Saturday, December 31, 2016

UK: Awards Barred to “White Movies”

In another outburst of anti-white racism, the British Academy Film Awards (Bafta)—the U.K.’s equivalent of the Oscars—will in future be denied to any British movie that only has heterosexual white actors.
According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual.
Read More:

Trumping Obama 'N Shiz - 2017 Predictions - Jay Dyer on Boiler Room

Conservative Actor James Woods Returns to Twitter Six Weeks After Quitting Over Political Censorship

Most celebrities are about as assured on Twitter as a duck on a highway. Not Hollywood actor James Woods.
Like the characters he’s played in films including CasinoThe Hard Way and Salvador, Woods takes no prisoners and doesn’t suffer fools gladly on social media.
Last month Woods, 69, swore off Twitter on censorship grounds after they suspended a host of accounts allegedly linked to the alt-right.

Stuff Black People Don't Like - SBPDL: Her Name is Marie Buck: 81-Year-old Great-Grandmot...

Stuff Black People Don't Like - SBPDL: Her Name is Marie Buck: 81-Year-old Great-Grandmot...: PK Note: Pre-order  The Truth About Selma: What Happened when the Cameras Left and the Marching Stopped  today! The paperback will be avail...

How To Create Toxic Elites

Our elites are toxic, and our proles made it so.
The dominant story throughout human history is that people specialize in illusions, and when they get together in groups, they create an echo chamber which reinforces those illusions, and then they force those on others.
Then “intellectuals” get famous for inventing alternate stories about how it was not human group stupidity arising from our individual selfishness that did us in, but something else… something external to whatever group we perceive ourselves as part of.
Hence the mania, these days, to blame any group of elites: the Left blames the Rich™ and the Whites,™ and the Right blames the Globalist Elites.™ (And everyone seems to blame The Jews,™ which is causing many Jews to identify as right-wing in order to point out that Jewish Leftists are just as crazy as regular Leftists, but non-Leftist Jews are not part of that craziness and wish to avoid mass graves in the coming physical removal of Leftists — smart of them).
This is how intellectuals distract: they invent a positive story about our shiny future, identify a scapegoat that threatens it, and then push us toward an ineffectual but emotionally satisfying method of achieving that future, usually some variant on the universal sensations that make a room buzz: we are all one, peace on earth, love/accept/tolerate everyone, we are all equal, trust Jesus, etc.

Read More:

Israel grabbed over 13,000 dunums of Palestinian land in 2016

The Israeli occupation authorities (IOA) have seized about 13,295 dunums of Palestinian land during 2016, according to a report released on Thursday by the Palestinian Land Research Center (LRC).

Read More:

'Holds No Water': How Obama Invented 'Russian Hackers'

U.S. President Barack Obama smiles as he delivers remarks at the annual White House Tribal Nations Conference in Washington November 5, 2015

On December 29, the United States announced a series of measures against several Russian organizations and individuals in retaliation for Moscow’s alleged hacking into US political institutions. Washington also expelled 35 Russian diplomats and their families (about 100 people in all) and is closing down two Russian-owned compounds in the US.

Even though the expulsion of the country’s diplomats and closure of its diplomatic missions traditionally entails a tit-for-tat response, President Putin said on Friday that Russia will not expel US diplomats in response to Washington’s unfriendly move. "We will not create problems for American diplomats. We will not expel anyone," Putin said. “Furthermore, I invite all children of US diplomats accredited in Russia to the Christmas and New Year tree in the Kremlin.” He added that Russia’s further steps in restoring ties with the United States will depend on the policy of President-elect Donald Trump. Promised revenge

Earlier this month President Barack Obama warned that the US would “take action” against Russia for alleged cyberattacks on Democratic Party  officials who claimed that outside meddling prevented Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton from winning the presidency.

Russia has flatly denied all accusations that it organized the hacking of email accounts of Democratic Party officials and Clinton's campaign chief, John Podesta, and then leaked them to the whistleblowing anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks.

Read More:

Those outraged over the UN resolution should be more concerned with Israel’s nukes aimed at us!

Those outraged over the UN resolution should be more concerned with Israel’s nukes aimed at us!

By Dr. Patrick Slattery — The response to the recent vote in the United Nations Security Council over Israeli settlements has caused quite an uproar, which as usual completely misses the relevant points.
The political “right” in the United States has pretty much roundly condemned the Obama administration over not exercising its veto power to block what was otherwise a unanimous vote by the UNSC. Not just the Neocucks, mind you, but even paleo-conservative Pat Buchanan penned an article that, while not exactly condemning the UN resolution, used it as an example of why we should get out of the United Nations. This tacit support of Israel’s position by Buchanan was backed up by his calling war criminal Netanyahu “Bibi” and referring to Israel by the feminine pronoun “she,” which is something that we English speakers don’t do when referring to countries.
On the other hand, it is ridiculous to either praise or criticize Obama for “bitch-slapping” Netanyahu over this vote. Obama spent his entire eight years in office bending over backwards (forwards, more like it) for Israel. He completely shut his eyes to the murderous bombing of Gaza during the month of his inauguration, he signed on to the biggest-ever military give away package to Israel, did Israel’s bidding in fomenting civil war in Syria, and forced Iran into a very unfair nuclear deal that completely ignores Israel’s nuclear arsenal that poses an existential threat to the rest of the world.
The text of the resolution is extremely tame, merely stating that Israel should abide by international law. Try to find anything anti-Semitic or unfair in the text of Resolution 2334. But is contains no enforcement mechanism, just a request that the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months. So despite the outrage on the part of Jews and Zio-cucks, the passage of the resolution is hardly a victory worth celebrating, although the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement might hail the development. (Oh, I forgot, we are not allowed to use the world “hail” anymore. That would make us Nazis.)
The largely Jewish-led BDS movement gets people to measure victory or defeat by the number of Jewish housing units that are built in East Jerusalem or the West Bank. We are then encouraged to define our allies, who are the good guys and bad guys, by this measure. This turns many liberal Jews into “allies.”
But the real issue is that Israel has amassed hundreds of nuclear weapons and the missile, bomber, and submarine systems to deliver them to European capitals and even American cities. Yet thanks to the BDS movement, liberal Jews who support Israel’s capacity to genocide Europeans with these weapons are somehow our allies.
NOBODY is talking about Israel’s nuclear menace, even as we are putting our entire foreign policy behind protecting Israel from a non-existent Iranian nuclear menace. Israel has a Samson Option, whereby it would nuke European (and other) capitals should it be faced with regime change. Given that Jews effectively control the US and Europe, if Jewish power in these countries is “regime changed” would that trigger the Samson option?

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

How Blacks Changed Our School by George Holiday


A once-vital Catholic school is now is steep decline.
I am a teacher at a small Catholic school, where I have taught for over 15 years. During that time I have seen a massive demographic shift in the student population. As you might expect, the effects have been mostly—and significantly—negative. This shift closely mirrors the overall trends in our society in terms of its effects on group behavior and identity, and the future of our country.
The school has been around for more than half a century, in what is now a racially mixed suburb. For most of its history, it was attended by children from the parish. The community was very tight-knit. It was common for a teacher to educate two or even three generations of the same family. When children became friends their parents often became friends. School events such as banquets, festivals, cooking competitions, and fish fries were major social events for parents and students alike. Most of the families attended church together, and priests stayed at the church for years. Most of the students who did not attend our church were still Catholic; they came because their neighboring parishes did not have their own schools. The student body was overwhelmingly white—usually 90 percent or more—and most non-white students were Asians. Some of the black students were African Catholics, but most were American blacks who lived nearby.
The curriculum focused on what were traditionally core subjects in Western education, with a focus on college preparation. Graduates could write well, and were usually well-versed in the Catholic catechism. Of course, students wore uniforms: skirts and blouses for the girls, dress shirt and tie for the boys, dress shoes for both. Students looked clean-cut and respectable, and were easily identifiable in public. Discipline was relatively tight, and students with poor manners were corrected.

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Black Mob Violence Sweeps Malls Nationwide

Black Mob Violence Sweeps Malls Nationwide
Two days ago, we reported that heading into Christmas, countless "mall brawls" had broken out across America's as last minute holiday shoppers were filmed brawling with each other in shopping malls in New Jersey, Alabama, Georgia and other states for those last minute "holiday cheer" purchases. The videos made for for a very Unmerry Christmas.
Now, in the spirit of holiday symmetry, following the one day lull on Christmas Day, the brawls returned on the day after Christmas, with fights, disturbances and false reports of gunfire causing chaotic scenes and shutting down several malls across the United States on Monday, as shoppers scrambled for the best deals in the typically busy post-Christmas shopping day.
The first calls from the The Mills at Jersey Gardens came in just after nightfall Monday. Witnesses said they thought they had heard shots fired. That, along with a fight, led to what Elizabeth police Officer Greg Jones described as a "chaotic panic and everybody running all at once."  Eight to 10 people suffered minor injuries during a melee in the food court at the Jersey Gardens malls the mayor there said on Twitter.
Read More:

Fool’s Conspiracy: Did Kurt Eichenwald Use Journalism to Shield Himself After Viewing Child Porn 22+ Times?

In the mid-2000s, former New York Times writer Kurt Eichenwald fell into disrepute after being caught paying a source $2,000 — money that the journalist claims he requested back — an additional $1,184 to that source via PayPal to acquire and download illicit images, and likely wired $1,000 more to the same source under a fraudulent name. That source, former child porn star Justin Berry, had become a cautionary tale of the perils of child pornography with Kurt Eichenwald being initially heralded as a hero who “saved” him.
What has not been reported until this time is that Mr. Eichenwald accessed illicit images of Mr. Berry (then an 18-year-old) and a 14-year-old young man masturbating at least 21 times over a seven day period from June 23–29, 2005 — a video that the now rehabilitated Newsweek Senior Writer claimed he had only viewed a single time with Justin Berry after the two met at LAX Airport on June 30 for journalistic purposes.
It has also gone unreported that Mr. Eichenwald proffered false testimony both in written statements and verbal testimony asserting that he had not identified himself to Mr. Berry until June 30, 2005 notwithstanding having sent the former child porn actor a check for $2,000 with his name on it on June 8, 2005.
Further that payment went to the production of the child pornography video (titled JustinPreview2) featuring the 14-year-old child masturbating side-by-side with Mr. Berry on June 9, 2005 (the following day) — with court records indicating that Berry withdrew $300 following the deposit of that check to pay the young man for his participation in the illicit video.
Not only did Mr. Eichenwald violate all bounds of journalistic standards, but he proceeded to convince Mr. Berry to flip state’s evidence on the same day — July 14 — that Eichenwald’s administrative account on the child porn site was deleted and all messages between Eichenwald and Berry were scrubbed from Mr. Berry’s computer.

Read More:

Monday, December 26, 2016

In the Shadow of the Sword - American Renaissance

In the Shadow of the Sword - American Renaissance: Muslims are spoiling Christmas all across Europe.

A "Hate Crime" with no arrests... Vandalizing of Monument Avenue on Night of Trump's Win in Richmond still has no arrests


As more and more "hate crimes" instantly promoted by the mainstream media (to perpetuate public opinion against white people) turn out to be nothing more than hoaxes, one real crime based purely on anti-white hate still has yet to be solved. [Richmond monuments vandalized during anti-Trump protests; 12 arrested,, 11-9-16]:

 Hundreds of people gathered in and around Monroe Park in Richmond to march in protest of President-elect Donald Trump Wednesday night. 
 Protesters shut down several streets as they marched near VCU chanting, “No Trump. No KKK. No fascist USA.” Some were also carrying banners that read, “not my president.” 
A large group was also seen marching onto I-95 south in downtown Richmond, eventually shutting down the interstate in both directions.According to police, ten people were arrested for refusing to leave and charged with unlawful assembly and for being pedestrians on an interstate. 

Read More:

‘Freud Lives!’ by Slavoj Žižek

As pub­lished in Lon­don Review of Books, Vol. 28 No. 10 · 25 May 2006

In recent years, it’s often been said that psy­cho­ana­lys­is is dead. New advances in the brain sci­ences have finally put it where it belongs, along­side reli­gious con­fess­ors and dream-read­ers in the lum­ber-room of pre-sci­en­ti­fic obscur­ant­ist searches for hid­den mean­ing. As Todd Dufres­ne put it, no fig­ure in the his­tory of human thought was more wrong about all the fun­da­ment­als – with the excep­tion of Marx, some would add. The Black Book of Com­mun­ismwas fol­lowed last year by the Black Book of Psy­cho­ana­lys­is, which lis­ted all the the­or­et­ic­al mis­takes and instances of clin­ic­al fraud per­pet­rated by Freud and his fol­low­ers. In this way, at least, the pro­found solid­ar­ity of Marx­ism and psy­cho­ana­lys­is is now there for all to see.
A cen­tury ago, Freud included psy­cho­ana­lys­is as one of what he described as the three ‘nar­ciss­ist­ic ill­nesses’. First, Coper­ni­cus demon­strated that the Earth moves around the Sun, thereby depriving humans of their cent­ral place in the uni­verse. Then Dar­win demon­strated that we are the pro­duct of evol­u­tion, thereby depriving us of our priv­ileged place among liv­ing beings. Finally, by mak­ing clear the pre­dom­in­ant role of the uncon­scious in psych­ic pro­cesses, Freud showed that the ego is not mas­ter even in its own house. Today, sci­en­ti­fic break­throughs seem to bring fur­ther humi­li­ation: the mind is merely a machine for data-pro­cessing, our sense of freedom and autonomy merely a ‘user’s illu­sion’. In com­par­is­on, the con­clu­sions of psy­cho­ana­lys­is seem rather con­ser­vat­ive.
Is psy­cho­ana­lys­is out­dated? It cer­tainly appears to be. It is out­dated sci­en­tific­ally, in that the cog­nit­iv­ist-neuro­bi­o­lo­gist mod­el of the human mind has super­seded the Freu­di­an mod­el; it is out­dated in the psy­chi­at­ric clin­ic, where psy­cho­ana­lyt­ic treat­ment is los­ing ground to drug treat­ment and beha­vi­our­al ther­apy; and it is out­dated in soci­ety more broadly, where the notion of social norms which repress the individual’s sexu­al drives doesn’t hold up in the face of today’s hedon­ism. But we should not be too hasty. Per­haps we should instead insist that the time of psy­cho­ana­lys­is has only just arrived.

