Category: Hungary

Morgan and Other News

“Movement” stupidity.

The Type Is are doing their best to destroy whatever little is left of a credible racialist “movement” in America.

But, hey, don’t listen to the criticisms of this blog.  Keep on supporting Type I retardation, sweaty fetishism, fossilized dogma, and send those “D’Nations” to “leaders” for their European travels, gym memberships, movie nights out, and comfy lawn chairs for their homes in blue state suburbs.  Money well spent!

The fundamentally dishonest John Morgan:

I realize this is beside your main point, but legally speaking I am a Hungarian, as my mother’s ancestors, although Transylvania Saxons (ethnic Germans), were citizens of the Hungarian Kingdom for 800 years, and moreover my mother’s parents were born in Transylvania before the Trianon Treaty, which ceded Transylvania to Romania from Hungary, so under the law I am just as Hungarian as anyone else, even if I’m not ethnically Magyar. If I tell most Hungarians I am Transylvania Saxon, they just say, “That’s Hungarian.”

Yeah, that’s great.  Uh…you are of Anglo-Germanic ancestry, and are living in a country whose majority is ethnic Hungarian (that the origins of that ethny are “mixed” is irrelevant to the present existence of their ethnic identity).  “Legally speaking” you are Hungarian!  Great!  Legally speaking a ghetto Negro is an “American.”  And their ancestors were here for centuries. Legally speaking a Turk in Berlin is “German.” And you can find White Americans who will look at a Negro and say – “That’s American.” What nonsense.  And even if you want to call Morgan’s maternal line “Hungarian,” what about the paternal line? Or are “halfsies” now acceptable to ethnonationalists?  Something to debate about snug in your hobbit holes.

The reality: Morgan is an ethnonationalist living in someone else’s country – “legally” or not.  A hypocrite.

And as regards Morgan’s contention that Hungarians are “undeniably” of “Central Asian origin” – at most perhaps a few percentage points of their ancestry is such. For the most part, they are not that much different from their Central European neighbors.

I have no idea what percentage of the American radical Right has pan-Europeanist sentiments…

Superficially and dishonestly, some reasonable fraction. Honestly and authentically, maybe 1% – or less.

TOO Retard:

 <Cam OT>, <Andrew>, and Richard McCulloch all take me to task for excluding indigenous (ethnic) Russians from the White race.  This is not a major issue for me, and I have no serious objection to including them.  

I’m sure they’re relieved.  After all, it’s up to you to decide on the racial provenance of Russians.

My primary rational for excluding them was that, even though they may have some Scandinavian blood…

The only important thing of course. But not enough such blood to qualify for automatic passing of “extreme vetting.”

…that Russians are not truly Europeans…

Stating that makes it true.  “Movement” solipsism in action.

…and have not contributed to human intellectual and cultural life to the extent that Europeans have.  

We can name any number of groups that this author would worship that have contributed less than Russians have.

Also, there is so much racial admixture there that I wonder how White they truly are—a point nicely made by <PJ Dooner> later in the comment chain.  

A comment made by some random fetishist is obviously solid evidence.

This is certainly an area ripe for more research and study.

Crack open your copy of March of the Titans!

But if we want to include 110 million ethnic Russians, along with some 35 million Ukrainians and around 8 million Byelorussians, I have no major objection.  This, though, makes the ‘genocide’ theme even less tenable, because there are now some 950 million Whites globally.  Do <Cam OT>, Andrew, and Richard really want to go there?

Definitely evidence of the non-“Whiteness” of Russians right there!

Advertisements

Der Questions for Der Movement

In all cases, emphasis added.

See this excellent and powerful Strom piece.  One part particularly caught my attention:

We need a strong, organized, racially conscious White community in every state, in every city. When we are much stronger, much larger, and much better organized, then even the most venal of politicians will be afraid to cross us. We will have businesses that bring in hundreds of millions per year, not just hundreds of thousands. We will have our own media providing not just racially-oriented news and commentary, but every kind of information and entertainment and advice and anything you can think of, in depth and with an implicit (and often explicit) pro-White perspective. That’s where we need to be. That’s what we need to do. In the words of the old union men who stood for White labor against Gilded Age leaders who betrayed their own Folk, we need to organize, organize, organize.

And National Alliance members are doing exactly that, all over North America.

