Saturday, June 26, 2010

Musings: 6/26/10

Re Kevin MacDonald: Some thoughts on Richard Wrangham

Why is Whites organizing as Whites on behalf of White interests taboo? From an individualist perspective, I personally find it as distasteful as Jews, Blacks and Hispanics doing likewise, but I don’t blame Whites who do, particularly in America where the few that are doing so are responding in kind to ethnic tribalism in order to protect their own lives and interests.

The reason it is taboo in in the West is because the Left has characterized White colonialism and Nazism simultaneously as White nationalists movements and as the ultimate evil in world history, when in fact Nazism was merely the antithesis of Jewish Bolshevism, which exterminated millions based on race (under the guise of class) and religion (implicitly anti-Christian) before the Nazis ever did. And colonialism was not carried out by average Whites, but rather by hyper-ambitious elites on behalf of their own wealth, vanity and glory, and at the expense of average Whites (studies have shown that colonialism incurred net losses for the taxpayers in countries that carried it out).

With this in mind, I would conclude that these hyper-ambitious, bloodless elites of all races who are today imposing this political and cultural regiment of globalization and its attendant political correctness (many of whom are getting rich doing so) are ethically and morally far closer to the elitist colonialists they profess to loathe than are the average Whites whom they seek to straw man in advance of their own bank accounts and careers.

Average Whites are essentially being framed for the sins committed by a bloodless elite by a neo-bloodless elite, who are then carrying on in public about how “evil” the Whites they’ve framed are. Can there be any creature or group more disgusting and loathsome than one that would undertake such a deed?

dc [in article comments]: "people here, especially I think Americans, talk endlessly about the dreadful “liberals” and the evils of “liberalism”, and I for one have no idea what they mean...Surely the word is simply a near synonym for ‘generous’"

Contemporary Western liberalism has nothing in common with the classical liberalism of more than a few of America's founders, nor anything to do with generosity (it's not "generous" to shakedown taxpayers to support massive social-engineering projects and monolithic super-states that have to support themselves at the point of a warmongering, hegemonic gun). Contemporary Statist-centered left-liberalism, which is a synthesis of Communism and, say, FDR's "liberalism" (which was in bed with corrupt Jews and Wall Street banksters even back then) can be referred to shorthand as neoliberalism, which itself is a kissing cousin of the neoconservatism fancied by GW Bush and much of the mainstream GOP.

Both of these are largely manifestations of Jewish thought and ethics, and are thus inherently elitist, anti-(average) White, anti-Christian, anti-Western, and ultimately murderously misanthropic. (And contemporary left-liberals still affect to be "searching" for what all the screaming is about; can there be a more phony and studiously superficial species on earth?)


The Judeofascists are such transparently insane egomaniacs and pharisaic control freaks, I have no idea how anyone could ever believe they would ever respect, or even consider abiding by the tenets of democracy like proportionate representation, free speech, equal rights and liberty for all.

Yet even as they strangle free speech and liberty in America, they portray the Judeofascist War on Terror as a battle for human rights, freedom and democracy in the Middle East.

Their hypocrisy and inherently contradictory, schizophrenic nature and policy is so intense and contrary to sanity and good conscience, it’s a wonder they can even function, let alone seize power.

The fact that they can withstand the self-disgust and loathing that any normal person engaged in that kind of behavior would feel tells me there is something profoundly psychologically defective about them. I suspect that most of them are indeed sociopaths.

No comments: