Category: crimes of the Jews

Genes and Health in Der News

In all cases, emphasis added.

But, but, but….I thought we were all exactly the same:

The inclusion of diverse ancestries in the present meta-analyses allowed us to identify two loci that would have been missed in meta-analyses of European-ancestry individuals alone. In particular, the lead variant (rs141588480) in the SNTA1 locus is only polymorphic in African and Hispanic ancestries, and the lead variant (rs190748049) in the CNTNAP2 locus is four times more frequent in African-ancestry than in European-ancestry. Our findings highlight the importance of multi-ancestry investigations of gene-lifestyle interactions to identify novel loci.

Comparing admixed Latin Americans to the Finnish population isolate: 

Most population isolates examined to date were founded from a single ancestral population. Consequently, there is limited knowledge about the demographic history of admixed population isolates. Here we investigate genomic diversity of recently admixed population isolates from Costa Rica and Colombia and compare their diversity to a benchmark population isolate, the Finnish. These Latin American isolates originated during the 16th century from admixture between a few hundred European males and Amerindian females, with a limited contribution from African founders. We examine whole-genome sequence data from 449 individuals, ascertained as families to build mutigenerational pedigrees, with a mean sequencing depth of coverage of approximately 36×. We find that Latin American isolates have increased genetic diversity relative to the Finnish. However, there is an increase in the amount of identity by descent (IBD) segments in the Latin American isolates relative to the Finnish. The increase in IBD segments is likely a consequence of a very recent and severe population bottleneck during the founding of the admixed population isolates. Furthermore, the proportion of the genome that falls within a long run of homozygosity (ROH) in Costa Rican and Colombian individuals is significantly greater than that in the Finnish, suggesting more recent consanguinity in the Latin American isolates relative to that seen in the Finnish. Lastly, we find that recent consanguinity increased the number of deleterious variants found in the homozygous state, which is relevant if deleterious variants are recessive. Our study suggests that there is no single genetic signature of a population isolate.

Alon Ziv weeps.  In this case, the more admixed populations, with their bottlenecks and consanguinity, have significant stretches of homozygosity and more deleterious alleles than the more isolated Finns.  So, “increased genetic diversity” does not necessarily equate to fewer deleterious alleles.  And all of this doesn’t even consider outbreeding depression from breaking up coadapted gene complexes.

Alcohol consumption, SNPs, and ancestry:

Alcohol consumption is a complex trait determined by both genetic and environmental factors, and is correlated with the risk of alcohol use disorders. Although a small number of genetic loci have been reported to be associated with variation in alcohol consumption, genetic factors are estimated to explain about half of the variance in alcohol consumption, suggesting that additional loci remain to be discovered. We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of alcohol consumption in the large Genetic Epidemiology Research in Adult Health and Aging (GERA) cohort, in four race/ethnicity groups: non-Hispanic whites, Hispanic/Latinos, East Asians and African Americans. We examined two statistically independent phenotypes reflecting subjects’ alcohol consumption during the past year, based on self-reported information: any alcohol intake (drinker/non-drinker status) and the regular quantity of drinks consumed per week (drinks/week) among drinkers. We assessed these two alcohol consumption phenotypes in each race/ethnicity group, and in a combined trans-ethnic meta-analysis comprising a total of 86 627 individuals. We observed the strongest association between the previously reported single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs671 in ALDH2 and alcohol drinker status (odd ratio (OR)=0.40, P=2.28 × 10-72) in East Asians, and also an effect on drinks/week (beta=-0.17, P=5.42 × 10-4) in the same group. We also observed a genome-wide significant association in non-Hispanic whites between the previously reported SNP rs1229984 in ADH1B and both alcohol consumption phenotypes (OR=0.79, P=2.47 × 10-20 for drinker status and beta=-0.19, P=1.91 × 10-35 for drinks/week), which replicated in Hispanic/Latinos (OR=0.72, P=4.35 × 10-7 and beta=-0.21, P=2.58 × 10-6, respectively). Although prior studies reported effects of ADH1B and ALDH2 on lifetime measures, such as risk of alcohol dependence, our study adds further evidence of the effect of the same genes on a cross-sectional measure of average drinking. Our trans-ethnic meta-analysis confirmed recent findings implicating the KLB and GCKR loci in alcohol consumption, with strongest associations observed for rs7686419 (beta=-0.04, P=3.41 × 10-10 for drinks/week and OR=0.96, P=4.08 × 10-5 for drinker status), and rs4665985 (beta=0.04, P=2.26 × 10-8 for drinks/week and OR=1.04, P=5 × 10-4 for drinker status), respectively. Finally, we also obtained confirmatory results extending previous findings implicating AUTS2, SGOL1 and SERPINC1 genes in alcohol consumption traits in non-Hispanic whites.

Jews and Europeans have, apparently, been enemies from the very beginning.