I have some questions for Kevin Strom. These questions are coming from someone who has been involved in pro-White activism for a quarter-century, who has met your mentor Pierce, and who has praised you for the positive effect that your 1990s ADV broadcasts had on my activist development.  So this is not coming from a direction of hostility.

1. I understand that there may be things the National Alliance is currently doing that you cannot talk about publicly and – who knows? – maybe your group is really making the headway you claim.  But based on my experience with Der Movement, color me skeptical (no offense).  Do you really believe that your group is “doing exactly that” – all the things that you have described?  Really? Or that there is even the slightest possibility in the reasonable future that even the smallest fraction of these goals will be achieved?

2. With endless decades of “movement activism,” utilizing millions of dollars of donations and membership dues, and millions of man hours of effort, why hasn’t ANY of the above mentioned goals been even partially accomplished?  And that includes the efforts of Pierce and his incarnation of the National Alliance.  Are you aware that your other mentor, and friend, Revilo Oliver made a video discussing 50 years of “movement” failure…said video being made 50 years ago?

3. Why should we expect anything to be different now?

4. Do you admit that there is an ethnic affirmative action policy in the “movement,” particularly with respect to leadership, favoring individuals deriving from Northwest European (especially Anglo-Germanic) ethnic groups?

5. What has the National Alliance learned (if anything) from past failures?

Ethnonationalist filth attacking Spencer:

The majority of European nations, including the entire Schengen Area, and nations with nationalist governments, have banned Spencer and condemned his “racial European” message and his call for a “white racial empire”. While promoting his message in a controversial speaking tour in Hungary, Spencer was mocked by the Hungarian newspaper Népszabadság for his call for “a white Imperium” through a revival of the Roman Empire, and for his claim to be a “racial European”, ideas that the newspaper called contrived and without any basis in European history. In the aftermath of the controversy, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán pressed through legislative measures which banned his entry and condemned Spencer. The government of Poland has also banned him from entering the country and condemned Spencer, citing Spencer’s Nazi rhetoric, the anti-Polish and anti-Slavic racism of the Nazis, and the Nazis’ genocide of Slavic Untermenschen during World War II. In July 2018, Spencer was detained at Keflavík Airport in Reykjavík, Iceland en route to Sweden and was ordered by Polish officials to return to the United States; the successful effort of the Poles to ban Spencer from other parts of Europe arises from the Schengen Agreement.

The Hungarian newspaper was a leftist one, but Orban has no excuse, nor has the Polish government.  And remember what happened to Taylor. Has anyone noticed that, interestingly, divisive American ethnonationalists so far have had no problems traveling to Europe?

The Unz Review reader comment about Taylor and CNN:

Alfa158 says:

June 29, 2019 at 6:47 am GMT • 100 Words

Mr. Taylor is a gentleman and prone to the altruistic sentiments that plague Whites. Consider that Miss McGuirk started out by by making the implausible claim that although she is executive producer, she has no influence on the even the title of her own production.

It is entirely possible that she is another Lucy imploring Mr. Taylor to go ahead and kick the football because she won’t pull it away. Her role was to sweet talk him into walking into the abattoir.

I could be wrong, but consider this rather telling bit of evidence: if she was genuinely what she presented herself to, be a fair, impartial seeker of truth and discourse why would she be working for a cesspool like CNN? And why would the denizens of such a pit retain someone like her?

Then we have this, also from The Unz Review comments:

Anon[388] • Disclaimer says:

June 29, 2019 at 3:36 pm GMT • 100 Words

White supremacism has been a tool of those who seek to subvert Christianity. Any greatness of Europe and the West is due to Christianity and to think otherwise is an abominable blasphemy. Had Christianity taken root in the heart of Africa or India rather than Europe and the West we would have had a flourishing of Africa and India for the past 1500 years and Europe and the West would still be barbarian.

Now, initially I thought this was just sarcasm or amusing trolling.  However, considering how deranged devout Christians are, it may be for real.  Who knows?  

Oh Siberia!

Of interest to all Europeans, as Durocher would say.  Emphasis added.

Some papers unlikely to be focused on by The Unz Review or Raciology crowds.

Number one.

In this study we compare the genetic ancestry of individuals from two as yet genetically unstudied cultural traditions in Estonia in the context of available modern and ancient datasets: 15 from the Late Bronze Age stone-cist graves (1200–400 BC) (EstBA), and 6 from the Pre-Roman Iron Age tarand cemeteries (800/500 BC–50 AD) (EstIA). We also included 5 Pre-Roman to Roman Iron Age Ingrian (500 BC–450 AD) (IngIA) and 7 Middle Age Estonian (1200–1600 AD) (EstMA) individuals to build a dataset for studying the demographic history of the northern parts of the Eastern Baltic from the earliest layer of Mesolithic to modern times. Our findings are consistent with EstBA receiving gene flow from regions with strong Western hunter-gatherer (WHG) affinities, and EstIA from populations related to modern Siberians. The latter inference is in accordance with Y chromosome (chrY) distributions in present-day populations of the Eastern Baltic, as well as patterns of autosomal variation in the majority of the westernmost Uralic speakers [1–5]. This ancestry reached the coasts of the Baltic Sea no later than the mid-first millennium BC; i.e. in the same time window as the diversification of west Uralic/Finnic languages [6]. Furthermore, phenotypic traits often associated with modern Northern Europeans like light eyes, hair and skin as well as lactose tolerance can be traced back to the Bronze Age in the Eastern Baltic.

Number two.

European population history has been shaped by migrations of people, and their subsequent admixture. Recently, ancient DNA has brought new insights into European migration events linked to the advent of agriculture, and possibly to the spread of Indo-European languages. However, little is known about the ancient population history of north-eastern Europe, in particular about populations speaking Uralic languages, such as Finns and Saami. Here we analyse ancient genomic data from 11 individuals from Finland and north-western Russia. We show that the genetic makeup of northern Europe was shaped by migrations from Siberia that began at least 3500 years ago. This Siberian ancestry was subsequently admixed into many modern populations in the region, particularly into populations speaking Uralic languages today. Additionally, we show that ancestors of modern Saami inhabited a larger territory during the Iron Age, which adds to the historical and linguistic information about the population history of Finland.

This model, however, does not fit well for present-day populations from north-eastern Europe such as Saami, Russians, Mordovians, Chuvash, Estonians, Hungarians, and Finns: they carry additional ancestry seen as increased allele sharing with modern East Asian populations

As shown by these multiple lines of evidence, the pattern of genetic ancestry observed in north-eastern Europe is the result of admixture between populations from Siberia and populations from Europe.

This individual may be interested in learning about these data.

SLC News, 4/10/18

In der news.

Another victory for farstreaming: Chickenwire Vic wins again.

Read this.

Orban moves ever more to the Right, and goes from strength to strength.  Jobbik engages in centrist mainstreaming, and achieves results so modest they are equivalent to a moral defeat.

There is in fact NO evidence whatsoever that mainstreaming works as an effective electoral strategy.  Quite the opposite: mainstreaming usually ends in humiliating defeat, while prudent farstreaming, in the right circumstances, yields the desired results.

Mainstreaming, just like the “gateway hypothesis,” is one of those ideas that sounds reasonable in theory, but has not a single shred of empirical evidence to back it up.   

More anti-White animus displayed by the Yellow Fist of Hatred.  No worries though.  According to the Silkers. These disgruntled Asiatrices will be “the border guards of the West.” All they have to do is let their natural black hair color shine through, pick up their trusty rifle, and start ordering about mewling White manlets.  It’s all good!

Don’t forget that borderline retarded cuck nagger Roissy predicted that Bezos would turn “hard right” politically because Bezos looks “jacked” after working out.  After all, as we know, every single male with a muscular physique (or what passes for it) is a budding Nutzi, that’s how political affiliations are formed.

Yes, I agree, what Nehlen did was unforgiveable,  But what caught my eye was this”

Then in 2018 (several weeks after my Wage the Battle review), Jared Taylor distanced himself from him. Initially Nehlen had been invited to speak at the 2018 American Renaissance conference. But after taking a close look at Nehlen’s campaign, Taylor disinvited him from speaking (but not from the conference). Nehlen responded by embargoing the conference altogether and making a big stink about it on social media.
For me, that’s when the cracks in the dam began to appear. Sure, Nehlen had his supporters, many of whom accused Taylor of cucking to the Jews. But other voices began to pop up. Nehlen’s campaign does lack a certain amount of class. Maybe Taylor was put off by that. Nehlen does kind of beat a dead horse with the Jew thing as well. Maybe that made Taylor uncomfortable. Nehlen also had some nice things to say about Louis Farrakhan, didn’t he? That certainly wouldn’t fly at Amren. So maybe Taylor wasn’t completely out of his mind by disinviting him. Furthermore, Nehlen certainly could have handled it better. He could have realized that the JQ simply isn’t Taylor’s thing…

Yeah, sure, it was about Farrakhan, which is why Amren itself endorsed Farrakhan’s Black separatism.

Why can’t the “old boys network” be honest and just admit the disinvitation of Nehlen was mainly – likely only – for one reason?

In the Alt Wrong hierarchy, Jews (and Asians) are right there at the top, certainly valued much more than grossly inferior groups like Romanians and Italians.  What’s the chance that an anti-White ethnic activist would be disinvited from the conference?  

Ethnoretardation

More “movement” stupidity.

So, with all the heroic ethnonationalist parties in Western Europe, nothing gets accomplished to save race and civilization, and Western Europeans have to flee to the east and “colonize” Hungary.

Der Movement, being what it is, can never let a story about Eastern or Southern Europe go by without commenting on how racially degenerate and inferior the natives of those lands are (*); thus:

We who live in Western Europe know what’s going on: We’re being flooded by eastern Europeans! Hungary is a corrupt Turanic-Turkish country ruled by the gypsy Victor Orban,

The guy who wrote the article is a 100% moron.

And since Eastern Europeans are feistier than slothful and hedonistic Southern Europeans, they fight back:

How long before Hungary collapses under the weight of parasitical West Euros? These Invaders are not healthy, nor are they strong. They have no closeness to the Hungarian people, no Ethnic identity. Will they stand and fight with the East Europeans? Doubtful. A backbone and determination to preserve heritage is necessary which the Hungarians have.

What can the Hungarians gain from having these toxins drip fed into their homeland?

Dilution or confusion? More likely dissolution. Better revulsion and rejection now before destruction.

Meanwhile, Europe continues to be overrun by the Global South.  Thus, the wages of ethnonationalism, a failed and expired brand of petty nationalism for which we should have ZERO TOLERANCE.


This is the outcome of Brexit.  Ethnonationalism on the march!  All hail the UKIP!  Free of the EU, just in time to become a colony of India.  Very good!  Spencer was right in his skepticism about Brexit.  The rest of us. including myself, were wrong.  Although, in my defense, my support of Brexit was simply to destabilize the EU and upset the globalist status quo – I was always deeply suspicious of the ethnonationalist scum getting all breathless about “sticking it to the Polacks” while at the same time singing the praises of “Commonwealth immigration.”  But still, I was not suspicious enough; I was too tolerant of the ethnonationalist plague.  Spencer’s initial instincts were healthier; I must admit that.  


Lesson learned: Never trust an ethnonationalist.

*The official anthem of Der Movement was written long ago by Belloc:

Behold, my child, the Nordic man,

And be as like him, as you can;

His legs are long, his mind is slow,

His hair is lank and made of tow.

And here we have the Alpine Race:

Oh! What a broad and foolish face!

His skin is of a dirty yellow.

He is a most unpleasant fellow.

The most degraded of them all

Mediterranean we call.

His hair is crisp, and even curls,

And he is saucy with the girls.

Political EGI VII: Orban’s Speech

Analyzing excerpts from an Orban speech.

I’ve been critical of Orban, but with his continued farstreaming and Jobbik’s continued mainstreaming, Orban may now represent the “far right” of Hungarian politics.  In addition, while I am dissatisfied with the more “implicit” aspects of Orban’s rhetoric, we must understand the limitations – de jure and de facto – for open, free speech in Europe, and the constraints that an elected political leader in the EU has in speaking the truth. Nevertheless, let us take a critical look at Orban’s public utterances.

