White Nationalism, Part II

Sionnach wrote:

I’m afraid that your tendency to assume has slapped you in the butt.

I am not opposed to voluntary segregation. I support respecting the rights and wishes of people in a community to conduct commerce with whomever they wish for whatever reason they deem appropriate, including a perception of “race”. I support also their right to keep out whomever they want based on anything they please. All of that is based on the fact that those people own the property where they live.

That is not what you are wrong about.

What you are wrong about is your presumption to have rights with respect to the property that other people own. You presume that your whiteness entitles you to steal and pillage property, break up families, assault people who are peaceful and honest, and squat on whatever land you decide you like. You advocate looting.

I’m upper class, so what? I live in the Arab/Turkish quarters in Munich with a heavy mixture of German and Islamic Mediterranean population. I used to live near Pigalle in Paris - again the Arab quarters.

I have produced films and television programs about gang violence all over the world, about urban ethnic strife, about you guys and on a variety of similar topics that has required me to spend much time and make many acquaintances well beyond my own social and ethnical background.

Get back to me when you have slept on the mud floor of an African hut, or spent a few nights out on town with well adjusted black youth in Paris witnessing that no matter how non-violent and non-criminal they are they get harassed by the police, you guys and society in general just for being of a different skin color.

Open your mouth again when you have spent three peaceful years in a multicultural neighborhood where the only racial incident was right after September 11th when the Arab and Turkish population didn’t dare go out for fear that everybody else had started hating them for something they neither did nor supported.

What on earth are you talking about? Your grasp of European politics is not poor - it is laughable. Pro primo the immigration trend in Europe is declining, which is unfortunate since we desperately need new arrivals in order to balance our growing non-productive pensioner population beyond our zero population growth. We also need to replace a few spineless louts who live like leeches off the welfare system and spend more time running around waving red black and white flags and screaming about imaginary threats to ‘their culture’ than doing something productive for themselves and society.

As for support for the populist extreme right-wing parties in the EU… support was growing, but is not anymore. The French presidential elections gave Le Pen and FN 17% in France. Austria had Haider and his cohorts, Denmark have a minority of loons as well, Holland have the whack-jobs of the departed Pim. There are two or three dumbasses running around in several of the parliaments elsewhere, but generally speaking the rest of the EU hasn’t followed. Support is local and pretty much concentrated to areas of high unemployment and social unrest (as usual). For instance; Saxony Anhalt in Germany had local elections that gave a Nationalist party some minor success, it made alot of headlines but has no real effect on politics (Saxony Anhalt is one of the German states). None of the extremist right-wing parties can even make the percentage barrier to get one single representative into the German Bundestag (the Parliament). In the elections a few weeks ago they also more or less threw out the dwindilng communist party - less and less loons.

There is a group in the European Parliament that collects the rare few far right-wing kooks that manage to get themselves elected to the EU. They are an anti-EU, pro-Nationalism and anti-Immigration bunch. Masters of irony as they must be they call themselves the Group for a Europe of Democracies and Diversities. They number 16 (2.6%) seats out 625. Nobody takes them very seriously. There is also the slightly more moderate, but still anti-immigration and pro-Nationalism, Union for a Europe of Nations holding 22 seats (3.5%). While the EDD manage to hold their seats in the election of 99 the UEN went from 30 seats to 22 loosing almost a third.

In Austria Haider’s Nationalist party has completely disintegrated and their exit from government is imminent.

After Le Pen unexpectedly beet the Socialist candidate in the preliminaries for the Presidential in France the whole population came out in force for the finals and Chirac - the conservative candidate - beet him with a vengeance.

In Denmark the populists of the Danish People’s Party got 11.3% of the votes in the last elections, a significant increase. Denmark represents about 1.1% of the EU population.

Almost ten years ago Sweden was plagued by infestation from a right extremist populist party that managed to hog some 10% of the vote in the parliamentary elections. They survived one term before imploding due to the deluded agenda they supported.

That leaves you with Holland where the late Pim Fortuyn’s party took 26 (17.3%) out of the 150 seats in the recent elections.

You could also bring up Italy and Forza Italia led by Berlusconi, but he isn’t really extreme right-wing, he’s just pro-Berlusconi, against all laws that would possibly effect his capacity to do tax planning and generally whacky. He is for instance not really anti-immigration – although he isn’t exactly pro either.

So we had a momentary upswing for the Nationalists and Racists (only Le Pen can justly be qualified as neo-Nazi of those), but as you can see it doesn’t seem to be going very well for the whack-jobs on the far right.

As usual Sionnach has not a single clue of what she speaketh of!

Sparc

Sionnach said:

You seem to forget that it’s not just your country. It’s the country of everybody who is a citizen here. Face it, your viewpoint is in the minority. You can fight back – by airing your viewpoint and hoping people agree. But you know what? People like you have tried doing that, and lost.

I had asked:

You replied:

So have many families who happen to have more skin coloring than you. And families who happen to be Jewish. Yet you have no problem wanting them to head back to wherever they supposedly came from. Since you’re in the minority viewpoint and you want an all-white area, seems to me you should be the one leaving and finding a nice little place you can set up as a racist haven.

Don’t tell me what I care about, because, as usual, you don’t have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about. The fact is that you do not respect the freedoms and wishes of the citizens and nativeborn people of the nation. How do I know? Because you’ve said so yourself. You want to ship the Jews to Israel (where you advocate nuking 'em). You want to keep people with colored skin from having the freedom to go where they please – even if they are citizens. Your little act proclaiming that you want freedom is complete and utter bullshit. It may fly when you are surrounded by your fellow Nazi friends, but it won’t here, where people are dedicated to fighting just that type of ignorance.

Please point to where I ever said anything like that. Don’t worry, it’s not the first time (or the second, or probably even the 100th) in this thread that you have been totally and completely wrong… Not that this will stop you, of course.

Says the person who wants to expel the Jews and nuke 'em, and tell others where they can or cannot live, and… Ah, irony…

I neglected to comment on the article that Sionnach linked to. I didn’t realize she had actually posted a link to some site that wasn’t an offensive cesspool of neo-Nazi propaganda. Ironically she managed to link to a blatant example of socialist agitprop, sprinkled with biased reporting and even one or two lies… Add that as a news item it’s kind of old, but hell I’ll bite.

Indeed we are. Personally I welcome the swing. Obviously Mr. Osborn of the Guardian doesn’t agree, which I can only say tough luck to. I shall add something to it in my end comment.

That is true and unfortunate.

Which is (and was in April) absolute fucking hogwash and bullshit skewed to fit the nationalistic sentiments in the UK. Bloody populist paintbrush wielded from the left trying to paint the federalists in some darker hue of right than we deserve. In fact all opinion polls show that support for increased federal union is on the rise across the Union – even in the UK.

I can’t say that I am proud of my Danish party brothers for associating with scum like the Danske Folkepartiet. Again though… Denmark is pretty damned small.

Forgot them in the previous commentary. Ditto as for all things said about Denmark.

What the flaming fuck does that have to do with anything? Bloody socialist agitprop journalism trying to associate the mainstream right with extremism.

Well, he was killed before that happened wasn’t he… and then they got somewhat less than predicted as commented earlier.

In Norway?¿? Not that I applaud the development in Norway. But hey Mr. Journalist of the Guardian, when did they join the Union? Wasn’t this article about the EU? Oh but please don’t let things like fact get in the way… We’ve already seen how Spain slipped into the list of extremism just because the elections didn’t go in the direction of your personal liking. Oh I see we kept the possibility open by using “continent” in the headline - smart, somewhat disingenuous, but smart.

See previous commentary.

Antwerp? Not Belgium, but Antwerp?¿? Did we run out of countries so we had to go down to local elections, eh? Granted that Antwerp is a heavy weight in Belgian politics, but last I checked they were still not really that influential on an EU level. But hey lets not have anything like objective comparability stand in our way - I mean our main point is to rally for the Reds, isn’t it?

Goodbye Mr. Haider, we shall not be missing you. No need to send any postcards. Don’t call and don’t bother with email either. See previous commentary.

So wait here… out of 15 member states, three of the smallest have experienced an increase in support for the far-right. France has Le Pen, has had him for years and more than him making landslides - he hardly increased his vote by a full percent compared to previous election - it was the Socialists that failed so miserably that they didn’t even manage to beat him and come in second so that they could run against the Conservatives as they usually do.… Berlusconi is a crook… the Conservatives in general are profiting from the Socialists mucking up the economy… hmm… that’s sure as hell some big wave of something sweeping somewhere for sure. Could it be a big wave of bullshit reporting sweeping over The Guardian? At least they got the headline right and only crapped all over reason in the sub-line.

All that being said I have to be fair and acknowledge that the Conservatives across the Union have been playing a little loose and fast with popular concerns about immigration. Remarkably it seems not to have done us in the right block that many favors though. More ground has been won on the fiscal failure of the socialists than on social agendas. In the end the immigration question tends to simmer off to the fourth page of the papers and whoever plays the card seems mostly to be trolling votes from the fringe supporters out on the far-right – save previously mentioned exceptions. Despicable, but hey its politics I guess.

Sparc

Wait, I know that line. Is it 1984? Hey gobear, she may have finally mentioned one of those WC artists you were trying to get her to talk about!

I neglected to comment on the article that Sionnach linked to. I didn’t realize she had actually posted a link to some site that wasn’t an offensive cesspool of neo-Nazi propaganda. Ironically she managed to link to a blatant example of socialist agitprop, sprinkled with biased reporting and even one or two lies… Add that as a news item it’s kind of old, but hell I’ll bite.

Indeed we are. Personally I welcome the swing. Obviously Mr. Osborn of the Guardian doesn’t agree, which I can only say tough luck to. I shall add something to it in my end comment.

That is true and unfortunate.

Which is (and was in April) absolute fucking hogwash and bullshit skewed to fit the nationalistic sentiments in the UK. Bloody populist paintbrush wielded from the left trying to paint the federalists in some darker hue of right than we deserve. In fact all opinion polls show that support for increased federal union is on the rise across the Union – even in the UK.

I can’t say that I am proud of my Danish party brothers for associating with scum like the Danske Folkepartiet. Again though… Denmark is pretty damned small.

Forgot them in the previous commentary. Ditto as for all things said about Denmark.

What the flaming fuck does that have to do with anything? Bloody socialist agitprop journalism trying to associate the mainstream right with extremism.

Well, he was killed before that happened wasn’t he… and then they got somewhat less than predicted as commented earlier.

In Norway?¿? Not that I applaud the development in Norway. But hey Mr. Journalist of the Guardian, when did they join the Union? Wasn’t this article about the EU? Oh but please don’t let things like fact get in the way… We’ve already seen how Spain slipped into the list of extremism just because the elections didn’t go in the direction of your personal liking. Oh I see we kept the possibility open by using “continent” in the headline - smart, somewhat disingenuous, but smart.

See previous commentary.

Antwerp? Not Belgium, but Antwerp?¿? Did we run out of countries so we had to go down to local elections, eh? Granted that Antwerp is a heavy weight in Belgian politics, but last I checked they were still not really that influential on an EU level. But hey lets not have anything like objective comparability stand in our way - I mean our main point is to rally for the Reds, isn’t it?

Goodbye Mr. Haider, we shall not be missing you. No need to send any postcards. Don’t call and don’t bother with email either. See previous commentary.

So wait here… out of 15 member states, three of the smallest have experienced an increase in support for the far-right. France has Le Pen, has had him for years and more than him making landslides - he hardly increased his vote by a full percent compared to previous election - it was the Socialists that failed so miserably that they didn’t even manage to beat him and come in second so that they could run against the Conservatives as they usually do.… Berlusconi is a crook… the Conservatives in general are profiting from the Socialists mucking up the economy… hmm… that’s sure as hell some big wave of something sweeping somewhere for sure. Could it be a big wave of bullshit reporting sweeping over The Guardian? At least they got the headline right and only crapped all over reason in the sub-line.

All that being said I have to be fair and acknowledge that the Conservatives across the Union have been playing a little loose and fast with popular concerns about immigration. Remarkably it seems not to have done us in the right block that many favors though. More ground has been won on the fiscal failure of the socialists than on social agendas. In the end the immigration question tends to simmer off to the fourth page of the papers and whoever plays the card seems mostly to be trolling votes from the fringe supporters out on the far-right – save previously mentioned exceptions. Despicable, but hey its politics I guess.

Sparc

Bloody populist paintbrush wielded from the left trying to paint the federalists in some darker hue of right than we deserve.

Should read

Bloody populist paintbrush wielded from the left itself trying to paint the federalists in some darker hue of liberalism than we deserve.

It seems that despite all those blacks, browns, and Jews trying to steal your piece of the pie–you’re in good shape, hon. You’re doing better than most people in this world. It’s funny–and horrible–that you think you deserve so much more.

While you’re asking God to rid the land of all the non-whites, do you also thank Him for having mercy on your wretched, hate-filled soul?

So last night I was merrilly reading the new book, Bad Medicine: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Distance Healing to Vitamin O, when I came upon Chapter 9, “The Race is Off: Race Defined.” Hmmm. What a coincidence! I certainly didn’t expect to see a discussion of race alongside discussions of myths related to medicine, but upon further reflection, it makes perfect sense. Let’s take a look:

“Race is a social construct, deep seated in an all-too-human, “us against them” mentality;”

Us against them… Who does that remind you of?

“Race, as we chose to define it, was based solely on a handful of genetic traits: skin color, hair type, and facial features. We could have picked any trait, really, to define race. We could have based race on blood type, where the intelligent and sublime ABs rule over those common, stupid, dirty Os. We could ahve chosen fingerprint types; there are many types, mapped out roughly from region to region around the world. We could have separated the races as baritones and sopranos. If Asians ruled the world, they may have had established that Europeans were stupid because they were prone to baldness. It’s all arbitrary. The ruling Europeans went with a certain set of external characteristics and tried to tie intelligence and behavioral characteristics to them.”

“The Human Genome Project … provided the definitive answer to the race qestion. … there is no such thing as race, biologically. All modern humans descended from a tightly knit group of early humans about 100,000 to 150,000 years ago. The genes don’t lie. Although humans have since spread out into relatively isolated regions of the world, there simply has not been enough time to produce the radical genetic differences that would separate humans into races or breeds. From a biological standpoint, any so-called white man can be more similar to a so-called black man than to his own family. Conversely, more genetic variation exists within Caucasians than between so-called races.”

“Mentally and creatively, race is never a factor. Geniuses and idiots exist around the world. If any given race seems more inclined to behave a certain way or excel in a particular field, the reason is purely social. Germany produced musicians; France produced painters. There’s nothing genetic here. Genius is genius; society dictates the path.”

As I noted, Sayce and Peterson had a poor grasp of history. The intermingling began hundreds of years before the construction of the great pyramids (which were built more than 1,000 years before the enslavement of the Hebrews).

This is the sort of error that keeps publishers other than Scott-Townsend from bothering to reprint that work.

And the blacks and Mexicans have been here longer and the Asians as long as your ancestors.

Before the 1960’s, it ranged from 85% white to 80% white with the only big “minority” being blacks. Now it’s on the decline.

When did I ever say any of that? I suggest you stop making things up.

Why the hell would I want to sleep in an African mud hut?

Boo-hoo for the well-adjusted black youth in Paris. He’s probably like one of those American Negro whiners who cries about “racial profiling” when it’s his racial group that’s clearly responsible for the most violent crime.

"On February 9, the anti-immigrant National Front captured its fourth city hall, in Vitrolles, a town of 33,000 just north of Marseilles, with 52 percent of the vote despite a united effort by mainstream political parties to defeat it. Like the other cities controlled by the National Front–Toulon, Orange and Marignane–Vitrolles is a southern French city with a large immigrant population and a high unemployment rate…

…A profile of Pantin, a Paris suburb, said that the most of the 5,000 residents of a housing development called Les Cortilliere are immigrants from Algeria, Morocco and West Africa who have a 40 percent unemployment rate. Unemployed youth are torn between drugs and Islam, according to the account and the French republican model of integration through education is breaking down as immigrant youth do not learn French and behave as French."

  • Migration News

“The opinion poll commissioned by BBC News Online also found that 44% of those asked believe immigration has damaged Britain over the last 50 years.” - BBC News

“Shattering the cosy consensus of Dutch politics, the Pim Fortuyn List emerged as the second biggest party with 17 per cent in exit polls, despite being cobbled together only three months ago.” - uk telegraph news

American poll results have already been posted here, and the fact is that the vast majority have always been in favor of decreased and restricted immigration

Click here for opinion polls of Canadians, which is the same story as everywhere else

It still looks like a great deal of people want less immigration, not more. And all you can say is that they’re “wacky” because they don’t support your agenda.

Proof?

Besides blacks, which were hauled over as slave labor (which was a very bad idea), proof? The mexicans of today aren’t the indigenous natives of California/TX, etc… they are from Mexico and Central America. The Asians that came over as cheap railroad labor probably represented a tiny fraction of 1% of the population, considering that whites were 89% and blacks were around 11% before the 1965 immigration act. The America before 1965 wasn’t some multicultural mishmash like people like to claim it is by pointing to tiny groups of coolie laborors in the West.

sigh

  1. Correlation does not equate to causation.
  2. Averages do not translate to specifics.

Please provide evidence that the prosperity of the U.S. is on the decline. And no, instances of recession don’t count.

Then, please provide evidence that said decline is specifically the result of an increase in minority populations.

He?¿? What led you to believe that it was a male and that it was only one person?

You are aware that France has some 60 million inhabitants aren’t you? That Migration News isn’t exactly an unbiased news source we know, and you don’t care about.

As for the rest of your babbling about a continent you claim to have some mystical racial connection to, yet not the slightest knowledge about, I have commented. If you just go on burping quotes repeating the same information over and over again without regarding my commentary you are only confirming what I have said all along: debate with White Nationalists is hopeless.

Show me where I did this? As far as I know I debated IzzyR from the premise that his stand is not mine, and yet sane. I have stated that the ideology that is yours that is a twisted and sick one, or whacky if you like. Not being pro-immigration, or rather for partially or completely open borders as would be the term is not the same as being a White Nationalist, a.k.a. neo-Nazi. I have already provided you with a list of opinions and views that denote your kind, anti-immigration would be rather weak to describe your stand, or?

I’ll say that in another way in respect of your reading comprehension: Many of my Conservative party brothers and sisters here in Europe are for restrictive immigration. I disagree, that doesn’t mean that I think that they are nuts, just that they are wrong in my opinion. On the other hand when someone wants to repatriate all the Jews to an undefined place and take other measures of ethnic cleansing I will question their sanity.

Sparc

Sionnach

So far, three profound problems in your position have come to light in your debate. They are:

(1) You insist that you be considered as an individual among White Nationalists. It is true that you do, in fact, hold views that are contrary to the views espoused in the White Nationalist FAQ. And yet, you are, by your own words, unwilling to consider others as individuals among the groups that you have assigned to them.

(2) You insist that deviance in homosexuals is a genetic defect, despite that that is in direct contradiction to the statement in the White Nationalist FAQ. And yet, you are unwilling to acknowledge that your own deviancies are genetic defects.

(3) You insist that you have the right to exclude others, and yet you deny them the right to exclude you. You presume that you may steal their property and squat on their land, and you even presume that you may assault them and ship them like cattle to wherever you please.

Clearly, the onus is upon you to explain how it is that you are not simultaneously a hypocrite, a psychopath, and a sociopath because from all appearances, at least, those descriptions suit you.

Prove that blacks and other non-whites groups are responsible for this decline (the existence of which is debateble too), and not greedy capitalists (were Jews responsible for Enron too?).

But according to your own “argument”, these things don’t make you American. No, in your eyes, white skin is the most important criterion.

You admitted that you have Russian ancestry. Well, you shouldn’t have done this because it only makes me feel superior to you. As far as I know, there were no Russian forefathers. No “-skys” appeared on the list of names on the Declaration of Independance. Just a bunch of English dudes, I believe.

Chances are I have English ancestry, due to the history of white-on-black rape during slavery and the origin of my last name. Chances are I’m linked to one of the forefathers. Would this not make me more American than you, if true?

And you aren’t descended from the indigenous natives of the US. You aren’t even halfway related to the English settlers who first colonized this country. Your claim to the US (and to Canada–hahahaha!) is just as ridiculous as the Mexican’s claim to the US. No, it’s more ridiculous because at least Mexicans have lived in parts of this country hundreds of years before yours did.

Just curious why you don’t view Mexicans as “white”. Does their European heritage get trumped by the Indian? Don’t they speak a European language? Don’t most practice a religion brought to them by Europeans? Don’t most of them bear European last names? Isn’t their culture more European influenced than Indian? If they were lighter-skinned would you welcome them into your White Nation? What about “white” Argentinians? “White” Cubans? “White” Dominicans? “White” Brazilians? How is a “white” Mexican any different than a “white” Russian? Aren’t they both brothers in your paradigm?

Why should I provide evidence for something I didn’t say? I never said that the decline was in “wealth” (wealth is probably the only thing that keeps everyone from completely going at each other’s throats even though job and financial security is far down), and I never said the decline was only a result of an increase in non-whites. I think the decline is a result of modern Liberalism. Modern liberalism is also responsible for a political climate that makes it taboo to speak of any racial problems in any terms besides blaming whites for the failure of non-whites and demanding that whites help out non-whites more.

Then what’s the “decline” of which you complain?

What are these “contrary” views? I insist on not being called a “supremacist” and “neo-nazi” because I’m not one.

When did I insist anything about homosexuals, besides that I think their political agenda is stupid? I don’t care why people are homosexuals. They should keep it in the bedroom.. Why are you so homosexual obsessed?

Again, what the hell are you talking about? I haven’t stolen any property to squat on land, nor do I want to “steal”. I don’t demand to move into neighborhoods and other countries where I don’t fit in. I don’t demand “special rights” based on a “minority status”. When did I ever say I think I should assault people? The only people that I think should be shipped out without compensation are dual-loyalists and criminals. As for others, any moving would be done with compensation.

Are you referring to Andy Fastow?

What does any of this have to do with preserving western culture and nations? What does any of this have to do with the threat of non-white crime and extortion racket?

Again, what does any of this have to do with the threat of non-white violence and extortion (in the form of taxes and aff. action) by non-whites and the right of people to live amongst their own kind instead of waves of immigrants? I’m not “claiming” any land but the land I own, and definately not the cesspool called California that has gone from the Golden State to the National Joke state. Liberals and immigrants take that state and good riddance. But, why do they have to have every state and county also? Why should every state and county be flooded with third-world immigrants even if the people don’t want them? Why should every Westen country be flooded with immigrants if most of the people don’t want them and think it’s not worth it? No one has came even close to addressing this question.

The whites in Latin America are white. The mongrolized mixed races of Spaniards + Indians are not.

Decline in morality and rise of a nihilistic culture.