As members of Der Movement agonize over those dastardly “Big Pharma products” violating our precious bodily fluids via injection (the horrors of vaccination!  Louis Pasteur the cryptic Jew!  Jew doctors!), the real threat to White health is that that the average White has a BMI rivalling that of a black hole singularity. That is why diseases like Type 2 Diabetes are increasing in frequency, including among the young. But, hey, those needles are real scary and all.  Big Pharma!  Big Pharma!  Pass another Big Mac, please.

Advertisements

White Nationalism, Free Speech, and Legitimacy

Defending White nationalism.

Recent events paint a dark picture for White nationalism.  Censorship.  Deplatforming. The Left-Corporate Alliance.  Government persecution.  Congressional hearings attempting to label White nationalism as akin to domestic terrorism, part of a global terror threat. The ability of leftist thugs – supporting by Big Business and by the Political Establishment – to attack rightists with impunity.

Now, the paradigm equating White nationalism with terrorism is absurd, and others have cogently pointed out that the “data” supporting that paradigm is, at best, flawed, and, more likely, intentionally mendacious.

And, of course, this is all highly hypocritical, since the real violence mostly comes from the Left. Thus, while leftists assert that “words are literally violence,” they ignore the actual global leftist terror network that attacks rightists – even political candidates – and they are careful not to apply the same standards of guilt by association to Islam or to Black activists. 

Indeed, if the government wants to investigate a global terror threat, they’d be better off concentrating on Burger King – an international corporation that encouraged the use of its products for political violence in the UK – rather than on a small handful of relatively powerless and underfunded White racialists.

But we have to understand that this is all about criminalizing an ideology. All else is merely an excuse. That is why an insulting letter to an alien congresswoman is considered “terrorism,” while Richard Spencer being physically attacked in the street because of his political views is not.  Who?  Whom?

Yes, there have been some isolated instances of White nationalist violence. However, White nationalist terrorism – to the extent it actually exists – is due to White nationalists not being allowed to participate in the political process (politics broadly defined). The repression censorship, deplatforming, leftist attacks, etc., are the cause of Far Right violence, not its consequences.  Any objective and sane understanding of cause and effect and an honest appraisal of the order of events clearly demonstrates that manifold instances of political repression and social pricing, over decades, have left some White nationalists desperate and with no confidence whatsoever that their concerns can be effectively addressed via legal political processes.  Thus, some engage in foolish acts.

Thus, it is obvious that suppressing the non-violent expression of Far Right ideas will only cause more (not less) violence coming from that direction. Now, unintelligent Arab congresswomen and moronic Puerto Rican congresswomen are likely too stupid to understand this, but the Jews behind the scenes surely must.  The latter are callously setting the stage for more violence and more victims in order to justify further repression. The brown puppets blathering in public are just for show.

One can argue that Suvorov’s Law of History – the observation that revolutions do not occur during the period of greatest repression but when that repression is suddenly relaxed – is one reason why the System dares not let up on its repression of the Far Right (see more below).  Be that as it may, the point still holds that the sporadic outbursts of Far Right violence are due to the pre-existing repression. Relaxing the repression may cause “revolution” but that “revolution” can be social and political; it does not have to include violent terrorism.  If the concern is with terrorism rather than simply the success of Far Right ideas, then more repression will cause more terrorism (likely leading to more repression, etc.).  If the Left was sincere about avoiding violence and terrorism from the Right, then they’d lessen the repression. That they want to increase the repression reveals their true motives – at least the true motives of the wirepullers behind the scenes.

And we must also consider the association between legitimacy and political participation, a participation that requires free speech and free assembly, both of which are incompatible with the criminalization of any ideology. Even some mainstream and/or leftist commentators understand that free speech and open political participation are tied to System legitimacy.  If you want people to accept the legitimacy of the outcome of the political and social process, then you must allow them free and unfettered participation in that process. That includes them expressing their views, organizing (meetings, conferences, activist groups, political parties), engaging in the electoral process as candidates, and not having their views labeled as “terrorism.”  Let’s consider what a legal scholar with a Jewish surname has to say on the issue of free speech and legitimacy, emphasis added:

Ironically, however, hate speech restrictions can undermine the legitimacy of antidiscrimination laws, both in terms of their popular acceptance but even more crucially with respect to the morality of their enforcement. For instance, laws forbidding people from expressing the view, as is the case in several European jurisdictions, that homosexuality is immoral or disordered, can destroy the moral justification of enforcing laws against sexual orientation…Conversely, the ability of Americans to freely oppose antidiscrimination laws by publicly expressing bigoted ideas about groups protected by these laws strengthens the legitimacy of enforcing these provisions even when doing so infringes upon deeply held religious convictions….I have argued that by impairing the opportunity for dissenters to participate as equals in the public debate about such matters as race, ethnicity, immigration, and sexual orientation, hate speech laws and public order provisions in force in many liberal democracies have significantly diminished political legitimacy, in both the descriptive and normative sense. Specifically, for those inhibited by these laws from expressing their opposition to antidiscrimination measures, these upstream speech restrictions have diminished, and in some instances may have destroyed, their political obligation to obey these downstream laws. Even more troubling, these inhibitions on equal political participation may have in some cases rendered immoral what would have otherwise been a moral use of force to make these dissenters comply with these antidiscrimination laws.

Let me again remind you that the people talking about “domestic terrorism” have the real objective of criminalizing an ideology. They are not really concerned about “acts of violence,” such acts coming to a significant degree from their side of the political divide and of which they say nothing.  In the end, and as shown by the censorship and deplatforming, it is really an issue of free speech, public assembly, and the right to organize on the basis of White racial interests. Thus, what Weinstein writes is wholly appropriate – the issue has always been whether someone like Taylor, Spencer, or Johnson can have a public forum; whether or not shooting up a synagogue is “domestic terrorism” is merely a smokescreen. After all, let us follow this logic to its natural conclusion.  Mr. Inner Hajnal Nutzi shoots up a synagogue, claiming White nationalism as a reason.  Domestic terrorism!  Then anyone who supports White nationalism, writes or speaks in favor of it, donates to it, etc. is a supporter of domestic terrorism and, hence, a criminal.  An ideology criminalized.  QED. Of course, no one would apply the same standards to Islam or the Left, but we understand it is all about power and not about fairness or the rule of law.

And, speaking as a (law abiding) White nationalist myself, I can assure one and all that, yes, I consider the System and its edicts as completely illegitimate, and that I follow those edicts only under coercion.  I assume many Whites – including civic nationalist types and other on the Right – believe and act the same. There is a widespread legitimacy problem for the System and it will only grow as the repression continues.  In the short term, the System can simply use coercion to enforce its edits and ignore the issue of legitimacy.  That’s likely not sustainable in the long run. Keep in mind that by saying this I am not saying “victory is inevitable,” I’m not one of the grifters trying to “white pill” supporters in order to ensure that the “D’Nations” continue.  I’m predicting eventual chaos and collapse, not victory.  As the USSR demonstrated, a System that has lost legitimacy is headed for collapse, even with coercion.  As a last resort, they loosen the chains of repression to salvage what they can, and, according to Suvorov’s Law of History, that sudden relaxation of repression heralds the final disintegration.  Alternatively, an illegitimate System can try and maintain the repression, and find that significant fractions of the population adopt passive aggressive disinterest in response, undermining social cohesion and political effectiveness. In the case of the USA, it will be precisely the most productive elements of the population that will begin to exhibit a tacit withdrawal and subtle subversion, making eventual decline and possible collapse even more likely.

Some will object – what about Europe?  They have repressive speech codes and aren’t the national governments there considered legitimate by the people?  First, I can’t speak for rightist Europeans – it is very possible that the growth of populism there is indicative of a growing element that does indeed consider the System illegitimate. And, second, the USA, with its particular history of, and alleged commitment to, free speech, is expected to exhibit a much stronger association between free expression and political legitimacy than do nations that have histories of kings, dictators, strongmen, and laws against lese majeste. What about the argument that European nationalists have had success despite the speech codes there?  What success?  In some nations, there has been a temporary slowdown in the degeneration, which can be quickly reversed by any subsequent leftist government; at best, there have been victories by civic nationalists and moderate petty nationalists.  The “grand success” in Europe is a figment of the Nutzi imagination.  And I can turn the argument around – imagine how much more successful the European Right could be if they could actually express their real views without fear of being fined or jailed?

So, no, the pathetically flimsy “successes” in Europe – which in any case have limited relevance to the American situation – in no way disprove the thesis put forth here.  Given the concerns of White nationalists, the situation in Europe remains dire. Demographic replacement is still “baked into the cake” there. Can European nationalists freely and frankly discuss these concerns?

And we must remember that the concerns of White nationalists are real; in fact, not only are they real, but they are the most important concerns of all, dealing as they do with the ultimate interests of national existence and genetic continuity.  Whites are in demographic and cultural eclipse, and will become minorities even in their historic European homelands. The United Nations openly advocates “replacement migration” targeting White nations (while Whites are told, at the same time, that any mention of that is “conspiracy theories”).  Whites are the only people on Earth not allowed to organize on the basis of racial self-interest; indeed, in majority White nations this expression of racial self-interest is either already criminalized or subject to social pricing (that is not good enough, it seems for the American Left, as they are now pushing for criminalization).  How is this repression consistent with legitimacy?  Obvious, it is not.  The System simply has no effective argument against the basic premises of White nationalism; therefore, it must use coercion.  However, as argued above, political coercion in the context of “democracy” is illegitimate and will erode the basis for peoples’ willingness to invest in the collective good.

Finally, I have to note that one major reason why White nationalism has reached such a sorry state of powerlessness and repression is the utter failure of its leadership.  The inept affirmative action leadership coupled to defective followers have squandered endless opportunities, and smeared White nationalism with the stench of failure – made more laughable by the endless cries of some of them that we are “moving to victory,”

And some of the leadership have no sensible understanding of the animating mindset of the censors.  For example, it is hard for me to express in words how absolutely foolish Richard Spencer is being here.

How naive can you be to actually believe the System will ever definitively and carefully – much less permanently – clearly state speech codes that can then be worked around.  Let me tell you the obvious – the only speech they want from WNs is silence.  No matter how you try and get around their speech codes, they’ll just keep on changing them to justify censoring you. They will forbid more and more words, and once that becomes untenable, they’ll just forbid “tones” and “implications” – all decided upon arbitrarily to achieve their political goals. It’ll be the race of the Red Queen and you can never win – it’s the gatekeepers of access who will have the power to determine what is acceptable or not. Once there are speech codes that are accepted as a part of society, nothing stops those codes from being constantly fine-tuned to silence opposition.

The only speech code that you can “work around” is NO speech code. You need either a platform that cannot be or will not be censored and/or an extension of “protected class” to include sociopolitical beliefs – with the former being more realistic than the latter.  The idea that the System is going to finalize a set of speech codes that would enable anything other than mild civic nationalism (if even that) is absurd.  Of course, Spencer may claim he is only talking in theory, but advocating for speech codes in theory (however unrealistic) is not anything anyone on our side should be doing.

The future looks grim and I have no easy answers. But I do know that asking for a more snug fit for our memetic straightjacket is not the answer. This is not an athletic contest between gentlemen, with both sides playing by the rules.  The System will continue trying to change the rules in the middle of the game in order to win. The only weakness they have is that the game has spectators, the White masses, and while these are mostly inert, they are not all completely inert. The System’s ability to “cheat” is constrained by their need to appear to be playing fair, to trick the rubes into believing the “free democratic America” still exists.  Thus gives our side some room to maneuver. Begging for better defined constraints is not the direction our maneuver should be going.

Strom on the new wave of censorship.

And what has happened to Mr. Moderation, the wonderfully pureblood Common Sense Counselor?

This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe violations of YouTube’s policy prohibiting hate speech.

Chastising extremists over how they talk about the Jews didn’t really help you, did it?

The Ratchet Only Moves Left

The victorious Left.

Look at the history of the United States over the last 60 years or so.  When a “liberal Democrat” is President – particularly when coupled with a Congressional majority of like kind – leftist, anti-White policies come fast and furious.  This was especially prevalent with Lyndon Johnson, with the Civil Rights and Immigration Acts, and the other social engineering of the 1960s, including the “war against poverty” that transferred untold amount of wealth from White to Black America (there’s your reparations, right there); it was also prevalent with Barack Obama, with DACA.  But, here’s the point – when a “conservative Republican” is in power, even when coupled with a Republican Congress, the country still moves to the Left, albeit a slightly slower pace than before, but sometimes faster socially and culturally.  Nixon gave us affirmative action and busing, Reagan gave us illegal amnesty and the Martin King holiday, the Bush family were racial liberals, and Trump is a fraud who has done nothing for his base and has made sounds about increasing legal immigration.  Speaking of mass immigration, it – in both its legal and illegal forms – has been in full force, regardless of who is in power. There’s never any attempt to meaningfully reverse any leftist initiative.  Executive orders regarding affirmative action remain in force, despite whatever “conservative Republican” is in power.  Culturally and socially, the country moves to the Left in either case – it certainly did under Johnson (mostly because of the war in his case) – but “conservative Republicans,” despite not actually doing anything “conservative” domestically as regards race and culture, trigger intense leftist social activism.  We saw it under Reagan, and even more virulently under Trump.  We see the same in Europe. Rightist governments never reverse the tide of immigration, never attempt to repeat “hate speech laws” with restrict their own freedom of expression, never leave international agreements obligating them to take in refugees (America is the same) – which is the equivalent of open borders, since any invader can (and do) claim to be a “refugee” and has to be processed as such.

Both the Left and Right attack those on the Right.  Obviously, the Left does so, but when the Right is in power, they love nothing more than do concentrate their firepower on those farther to their Right.  “Based” Austria and Poland attack the Far Right, going so far as to ban Taylor from Europe (Poland) for example.  Trump’s DOJ persecutes his own supporters while giving Antifa a free pass; while people on the right have been virtually begging Trump to do the right (and obvious) thing and declare Antifa a domestic (and international) terrorist organization, he only has eyes toward Iran (we have to satisfy Jews, of course).

Of course, when it comes to actual “extremist” groups, the Left wins again, their groups are wildly successful while the Far Right is comically inept.

The ratchet always move sin only one direction – toward the Left.

The Left has psychological intensity, for the Right it’s a hobby, the Right has no staying power, no drive.  The Left fights for a future (from our perspective a nightmare future), the Right fights for an imagined past.  The Left engages, the Right talks about being “snug in your hobbit hole.”

And, of course, the Mainstream Right is based on the same egalitarian lies as the Left; no wonder they move the ratchet in the same direction.  The Far Right is based on healthier ideas, but is composed of highly defective and unhealthy people and thus is incapable of achieving anything of value.

But, to be fair, the Jewish Question – at least here in America – raises its ugly head.  A thought experiment – imagine that Jews as a whole were right-wing, pro-White, nationalistic, with an agenda to promote wholesome family values – as opposed to the reality which is the complete inverse of all of that. In this bizarre world of right-wing pro-White American Jews, it would likely be the Right going from victory to victory, and the Left being inept and hopeless.  If all the Jewish intelligence, money, power, and influence were channeled to the direction of pro-White interests, it wouldn’t be as helpless as it is now.  But that’s only a thought experiment – Jews are a non-European, non-Western people with a historical – virtually inbred – animus towards Whites and the West, and they will, as a matter of course, as a group, oppose White interests and work for Western degeneration.  However, to be fair, we cannot blame the Far Right for all their failures here in America, although if they were clever and competent, they would find they still have room to maneuver.  European Rightists have less of an excuse, as the Jewish power is not as directly powerful there as here, although it is an important factor, including via powerful, indirect American influences.

The JQ cannot be changed.  How Der Movement deals with it, and the overall situation caused by it, can change.  The JQ is part of the problem, and the Far Right will ultimately be judged by its success or lack thereof, and success has to be obtained in the face of a determined and ethnically cohesive foe. This problem is “baked into the cake” of anti-Whiteness.  It cannot be evaded. Has Der Movement successfully dealt with it, or any other problem for that matter?  Has the Right as a whole understood what it needs to do?  Has it achieved any lasting victories whatsoever?  Or is it hopelessly inept?

If you want to defeat a powerful enemy, then being hopelessly inept is not the way to-do it.  And “hopelessly inept” is the perfect description of the Far Right.

A Call for Desegregation and Other Matters

Observations.  In all cases, emphasis added.

The great and good Jew Judge Sand destroyed Yonkers via “desegregation.”  Very well. I agree: We need desegregation!  Homogeneous communities are unacceptable!  I say we start here.

Let’s build some nice low income housing there, and bring in lots of poor Black and Hispanic families.  Mix it up!  The vibrant diversity will flourish in New Square!  Why not?  Can someone explain why New Square must be bereft of diversity?  New Square would also seem to be a perfect place for relocating refugees and other migrants.  Central Americans, Somalis, Syrians…the more the better.  They deserve a chance at a new life, no?  We can have some nice Black boys in New Square to date the Jewish girls, and nice Catholic Hispanic girls for the Jewish boys.  Again, can someone on the Left please explain to us why that should not occur?  Why don’t you go to New Square and not leave – make your stand! – until the community is properly desegregated? 

Notre Dame as an analogy for the fall of the West?  Perhaps. Blame Der Movement for that – squandering the last chance we’ve had to save race and civilization.  Notre Dame crashing and burning – just like the Alt Right. And do you think it would make any difference if the French authorities would find evidence of terrorism there and admit it?  Whites would enthusiastically flock to the streets – to demand more immigration, protect their Muslim “brothers and sisters” from a “backlash,” and vote to turn what’s left of the church into a mosque. 

An example of a stupid bastard.  Whither those big Nord Brains, Durocher?

Agreed (except for the praise of the Unz site):

Niccolo Salo says: • WebsiteNext New Comment

April 15, 2019 at 2:42 pm GMT • 100 Words

Who is this fucking clown? Hilarious shit.

“If there is even a partial biological basis to (northwest) Europeans’ psychology, which in turn underpins Western culture in all its uniqueness, then the genetic replacement and dissolution of this population through immigration will, eventually, mean the end of that psychology and culture.”

Imagine assigning the greatness of Western Civ to Nords like this guy does.

I read Unz Review daily because it does deliver a lot of quality but this piece has to be one of the most embarrassingly bad ones that I’ve ever come across here.

Congrats Monsieur Durocher.

Meet Ron Unz.  Unz:

…few forces that could so easily break America as the coming of white nationalism.

Johnson and Durocher write for this Jew.  Disgusting.  Now, knowing these type, I can imagine their riposte. First, we’ll be told that my comments (from yesterday) about Pierce not tolerating WN 2.0 hijinks is “low information moralizing” because Pierce dealt with the Jew publisher Lyle Stuart.  Next, we’ll be told that Unz criticizes Jews and allows writers at his site to do the same, so any criticism of the Unz site is more “low information moralizing.” Let’s consider each argument in turn.

From what I can gather about Stuart, he was a type often found in his tribe – intentionally provocative and attention seeking.  Under the banner of being an advocate of unrestricted free speech, Stuart published a wide variety of controversial books on many topics. He was not an ideologue, he did not try to steer Far Right thought in any direction, and he certainly didn’t fund individual “thinkers” to promote a specific worldview.  The Unz site,on the other hand, does indeed promote a spexific worldview that is,ultimately congenial to Jewish interests.  And as far as criticism of Jews goes, that’s not what “rightist”-oriented Jews fear. The main enemy  for them is pan-European nationalism that unites all Whites and excludes Jews.  

Allowing criticism of Jews so as to attract “anti-Semites” to participate in the anti-WN and anti-pan-European HBD project is just sound strategy. I suppose the Quota Queens haven’t noticed that Unz and the various “Amren Jews” – Hart. Weissberg, Levin, etc. – all seem to share certain memetic characteristics.  All are HBDers, all are “race realists,” all would tend to praise Jewish and Asian IQ, all have some level of distaste for hardcore White nationalism, all would seem to favor Jeurasian “cognitive elitism” over pan-European nationalism.  Let’s look at some people funded by Unz.  Greg Cochran, who muses that Israel should conquer Italy for Jewish lebensraum and who, if I recall correctly, was skeptical of “Salterism.”  Steve Sailer – anti-WN “citizenist” and prime HBDer.  “Razib” Khan – whose GNXP was a prime opponent of WN, promoter of “cognitive elitism, and which delighted in attacking any and all manifestations of pan-Europeanism in favor of intra-White division. GNXP also featured scurrilous attacks against Salter. “The Unz Review” has columns by the despicable Jayman – a non-White HBDer who – just like GNXP – attacks Salter, attacks White ethnics, and promotes intra-White division.  Then we have the Judeophile Derbyshire, a prime HBDer who thinks Amren conference attendees are “latrine flies” and who has written in support of miscegenation.  See any underlying connection, perhaps?

So…are you still going to equate Unz with Stuart?  Are you still going to argue that Unz is A-OK because some criticism of Jews can sometimes be found at his site?

You are all absolutely despicable.

Genome sequences are known for two archaic hominins-Neanderthals and Denisovans-which interbred with anatomically modern humans as they dispersed out of Africa. We identified high-confidence archaic haplotypes in 161 new genomes spanning 14 island groups in Island Southeast Asia and New Guinea and found large stretches of DNA that are inconsistent with a single introgressing Denisovan origin. Instead, modern Papuans carry hundreds of gene variants from two deeply divergent Denisovan lineages that separated over 350 thousand years ago. Spatial and temporal structure among these lineages suggest that introgression from one of these Denisovan groups predominantly took place east of the Wallace line and continued until near the end of the Pleistocene. A third Denisovan lineage occurs in modern East Asians. This regional mosaic suggests considerable complexity in archaic contact, with modern humans interbreeding with multiple Denisovan groups that were geographically isolated from each other over deep evolutionary time.

Hmmm…read this.

The only concern shown for the white majority is how to keep them placated as their communities are torn apart by immigration, how to keep them silent when they get angry, and how to keep them from feeling racial solidarity in the face of overwhelming hordes of hostile foreign races swarming into the countries of their ancestors without their consent.

Like giving them a $1000 per month handout? I don’t expect folks who sell out to a millionaire Jew to see any inconsistency in their blog’s positions.

Read this. And in the West, demographics are replacing humans with monkeys.

And so it goes.

(Jewish) Crime and (White) Punishment

Food for thought.

Fyodor Dostoevsky was very prescient. When reading the excerpt below consider that the plague in question could be thought of as Marxism broadly defined – not only traditional Marxism, but Cultural Marxism, Psychological Marxism (Freud, Frankfurt School),  Racial Marxism, every social infection and perversion that has been propagated by a certain Levantine (Asia) tribe (microbes, and the memes are microbes as well) infecting the White race (Europe and then the world). Fyodor the Christian would no doubt be offended by my considering Christianity as one of the egalitarian Marxian creeds emanating from Asia to infect European Man.

Excerpt from the epilogue of Crime and Punishment.  Emphasis added:

He dreamt that the whole world was condemned to a terrible new strange plague that had come to Europe from the depths of Asia. All were to be destroyed except a very few chosen. Some new sorts of microbes were attacking the bodies of men, but these microbes were endowed with intelligence and will. Men attacked by them became at once mad and furious. But never had men considered themselves so intellectual and so completely in possession of the truth as these sufferers, never had they considered their decisions, their scientific conclusions, their moral convictions so infallible. Whole villages, whole towns and peoples went mad from the infection. All were excited and did not understand one another. Each thought that he alone had the truth and was wretched looking at the others, beat himself on the breast, wept, and wrung his hands. They did not know how to judge and could not agree what to consider evil and what good; they did not know whom to blame, whom to justify. Men killed each other in a sort of senseless spite. They gathered together in armies against one another, but even on the march the armies would begin attacking each other, the ranks would be broken and the soldiers would fall on each other, stabbing and cutting, biting and devouring each other. The alarm bell was ringing all day long in the towns; men rushed together, but why they were summoned and who was summoning them no one knew. The most ordinary trades were abandoned, because everyone proposed his own ideas, his own improvements, and they could not agree. The land too was abandoned. Men met in groups, agreed on something, swore to keep together, but at once began on something quite different from what they had proposed. They accused one another, fought and killed each other. There were conflagrations and famine. All men and all things were involved in destruction. The plague spread and moved further and further. Only a few men could be saved in the whole world. They were a pure chosen people, destined to found a new race and a new life, to renew and purify the earth, but no one had seen these men, no one had heard their words and their voices.

The new pure chosen people – ethnocentric White nationalists?

.. but no one had seen these men, no one had heard their words and their voices.

Maybe because they were censored and deplatformed?

Nutzi Sunday

Type I filth killing racial activism.

Guess who the “your” describes, eh?  All the rest of the quota queens and their enablers, with their wink, wink, nod, nod toward dysfunctionals (because they are dysfunctional themselves).

It’s hard for me to express how much I loathe these Type I retards – whatever little memetic progress Der Movement makes, tiny baby steps, can be ruined, set back, by one thoughtless act.  So, Instead of “screw your optics,” how about “screw your juvenile acting out?”  Can this specimen explain to us – from his jail cell – exactly what he thinks he has accomplished with his little steel city escapade?

Is it fair to blame Der Movement for this?  After all, they’ll say, anyone can assert adherence to a cause and do stupid things.  Fair enough.  However, I make two points.

First, the Type I core of Der Movement, with its crudity, stupidity, quota systems, rigid dogma, etc. attracts and nurtures trash like Mr. Screw Your Optics

Second, the constant failure of Der Movement, its ineptness, its utter lack of any hope of real progress, induces despair in its followers, leading some to act out in frustration. They have no outlet for pent-up activist energies, because there is “no there there” in Der Movement, it is all sound and fury signifying nothing. So, some unbalanced Nutzis create their own sound and fury in response.

So, yes, indirectly, Der Movement is responsible.  And note I am not whining about Christian morality here or, worse, “mourning the victims.”  My concern is with White racial activism, and the constant harm done to said activism by Der Movement and its retarded followers.

And thanks a lot, Type I scum, for giving Mama Merkel, the Queen of Auto-Genocide, the chance to engage in international moral posturing.

Der Movement will NEVER make ANY progress as long as Type I trash are running the show.  The Type Is need to sit down, shut up, and let Type II adults grab the reigns for once.

Johnson and I sort of agree in one sense and disagree in another:

Counter-Currents

‏@NewRightAmerica

 37m37 minutes ago

More Counter-Currents Retweeted Joyce

Disavowing is too weak. We need to morally condemn cranks who go on shooting sprees. Since when does condemning evil NOT help you maintain your moral legitimacy? Doing good and shunning evil is pretty much the essence of a moral life. It doesn’t matter what our enemies think.

Moral condemnation – but only in the sense described below.  Not in an absolute sense.  I don’t consider the shooter “evil” – merely incredibly stupid, reckless, and asinine.  I’m not concerned about how the broader society views my moral legitimacy other than how it affects White racial activism.  So, yes, I am concerned, but only in a utilitarian sense.  My morality is different from that of the broader society, and while I am currently forced to adhere to the latter (most of the time), I do not grant it an inherent legitimacy.  I maintain authenticity by following, in a moral sense, my own inner directives.

Now, how do I judge the morality of a racially relevant action?  Adapting Salter’s “mixed ethic” I propose a two part scheme:

First, does the action advance or harm White racial interests?  If it harms those interests, it is immoral.  If it advances those interests, then –

Second, does the action reasonably, and to the extent practically possible, minimize the harm done to the individual rights of Whites and to the individual and group rights of non-Whites?  After all, one could think of many actions that could in theory advance White interests but do so at costs that would offend most people’s innate sense of objective (aracial and disinterested) morality and human decency – even (possibly) offend my own sense of morality that is different from that of the broader society. If such an action was truly necessary, then the costs would have to be accepted; however, if significant moral cost is incurred for some marginal gain in White racial interest, a cost that would offend the inherent moral sense of Whites, then I argue that marginal advantage – something not existential, not required for racial survival and reasonable racial prosperity – can be foregone.

This idiotic attack on the Synagogue fails test one, and would fail test two even if it did not fail test one. 

At this point people looking to trap me in an inconsistency will say: “hey, I thought you were a Moralpath and such people will accept even war and genocide to do what they feel is right – so why do you reject this action?”  The point is – doing what’s right.  The underlying basis for moralpathy is pursuing one’s moral path regardless of where it leads. That does not have to be the most extreme choice in every instance. In some cases, restraint is deemed right, in other cases, war and genocide. It depends upon context. Shooting up a Pittsburgh synagogue achieves nothing positive that I can see, and instead is a net negative for White racial activism. Thus, it is not “right” as I define it, so I oppose the action.  On the other hand, if White survival in another context required war and genocide, then war and genocide it must be.  Further, if Whites become extinct I say let the world burn and I do not want “high IQ Asians” to rule and prosper; in my view, any human world that allows White extinction does not deserve to survive and prosper.  Context, my friends, context.

I recently critiqued Greg Johnson when he implied that he and his site do not obsessively criticize Richard Spencer. It would seem others share that view.  A partially censored comment by Andrew Joyce:

Greg Johnson…His fixation on Spencer appears almost Biblical, and is inexplicable unless one assumes Spencer occupies a massive role in his psyche. Strange…

I censored part of the comment because I’m not interested in personal ad hominem against Johnson or anyone else; I’m concerned with ideas and actions.  The issue here is the Johnson-Spencer feud, and what I termed the “ugliness” of Johnson kicking Spencer when the latter is at a low point, both “professionally” and personally.  Let it go, Greg.  How about a moratorium on Spencer comments at Counter-Currents?

And this humorous aside from Joyce:

My goal for 2019 is to think about my wife at least half as often as Greg Johnson seems to think about Richard Spencer.

Note carefully the comments to this essay, focusing particularly on those by miguel70, minsc, and, of course, O’Meara.

West Coast White nationalism, I suppose.  The “big tent” (of the circus freak show).

More O’Meara:

The Right of course promotes extermination of the homo; the Left originally promoted promiscuity and hedonism, but when AIDS made this impractical, pivoted to a modified version of the Right’s “family values” — contrary to all historical evidence, the gays always wanted to marry and raise children!

In both cases, society loses the important contributions of the homo to culture and statecraft…

Extermination?  How about not making Far Right activism a front for pushing a homosexual agenda?  This has been going on a long time.  I remember the early days of online Yahoo groups, with “gay National Socialist” groups. What was that?  An intellectual discussion of sexuality and politics?  No, instead it was a disgusting hook-up site with adverts such as “U Piss, I Drink.”  

Contributions to “culture and statecraft?”  How come those contributions were more legitimate in past centuries, when (religious) intolerance to homosexuality was greater?  Sublimation was the real outcome of “The Right,” not “extermination.”  It’s today’s tolerance that brings degeneration. Historically speaking, the evidence is that homosexual contributions to society are maximized in situations far more restrictive than in today’s society…or on certain WN blogs.

Greg Johnson

Posted October 25, 2018 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

I’m approving this comment because I am a connoisseur of jaundiced rants by paranoids. I love it when lunatics act patronizing.

A self-referential “meta” comment if there ever was one.

Pure delusion:

The Cultural Renaissance began more than eight years ago at Counter-Currents. Why not lend your shoulder to the wheel?

If Trump as not a retarded fraud, and if Sessions was not a far-left cuck, this here is all the “legal justification” they need to refuse entry of the Invasion Caravan. The “refugees” were offered “refuge” in Mexico.  They refused.  The want the USA.  They are economic migrants, they are invaders, and they are no different from the Wehrmacht marching through Paris in 1940.  This is a test for Trump.  Put down the Big Mac and act.

They’re …HuWhite.  Meyer Lansky, Antifa…what’s the difference?

I agree with much of what Strom says about the Jews, although we disagree on other issues.  For the most part, I agree with Joyce’s writings at TOO.  But for the sake of consistency, both men need to take on the Alt Wrong.  Why should certain people be sacrosanct and above criticism?  If both Joyce and Strom view Jews as a particularly pernicious influence, then why “hold your fire” against those who bring Jews into the heart of pro-White activism?  

Born in Blood

Strom piece.

They’re…HuWhite!

I assume Strom will continue to discuss the ADL’s perfidy over the next episodes, all of their sordid history.  The problem is we’ve heard all of this before, he’s preaching to the choir.  The net effect on the wider White population: zero.  A more helpful analysis would be this: how was the ADL actually founded, organizationally speaking, how was it structured, how was it funded, how did it network, how did it compromise Gentile elites?  No doubt much of that was due to the Jews’ specific characteristics, their extreme ethnocentrism, and some of the criminal connections Strom alluded to.  But, there must be some lessons in the ADL story that can be educational for White activists wishing to emulate some aspects of ADL organizational structure, fundraising success, and ability to leverage influence over crucial elites.  Even if a pro-White group were achieve only a small fraction of the ADL’s success, this would be an enormous gain over the nothing we have now.  I wish that Strom – an intelligent fellow who has done his research – would help us by dissecting the keys to the ADL’s success with a specific emphasis on those keys that would be possible for us to learn from, adapt, and implement.