Black365 and Non-White Supremacism

James Edwards had a piece recently about McDonalds and their promotion of a program and web site named black365 "celebrating Black culture ...".

McDonalds pioneered multicultural advertising decades ago, particularly supporting a strong pro-Black identity. We should start a new healthy restaurant chain called MacDonalds catering to Whites. The golden arches could be replaced by a big White W. :)

I fully agree with James Edwards' point about the massive double standards employed by multinational corporations and other institutions that promote non-White identity while NEVER doing the same for Whites. About the only time corporations or advertisers explicitly mention White identity is to mock or subvert it, e.g. Whites can't dance or Whites are uptight.

Far more common is the implicit treatment of Whites through subtexts which serves three major functions. First, they constantly denigrate White identity, history, culture, attitudes, character and peoplehood, unlike non-White groups, which are respected and shown positively (the only exception being Arabs and Muslims who are sometimes demonized: guess why?). The goal is clearly to destroy any explicitly White group identity and self-esteem. Second, they illustrate "proper" thinking and behavior to define the bounds of accepted White identity. Whites not accepting their assigned safe and submissive role are shown as evil and contemptible (nazis, klansmen, haters, militia "nuts", etc). Everyone gets the message, if only subconsciously. Third, they train non-Whites, including recent immigrants, to see Whites as a hated class to be attacked and displaced in the future.

The only accepted "traditional" White identity is to be a patriotard tool of warmongering Zionists and globalists who push other people around in their own countries because the whole world really, really wants to be like America! Support "democracy"!!!

These subtexts are literally millions of subtle cues embedded throughout the totality of "our" cultural and entertainment programming. Even though no one sees all or even most of the full set of programming, the average person grows up seeing at least tens of thousands of these anti-White subtexts in thousands of different programs. They become signficant because instead of being randomly distributed in a balanced way, they are systematically biased against Whites. Just watch TV on a typical night and you'll see dozens of examples.

The anti-White bias is obvious by comparing the corresponding treatment of non-Whites and Jews (Jews are exquisitely sensitive to the slightest of slights) using the "identity interchange" test. If the commonly accepted anti-White subtexts had the identities exchanged with a non-White, the non-White advocates would be livid with rage at the racist propaganda being spread about their people! It's great for Whites though!

Ultimately they want to program Whites (and non-Whites) to behave as servants to their agendas. Our children are cut off from the brilliant accomplishments of their ancestors and the heights and nobility of a healthy White culture and society. Instead they're encouraged to be docile little consumers buying corporate junk manufactured overseas from corporate retail zones next to corporate-built suburbs mostly built with cheap illegal alien labor. These suburbs are meant to be a tacit place of safety using wealth as a barrier instead of ethnocentrism, until the next round of immigration and Black criminal subclass resettlement starts the process over again, leading to fat profits for the controllers managing the process.

Isn't modern America such a wonderful land of opportunity? Our founding fathers would be so proud!

These constant media images of Whites are a crucial pillar in creating and enforcing anti-White double standards in our "civil society". The news, entertainment and advertising propaganda machines wield massive influence over most sectors of our society including a significant fraction of our intellectual elites.

One current repulsive example of White-demeaning advertisting is this AT&T commercial where a gay-seeming White guy apparently lives in a big house in a suburban neighborhood surrounded by a carefully chosen multicultural crew consisting of a normal Asian man and three children: a Latino boy and White girl who are silent, and an Asian girl, the center and leader of the children. The Asian girl plays the role of a ghetto-speaking Black woman from a soap opera because the gay White guy has asked the neighborhood kids to help him "catch up on his soaps" because he's already apparently recording two other shows during the airtime of the soaps.

This is the ideal White man according to our cultural programmers: one who won't reproduce, will happily acquiesce in his people's displacement (and isn't even aware he's part of a people other than "American"), is happily multiculturalist, lives a hedonistic lifestyle, is practically a women (and won't be hunting, fishing, owning guns or have any survival skills) and enthusiastically submits to brainwashing by our elite masters.

Why do we give our money to these anti-White corporations?

Isn't it great that Whites have such a great sense of humor that they're OK with being constantly ridiculed unlike all the other groups that demand respect?

No it's not. It's because Whites are cowed into submission by an evil, anti-White, uncivil society that despises them but that controls most levers of power and uses them aggressively to oppress Whites, attacks their identity, legally steals their wealth and transfers it to non-White colonizers, ungrateful Blacks or various corrupt forces, and then tars any White dissenters and resisters as "racists", "bigots", "fascists", "neo-nazis" and "white supremacists".

Ultimately, it's perfectly reasonable that Jews, Blacks and others feel racial solidarity and behave ethnocentrically and even that powerful organizations pander to them.

What's NOT OK is that Whites engaging in logically equivalent beliefs and activism are falsely smeared as Nazis, Klansmen or White supremacists by non-White supremacists, especially by powerful and wealthy Jewish and crypto-Jewish organizations and their toadies throughout our "civil society", including the government, corporations, advertising, Hollywood, the MSM and the educational industrial complex. And for almost everyone in the US the propaganda machine has reinforced THOUSANDS of times that those labels represent the worst possible evil.

Whites must stop tolerating these double standards against us and only us. We need to make it crystal clear that anything but full acceptance of White advocacy and ethnocentrism while all others are both tolerated and encouraged is NON-WHITE SUPREMACISM. I googled this term a while back and found a few scattered references to it so this is an existing but rare concept. It deserves to become just as mainstream as "white supremacism".

We must start calling things by their true names instead of participating in the swarm of lies and obfuscations that enable the anti-White Matrix to pass itself off as a colorblind society that is supposedly just.

Colorblind is a con.

America is anti-White and non-white supremacist.

Try these on for size: Black supremacism, Jewish supremacism, Hispanic Supremacism, Asian supremacism. When non-White advocates believe they have more rights than Whites they are SUPREMACISTS. They need to start hearing this accurate description of their rhetoric and behavior. Oppressed Whites need to learn this tool of understanding and self defense.

While the anti-White activists bring up false anti-White doctrines like "White Privilege" the reality of our society, when normalizing for ability and behavior, is "non-White Privilege", especially Black and Jewish Privilege. Whenever anyone tries to fling the pathetic accusation of White privilege, Whites should immediately point to the success of groups like Blacks, Asians and Jews which typically have better outcomes than Whites per capita, especially Jews, whose outcomes are staggeringly higher than Whites in terms of wealth, elite education, media ownership and influence, academic position, campaign finance, elite government positions, etc. Hmmm, how come stories about Jewish influence NEVER EVER appear in the mainstream media while LOTS of anti-White or White-critical stories DO? It must be all that White Privilege typically taught by Jewish or non-White professors and activists. It was enlightening to see the Whiteness Studies conference that had a Shabbat dinner on Friday night in their official schedule as well as a roster containing a majority of Jewish and non-White participants.

When a large enough group of Whites drop out of the anti-White Matrix and create alternative institutions that empower and protect Whites, their identity, history, culture and peoplehood, the existing institutions will be forced to either adapt or reveal their raw hatred and oppression of Whites. This large group must be led by a vanguard. Some early pioneers have been at it for decades. Now more of us are joining their efforts. We need to keep widening the circle and to tolerate different kinds of pro-Whites, including the shaky ones in the middle starting with pro-White training wheels.

Part of the problem is that Whites have been so deracinated (cut off from their roots) and indoctrinated in White-self-hatred that our culture and identity is a shambles for the vast majority of our brethren. We probably can't fully recover what we once had but we can draw from the best of our heritage and forge a new spirit and culture for our people. We also might not be able to create a monolithic, unitary culture, but if we have several White cultures that mostly share a core of common values across different belief systems, that will be infinitely preferable to our current atomization and deracination. The largest split among pro-Whites is probably between Christians and non-Christians. We should not worry about all Whites having to fit some specific ideology or set of values. Support pro-White diversity!

Some Whites will always be implacable enemies. Fine. Let them pursue their suicidal path in their own spaces and we can pursue our destiny separately. Good riddance. Divorce is the solution.

In time we can create a White Renaissance.

It will take much time and effort to counteract the massive 24x7 anti-White control program that's been operating unimpeded for many decades.

Essentially every piece of our "civil society" must have alternative institutions by and for Whites promoting our interests. I've already discussed alternative institutions in detail regarding higher education in a non-racial manner and alternative media promoting White advocacy. I also explored White separation.

We also need institutions and organizations that subvert the existing ones while not being rabidly or even overtly pro-White. We need to recruit Whites from the middle and take them a step at a time to full-blown White advocacy, ethnocentrism and nationalism. A major attack vector are those areas of our "civil society" that promote lies, anti-White bias or non-White supremacism. Trust in these institutions is already low. When average people see professional quality stories with fully documented details available that expose the lies, distortions and propaganda of the current system, cynicism and distrust will strengthen dramatically and faith and trust will be transferred to the new alternative sources. Anti-White crime is an massive opportunity that needs to be exploited to destroy trust in the current lying system. It wouldn't be an issue if they weren't such vicious lying anti-White bigots so they deserve no sympathy.

A major barrier to building pro-White institutions is the current dominance of anti-White racism by "civil society". Budding pro-Whites are assaulted by powerful and wealthy groups like the ADL and $PLC and many other groups coordinated with allies in Hollywood, the MSM, academia, government, corporations and other commanding heights in our society. It will be a long-term struggle to gain our rights and justice. We already have some organizations working for our interests, so let's support them however we can, even if only to spread awareness through personal connections.

There are other areas I'd like to discuss, including my long-promised alternative cultural post, which is one of the most important alternatives needed because it is the most powerful force brainwashing most Whites. The sheer repetition of anti-White and pro-multicultural ideology over the full lifetime of most citizens, including the numerous subtle subtexts, is difficult for most people to escape. But imagine a full offering of cultural programming that is pro-White with many of the subtexts and meta-messages inverted from their anti-White bigotry. I believe when many Whites are exposed to hundreds and thousands of hours of pro-White cultural programming, White advocacy will become a mass movement including both our average and cognitive elite populations.

It can happen in stages too, where a small nucleus of Whites create and distribute this pro-White content and then gain an modest audience that then grows as the truth, hope and justice of our side inspire more and more Whites to escape their brainwashing.

We must build our institutions and their broad acceptance piece-by-piece from the bottom up. We can use our talent and spirit to create something authentic even if we have limited resources compared to our oppressors. Some of these pieces are already in place, like some of the organizations I link to. We must start within our own families, friends and communities. We must contest the universally accepted anti-White bigotry and those who promote it.

The future is uncertain. We must work to prepare ourselves for any contingency that comes our way.

We'll know we're made progress when large business interests start fearing the anger the White community and pander to us the way they pander to non-Whites.

nativeamerican365, black365, jew365, raza365, asian365 are all fully supported by "our" "civil society".

white365 must be too.

Prophets of Doom and the Need for Organization

Have you ever watched prophets of doom like Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente or Alex Jones? My perception is that Peter Schiff is the least extreme while Alex Jones is a full-blown conspiracy theorist (not that there's anything wrong with that if he mostly turns out to be right!). Gerald Celente is intermediate being around half or two-thirds of a full-blown conspiracy theorist.

I can't help noticing that each of the three appear to gain fame and make their livelihoods through their pessimistic rhetoric. Peter Schiff's company, Euro-Pacific Capital, sells services based on his theories, he publishes best-selling books and he apparently consults for the rich and powerful (e.g in the UAE). Gerald Celente sells a newsletter and makes many paid appearances while Alex Jones hosts a radio show and produces a lot of DVDs. Both Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente have appeared in many MSM shows in spite of their somewhat anti-Establishment messages. Despite these potential conflicts of interests, many of their claims seem plausible and deserve a fair hearing, especially given their recent predictions of our economic troubles with lucid explanations when the other pundits belittled them while predicting smooth sailing as far as the eye could see.

The doomsters share some commonalities in their predictions, particularly in believing a major depression is coming. Peter Schiff seems to believe it's more a matter of incompetence, while Gerald Celente believes they are inflating a final bubble, the "bailout bubble" to succeed the previously popped dot.com and housing bubbles, which will ultimately burst with no further bailouts possible, and that powerful interests will use these turbulent times to bring in more authoritarian control, likely launching a war to distract from total economic collapse. Alex Jones seems to have an intricate conspiracy theory about this being a long-standing plan to create a totalitarian world government with most people becoming highly controlled slaves and around 80% of the population being killed using bioweapons. In spite of the seeming outlandishness of some of Alex Jones' beliefs, some of what he says seems quite reasonable, particularly giving the creeping totalitarianism and police state structures. I get the sense that during some of Alex's most agitated rants he is being a bit of a showman, kind of like Glenn Beck periodically comes across as phony, except that Glenn Beck seems a lot more phony than Alex Jones. I've heard maybe around 15 hours of Alex Jones and perhaps 10 hours of Glenn Beck, so I'm no great expert on these guys.

I haven't carefully researched much of what these guys say (e.g the alleged misdeeds of the Federal Reserve), but much of their message seems plausible. In particular I strongly suspect that the US economy has been managed badly, e.g. by encouraging speculation over long-term investment, allowing looting by the executive class, losing advanced manufacturing and not properly protecting our markets in balance with how our trading "partners" protect their markets, and that the phony economy will soon come crashing down. Some excellent writers discussing this are Pat Buchanan and the Irish economics writer, Eamonn Fingleton. I strongly recommend Mr. Fingleton's book In the Jaws of the Dragon which discusses how the East Asian Economic and Political System is not compatible with Western style capitalism, at least how it's practiced in the US currently.

Whether there is a New World Order (NWO) conspiracy to impose totalitarian control on the US and ultimately the entire world is such a disturbing question that deserves a full and fair investigation even if it is likely false.

Unfortunately there are many issues needing a similar thorough analysis by fair and objective observers, while most of us can only devote a little time on the side to explore these issues. One goal is for us to eventually create think tanks with full-time scholars and support staff to investigate issues and think creatively about the problems facing us. This is something for White advocates to aim for in the future although we have the beginnings of this. Another approach that can be started sooner and with minimal resources is harnessing the power of thousands of part-time activists over the internet by intelligently combining their efforts to enable these sorts of detailed investigations. Many of these investigations can be done with other groups because many of the topics aren't directly related to White advocacy.