UN Passes Resolution on Ending Israeli Settlements

Danny Danon - Israel's new ambassador to the UN. (Photo: via twitter))
The UN Security Council has voted in favor of a resolution demanding the halt of settlement activity by Israel on occupied Palestinian territory with the United States notably abstaining.
The resolution was put forward at the 15-member council for a vote on Friday by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal a day after Egypt withdrew it under pressure from Israel and US president-elect Donald Trump.
Israel and Trump had called on the United States to veto the measure.
It was adopted with 14 votes in favor, to a round of applause. It is the first resolution the Security Council has adopted on Israel and the Palestinians in nearly eight years.
Israel’s UN ambassador, Danny Danon, reacted angrily to the vote and issued a sharp parting shot at the Obama administration’s role.
“It was to be expected that Israel’s greatest ally would act in accordance with the values that we share and that they would have vetoed this disgraceful resolution. I have no doubt that the new US administration and the incoming UN Secretary General will usher in a new era in terms of the UN’s relationship with Israel,” he said.
Read More:

trump triumph means chronicles wins, national review loses By:John Seiler

Are you sick of winning yet? I’m not! And one of the biggest winners is Chronicles Magazine.
While one of the biggest losers is National Review, a shadow of its former self, the great magazine I grew up with in the 1960s to the 1980s. NR besmirched itself by attacking Trump all along, especially its February 2016 Symposium, “Conservatives Against Trump.”
It’s a bookend to the March 2003 screed, “Unpatriotic Conservatives,” attacking those who presciently opposed the Iraq War from the get-go, by David Frum; who 13 years later also screeched against Trump, in October predicting “a scorched period of recrimination ” against Trump supporters after he loses “as big as he’s going to.” Frum (now with The Atlantic), like most NR writers, has a 1930s Moscow purge mentality.
Why does anyone subscribe to NR, or give it money, when Chronicles is the magazine of real conservatism – and real prescience? (Subscription info here. What a great Christmas gift! Donations info here.)
I bring this up because on Scott “Dilbert” Adams’ blog someone reminded me of my own early Nostradamus imitation, right here in Chronicles, on the Trump phenomenon. On June 11, 2014, more than a year before Trump’s surprise announcement of his run on June 16, 2015, I wrote, “Right now the immigration issue is lying in the street for whatever Republican presidential candidate, if any, is willing to pick it up. . . . That’s shown by Tuesday’s primary defeat of Republican House honcho Eric Cantor, what Tom Piatak called ‘a victory for America.’”
That’s now also an apt name for Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, 2016: A victory for America.
I continued, “It’s too bad Pat Buchanan will be 78 for the 2016 presidential election. He only would have to rerun his 1996 platform to sweep the GOP primaries, then beat Hillary or whomever in the general election. He was 20 years ahead of his time.” Which is exactly what Trump ended up doing, using the new social media to his advantage by going above the Main Sleaze Media that had trashed Pat. Buchanan + Trump Tweets  = Trump Victory.
Then on Dec. 17, 2014, I predicted, “But immigration will be the issue of 2016, especially in the GOP primary gauntlet.” I didn’t predict the candidate. Trump was rumored to throw some locks of orange hair into the ring, but that rumor had been around since the late 1980s.
After Trump’s announcement of his candidacy, I wrote here three weeks later, on July 7, 2015, an article headlined, “Trump seizes immigration issue.” Referencing my 2014 articles, I wrote, “I had no idea who the candidate might be.
“Turns out it’s Donald Trump. . . . Trump called for building a wall with Mexico and otherwise enforcing U.S. immigration laws. That gained him publicity, as did the backlash against him by politically correct companies he had done business with, as well as New York’s Stalinist mayor, Bill de Blasio.
“So much for ‘free speech’ in America.
Read More:

Sunday, December 25, 2016

Heavy drinking has been normalized for women, and it’s killing them in record numbers

Women drink wine

By Kimberly Kindy and Dan KeatingThe Washington Post
The ads started popping up about a decade ago on social media. Instead of selling alcohol with sex and romance, these ads had an edgier theme: Harried mothers chugging wine to cope with everyday stress. Women embracing quart-sized bottles of whiskey, and bellying up to bars to knock back vodka shots with men.
In this new strain of advertising, women’s liberation equaled heavy drinking, and alcohol researchers say it both heralded and promoted a profound cultural shift: Women in America are drinking far more, and far more frequently, than their mothers or grandmothers did, and alcohol consumption is killing them in record numbers.
White women are particularly likely to drink dangerously, with more than a quarter drinking multiple times a week and the share of binge drinking up 40 percent since 1999, according to a Washington Post analysis of federal health data. In 2013, more than a million women of all races wound up in emergency rooms as a result of heavy drinking, with women in middle age most likely to suffer severe intoxication.

This behavior has contributed to a startling increase in early mortality. The rate of alcohol-related deaths for white women ages 35 to 54 has more than doubled since 1999, according to The Post analysis, accounting for 8 percent of deaths in this age group in 2015.
“It is a looming health crisis,” said Katherine M. Keyes, an alcohol researcher at Columbia University.
Read More:

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Russian Wikileaks Hacking the Election for Trump: Total CIA Nonsense - J...

The New Silk Road Will Make Iran Immune to Western Sanctions


In January 2016 we’ve witnessed a partial withdrawal of sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran. It should be noted that the introduction of those was linked to Iran’s nuclear program, which worried the United States and its allies, therefore Western countries were behind the introduction of sanctions that were aimed at applying pressure on Iran back in 1970s. In July 2015, after lengthy negotiations a compromise was reached: Iran and the group of six (the five permanent UN Security Council members – Britain, China, Russia, USA and France along with Germany) have signed an agreement establishing a gradual withdrawal of all sanctions. Under this agreement, Iran would provide access to its nuclear facilities to IAEA experts so that they could ensure that the nuclear energy is only being used for peaceful purposes. The agreement was soon labelled a diplomatic breakthrough, and it was believed that it would put an end to the growing tension in the region. However, by the end of 2016 the situation started deteriorating again.
At first everything went according to the plan. In January 2016 the United Nations and the European Union lifted the sanctions regime against Iran, while the US trade embargo and restrictions on US citizens traveling to Tehran remained in place. Nevertheless, Iran began to rapidly rebuild the old political and economic ties.
In August 2016 the United States accused Tehran that it was secretly supporting the rebels in Yemen, while providing them with modern missiles systems. According to Washington, this step allegedly threatened the stability of an entire region. At that point the White House announced that it is considering the possibility of introducing new sanctions against Iran.
Then, on September 3, a new scandal broke out when it was established that Washington has sent 400 million dollars to Tehran in cash on the same day a number of American prisoners got released from Iranian prisons. At that point Washington was accused of violating the US principle to never pay ransoms for hostages. In return, President Barack Obama declared that this sum was transferred to Iran as part of the debt that the US was forced to pay due to the decision of the Hague Tribunal. Nevertheless, on September 23, 2016 the US Congress adopted a bill prohibiting the US government to make any cash transfers to the states that are allegedly suspected of sponsoring terrorism.
Read More:

Russo-American Paradigm Shift

It’s difficult to point to a moment in time where one could say that Christendom was united in any real sense. From the Constantinian shift1 in the 4th century up until the East-West schism of 1054,2 it could be argued that Christendom was unified in a loose sense, however the theological differences between the Latin West and the Greek East had been present since the early days of Christianity. Even then, as distinct national identities arose during the middle ages after the disintegration of the Roman Empire, it could hardly be argued that Europe had ever been united in any peaceful sense.
Fast-forward to 1949, and after the most devastating war in human history,3 Western Europe would unite under the banner of N.A.T.O. led by the United States, and later the European Economic Community in 1958. Although primarily established to consolidate opposition to the Soviet East during the Cold-War, this arrangement would continue after 1989-1991 when the Eastern Bloc collapsed and the Soviet Union disintegrated. The idea of a United States of Europe, promoted by the United States of America, had been there since the conception of the European Union.4
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States and N.A.T.O. would be deprived of an enemy. In recent years, Western diplomats have attempted to argue that post-Soviet Russia still poses a threat to the West and the world. English journalist Peter Hitchens, who lived Moscow during the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, argues differently.5 To him, the Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991, and the collapse of the ruling Communist Party was evidence of this, noting how burnt Communist Party membership cards filled the bins of Moscow during that time. He explains how the Soviet Navy was effectively scuttled in Sevastopol, and that the border of Russia now looked similar that imposed on them by Kaiser Wilhelm in 1918.6 The key point Peter puts across is that Russia and the Soviet Union are two different things, and that after 1991, the latter ceased to exist.
In the late 1999, N.A.T.O. would expand to include Poland and in 2004 it would expand further to include Romania, Bulgaria as well as the Baltic states. Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad was now isolated. Russia’s access to the Mediterranean as well as the Baltic Sea was reduced drastically.
Read More:

An Academic Book on Jewish Subversion of Christmas by Kevin MacDonald

Editor’s note: Originally posted in 2012, this article gets at the Jewish ethnic angle behind the “War on Christmas.”
A new book, Joshua Eli Plaut’s A Kosher Christmas: ’Tis the Season to Be Jewish, documents what we have known all along: The Jews did indeed subvert Christmas.  This book deserves a full review, but Ethan Schwartz’s summary and comment (“Twas the night after Christmas“) deserve scrutiny. First the summary:
Jews have been the vanguard of an effort to “transform Christmastime into a holiday season belonging to all Americans,” without religious exclusivity.  The most important Jewish mechanisms of secularization are comedy and parody, for laughter undermines religious awe.  Take, for example, Hanukkah Harry from “Saturday Night Live”, who heroically steps in for a bedridden Santa by delivering presents from a cart pulled by donkeys named Moishe, Hershel, and Shlomo.  Remarkably, Hanukkah Harry has emerged as a real Santa-alternative for many American Jews.  Plaut sees such things not as attempts at assimilation but as an intentional subversion of Christmas traditions.  “Through these parodies,” he writes, “Jews could envision not having to be captivated by the allure of ubiquitous Christmas symbols.”  And it isn’t just Jews: for Americans in general, Jewish parody helps ensure that Christmas “not be taken too seriously” and that the celebrations of other traditions “be accorded equal respect and opportunity.”
There seem to be two messages here. One is the message of subversion utilizing ridicule among other methods. The other is that Jews are seen as high-mindedly making Christmas  “into a holiday season belonging to all Americans.” The end result is that Christmas is not “taken too seriously” and the Christian religious aspect central to the traditional holiday is de-emphasized.
People who take their religion seriously do not allow their religion to be ridiculed. One need only think of the Muslim reactions to cartoons ridiculing Mohammed. The fact that Jews have been able to ridicule Christianity without any serious negative consequences is an important marker of Jewish power and an equally strong indication of the decline of Christian religious belief. I suspect that the organized Jewish community would react in outrage if non-Jews ridiculed religious Judaism. Indeed, any criticism of Jews as Jews is off limits in the mainstream media. (A topical short list of verboten topics: the loyalties of neocon Jews and their role in promoting the war in Iraq, the Jewish aspect of theIvy League admissions scandal, how Jewish control of Hollywood influences media content.)
Read More:

The Rise of Political Correctness. By Angelo M. Codevilla

Comrade, your statement is factually incorrect.”
“Yes, it is. But it is politically correct.”

The notion of political correctness came into use among Communists in the 1930s as a semi-humorous reminder that the Party’s interest is to be treated as a reality that ranks above reality itself. Because all progressives, Communists included, claim to be about creating new human realities, they are perpetually at war against nature’s laws and limits. But since reality does not yield, progressives end up pretending that they themselves embody those new realities. Hence, any progressive movement’s nominal goal eventually ends up being subordinated to the urgent, all-important question of the movement’s own power. Because that power is insecure as long as others are able to question the truth of what the progressives say about themselves and the world, progressive movements end up struggling not so much to create the promised new realities as to force people to speak and act as if these were real: as if what is correct politically—i.e., what thoughts serve the party’s interest—were correct factually.
Communist states furnish only the most prominent examples of such attempted groupthink. Progressive parties everywhere have sought to monopolize educational and cultural institutions in order to force those under their thumbs to sing their tunes or to shut up. But having brought about the opposite of the prosperity, health, wisdom, or happiness that their ideology advertised, they have been unable to force folks to ignore the gap between political correctness and reality.
Especially since the Soviet Empire’s implosion, leftists have argued that Communism failed to create utopia not because of any shortage of military or economic power but rather because it could not overcome this gap. Is the lesson for today’s progressives, therefore, to push P.C. even harder, to place even harsher penalties on dissenters? Many of today’s more discerning European and American progressives, in possession of government’s and society’s commanding heights, knowing that they cannot wield Soviet-style repression and yet intent on beating down increasing popular resistance to their projects, look for another approach to crushing cultural resistance. Increasingly they cite the name of Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937), a brilliant Communist theoretician for whom “cultural hegemony” is the very purpose of the struggle as well as its principal instrument. His writings envisage a totalitarianism that eliminates the very possibility of cultural resistance to progressivism. But owing more to Machiavelli than to Marx or Lenin, they are more than a little complex about the means and are far from identical with the raw sort of power over culture enforced by the Soviet Empire or, for that matter, that is rife among us today.
My purpose here is to explain how progressives have understood and conducted their cultural war from the days of Lenin, and how Gramsci’s own ambiguous writings illustrate the choices they face in conducting that war in our time and circumstances—especially with regard to political correctness in our present culture war.
Culture Wars
Every form of progressivism bases itself on the claim of a special, “scientific,” knowledge of what is wrong with humanity and how to fix it. The formula is straightforward: the world is not as it should be because society’s basic, “structural” feature is ordered badly. Everything else is “superstructural,” meaning that it merely reflects society’s fundamental feature. For Marx and his followers that feature is conflict over the means of production in “present-day society.” From the dawn of time, this class warfare has led to “contradictions”: between types of work, town and country, oppressors or oppressed, and so on. The proletariat’s victory in that conflict will establish a new reality by crushing all contradictions out of existence. Other branches of progressivism point to a different structural problem. For Freudians it’s sexual maladjustment, for followers of Rousseau it’s social constraint, for positivists it is the insufficient application of scientific method, for others it is oppression of one race by another. Once control of society passes exclusively into the hands of the proper set of progressives, each sect’s contradictions must disappear as the basic structural problem is straightened out.
But wherever progressives have gained power, all manner of contradictions have remained and new ones have arisen. Progressive movements have reacted to this failure by becoming their own reason for being. Theoretically, the Revolution is about the power and necessity to recreate mankind. In practice, for almost all progressive movements it is about gaining power for the revolutionaries and making war on those who stand in their way. For example, transcending private property, the division of labor, and political oppression was never Marxism-Leninism’s core motive any more than worker/peasant proletarians were ever its core protagonists. In fact, Communism is an ideology by, of, and for ideologues, that ends up empowering and celebrating those very ideologues. This is as true of progressivism’s other branches as it is of Marxism.

Read More:

Thursday, December 22, 2016

"Vote Trump" Burning of Black Church Media Promoted as Fact Before Election... Perpetrated by Black Member of the Mississippi Church

What was it written here only a few weeks ago? 

Just before the election of Donald Trump, there was a last ditch by the corporate/legacy media to turn an obvious hoax into an international incident worthy of supplanting all momentum the Trump Train had gained and forever derail it: Mississippi was burning again, and "Vote Trump" was spray-painted on the remains of a charred black church. 

For decades, whites have been conditioned via Hollywood/network and cable television/public school to believe their is no greater sin in the world (worse than rape,  murder, and pedophilia combined) than racism. 

And with the burning of a black church in early November 2016, the coronation of Hillary Clinton appeared imminent. 

But what, what was it written here only a few weeks ago? 

Oh... Has the Burning of the Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church in Mississippi (With "Vote Trump" Written on it) Been Deemed a Hoax Yet? (November 30, 2016)

Read More:

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Crime and Punishment is 150 – and its politics are more relevant than ever

Image result for Crime and Punishment is 150 – and its politics are more relevant than ever
It is now 150 years since the publication of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. An incredibly influential novel, Crime and Punishment also has a particularly contemporary political significance.
The plot hinges on how, one summer’s day in St Petersurg, a penniless student, Rodion Raskolnikov, murders an old woman pawnbroker. He does it partly to prove an idea that he has written about: that exceptional people, like Napoleon, can be above the law. Besides, to him the pawnbroker is a “louse” whose murder will be a net benefit to society. But during the murder, the victim’s kind and vulnerable sister walks in. Raskolnikov kills her, too, without a second thought. The reader sees how Raskonikov has become desensitised and how his ideas (influenced by his reading of Hegel and Bentham) have unintended consequences.
Raskolnikov’s name means “split in two” or “schismatic”. His split personality inspired Stevenson’s story of Jekyll and Hyde. One of the first psychological novels, Crime and Punishment is also deeply political. It reflected a wave of reaction against economic liberalism, not unlike that which has occurred during 2016. Raskolnikov is shown to be a confused hybrid, both reflecting liberal thought and rebelling against it.
Read More:

Ann Sterzinger: Guillaume Faye Does Fiction: Archeofuturism II

Archeofuturism II is a full-on future dystopia, predicting that the entire globalist civilization will collapse like a cheese-and-hummus soufflé by 2025.
June, 1914. Europe is at the height of her power, and summer enters proudly, ready to shine with all her fire. It’s the final summer of the Belle Epoque; the last beautiful days before the iron hurricane. And although international tensions continually unnerve the public mind, in high society, everyone is serene: this crisis will surely blow over like the rest, like the one in 1910, won’t it? The Kaiser will never go for war. He’s not mad!
—Guillaume Faye, Archeofuturism II
So! The leaders of the “liberal” democracies of Europe are sort of waking up to the fact that welcoming millions of carriers of an ideology that reviles you and your liberal democracy might not be the best way to run said racket. This has not been achieved without ceremonially scolding a fewGeert Wilders along the way—but at least Angela Merkel has realized she needs to cover her ass by calling for a jihad on cloth for heads, thereby relieving the fabric shortage caused by her ample Teutonic behind.
While the migrant crisis has been extreme enough to make it clear to pretty much any sentient being that Islam is incompatible with pretty much anything, the French journalist Guillaume Fayehas been saying so for long enough that he’s apparently  grown bored of writing essays about it, and has spun off into science fiction instead.
Faye is perhaps best-known these days for Archeofuturism, a book-length 1999 essay (re-released by Arktos in 2010) that predicted the cataclysmic end of our technological age. The end times will be brought about by a “convergence of catastrophes,” both ecological and economic, facilitated by the globalist attempt to smush incompatible cultures together just for shits and giggles (or divide and conquer). He predicts the collapse will bring about a return to a patriarchal, pastoral, medieval-type society—that’s the “archeo” in the term archeofuturism—letting loose the mead-horn-swinging man’s world that is only ever barely fettered by civilisation anyway. The feminised civilisation that can’t help trying to mother bearded 10-year-olds has dug its own grave.


"Cultural Enrichment" and Sexual Competition
Editor's Note: Adapted from an address to NPI’s 2016 Conference by F. Roger Devlin

Thank you all. And thank you to Richard for inviting me to speak to you today. I have a lot of matters I would like to address, so this talk may get a little disjointed. But I think we can live with that. Many of you have probably seen my byline but not know me by sight. I write a lot about men and women and their mutual relations. Sometimes the men in our movement fail to appreciate sufficiently the relevance of this subject to our political struggle as a people. Women don’t usually have that problem. They know that they control the perpetuation of our race, and in the final analysis, that’s almost all that matters. Feminists are the ones who like to say that the personal is political, and on this point at least, they are correct.
Today, I would like to begin by drawing your attention to an article published in a Norwegian newspaper three and a half years ago. [A translation of the original article can be found here.] Those of you who have been in our movement that long may remember the flurry of discussion it occasioned at the time. The article appeared in one of the few Norwegian publications not dependent on government subsidies, and therefore free to tell the truth about the situation in that country. It was based on interviews with two young men from Grorudalen, a suburban area outside Oslo that has enjoyed more cultural enrichment than any other place in that country, mostly Pakastani and Somali Muslims. The two young men reflect on the challenges of coming to manhood in such an environment.
They report that there is a clear hierarchy among the local boys, and native Norwegians are at the bottom of it. They are often physically attacked by the immigrant boys in the local schools. Authority figures such as teachers tell the Norwegian boys never to retaliate, even when punched. The immigrant boys are to be pitied, they are told, because they come from countries which have suffered from war—even though some are third generation by now.
Read More:

The Desperate Revisionism of the Left GEORGE NEUMAYR

In possession of government power, liberals pompously invoke established customs. But once out of power, they immediately start breaking them. No sooner had they lost the White House than they returned to the primitive and infantile stance of 1960s-style radicals.
Liberalism is willfulness writ large. Its relationship to law and custom is determined not by fixed principle but by whatever liberals want at any given moment. Insofar as law and custom are useful to retaining power, liberals demand that others follow them. But the moment law and custom become an impediment to regaining power, they give themselves permission to violate them. The “ends” suddenly justify the means, and anyone who questions their bad behavior fails to see the “higher” good at stake.
Hillary spent much of the campaign harrumphing about Trump’s “horrifying” disdain for decorum and election-year proprieties. But in defeat, she and her aides have now exceeded whatever post-election pouting they claimed Trump would indulge. Their hypocrisy so far has been hapless, losing votes in recounts that they demanded and electors from an electoral college that they intimidated.
So much for the “temperament” of Hillary and her supporters. They alone, according to the media, had the “maturity” and “stability” to save a serene republic from Trump’s tantrums. Now they behave like demented flower children. Soon we will see them throwing pies, as they did during the Bush years, at government officials and holding endless “marches on Washington.”
Never far below the vestments of liberal establishment respectability lies the shabby attire of radicalism. Out come the obscene placards the moment liberals lose. In defeat, their rhetoric grows unruly and revolutionary, with old contempt for the “bourgeois” resurfacing in jeremiads against “talk radio” and “white privilege.” They grow more paranoid, blaming enemies, both foreign and domestic, for their loss of power.
In their mutterings about conservative FBI agents, Russian hackers, and a “basket of deplorables,” Bill and Hillary sound like the 1960s radicals and George McGovern campaign volunteers they once were. Back then, they blamed McGovern’s loss on Nixon’s appeals to “hard hats” and a populace too unenlightened to appreciate McGovern’s platform of acid, abortion, and amnesty. Not much has changed. According to Bill, Trump won because of his appeal to “angry white men.”
The revisionist spin they are putting on the race is laughable, given the lengths to which the ruling class went to pull Hillary across the finish line. She had all the advantages in the race — more money, more media, a Democratic establishment propping her up, a Republican establishment tearing Trump down. She had an attorney general and FBI director who saved her from indictment. She had endorsements from almost every newspaper coast to coast, multiple cable channels and networks functioning like adjuncts of her campaign, and Hollywood and academia churning out propaganda for her daily. And she still couldn’t win.
Read More:

How To Submit A Complaint About Extortion Realtor Tanya Gersh

You have probably read about realtor Tanya Gersh and her attempts to extort money from Richard Spencer’s mother. Here is how to file a complaint with the Montana Board of Realty Regulation about Tanya Gersh.
  1. Download the PDF complaint form. You can edit a form pre-filled with the sample answers below.
  2. Fill out the form; specify “See attached file” under LIST OF WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE and include the trove of emails and public posts made available by Sherry Spencer.
  3. Send the form to the board via email.
Here are some sample texts for the fields on the form. These should not be used exactly.
Complaint Against: Tanya N. Gersh
License #: R​R​E​-​R​B​S​-​L​I​C​-​3​8​1​3​8
Profession/Occupation Type: Realtor/Salesperson
Address: 121 Wisconsin Avenue, Whitefish, MT 59937
Read More: