White Nationalism, Part II

Great Debates
301

Aw, jeez.

Sunshine, where I come from, we classify ‘genocide’ as an attempt to wipe out an entire class of people through organized, wholesale murder. I see no such plan by Jews to do this to anyone (no, not even the Palestinians that you falsely claim to have such a concern for), nor do I, or anyone I know, consider something like journalistic choices to equate to genocide.

Look, as I stated near the beginning of this thread, I simply don’t find that the many bogeymen that you and your fellow travelers think such a threat, are indeed the menace that you claim. I’ve lived 48 years amongst Jews, minorities, gays and those of mixed races as well as whites; I’ve only felt personally threatened a few times and the vast majority of those threats were at the hands of whites. I’ll list the incidents for you if you wish.

Despite this supposed menace from Jews and non-whites, you and yours somehow manage to eke out a fragile existence, right? What do you do for a living, Halogen? How do you account for the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in this country can somehow exist and travel about without giving the slightest thought to the menaces you are obsessed with? In some ten pages and dozens of postings by you and yours to this absurd thread, you have completely failed to make a credible case that I and others like me are under dire threat from Jews and non-whites as some sort of class.

I don’t know, let’s ask someone who is actually Jewish. If I were to hazard a guess, I’d say that it might be because the last such attempt at ‘separation’ resulted in a rather high body count on the part of those being ‘separated’.

Deny the Holocaust all you wish; I’ve read both sides of the story with a neutral attitude, and the evidence that many millions of Jews, Gypsies and others were murdered during WWII is overwhelming.

Frankly, I find your attitude blockheaded and repellent beyond belief. Persons with your views remain a tiny minority after decades of proselytizing for the wonders of whiteness, and the reason isn’t because of some media conspiracy, it’s simply because your views are built on a foundation of lies.

You want to separate yourselves from particular classes of people, fine; do so, the sooner the better. In particular, please separate yourselves from me. As you are among the tiny minority, though, it’s up to you to go somewhere else if you really need separation. And please don’t kid yourself that there is some sort of silent majority out there waiting to rise up on your behalf; if such existed they would have shown themselves by now.

BTW, I have only posted again to this thread to respond to a particularly assisine claim, by you, Halogen and I really, really have no intention of wasting any more time on the idiocies you espouse. Thus you get to have the last word if you want it. Go to town, babe. Cheers.

302

Sionnach wrote:

It’s not your opposition to the ADL that concerns me. It’s the statement you made that you needn’t be bothered concerning yourself over one tree out of the whole woods. It’s your baby with the bathwater mentality.

White Nationalism harbors and protects dangerous fringe elements, like Nazis, skinheads, and supremacists. See your own discussion about the banning of Nazi symbols.

Unlike the jewboy in your example, you do indeed identify yourself with the White Nationalists.

As you might recall, I do not. But I also pointed out several heterosexual deviations. Do you ban men who suck women’s toes and women who lick men’s butts? Do you deny that those are sexual deviations?

[…shrug…] Okay, fair enough.

Let me be the first to inform you that you lost World War II. You failed to annihilate the Jews, homosexuals, and retarded and deformed people. You failed to establish a thousand year Reich. You got your Aryan asses whipped. And now the winners are doing with the land what they wish. So get over it.

Yep. It is your callous disregard for human life that will forever isolate you as a tiny percentage of the white population. You don’t mind evoking the deaths of millions of people just so you can bully a Jew.

Obviously, the reason you won’t allow people to discuss or even mention their faith on your board is that one of the culturally identifying characteristics you’ve mentioned for your gang is Christianity. Jesus was a Jew. And worshipping Him while taunting the descendants of His people would be too blatant a hypocrisy even for you.

You’ve raised statistical fallacy to a whole new level. That might be because you copy your arguments from sites like Jerry’s Personal Grudge Against Jews page. But if you would visit sites like The US Census, you’d see that only 9.4% of Whites are below the poverty level, while 22.0% of Blacks are.

As a Libertarian, I support the elimination of all arbitrary so-called “borders” that are nothing more than lines in the sand drawn by tyrants who presume to have authority over everyone who lives inside them. Let people trade and travel freely so long as they are peaceful and honest. And eliminate all welfare and other entitlements.

303

I just have to say that this paragraph made me smile. Well put Lib.

In fact it exemplifies both the stupidity of the argument that the neo-Nazis forward as regards ‘winner takes all’ as well as shows what a miserable failure the ideology in question is.

…and Lib, as regards quibbles about this in other places… you’re starting to sound more and more like you agree with me as regards tone and content.

Sparc

304

Halogen said:

Here’s where we hit our fundamental difference. I am for diversity and mixing with other races, and I do believe that races are “equal in intelligence and aggressiveness”. It goes with believing that nations, sexes, and humanity in general, as a rule is “equal in intelligence and aggressiveness” although individuals vary widely.

I’ve lived in a town that’s primarily white and in a town that’s primarily mixed race. I found the latter a much safer and pleasant place to live in. I’ve found highly intelligent in both places, and I’ve found wonderful people in both places. I’ve also found complete and utter jerks.

In any society, there are going to be those who differ from the norm and society will try to find some way to discriminate against them. In Japan, one of the most deliberately homogenous societies in the world where uniforms are regulated to cut down on bullying, kids will be bullied because of the lengths of their socks. The more diverse a society, the greater the room for acceptable deviation, and the safer those who are different are likely to be.

I suspect to people like Halogen and Sionnach being different is a bad thing, possibly one which should be eliminated. I fit their definition of white in both appearance and heritage, not to mention genetic traits involving intelligence and physical robustness. I’m also a devout Christian. Nevertheless, I was branded as “Different” and got to experience what it was like. Killing us all would be a kindness if the alternative is to be subjected to a continuous regime of verbal and physical abuse. Still, just as I did in high school, I will stand and say, “I’m here. I’m not going away just because it will make you happy. Deal with it.” You see, I suspect that after you get rid of the Jews, the Blacks, and the Asians, you’ll just find someone else who you decide is unacceptable. Sooner or later, you’ll get around to outspoken white women who don’t know their place, or however it was I was and am thought of. Since the battle’s coming sooner or later, I’ll pick my time and place to fight.

In My Opinion:
If you choose to believe that the only acceptable people in the world are people who are “just like you”, however you choose to define that, fine. Please don’t wrap it up in terms of “superiority” or “purity”. Whether you believe in the Bible, evolution, both or neither, we all come from one common stock, therefore we are all mixed race mutts. I happen to believe diversity is good. Introducing new ideas and conditions tends to promote growth. Removing it tends to induce stagnation and death. As evidence, I give you the universe as a whole, from entropy in physics to “hybrid vigor” in biology.

WN’s speak of the value of a society which excludes all non-native influences. Japan closed itself off from all contact with the outside world for over a century. When it emerged, at gunpoint, it found a radically changed world in which it was at a disadvantage. By adopting Western tactics and technologies, Japan was able to build itself up to a power in Asia. During Japan’s boom economy in the 1980’s, Japan adopted Western technology, although it used Japanese methods to manufacture it. Those same Japanese methods led to the downfall of Japan’s economy in 1990, a downfall from which that country has yet to recover completely.

CJ

305

Prove that the Jews were destroying Germany. Go ahead, I dare you.

306

Sparc wrote:

We are allies, my friend. Your way and my way both have a place.

307

If anything, staying isolated leads to inbreeding.

Also, all Nazi Germany was, in the end, was a cult of mediocrity. Nothing interesting, or innovative. All bland, boring, dry and stale. Stagnant.

308

And incredibly beautiless architecture.

309

Yeah, horrible architecture for the state buildings but I like the painting style.
Film industry was pretty inovative too (Riefenstahl) as was industrial designing (still like the Volkswagen).
Their weapons of war are also pretty cool and highly innovative (too many examples).

Oh and let’s not forget the music industry (‘Lili Marlene’).

310

Um, wasn’t Lili Marlene pre-Nazi?

I thought it was from WWI?

311

Have our friends left us or will they come back and play?

312

But trying to get more information in response to www.nizkor.org. That’s a very interesting site, but it doesn’t adequately explain the lack of air photo evidence or traces of ashes from the so-called holocaust. The stuff about Goebbels’ diary is persuasive but hardly conclusive, even if authentic- he was the minister of propaganda and would have absolutely no role in any extermination plan. I’ll admit it if I find that I’m wrong about the “holocaust”, but I don’t think that’ll be necessary.

Guinastasia’s assessment of Nazi Germany as dull, stagnant and boring is wrong. The government was LOVED by Germans- compare this with the contempt that many Americans feel for our government. The Nazis ended massive unemployment and inflation and removed a class of obnoxious parasites- if only GW Bush could do the same for us!

Jews destroying Germany- Rosa Luxemburg, a jew, led a Socialist revolution in Germany and then sought terms to surrender in WWI while all the armies were still in offensive positions. Without a defensive position, the Germans were in no position to negotiate and got screwed with the Treaty of Versailles. The reparations payments led to the inflation and the famous stories of carrying wheelbarrows full of paper money to buy groceries. Massive unemployment. Jews were also behind the particularly degrading “art” of the 1920s, just as they are behind today’s degrading mass media. Hitler knew that coexistence was impossible.

CJHOWORTH thinks that Sionnach and I are against everyone who is different. We’re not against anyone- we favor peaceful separation of the races, not everyone who is “different”. Anti-white violence has reached a level that is intolerable and any white man who sits back and allows white men to be killed, white women to be raped and white children to be robbed in the name of “diversity” is not a man at all.

Thanks for the input- arguing with you guys forces me to study! Will be back soon.

www.stormfront.org/forum

313

If you’re really interested in evaluating the evidence that the Holocaust really happened----i.e., six million Jews were intentionally murdered–I would suggest the book *Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?*

314

Please specify exactly which art this is. Names of artists, and the works which you find “degrading”, and the ways in which you find these works of art “degrading”.

This sounds like you’re saying that Rosa Luxemburg had influence on the German surrender in November 1918, and was personally responsible for the fact that the Germans “got screwed” by the Treaty of Versailles. Strangely, none of the encyclopedias that I have available to me mentions that she had anything to do with either the German surrender or the Treaty of Versailles.

Since she was in jail for the duration of the war and wasn’t released until the war was over, I don’t see how she could have had any influence on the terms of the German surrender from a Berlin jail, and since she died in mid-January of 1919, it seems odd to hold her responsible for the terms of a treaty, the conference for which wasn’t convened until a week or so before she died, and that wasn’t signed until June 28, 1919.

Encyclopedia.com

http://www.historybookshop.com/articles/events/versailles-treaty.asp

This history of the German Communist Party doesn’t mention anything about Rosa Luxemburg and the Treaty of Versailles.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERkpd.htm

This is the only connection between “Rosa Luxemburg” and the Treaty of Versailles that I can find, from the same website.

That seems like a pretty big logical stretch–“The pressure of the unfair Versailles Treaty on the German middle classes caused them to look more favorably on the German Communist Party, which Rosa Luxemburg founded.” Nope, sorry, doesn’t work for me.

And anyway, apparently Rosa Luxemburg didn’t found the KPD all by herself–what about Karl Liebknecht, Leo Jogiches, Paul Levi, Ernest Meyer, Franz Mehring and Clara Zetkin?

How many of them were Jewish? Do you even know? Why pick on the one Jewish person?

Is it maybe because of this?

http://www.fallenmartyrs.com/poland.htm

Uh huh.

315

You do know that if you get basic facts wrong, it tends to tear down your house of cards theories, right?

Rosa Luxemburg was still in prison when the Armistice was decided upon. The German Army, while not yet defeated, had been withdrawing for three months. Ludendorff, himself, when asked what would happen if his desparate offensive of April, 1918 failed, replied “Germany will be destroyed.” so the German command (who later spread the lies regarding the “Socialist revolution”) was already aware that they could not win the war. Their April gamble failed when the extra troops and ammunition supplied by the late entry of the U.S. was brought to bear, providing the allies with reserves that Germany could not draw upon. In addition, the Austrian and Turkish fronts had collapsed in October, leaving Germany vulnerable to the fresh American-bolstered attacks from the west. Although Ludendorff and Hindenberg later claimed that the “socialists” had “weakened the will” of the German people, they never produced any evidence of that (since there was none). In fact, it was the militarized economy that had destroyed the ability of Germany to actually feed and clothe itself with malnutrition, and even starvation, occurring each winter. While the German withdrawal in the Fall of 1918 was, to a great extent, a planned consolidation of its lines, that consolidation was made necessary by the failure of the Right-wing economics coupled with the threat from the U.S. Rosa Luxemburg was not even released from prison until the Armistice had already been worked out and agreed to among the German High Command.

Facts are always pesky things that get in the way of good propaganda.

316

Halogen, you don’t need to supply a link to stormfront. People around here are well aware they exist, just as we’re aware that goatsex sites exist. I think the goatsex sites may be better thought of.

You are against diversity in that you want everyone who is different to be separate from you. I’ve also been a victim of far more violence and discrimination coming from white people than I have any other race, and I am about as white as you can get. I’ve also seen little evidence your movement is “peaceful.” Please feel free to present counter evidence.

By the way, here’s one more argument for you to tackle. WN’s claim that immigrants are damaging to the US economy. According to this article in USA Today states with the largest number of immigrants have the highest numbers of small businesses because immigrants are more likely to start their own businesses. In other words, immigrants are contributing to economic growth.

Please counter any of my arguments, but I’m particularly interested in seeing your response to the ones about Hawaii and about the supposed benefits immigrants receive. Just to give you an incentive, if you don’t counter a post, just for you two, I’ll take it as a concession that I’m right.

CJ

317

So, let’s say the Nazis had gathered all the world’s Jews together and sterilized them – that wouldn’t be genocide?

Genocide means the killing of genes or a genus (feel free to contribute an etymological perspective) – genocide can be accomplished without the killing of a single individual.

318

Let’s assume that it is true that “immigrants are more likely to start their own businesses”. And let’s ignore the fact that, as I understand it, the government has programs that subsidize many of these businesses. What you are trying to address is the net economic impact of immigrants. The rate at which immigrants start businesses – standing by itself – means little if anything. Suppose a ridiculously high proportion – say 50% – of new immigrants started their own businesses. The other 50% could still be on welfare for all we know.

319

Yeah, they could be. So could you. Or, they could have jobs - it’s not the case that they either have to start their own business or be on welfare.

Either way, what could be the case is rather irrelevant. What is the case is what matters. And unless you’ve got evidence which states that the majority of immigrants are on welfare, your point, such as it is, doesn’t do much to support whatever argument you’re trying to make.

And, I suggest you actually look up the word “genocide” in a dictionary. Here are some to get you started:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/g1/genocide.asp

http://www.wordsmyth.net/cgi-bin/simplesearch.cgi?matchent=genocide&matchtype=exact&matchid=-1&retall=1

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=genocide*1+0

http://www.bartleby.com/61/63/G0086300.html

I assume you can provide a cite which supports your definition.

320

You are conflating two different issues. One is the existence of borders, the other the existence of the state. Of course, state borders presuppose the existence of a state. And, like you, I dream of the abolition of the state, though I concede it to be a pipe dream. However, although state borders seem arbitrary and are, of course, dependent on the existence of the state, that is not an indictment of borders per se. Any concept of property rights recognizes the legitimacy of real property boundaries. The owner of a house has the right to exclude anyone. Likewise, the owners of a country have the right to exclude others from the country they own in common. The fact that the state has interposed itself and purports to be the guardian of this common property is irrelevant. From any Lockean or other libertarian perspective the labor of Americans has vested them with a property interest in the U.S. Forcing Americans to share their country with others against their will is a fundamental disregard of the concept of property. The state, however, has intervened to dilute Americans’ ownership interest.

I would point out further that the state has confiscated land through the power of eminent domain and decreed that all may pass on the public roads. In the absence of this state intervention, the sort of immigration you defend could not exist. Instead, an immigrant would not only have to find a receptive host within the country; he would also have to find a series of contiguous landowners willing to allow him to pass through to his desired destination.

I have stated this inelegantly as I am in a rush, but Hoppe provides brillaint expositions in both his book Democracy: The God That Failed and an article published in the Journal for Libertarian Studies (don’t have the cite at hand).