An example of how important work can be done by non-scholarly activists working part time would be an audit of references in academic works. One controversial example is Kevin MacDonald's books which probably have over 500 references per book. Imagine if a team of volunteers tracked down each and every source that Dr. MacDonald cited and did a fair-use scan of the full context of each citation. These could then be posted on a web site that had special software designed to support this sort of research and criticism. This software could be open-source and could integrate with existing software, like open-source portals or content management systems. Then users could judge whether Dr. MacDonald's books accurately quote and interpret each source. Statistics could be compiled about his accuracy. The critical point is that because everything is open, each assertion can be audited and each viewer can examine the full evidence to see who is reliable or not. For example, if it turned out that Dr. MacDonald was deceptive with 20+% of his references that would reflect badly upon his honesty, while if there were just minor nitpicks and no major duplicitous distortions, then his scholarly honesty would pass the first hurdle.

Note that this sort of detailed checking of hundreds of different references is a massive effort for one person, but would be easily doable by a few hundred people donating a few hours per person or by dozens of people giving 20-30 hours per person.

With his treatment of sources analyzed, scrutiny could be given to the rest of his text and the validity of his other facts and logic. Links to other sources could be developed in determining the truth. The ultimate result would be a detailed exploration of the truth or falsehood of the book and the underlying issues it discusses. Eventually the same sort of analysis can be applied to other sources with related things linked together for easy navigation to further human knowledge and understanding.

Many other authors, journalists, politicians, academics and organizations have works, predictions and promises deserving a careful accounting. Consider all the free trade propaganda that has turned out to be absolutely false. We don't currently have a systematic way to rate pundits and talking heads who've been wrong, very wrong and extremely wrong, yet are still invited back to deceive the public with special-interest propaganda. We desperately need this sort of accountability system to keep our "civil society" honest. Imagine how useful it would be for TV viewers to automatically see a side window pop up when a pundit was talking that had a summary of their historical accuracy, their affiliations, etc. If the viewer desired, then could drill down into the details with arbitrary depth. Ultimately this should encourage greater accuracy and less overt propaganda in the MSM. Here I'm assuming that the next generation or two of TVs will essentially be computer/TV hybrids that are hooked up to the internet, or that cheap devices with this capability will plug into the TVs.

By intelligently organizing our efforts we can create virtual think tanks that let us each make a small contribution that synergizes with hundreds or thousands of others to produce a much more powerful result than floundering around in isolation with our efforts having near zero impact. Our scholars could get virtual support staffs to aid their research efforts while channeling the energy of activists that would likely otherwise be wasted. This sort of organization can be applied to many kinds of activities beyond fact and logic checking.

This system could be applied to study a variety of other problems and issues. For example various facts, values and arguments could be explored. Evidence could be supplied or pointed to. The goal is a robust exploration of topics that tries to coherently and comprehensively explore issues from all perspectives. Dissenting viewpoints can be integrated into the exploration, in fact, ideally, the system would allow many different factions to concurrently articulate their strongest arguments and counterarguments all using the same system, i.e. everybody from the far left to the far right with all viewpoints in between, including off-the-wall ones. Hopefully by letting each side present its arguments and marshall its facts using the same system, areas of agreement or dissent can be clarified and rational dialog can be encouraged. The resulting explorations would also be excellent learning resources for readers wanting to explore different sides of complicated issues.

There would need to be features to fight those that try to subvert the purpose of open dialog, e.g. by creating lots of clutter and disinformation. I believe this can be done while not suppressing free speech. One approach would be that such trolls would eventually be rated by other people that you trust as trolls, so their contributions could be hidden by default. This could be overridden on a case-by-case basis when trusted voters believe the particular contribution adds value. Even though the trolls' contributions would normally be hidden, they would still be accessible so people could check whether or not they are actual trolls or if their viewpoint is being suppressed. Different factions may have different views of who adds value and one feature would let users explore the structure from different perspectives, e.g. what does the exploration look like from the perspective of a revolutionary far-leftist versus a neoconservative versus a White advocate, among dozens or even hundreds of different views.

We should fully reject the popular tactic of demonizing speakers, usually using ad hominem attacks, to avoid confronting their arguments. The neocons are notorious for this extreme intellectual dishonesty. Everyone's arguments should be considered in good faith and any flaws pointed out using facts and logic or by highlighting differences in values. In many ways obsession over the left-right divide or partisan party differences is con game designed to intellectually disarm us by limiting our thinking and to have us cheer for "our team", not noticing that both teams are tools of the elites. Instead of mindlessly rejecting anything leftists say, we should thoughtfully consider their points. In some cases they might be correct and we should adapt our viewpoint. We should be reading Chomsky, Nader and others, even though we may disagree with some of their values and beliefs.

By creating this enhanced "public institutional memory", those who use dishonest rhetoric will eventually damage their own reputations, while those operating honestly and in good faith will gain trust.

I believe we need much more free speech and open investigation while our "civil society" and elites are pushing for the opposite. Just look at the recent flood of articles and op-eds calling for stringent "hate speech" laws to weaken what's left of our Constitutional rights and the coordinated Jewish effort to get Pat Buchanan fired from his television job. I suspect one major cause of conspiracy theory and paranoia is the suppression of free and unhindered discussion. Ultimately our elites are undermining our "civil society" but perhaps this is intentional.

It's become clear that our "civil society", including academia, think tanks and the MSM, is not trustworthy in many ways and our government has likely succumbed to corruption through lobbying, cultural Marxist infiltration and other influences. Therefore we need to create alterative watchdogs to provide an independent audit of our existing institutions. Some of these alternatives may already exist or do part of the job, but there is a need for much more, particularly those that follow the approach I described above using sophisticated tools to create open research and criticism with full auditing of the facts, logic and values.

When we encounter lies or slander we can harness a community to produce detailed rebuttals with full proof if they don't already exist. Once detailed analyses of different questions exist, they can be referenced while making arguments, and if new information and perspectives arise, they can be integrated into the exploration.

I'm curious what other folks think of the doomsters and their messages as well as the rest of the post. I'd be interested in your comments or email.

PS.

Apologies for the delay in coming out with my alternative culture post, which is my next big article. Hopefully it will be ready within one or at most two weeks. I do have a list of those future posts I've mentioned in previous articles and hope to write one or two per month.

Original Giant Post

Update: 2009-02-12: See: Some Jews Supportive of White Advocacy

------------------------
Original Post Below
------------------------

This post follows up a discussion from a thread on the thought-provoking Roissy In DC blog.

I had started participating in that thread with this initial post.

[NOTE: Over the next week or so, I plan to break this post up into more focused chunks and point to those more narrow posts from this "parent post" adding a few additional notes. After that I'll try to get my posts more polished initially.]

Disclaimer: When I say "Jew" and "Jewish" I'm referring to ethnicity and not religion. I'll specify some term like "religious Jew" if needed. In fact many Jewish activists are actually atheists. Also, in some cases these folks may consider their activism to be, say, "Liberal" or "Conservative", rather than "Jewish" and they may or may not be conscious of serving Jewish group interests. And certainly not everything a Jewish person or group does is oriented toward serving Jewish group interests.

Seeking Alpha:

Scotch, a couple questions:

How does this grand conspiracy help Jews? I see how it helps the rich, and that the two overlap, but how specifically the Jews?

How does it help the Jews?

Here's a quote from one Jewish activist (from Chapter 7 of "Culture of Critique"):

The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible—and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Earl Raab, Jewish Bulletin, 1993 February 19, 23)

Obviously Mr. Raab believes Jews will be safer by living in a multicultural society where the share of the population of non-Jewish Whites is much smaller and has lost its hegemony over society. This is clearly totally unrelated to wealth but directly related to perceived Jewish safety.

I don't believe there is a "grand conspiracy" by Jews, but it is undeniable that various Jewish individuals and groups have pursued a broad spectrum of policies that have harmed the traditional population of this country and its social, cultural, religious and moral order, while benefiting the Jewish community and Israel. I think it is clear that in many cases these ethnic Jewish actors were motivated by their perceived group interests as Jews and did NOT mind the weakening and displacement of White Gentiles.

In fact this weakening appears to be the raison d'etre behind the traditional, nearly universal Jewish support for unrestricted mass immigration from 3rd world countries. Recently some thoughful Jews are questioning the wisdom of mass Muslim immigration (because it's bad for Jews).

From: High Noon to Midnight: Why Current Immigration Policy Dooms American Jewry by Dr. Stephen M. Steinlight

Thus, behind closed doors, Jewish leaders speak a different language. This is not entirely new with immigration, but the gulf is now a chasm. Privately they express grave concern that unregulated immigration will prove ruinous to American Jewry, as it has for French Jewry, and will for Jews throughout Western Europe. There’s particular fear about the impact on Jewish security, as well as American support for Israel, of the rapid growth of the Muslim population. At the conclusion of meetings with national leaders, several told me, "You’re 1000 percent right, but I can’t go out and say it yet." While they have yet to find the civic courage to break with the traditional consensus they can see the Rubicon glinting in the distance, and many recognize that eventually they will have to cross it.

Note: there is a smattering of Jews who seem to support controlled immigration for the broader interests of the country, like Dan Stein.

Another Jewish-dominated movement from the early 20th century was the banning of Christian prayer, symbols and belief from public schools which had been customary since the founding of the country. Are you denying this? (Jewish Power, J. J. Goldberg, p. 21)

Are Gentiles forbidden to notice the numerous lawsuits brought by Jews and Jewish or crypto-Jewish (e.g. the ACLU) organizations that effected these radical changes? It is significant because the Christian-based morality historically taught in public schools has been replaced by postmodern, politically correct relativism in many schools. This is the infamous Cultural Marxism mostly developed by Leftist Jewish intellectuals; see The Culture of Critique for extensive documentation).

So instead of punishing students for chewing gum and smoking like fifty years ago, our schools cope with slightly more serious hijinks, like murders, rapes and violent gangs. Every day, in every way, it's getting better and better!!!

Whites children are taught a cartoon version of history where their ancestors are the ONLY baddies and should be reviled while every other ethnicity should be celebrated for their innocence and authenticity.

Those millions of black men that were castrated before being shipped to slavery in the Arab World? Move along, nothing to see! Down the memory hole!

From Wikipedia:

The Arab slave trade from East Africa is one of the oldest slave trades, predating the European transatlantic slave trade by hundreds of years.^[30] Male slaves who were often made eunuchs were employed as servants, soldiers, or laborers by their owners, while female slaves, including those from Africa, were long traded to the Middle Eastern countries and kingdoms by Arab and Oriental traders, as concubines and servants.

Also, the youth curricula linked above don't have an iota about the Jewish role in American slavery, which was NOT non-existent. But that's not surprising, the dominant Jewish narrative seems to be there aren't any black spots in Jewish history and Jews themselves never do anything to contribute to anti-Semitism. The typical Jewish anti-Semitism book essentially asserts that Jews are sinless naifs incessantly persecuted without cause by evil, jealous, irrational Gentiles. I think more Jews need to sincerely look within and acknowledge that they have sometimes harmed other groups through their activism and behavior, and they need to atone for this just as those who transgress unfairly against Jews should do likewise.

Most Jewish activists have a hypocritical, double-standard of promoting a Universalist, deracinated, secular multiculturalism for the US and Western countries BUT NOT FOR ISRAEL! Israel gets to be an ethnocentric Jewish nation that includes legalized discrimination against its own indigenous non-Jewish minorities and that essentially restricts immigration to Jews. Again, a quick google search will lead to voluminous details.

Particularly hypocritical is the attempt to deconstruct, undermine and attack the ethnic identity of Whites and to prevent them from organizing for their own group interests (racial realism). Many Jewish organizations like the ADL and the SPLC act as politically correct enforcers attempting to crush Whites who are just trying to organize in a manner that is allowed and encouraged FOR EVERY OTHER RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUP. Of course no other group is as well-organized, well-funded and aggressive in pursuing their own interests as Jews.

Racial Realism means that Whites should look out for their own interests like everyone else is doing. The variant that seems most just to me is that Whites should have the same rights and respect as other groups, no more or no less, and that traditional Freedom of Association is restored so there can have ethnic enclaves not subject to neighborhood busting by sleazy developers. Likewise other groups can have their own sanctuaries. Of course in such a society there could also be many public spaces that were integrated as well, probably a majority.

White Supremacists believe that Whites are superior to other races and that Whites should conquer and dominate other groups.


I disagree with this position and am inspired by the following quote from Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn:

In recent times it has been fashionable to talk of the levelling of nations, of the disappearance of different races in the melting-pot of contemporary civilization. I do not agree with this opinion, but its discussion remains another question. Here it is merely fitting to say that the disappearance of nations would have impoverished us no less than if all men had become alike, with one personality and one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colours and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.

I think it is crystal clear that those two concepts are quite different. Racial Realism just says that if we're going to have a multicultural society, then Whites have same groups rights as everyone else: no better or no worse.

Right now America has a hypocritical system that is strongly biased AGAINST Whites and FOR ANYBODY BUT Whites. I'm fed up with these dishonest double standards and believe the more that Whites are belittled, discriminated against, demonized by Hollywood, the MSM, the Diversity Industry and the Youth and Higher Education Industry, and besieged by grossly disproportionate crime from the Black Thug subclass and to a lesser extent by Hispanics, the magnitude and details of which is covered up by our "journalists", the more Whites will give up on the Color-Blind society, as I have, since, for the most part, ONLY Whites have pursued it in good faith.

It is clear that the more power Whites have relinquished, the more sacrifices we've made and the more we've let ourselves be displaced by 3rd World immigration, the WORSE our treatment. Why should we keep enabling this rotten, hateful system?

Our society even allows OPENLY RACIST groups like La Raza and OPENLY SUPREMACIST groups like MEChA to receive public funds and operate on college campuses while prohibiting NON-RACIST White ethnocentric groups. On campuses members of those racist organizations are not shunned and persecuted the way a corresponding White racist or supremacist would be.

Janet Murguia of La Raza appears regularly in the mainstream media and is treated with respect, while White racialists, like Jared Taylor, don't get airtime except when framed as an evil, bigoted Nazi to be held in the highest contempt. This is a hypocritical, double standard.

Oddly enough Jewish ethnocentrists like Dr. Alan Dershowitz DON'T receive the same treatment. Dr. Dershowitz is passionately concerned with Jews ethnic survival and participates in organized groups to address this grave worry. That is perfectly reasonable and laudable! But don't accuse Whites of bigotry and agitate for legal oppression against ONLY Whites to suppress them the doing exact logical equivalent for their own people and interests!

Seeking Alpha:

How does your theory fit with the fact that many of the proponents of your stated theories aren’t Jewish? Is it secret mind control? Kennedy was behind the Immigration Act, no? Rumsfeld and Bush led the current charge on Iraq, and from what I’ve read there was plenty of hawks in the Clinton administration as well.

I just don’t see the motive. The only motives I see (I don’t agree with them, but the argument can be made) are ways these things help the rich.

I dispute your claim that "many of the proponents of your stated theories aren’t Jewish".

Most of these changes have been pushed predominantly by Jews. Depending on the issue the Jewish contribution can vary from moderate to overwhelming; I believe in going with whatever the facts are as well as they can be ascertained. For example, if Jews were 3% of the population but applied 80% of the force behind a certain movement, I'd call that EXTREMELY disproportionate. Even if they provided say 20% of the force, that would be fairly disproportionate but at least there would still be broad societal consensus. For most of these issues, I'd say the Jewish contribution is over 40-50%, particularly when you factor in their intellectual and cultural leadership and disproportionate influence over Hollywood, the media, government, business, education and academia which act as force multipliers by inculcating Gentiles toward supporting Jewish interests.

Decades of anti-White and anti-Christian propaganda from OVERWHELMINGLY Jewish-controlled Hollywood have had an impact.

See: Joel Stein, "How Jewish is Hollywood" and Steve Sailer's take on this story.

Gotta love Mr. Stein's conclusion:

I appreciate Foxman's concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.

A truly vicious piece of anti-White and anti-Christian hatred is "Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle". I'm planning a detailed analysis of this in a future post. The short answer is that pretty much ALL the Whites EXCEPT THE THREE JEWS (including the hippie drug dealer) are vicious, moronic, perverted, psychotic, thuggish, backwards, corrupt, racist, cruel or some other undesirable trait. Of course, the innocent black guy falsely jailed by a vicious, racist cop is saintly, the Korean and Hindu protagonists are cool dudes, as are the Jewish dudes, and, oh yeah, a group of Asians dorks turn out to be cool too. They drag Christianity through the mud with pure malice. Naturally the producer, directors and writers are all Jews.

When I accessed this Wikipedia page for the movie [on 2009-01-30 early AM EST], there is NO HINT that the movie might be biased against whites, although if one looks in the discussion and history it appears someone tried to get this in there, but was wiki-censored.

The simple test of double standards is whether our glorious PC commissars would change their opinion (Funny! Brilliant! Subversively Transgressive!) if various identities are interchanged (Unfunny! Viciously Racist! White Supremacist!). Hmm... Would the reception have been different if black characters were swapped with the white characters? Can you say "100 alarm riots in 100 hoods"? How about swapping Judiasm for Christianity? I'm sure the ADL, the SPLC and hundreds of other Jewish organization would be DELIGHTED with the witty sendup! NOT!!!

OK. Back to the Neocons.

Typically Jewish-led movements in Gentile host societies like having some Gentiles around, but usually they're the second string followers or "beards" like George W. Bush and NOT the central drivers and theorists. Kevin MacDonald discusses this extensively in "The Culture of Critique".

If you think George W. Bush "led the current charge on Iraq", that is, if he actually created and developed the doctrine and strategy, there's some scenic lakefront land in Florida selling on e-Bay real cheap! It's a REAL STEAL!

"White man's burden" by Ari Shavit in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz discusses the Neocons:

In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Eliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history.

A quick google search on neoconservative, jewish and "iraq war" will lead to many sources that provide great detail on this. Also, I gave some good initial books and some of the key players in my previous post.

The following article in The American Conservative magazine discusses the Neoconservatives including their role in promoting mass immigration for the US and in purging traditional conservatives (paleoconservatives) out of mainstream conservative media:

Among the Neocons: A foot soldier in the ideological wars relates by Scott McConnell

Justin Raimondo discusses the history of the Neocons here.

Some of the dissidents banished by the Neocons include Peter Brimelow, Joseph Sobran and Steve Sailer while others like John O'Sullivan gelded themselves to preserve their careers.

By the late 90s National Review had gotten very Neocon and Jewish and the remaining Gentiles knew they'd better not cross you-know-who if they wanted a home in "respectable media": that's the stick. Notice how Victor Davis Hanson's career skyrocketed (in Neocon controlled media) when he mouthed an extreme form of Neocon warmongering and 100% autonomic support for Israel: that's the carrot.

Check out the article: "Is Kevin MacDonald Right?" on jewcy.com which is an e-mail exchange between Joey Kurtzman and John Derbyshire which includes a discussion of Jewish power and influence in the media. This article is a gold mine. Here are two excerpts from John Derbyshire:

First Excerpt:

Working back through your questions: Yes, indeed I was, and am, “afraid of offending Jews.” Of course I am! For a person like myself, a Gentile who is a very minor name in American opinion journalism, desirous of ascending to some slightly less minor status, ticking off Jews is a very, very bad career strategy. I approached the MacDonald review with great trepidation. I gave my honest opinion, of course—the entire point of my line of work is to speak your mind and get paid for it—but I’ll admit I was nervous. Reading the review again, I think it shows.

Second Excerpt:

To your next point (I am working from the bottom up again) that my professed fear of ticking off Jews is some kind of affectation or pose, I can only assure you that this is not so. Almost the first thing you hear from old hands when you go into opinion journalism in the U.S. is, to put it in the precise form I first heard it: “Don’t f*ck with the Jews.” (Though I had better add here that I was mixing mainly with British expats at that point, and the comment came from one of them. More on this in a moment.)

Joe Sobran expressed it with his usual hyperbole: “You must only ever write of us as a passive, powerless, historically oppressed minority, struggling to maintain our ancient identity in a world where all the odds are against us, poor helpless us, poor persecuted and beleaguered us! Otherwise we will smash you to pieces.”

You can read between the lines of Derbyshire's contributions to sense his fear and caution to make sure he doesn't go too far in discussing this taboo. He also makes sure to add some sycophantic praise. Note: Mr. Derbyshire also writes some fine books for the general public discussing advanced mathematical ideas and history; I'm sure if he wants to continue getting these book contracts with major publishers that will be promoted in the major bookstores he knows he'd better be careful (Kevin MacDonald was banished from the major publishers).

Here's some discussion of this infamous e-mail exchange by Patrick Cleburne.

Anyone researching Neoconservatism, the Iraq War and Democracy-At-The-Point-Of-A-Gun-For-Arab-And-Muslim-Regimes-That-Are-Threats-To-Israel quickly finds that NEARLY ALL of the principle players were Jewish. George W. Bush was the nominal leader but was completely owned by this well-organized group of highly motivated ideologues. Try swimming through the sea of Jewish and Gentile-tool Neocon op-eds from after September 11th through the first few years of the Iraq War (there are probably thousands). I read through hundreds at the time and was complete Neocon tool for years. Their goals dovetailed neatly with what they considered to be in Israel's best interest by destroying the regimes considered most dangerous to Israel (Iraq, Syria and Iran).

Again, I'm not claiming all of these movements and actions are 100% Jewish, only that Jews have an extremely disproportionate influence. "The Culture of Critique" explores this in great depth.

Most disturbing is how a group of ideologues who put Israel's interest before America's were and are allowed to hold so many important government positions. And because it's now considered politically incorrect to discriminate in any way against foreign origin or ethnicity, our national security bureaucracies are filled with people of various backgrounds that may retain a higher loyalty to their ethnostate, like China, or alien religion, like Islam, which deeply compromises our security, unlike our various competitors that are unapologetically ethnocentric and lack legions of lawyers salivating over giant payouts for discrimination lawsuits. They'd better get with the multicultural program! Oh, they're non-White? How dare you corrupt their authentic culture!

A significant factor in Allied victory in World War II was our breaking of the Japanese and German codes which gave us great insight into their plans. If our government and society are infiltrated by hundreds or thousands of moles and operatives working for our enemies BEFORE and DURING wartime, we're open to intelligence breaches and attacks of shocking devastation, particularly in this era of WMDs. Most Americans don't appreciate our vulnerability since we haven't suffered a bloody war on our soil since the Civil War.

America will likely suffer grievous harm in the next two decades because of this.

Seeking Alpha:

Kennedy was behind the Immigration Act, no?

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was sponsored by Emanuel Celler, a Jewish Congressman from New York well known for promoting massive immigration since he was first seated in 1923. Sure, Ted Kennedy was a great supporter of of the 1965 Immigration Act but he was far from the being its primary cause. Other Jewish legislators like Senator Jacob Javits of New York also played a significant role in passing this act.

According to Wikipedia (and Kevin MacDonald agrees):

He [Jacob Javits] was also one of the main forces behind the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act that by removing immigration quota that favored Western European nations helped to make the U.S. a truly diverse and multicultural country.

Please read Chapter 7 of Kevin MacDonald's "The Culture of Critique". It lays out in great detail how Jewish organizations have forcefully and consistently pushed for mass immigration into this country. This book is heavily referenced and footnoted and includes a massive bibliography. It would be easy for a group to consult each of his original sources, excerpt a large segment around his reference and then let careful readers decide if he's been honest in his quoting and interpretation of these sources.

A General Discussion of Jewish Influence in Response to Some Questions

This post follows up a discussion from a thread on the thought-provoking Roissy In DC blog.

I had started participating in that thread with this initial post.

2009-02-03:

I've removed the bulk of this post for now because I want to divide it into smaller, focused, independent pieces.

I also want to improve its tone because my goal is not to rant (at least not too much!), but hopefully be constructive.

I plan to post new-and-hopefully-improved chunks as each is done and to edit this post to act as a table of contents.

Also, I'm planning to post soon on other topics like Civil Defense, Why I Gave up on the Color Blind Society, and so on. I want this blog to discuss a broad range of topics although the overarching theme is concern for the state of the US, the West and Whites.

2009-02-09:

See: Disclaimer: Group Reasoning

2009-02-10:

This is the original huge post I'm in the process of editing into smaller pieces. I guess I'll leave it here for reference.

See: Original Giant Post

2009-02-12

See: Some Jews Supportive of White Advocacy