There are three areas in which it is not enough to support processes, but in which we need a shift in scale, and the move to a fast track. One area is demography, in which we haven’t even reached a break-even point. It is some improvement that for married couples – or male-female couples in general – the fertility indicator expressing the nation’s demographic situation has risen from 1.2 to 1.44 children per couple, and this is promising, but 1.44 is still very far from 2. In order to feel safe demographically, the average statistical ratio of children to Hungarian couples should be 2.1. In practice this is hard to implement, but this is the average figure we should have. Until we reach that point, Hungarians must be seen as an endangered species demographically; and the people – but the Government above all – should understand the imperative which is implicit in this…

Obviously, any appeal to increasing native birthrates has a fundamental underlying foundation of genetic interests.  Using the term “endangered species” to describe any White group borders on ethnic/racial nationalism and is wholly a biological argument.  That may be as close as Orban currently believes he can approach the problem from the genetic standpoint.

…If we speak about a strong country, we must also mention public security. Today this means two things in particular: defence of the borders, and the ability to prevent terrorist attacks. There is no strong culture without a cultural identity.

Culture is of course important, but secondary to ultimate, genetic, biological interests.  Even better phrased: the biological and the cultural are intertwined and influence each other.

However much of a taboo one is breaking by saying it, there is no cultural identity in a population without a stable ethnic composition. The alteration of a country’s ethnic makeup amounts to an alteration of its cultural identity. A strong country can never afford to do something like that – unless some global catastrophe forces it to do so.

Yes, very good.  But – and this is crucial – a change in a country’s ethnic makeup should constitute a problem – indeed, THE problem – itself, and not just because it affects “cultural identity.”  Here, Orban places culture as the ultimate interests, and the ethnic makeup as a proximate concern that affects the ultimate one; whereas it should be the other way around. If it was somehow possible to preserve a Hungarian cultural identity even with population replacement – would that be alright to the likes of Orban?  The reply would be that such a situation would be impossible, but that’s not the point.  It is a thought experiment to explore, identify, and define priorities. Ethnicity or culture?  

Note I have no problem in invoking culture to defend ethnic genetic interests, nor do I lack understanding of the complexities that come with European speech laws and various other de jure and de facto restrictions.  But with Orban cutting so close to the edge here, one has to note the possibility that he sincerely places culture first, and is not only speaking this way out of necessity (which would obviously be more acceptable).

Over the next few decades the main question in Europe will be this: will Europe remain the continent of the Europeans? Will Hungary remain the country of the Hungarians? Will Germany remain the country of the Germans? Will France remain the country of the French? Or will Italy remain the country of the Italians? Who will live in Europe? 

That’s the ultimate existential question.  It is good that Orban is mentioning specific ethnic groups as the rightful inhabitants of specific nations – asking WHO will live in Europe. That is an EGI-loaded question.

This is a historical question which we must face up to today. As regards the specific situation – and this is quite telling about the world that we live in today – there’s no concrete, reliable information on the percentages of traditional indigenous Christians and the incoming Muslim communities living in Europe’s individual countries. In practice it is forbidden to gather information like this. And the data which is gathered is not adequate for us to predict what the future holds for us, as migrants, immigrants, are not evenly distributed throughout the different age groups. So the general figures say little about what awaits us. We should focus most on people under the age of 15, and also those between 15 and 45. From those figures we can project, we can calculate, what the situation will be like in each country in, say, 2050.

Looking ahead, unlike most politicians.  When you farstream, you are forced in that direction; conversely, when you mainstream, you are forced away from that direction. 

Naturally, when considering the whole issue of who will live in Europe, one could argue that this problem will be solved by successful integration. 

No, that’s exactly what we should NOT argue.  It doesn’t matter if aliens “integrate” – or, better yet, we do not want them and their alien genes to integrate.  We do not want them in our nations, carrying their alien genes, unintegrated either.  We do not want them at all.

The reality, however, is that we’re not aware of any examples of successful integration. It’s obvious that migration is not the answer to economic problems and labour shortages.

That’s true even if integration were to be successful.  “Economic problems and labor shortages” are not an excuse for genocidal race replacement.  The natives do not prosper by a “strong economy” when they are replaced by other peoples.  The Alt Right has correctly pointed out the Establishment hypocrisy: on the one hand, we must “save the environment” by having less children; on the other hand, we must import immigrants because Europeans don’t have enough children to “support the economy.”

Interestingly, people in Europe are least concerned about migrants taking their jobs. This probably reflects some form of personal experience.

If proximate concerns like that can motivate a defense of ethnic interests, fine, but of course the problem is much deeper than personal experience and personal grievance about job opportunities.

I can believe there are desperate situations, just like a castaway on the ocean finally giving in to the urge to drink seawater: it’s water, but it doesn’t quench one’s thirst, and only adds to the problem. This is more or less the situation in which those who want to cure their economic ills with immigrants will find themselves. In countering arguments for successful integration, we must also point out that if people with diverging goals find themselves in the same system or country, it won’t lead to integration, but to chaos. It’s obvious that the culture of migrants contrasts dramatically with European culture. Opposing ideologies and values cannot be simultaneously upheld, as they are mutually exclusive. To give you the most obvious example, the European people think it desirable for men and women to be equal, while for the Muslim community this idea is unacceptable, as in their culture the relationship between men and women is seen in terms of a hierarchical order. These two concepts cannot be upheld at the same time. It’s only a question of time before one or the other prevails.

Again, if these proximate concerns motivate ethnic defense, fine, but it obscures the question. If these migrants were 100% on board with current liberal European values, if they were seamlessly integrating, would race replacement – genocide – be alright then? We should be thankful they are not integrating well, that the experience for Europeans is painful enough to motivate ethnic defense. As Salter has written, the only thing worse than a multiculturalism that does not work is one that does.  How about talking about European ethnic-racial existence, rather than just culture?  I understand the practical implications for speech in Europe, but one could invoke the language of kin and family here.

Of course one could also argue that communities coming to us from different cultures can be re-educated. But we must see – and Bishop Tőkés also spoke about this – that now the Muslim communities coming to Europe see their own culture, their own faith, their own lifestyles and their own principles as stronger and more valuable than ours. So, whether we like it or not, in terms of respect for life, optimism, commitment, the subordination of individual interests and ideals, today Muslim communities are stronger than Christian communities. Why would anyone want to adopt a culture that appears to be weaker than their own strong culture? They won’t, and they never will! Therefore re-education and integration based on re-education cannot succeed.

Again, it is better that it does not succeed.  Stop talking only in terms of culture for godssakes.  There is room for rhetorical maneuver here, using careful language.  Why should Europeans be race replaced, regardless of “culture and integration?”

…there is a Soros plan. It comprises four points. He wrote it down himself, the Soros Empire published it and began recruitment for implementation of the plan. The plan says that every year hundreds of thousands migrants – and, if possible, a million – should be brought into the territory of the European Union from the Muslim world. The second point is that upon arrival every one of them should be given an amount in euros equivalent to four and a half million forints. The author of the plan would gladly finance this – but that is secondary, although it’s something that’s worth pondering. However, it’s not this, it’s not the business profit that’s the essence of the proposal, but the fact that in this way it’s possible to maintain a continuous influx. So those who want at least a million migrants to come in every year must maintain this mechanism – which in European political terminology is called a “pull factor” – so that they continue to come. And if they distribute them and everyone receives a sum – which is, in fact, higher than the Hungarian annual average wage – there won’t be a problem with reduced flow. The third point in the Soros plan is that the migrants arriving on the continent will have to be distributed among the countries of Europe as part of a mandatory and permanent mechanism.

Soros is of course a “HuWhite man of the West,” right?

A shrewd speaker should approach Universalist, faux-rationalist liberal Europeans and make the argument:

1. Universalism means that all peoples should have the same rights and should be cared for the same

2. You Universalists assert that genocide is wrong and you champion indigenous rights

3. Therefore, you must oppose European genocide – even auto-genocide – and champion the rights of indigenous Europeans

Of course, the Left, and much of the lemming-like masses, would reject such an overt argument, but that would force them to admit an irrational, inconsistent, hypocritical, anti-European worldview.

Sallis is Right Again: Farstreaming

Orban moving right.

Read this.

Recall this?

Well, my comment that Jobbik is to Orban’s right no longer holds, because Orban has continued farstreaming to his right, while Jobbik has been mainstreaming to the center.  The two ships have passed each other on the sea of political rhetoric.

Outcome:

Orban farstreaming to the right = sailing to political success.

Jobbik mainstreaming to the center = sinking and hemorrhaging supporters.

Mainstreaming may be good in theory but has no empirical support in practice. Mainstreaming fails.  Pushing the radical envelope succeeds.  Sallis is correct…again.