to bear ostracization and be given no
quarter by their fellows in a test of survivability. Women do not get to
see the coldness of life where competitors only see you as a meal to be
eaten or a resource of their own veneration to power.
Much as we try to protect our children, they also can grow unawares to the
harsh underpinnings of the world we grow within. Today, even men grow soft
in a technological world, and the realities of predatory nature oft go
lacking in conceptualization [that they become easy marks and useful idiots
in a new world emasculation of the male etc].
Revisit some reading on the times of Alexander the Great to see how men once
lived and died by the sword, and from bloody conquest, our very civilization
was wrestled from this planet. Such bloodletting can be seen right up to
modern times...only now, with technology, we leave our sword duels up to
atom bombs and other WMD's in a far more dangerous world...but yet,
seemingly more peaceful. In one blow, we can now accomplish what once took
many wars and countless deathmatches to accomplish. And so, we tend to lose
touch with that reality, going to work in nice air conditioned offices day
after day, returning home to modern conveniences and appliance luxury...and
what once seem such devlish antics of human struggle seem to fade in the
annals of time. The struggles go on however...and the possiblity of
holocaust the greater war constantly standing over our heads in the modern
era.
It does not mean we give up our ideals to embrace the harsh cruelties of the
nature in this world, but only that we 'temper' the structures by which we
give those ideals rise in the world that those structures can withstand that
nature. It means to understand when to comprimise...to instinctively
realize when one walks on thin ice and needs to draw back from hell or high
water 'progressivism'. It means not giving Iranian leaders public forums in
your own universities for one thing.
Our sense of safety and technological comfort has led to a kind of innocense
that would see animals in zoos and ask 'why are they caged'...and then
simply set about opening all the cages to free them. On some super plateau
of moral footing, one often cannot argue the sentiments such minds
carry...but it matters little as the lions they freed will turn back by
their nature, and eat us all whatever the case.
We don't know where this multicurtism is taking us...but I think we can see
how all this integration is changing us in big ways. Opening all the zoo
cages was either a very noble thing to do...or very stupid. By the year
2050 we should have a good idea of our own extinction that is already slowly
taking place. Get back to me if you live that long and then argue your
liberal morality of tolerance and diversity. I wager not only will you not
be here...but neither will your children nor children's children...as
anything recognizable by you now [in tempermant and spirit]. They will be
as alien as the animals we have now set loose among us.