Monday, July 31, 2017

Divided In Order To Stand

Check out this video from The Alternative Hypothesis, he has given some serious thought to something that I have been pondering for some time and that I think is inevitable if we are to survive, specifically the dissolution of the Union into multiple smaller, more manageable states.

One specific problem I came away from the video with is the impact of the rural-urban divide. Their map would give a lot of rural lands to progressive areas to connect Chicago and the West Coast cities but there are only so many organic pot growing progressives to work the land. They wouldn't want or know what to do with hundreds of thousands of acres of farm land. This was my comment on the video:
Very interesting work, I have been thinking this is the only way forward for a while and especially since the 2016 election and I like your thought process as to how it would play out. I do wonder about something, with free trade between the former United States and the rural/urban divide, why do leftists need or want huge swaths of largely uninhabited land that they are not inclined to live in or produce from? Wouldn't semi-independent city-states along the East Coast and the interior make more sense? I also don't care for the idea of creating continuity corridors that largely cut off access for the rest of us to the fresh water treasure of the Great Lakes.
All in all though, it is a good thought process and one we need to have. I especially like the comparison to the break-up of the Soviet Union, which while it was far from smooth and perfect was still preferable to the War between the States, even if a new version would be lopsided since the Left has disarmed themselves.

Sunday, July 30, 2017

Save Us Abdul! Come To Our Country And Fertilize Our Women!

Did you catch this story from the Daily Mail?
'Australian women need Muslims to fertilise them because their beer-swilling, drug-injecting men are incapable': Leading Islamic businessman's outrageous claims about shock fertility statistics
It is just chock full of good stuff, first and foremost someone living in Australia talking about fertilizing women (or fertilise because apparently Australians don't know how to spell. It is an island populated by criminals after all). I love me some good misogyny but fertilizing them? Are women the equivalent of corn? I am not a professional farmer but I think it you try to knife anhydrous ammonia into a woman, the cops will get involved, unless you live in a Muslim country and then the whore probably had it coming. What is even better is the picture the Daily Mail lifted from Facebook:

Where are the White women for the fertilizing?
Mmmm. What a stallion.

Yes sirree Bob! I bet the blonde Aussie babes are lining up for a good old fashioned fertilizing from this Casanova. Girls just swoon over the protruding mole on his forehead. This is what he actually posted:

Muslims have a duty to make your women happy. By fertilizing, forcing them to cover themselves head to toe and keeping civil order by ordering men to rape teenage girls in retaliation for her brother raping a different teenage girl. Life is a barrel of laughs for women in Muslim countries, as long as they laugh at home or in public while covered up and escorted by a male relative. Please note that this woman-fertilizing-machine, that totally unironically calls non-Muslims "bigots" after a juvenile screed, is quoting from a curious study:
His comments follow research by Hebrew University-Hadassah Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine in Jerusalem found male fertility had sharply declined by more than 50 per cent in less than 40 years in Western nations, including Australia.
Now what sort of linkage might one make there? Hmmm.

Anyhoo, he isn't totally wrong. Creepy and self-unaware af yes, but not totally wrong. Sperm count is going down among Whites and no one seems quite sure why or for that matter if it is a problem. Young White men are apparently more interested in drinking beer and playing video games and watching porn than they are in finding a woman to marry, settle down with and have kids together (i.e. fertilizing). Given the generally deplorable state of a significant portion of White women in the West that are either pussy hat wearing man haters or THOTs and skanks, not to mention government policies that encourage and subsidize men to knock up women and not marry them, you kind of can't blame men for sitting at home on the couch.

On a more serious note, this article is something to take note of for two reasons.

First, it is perfectly acceptable to talk openly about White genocide. You can advocate for replacing Whites with no repercussions unless you go about it in the sort of clownish and clumsy way that Mohamed here went about it. It is really happening. It has been for some time. White birth rates are plummeting while Africans, some Asians and Middle-Easterners are fertilizing like rabbits. Sperm counts are going down, not by a little bit but by HALF in Western nations over the course of my lifetime. I have a bunch of kids so clearly no sperm count problems here. The question you have to ask is:
Why are sperm counts inexplicably plummeting in Western, i.e. White majority, nations while remaining apparently high in non-Western nations especially when Western men enjoy the best nutrition and health care in the world? 
Let me adjust my tinfoil hat for a moment...

....that's better. It almost seems as if this is being done intentionally. If someone, a small minority group for example, wanted to replace a threatening and dominant majority race but can't because they are too badly outnumbered and outgunned, what would their plan be? Perhaps slowly poison their men to reduce fertility, encouraging birth control and abortion to reduce the number of pregnancies carried to term and creating social conditions where men don't want to get married or wait far longer than in the past so they can spend more time being single and getting into debt that discourages them from having children. At the same time you create crisis in Third World nations and encourage their male residents to leave to go to these low sperm count, low birth rate Western nations in massive numbers. Whites slowly die out, a lower IQ race that is easier to manipulate and control replaces them and you never have to pull a trigger yourself. If you have the long view, it is pretty ingenious.

The second thing that is important is to talk about are Whites in general. I plan on one or more likely several posts on this topic but in short one of the main problems with the alt-right and White nationalists in general is that they seem to think that getting rid of non-Whites will make everything better. It isn't that simple. Come with me to a suburban or rural Wal-Mart and I will show you what Whites in this country are like right now. Read about the opiod epidemic in rural White America and books like Hillbilly Elegy. Rural Whites have always been kind of redneck but at least they still got married and went to church. Now they pop pills and get knocked up. Many rural areas have the same social pathologies as minority dominated inner-cities minus one glaring problem, the murder rate.

Suburban White neighborhoods are full of cucks and low testosterone sissies. Young White men are angry and frustrated but they have no outlet so they sit at home alone being angry, shooting Nazis and aliens on the X-Box. They don't form friendships and they don't have girlfriends. When you can stay in the basement playing video games and watching porn or if you are especially adventurous you can get girls you know to send you nude photos without leaving the house, how are you supposed to form bonds with other people? Put yourself in the shoes of a modestly aware White middle-class male teen. You are going to graduate from high school having learned nothing except how to take tests. You have no skills. You have to go to college, everyone says so, and that means four more years of drudgery on campus being told how evil you are for being White by teachers paid by White tax and tuition dollars in a university built by White people. As an added bonus you get to leave with no job prospects, a mountain of debt, four years worth of psychological torture and for most of them still no job skills. You better find a job though because those student loan bills are going to come due! What could be better than paying for an "education" where you learned nothing for decades after you get your degree? I think the suicide rate is going up not because of "bullying" but because who the hell wants to walk into that for the rest of their lives?

Urban "Whites"? Please. The ones still in the urban settings are either so rich that they are insulated from all of this or are self-loathing liberals or they aren't actually White at all.

I read a lot of White nationalists and alt-right voices talking about social welfare programs to benefit Whites once we get rid of non-Whites but the stark reality is that Whites in the West are in terrible shape. Just getting rid of non-Whites won't magically make White men's sperm counts go up or convince White women to stop whoring around. It is easier and very tempting to focus on what others are doing to us instead of what we are doing to ourselves but that is not going to fix anything and it is precisely the sort of mindset that I find repulsive about a lot of non-Whites that claim to be oppressed at any and every opportunity.

Getting mad at goofball creeps like Mohamed up there doesn't do much. I am an advocate for my own people, why should we expect anything different from him? He is a Muslim and desires to see Islam dominate the world and people like him to rule, especially if that means ample White girls to fertilize. We should point this out again and again to redpill our friends, family, neighbors, fellow believers, etc. but we need to do the harder, more invested work at the same time. I can knock out a blog post in 20 minutes, if I stop checking social media and watching Youtube, but the work of raising a new generation of Whites to reclaim our heritage and civilization is a daily grind that only pays off decades down the road. That is where we need to focus a lot of our efforts and that is going to be a constant theme for me.

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Now More Than Ever.

Anyone who runs in any circles online where the discourse crosses the boundaries of what is "acceptable", particularly on matters of human sexuality, religion and of course race, is all too familiar with the omnipresent and often trolled tendency of the traditional controllers of social media that are almost entirely a homogeneous pile of leftists to suppress, manipulate and outright shut down politically incorrect speech and expression. It is just a reality of social media. Facebook jail is often the sentence for "hate speech" while Black Lives Matter thugs and agitators can say anything they want. Imams can preach *actual* hate for anyone but other Muslims of the correct flavor but a mommy-blogger who doesn't hate her own race sufficiently gets banned. We see it everywhere. One of my favorite Youtube content creators, VertigoPolitix, was hit with a suspension that as sure as a John McCain political betrayal is simply a prelude to a sudden and without warning complete deletion:

VP's main crime, I suspect, is that not that their material is un-PC or offensive, it is that they present counter-narrative dialogue in a way that is reasoned, sober, intelligent and well-researched. Some porky Mountain Dew swilling redneck angrily ranting about Jews and niggers, especially if he spits on the camera a time or two, is fine because it reinforces the race realism = hatred and ignorance narrative. In fact I suspect that more than a few of the most vocal and least intelligent voices on social media are likely plants to undermine the movements. An intelligent voice using facts and reason? Now that is dangerous. From what I have heard it sounds like VP was caught up in a massive attack by a small group of leftists that spam report posts, giving Youtube and other outlets the cover they need to suddenly ban and delete certain types of speech.

Of course everyone knows about Lauren Southern having her Patreon account deleted. Not suspended, just arbitrarily deleted. As she relied on Patreon for a lot of her income, this means she sort of got fired from her job.

Lauren Southern is not a dyed blonde version of Richard Spencer, not by a long shot. But she is not sold on mass importation of young, often violent and even more often perpetually unemployed men from third world cultures, to replace the population of Europe. So the Patreon Nazis say "No soup financial support for you!"

Why do they do this? The answer is both complex and simple. I will just give you the simple version.

They do it because they can.

I am sure it is partly ideology but also largely because they just can. Not to be graphic but they sort of seem to get off on it. Like the over the top, heavily fictionalized Nazi camp commander Amon Goeth in Schindler's List, social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter can sit on high in Silicon Valley, pointing to one ideology and declaring it gets to live and pointing an another and declaring it shall die.

I am completely serious.

We are living in a massive and bizarre cultural dichotomy. We are in a season where anyone who wants to can say whatever they want online. We also are in a season where a small number of uniformly leftist beta males can arbitrarily shut anyone down if they are so inclined. I can publish whatever comes into my head about what I had for breakfast or the latest sports squabble or politics or pictures of cats. I can also write about racial replacement and White genocide or Islamic extremism or the danger of normalizing sexual deviancy. On the other hand, the people who run places like Blogger (i.e. Google), Youtube, Twitter and Facebook can toss me in social media gulag for two weeks, delete my posts without warning or provocation or just ban me outright. They made the platform so they make the rules.

That brings me in a rather roundabout way to my point. Most of us have a limited pool of resources to draw from. If we spend money on X, we don't have it to spend on Y. We aren't the government so we can't just print money or steal it from tax cattle when we need more. It is not a stretch to say that we are far more politically engaged in how we spend our money day to day than we are when we go through the farcical cultural charade of voting. As an example, my family doesn't have cable or satellite TV and we haven't for a  very long time. I honestly can't remember the last time I sat on a couch and watched anything at all on a TV screen. Most of what comes over the TV is garbage and almost all of it is politically subversive in a way that directly opposes everything I believe in. Why would I pay someone to pipe into my home stuff that is harmful and undermines what I believe? I might as well pay a neighbor to pipe his car exhaust into the ducts in my home.

On the other hand I have no issue with paying for internet because I can pick and choose what content I consume. Granted we watch a lot of silly junk on YouTube like PewDiePie (I never watched him until the Wall Street Journal went after him but now I watch every video for a couple of seconds as an act of defiance) but we choose what to watch or not. We also don't go to the movie theater or rent movies from RedBox or pay for Netflix because again those outlets are creating mostly garbage that undermines and opposes what I believe. Why would I pay to see that and directly put money into the pockets of moronic actors who lecture me about global warming, gun control and racism while living in an electricity guzzling mansion behind walls, gates and armed guards to keep unsavory people, that coincidentally are often minorities, away from them?

For example, I priced DirectTV for my area since we don't even have the option of cable. I can get 150 channels of crap being broadcast to a little dish on my house 24-7-365 for only $50 per month, provided I agree to sign up for two years and lo and behold after 12 months my rate goes back up to $90 per month (subject to change and I assume the "change" would be higher, not lower). So over the course of two years that comes to a grand total for the most basic package of $1,680 or $70 per month. I am not paying that. In fact I am not paying $5 to get propaganda streamed to my house. So what can I do with that money instead?

For starters I just began supporting Gab financially on a monthly basis. It isn't a lot of money but it gets me the cool Gab pro logo.

I still tend to visit Twitter more than Gab but I give my money to Gab because I think it is important to have a platform that is not censoring thoughts that I support and not promoting nonsense that I do not support. More broadly, they don't censor anything so there is a lot of stuff I don't like but that is OK because I am sure plenty of people don't like what I say either. Gab is pretty exciting and I think it has the potential to become an alternate platform for thought and speech banned elsewhere, not just in character limited posts like Twitter but in video hosting, live chats and maybe an alternative to Patreon/PayPal. I believe that Andrew Torba, the founder of Gab, probably doesn't agree with all or much of what I think and say but I do believe that he is committed to providing a platform where I can say what I want. That is something worthwhile for me to support.

I also support, for now, via Patreon a few other voices like RAMZPAUL. I am guessing he will follow Lauren soon enough into the Patreon abyss but he amuses me and says stuff that needs to be said even if he isn't 100% on the right path on 100% of the issues. In this world we live in, someone who is more right than wrong is precious and someone who is mostly right is doubly so.

It doesn't matter to me specifically who or what you support with your time and money. I don't ask for permission from anyone else and no one asks me. Just be aware that how you spend your money matters. If you direct your money to garbage, mindless entertainment and "news" from people who probably hate you and would like to see you dead, your children enslaved and your race annihilated, then you kind of get what you have coming to you. You might still get that even if you don't subsidize them but at least you can go down swinging.

How you spend your shrinking discretionary income is one of the few remaining channels for you to make a difference. Don't waste it on nonsense that subsidizes people that hate you.

Monday, July 24, 2017

America's Original Sin?

The cult of White guilt in America is ubiquitous and is especially insidious because it tends to pop up in unexpected places and is reinforced via subtle and endless reminders designed to cement in the minds of every White American that they are bad people because of the misdeeds, real and imagined and inflated, of prior generations of Whites whether they are related or not. As such we all deserve to be insulted and punished at every opportunity. The opposite is never true of course. We are never given credit for creating the greatest and most enduring civilization known to mankind (We wuz kangz, you didn't build that, etc.) and other civilizations are never to blame for past abuses or current failings. The movement to replace White civilization, culture and ultimately the people themselves can only happen in a setting where White self-loathing and guilt gives the impression that the world would be a better place if Whites were gone and we pretended that Whites never existed. The obvious inconvenient truth that people from non-White nations are desperate to get to majority White nations because they recognize that nations run by Whites are better places to live no matter your skin color is best left unsaid.

The reason I bring this up is something I read the other day on Fox News. It had to do with a new show from the producers of the hit HBO show Game of Rape Thrones, David Benioff and D.B. Weiss. The new show will be called Confederate and is a fictional look at what the world would be like if the South had won the War between the States. As with anything Confederacy related, this show is already cancer. After all, it might accidentally portray a Southerner as something other than an uber-evil ogre that only bought blacks slaves so they can rape black women and we cannot allow that! The show sounds interesting, I like alternative historical fiction from the likes of authors like Harry Turtledove because it is fascinating to think how the world would be different if events happened in a slightly different way. That isn't why I am writing. What caught my attention and the point of my post was this line:
Taking on issues involving race and America's original sin - slavery - was sure to court controversy, Benioff said.
I have seen that phrase before. Why exactly is slavery America's "original sin" when slavery did not originate in America? Slavery predated America and lingered (and lingers) well after the Civil War. Slavery was practiced and is practiced in Africa, and of course many slaves sold to traders who ended up in America were captured and enslaved by fellow black Africans. Slavery was common throughout most of human history in one form or another and was common in non-White cultures. We see it repeatedly mentioned, although not condoned, in the Bible. In fact America is one of the few places where Whites fought and died in large numbers over the issue, a vicious and bloody war between Whites that ended up with American slaves being freed.

Unfortunately slavery was and remains the most useful weapon in the arsenal of those who wish to impugn Whites and denigrate Western civilization. No matter how the facts present the history of slavery, it is always and only the fault of Whites. Slavery is the sin that keeps on giving because no matter what good Whites have done, it is irrelevant because of slavery, and no matter what ills befall blacks it is never their fault, also because of slavery, even though there are no living former slaves or slave owners and haven't been for some time.

Pay attention to the language people use and call them on it when the language they use is aimed at pushing a false narrative. Slavery might have been sinful but it was not and is not unique to Whites or America. When we let others redefine history in order to create a framework that provides cover for the replacement of Whites civilization, culture and people, we are accessories to racial murder. Be sure you are informed because the assault on our people is constant.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Didn't See That Coming: A Diversity Hire's Diversity Hire Kills White Woman

A bizarre news story has fillled the web over the last few days of Mohamed Noor, a male Somali immigrant police officer who shot, apparently while seated and across his partner, an unarmed and by all accounts completely harmless White woman. As of early this morning, there are reports now that he fired his weapon in response to a "loud sound". As a gun owner I often unbuckle and draw my holstered weapon and shoot right across another person out of a car window at women in pajamas because I am startled by a loud sound. Of course the bodycams of both officers were not turned on. Perhaps if dyke police chief JaneƩ Harteau was more concerned about basic police procedures and less concerned with dancing around with her fellow sexual degenerates, waving the rainbow flag and celebrating sodomy pride, officers under her command would't be startled by loud sounds, draw their sidearm from a sitting position, shoot across their seated partner and gun down an unarmed, obviously non-threatening White woman in her pajamas. But then again, what else would you expect?

"Chief" JaneƩ Harteau, who crows on her Twitter page about being the mother of a "beautiful daughter", no mention of a husband or father of course since not only is she a girl she is also an open lesbian (I am shocked and stunned by this revelation), and being the "1st female MPD police chief" is pretty obviously a diversity hire, just like "Officer" Noor. Maybe she is a great cop and leader, probably not. She is a woman, a lesbian and Minneapolis is in the great diverse state of Minnesota (Hillary 46.44%, Trump 44.92%) after all and not surprisingly her boss the mayor is also a woman. My wife commented to me that when women are in charge they are ruled by their feelings instead of reason and facts and that is obviously on display here. A Somali, Abu Kassim Jeilani, got shot by cops in Minneapolis (while waving around a machete and crowbar) and the prior chief thought this was awful and could be avoided by hiring Somali police officers. That worked out well, huh?

The whole thing reminded me of a scene from 48 Hours where Eddie Murphy borrows Nick Nolte's badge and gun to get information from a "redneck" bar.

"I'm your worst nightmare, I'm a nigger with a badge"

Replace "nigger" with "Somali", for the sake of precision, and you get the situation in Minneapolis. Noor is one of 9 Somalis on the Minneapolis police force, so statistically White women in Minneapolis have at least a one in nine chance of getting murdered if they encounter a Somali cop.

Once upon a time societal institutions like the police and the military were intended to serve a specific purpose: to keep the citizens, who grant them lethal force authority and fund their existence via their taxes, safe from criminals and foreign adversaries respectively. Now? Now you can't even get enough "conservatives" in the House of Representatives to vote to overturn the policy of having the military pay for the "gender reassignment" surgery for mentally ill people who somehow got into the military and you have a "police chief" hiring people from primitive cultures and giving them guns, at least when they take a break from prancing around with rainbow sodomy pride flags. Ironically the same people that she hires as cops will someday be the people throwing perverts like Chief Cunnilingus off buildings. The MPD is obviously sold out on this idea, based on the crowing of Chief Harteau (did I mention she is the first female chief of police in Minneapolis?! And a lesbian!!!!) about promoting a Hispanic, Medaria Arradondo, to be assistant chief. The website for the Minneapolis police is like a poorly done parody site mocking social justice. Look at out staff!

So a Hispanic of some sort, a colored officer, a Muslim of some sort and a butch looking woman. If you keep scrolling you run into some White men, but even there you have a White cop with a little Muslim girl in a hijab. I would be willing to bet that the actual officers on the force are majority White males, but even that might not be true anymore. What White man would want to put his life on the line for people who by and large hate him and who will blame him for being too forceful or not forceful enough no matter what he does, not to mention the humiliation of having a lesbian ordering you around? Serve and protect has been replaced by pander and "pride".

It is suicidal to continue to bring in people from primitive cultures to flood our nation. To turn around and give those same primitives guns and the legal cover to use lethal force simply hastens the suicide.

Wake up.

The word diversity is just a polite way of saying White genocide and now it is simply getting more blatant. 

I don't think Mohamed Noor was intentionally planning on striking a blow for White genocide, given the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans I doubt he could think that far ahead. But the murder of a White woman by Mohamed Noor is the inevitable result of a policy that places feelings and "diversity" over public safety and cultural survival.

Look at these two. One is dead and the other killed her. I am not super excited about importing spiritual healers or whatever silly but harmless nonsense Justine Damond was into but I would take 100 of her coming to this country over one of Mohamed Noor's ilk.

Monday, July 17, 2017

The Great (Virtue Signaling) Commission

The most well known ending of the four Gospels is found in Matthew 28:18-20. Jesus speaking to His disciples upon rising from the grave sends them forth with Good News....
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20 KJV)
These words are the command of Christ that has driven much of the church for the next 2000 years. Countless missionaries and evangelists have gone to all the ends of the earth to preach the Gospel. They have also gone across the street. Later in the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles we see more details from Jesus on this sending:
But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. (Acts 1:8)
Take note of the order. The Gospel goes out locally to globally. He doesn't say this and I am loathe to put words in His mouth but it seems that He is saying that we should preach where we are first and foremost. Even in America with a church on every corner and sometimes two, there are a ton of unsaved people. That is due in part to our assumption that being an American = being a Christian and also thanks to a ton of confused to heretical "churches". From liberal, apostate denominations like the United Methodists and the Episcopalians to historic enemies of the Gospel like the original globalists in Roman Catholicism to out-and-out heretics like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, America has been a breeding ground from cranks and crackpots and has proven to be fertile soil for both the Gospel and for anti-Christs.

If you ask any even slightly aware Christian they will admit that there are a ton of people who are lost in a small circle around their home and that there are a ton of people with real, legitimate needs in that same circle. So why then do we see so much focus on overseas mission and mercy work?

The simple answer is that it is White guilt mission porn, virtue signaling under the guise of the Gospel. Most of my social media contacts in my "real" life are Christians and that means social media pages full of photos of White Christians in some far off land, grinning at the camera with a black, Hispanic or Southeast Asian kid. They are overwhelmingly "vacationaries", blending a week or two long "mission trip" with a little vacation to an exotic locale. It is how we get street cred in church. Why don't we see photos very often of those same folks in Appalachia or other rural areas in the U.S. wrecked by opiod addiction, broken families, unwed mothers, unemployment, hunger and poor medical and dental care? Read Hillbilly Elegy and tell me there isn't a need in rural, White America. I am afraid the answer is that we feel better about ourselves if we are seen to be "helping" non-Whites. A picture of me with a little boy in West Virginia coal country is not going to get a lot of heart "likes" and emoji on Facebook. But a picture with a little girl in Vietnam or a couple of little black kids in Ethiopia is going to shower me with virtue signaling manna. Perhaps you think I am being harsh but if you are honest with yourself you know I am right. Even Samaritan's Purse, a monster of a relief agency with over $634,000,000 in contributions and other support according to their annual report, a number that staggered me even though I was expecting a large figure, bills itself as an "International Relief" agency and fills their webpage and annual report and marketing materials with pictures of kids from around the world, even though they actually do a lot of work in the United States. One place you won't find much diversity is on their board of directors who all kind of look like me, just older:

A dozen board members and they are 100% White men. Many would complain about a lack of diversity. I would too, where are all of the "people of color"? Or is mission work overseas just a burden for Whites? I am willing to bet that their missionaries, aid workers, staff, etc. are also overwhelmingly White. Even though Whites are a small percentage of the world's total population, we do an incredibly out sized amount of mission and mercy work that far exceeds our representation in the world. Yes I know, "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more. " (Luke 12:48). Also "With great power comes great responsibility", Spiderman's Uncle Ben Parker. I don't deny that. I also understand that in the U.S. a lot of the social safety net is already provided by the Feds. I just don't see where "Well Caesar has America covered, so off to Ecuador we go!" is in the Bible. Many Christians have been on a lifelong guilt trip from the pulpit that tells them that they should feel bad about having running water and Uber.

Another issue is simple stewardship. For example, just using Travelocity and picking a date in September, I found airfare for one from O'Hare to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia is over $1,000 and that cheapest flight takes over 38 hours and sounds kind of sketchy. That doesn't take into account other expenses like meals, housing while you are there, vaccinations, extra cost for luggage, the need for a passport, the time commitment, etc. On the other hand, driving from Chicago to Charleston, WV is about a 500 mile trip and takes about 7 hours. Even in a big church van getting 10 mpg that is 100 gallons of gas round trip and at an inflated $2.50 a gallon that is $250 plus meals and accommodations. The difference is that a big church van can carry a dozen people or more so the cost per person is next to nothing compared to over a grand for a single person to go to Ethiopia. So ten people could go to West Virginia for less than the cost of one person going to Ethiopia. Rather than sending White aid workers and missionaries overseas, it is much more cost-effective to have them serve and evangelize in the U.S. and if you are so led send cash to local aid groups and missionaries so that they can make a living and also work with people with whom they share a culture and language, instead of English speaking Whites. If you don't think places with a heavy mission work presence like Guatemala, Haiti and others have a lot of people who take advantage of White American Christians, you are naive. I have been overseas and I know it happens. For a fraction of the cost and with far greater impact American churches can aid people in the U.S. who need help and the Gospel plus reach far more efficiently and effectively people in third world nations by supporting local missionaries.

Don't even get me started on the need for the Gospel in Europe. According to one survey, something like 5% of of people in the United Kingdom attend church services, which is by far the lowest bar possible for gauging actual faith, and American Christians share a lot of culture and have a common language with Brits. In other Western European nations the numbers are just as bad. Only in places like Poland is church attendance still strong and most Poles are attending the Catholic Mass which is almost as bad as not going to church at all. In general, apart from Muslim majority nations, according to Wikipedia the least Christian nations are European. So why no mission trips to England or Poland or the Ukraine or Sweden? I know of some Christians that do go to majority White nations like Russia and the Ukraine but nowhere near the numbers that go to non-White nations. The only explanation that makes sense is that we get more satisfaction out of being seen to be compassionate toward black and brown people than we do White people. Little Colombian or Kenyan orphans generate more social media love than little Russian orphans even though it seems iron-clad to me that it is more efficient and effective to send money instead of White missionaries and aid workers.

Somewhere along the line we seem to have forgotten the purpose of the Great Commission. It is to spread the Gospel and make disciples, not to go for a week to a third world nation so we can post pictures on Instagram of little brown and black kids to signal our virtue. It is not that I think non-Whites are less in need of or deserving of the Gospel and simple mercy. The Gospel is for all people everywhere. I am simply making the case that we need to be smart and realistic about how we allocate our resources. For what it costs to send a "team" of "missionaries" to some third world country for a week to paint a building and take pictures of little non-White kids you could realistically fund a number of indigenous workers for a year or more. Hire a Dominican to paint the orphanage so he can also feed his family instead of paying thousands of dollars so a White church lady can do the same thing.

Let's set our virtue signaling and White guilt aside and start serving with our heads as well as our hearts. You don't get extra points in Heaven by guilt-driven fundraising to go to Ghana instead of going to Alabama and the Lamb's Book of Life doesn't have links to your Facebook page.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Race And Civilization Cannot Be Divorced

Lauren Southern (who is not right on every issue but she is more right than not and I believe is getting righter by the day, plus is a bit of eye candy) posted a video a while back on the Great Replacement. Here it is below if you want to watch....

During the video there was a screenshot of an older article (from 2000) from The Guardian titled not-so-subtly "The last days of a white world". It is pretty old so the data it has is both stuff we already know and way out of date. The article is nothing special and as it comes from a far Left publication it glosses over or ignores the seriousness of the issue with quotes like this:
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown of the Foreign Policy Centre, who arrived in London from Uganda in 1972, said such fears are basically racist: 'Only white people worry about this. It's because for such a long time the world has been their own. To talk about it feeds a particular type of racism that says that blacks breed like rabbits. There is an underlying assumption that says white is right.'
She added: 'There is a white panic every time one part of their world seems to be passing over to anyone else. But it's foolish to panic about it. So what if we do become a majority? What difference does it make?'
For Alibhai-Brown, the decline of whites is a question of redressing the balance after they colonised much of the world. 'The empire strikes back really. There was this extraordinary assumption that white people could go and destroy peoples and it would have no consequence. It astounds me,' she said.
Almost two decades later in 2017 as the hordes of "migrants" invade Europe and slowly but inexorably mutate what was for centuries the heart of civilization, not just Western civilization but civilization period, I think many of us and more by the day are answering her question "What difference does it make?". I would wonder why Yasmin, who came to London in 1972, stays in Europe if it makes no difference whether a country is populated by White European or Ugandans. I went to her Wikipedia page and was treated to this little gem:
Alibhai-Brown was born into the Ugandan Asian community in Kampala in 1949; her family belonged to the Nizari branch of the Shia Islamic faith, and she identifies as a Shia Muslim. Her mother was born in East Africa and her father moved there from British India in the 1920s.
After graduating in English literature from Makerere University in 1972, Alibhai-Brown left Uganda for Britain, along with her niece, Farah Damji, shortly before the expulsion of Ugandan Asians by Idi Amin, and completed a Master of Philosophy degree in literature at Linacre College, University of Oxford, in 1975. After working as a teacher, particularly with immigrants and refugees, she moved into journalism in her mid-thirties. She is married to Colin Brown, chairman of the Consumer Services Panel of the Financial Services Authority. The couple have a daughter, and Alibhai-Brown has a son from a previous marriage.
So she is a divorced Muslim woman who doesn't cover her head and who essentially fled the paradise known as Uganda when it was taken over by lunatic Idi Amin. Why did she flee to the U.K. only to get a divorce and then marry a White Englishmancuck? Oh that's right. because it was full of people not like herself but then she makes a career out of bashing the people who took her in and gave her shelter, happiness and prosperity, protected from the likes of people like herself. I have more to say on that line of thinking for another day, suffice it to say the sheer ingratitude of the non-Whites who enjoy the fruit of centuries of labor and blood from Whites is infuriating. 

My main point comes from the subheading of the article: We are near a global watershed - a time when white people will not be in the majority in the developed world, Britain included.

You will note if you read the article that the Guardian doesn't lament this seismic change, it seems to celebrate it and if anything be kind of miffed that it is taking so long to happen.

It is nonsensical for the Guardian to have a subheading that talks about "the developed world" with a minority of White people. Apart from a small handful of nations in Asia which are notable for being highly homogenous, there is no developed world apart from majority White nations. That is not a coincidence. It isn't as though the developed world magically sprang up from the earth overnight and the lazy Whites just moved in and occupied it, and it certainly is a fantasy that blacks created civilization and Whites stole it. We created it. The developed world is the direct result of the advancement of White civilization.

A lot of people, concentrated in the ranks of the elites in our culture, are giddy at the prospect of Whites becoming a minority despite the clear and obvious suicidal mindset behind this. The very culture that has made them immensely rich, powerful and influential will evaporate like a morning mist once Whites become a minority and a black, Hispanic and Muslim combination reaches critical mass.

There is a very small contingent of people for whom this change is going to be immensely profitable and they tend to be the loudest advocates for replacement. The very wealthiest among us who can pay to insulate themselves from the impact of the policies they push, who can afford armed guards and high powered attorneys and lawyers and live in segregated communities will be just fine and tend to be disproportionately Jewish, even "conservative" Jews like Jennifer Rubin and William Kristol who openly advocate wholesale replacement. Everyone else will not. Do you suppose that when Whites are a minority and Muslims and blacks dominate our population that having a Coexist bumper sticker on your car and an ACLU donor card in your wallet will stop them from stealing your Prius and raping your wife and children (and perhaps you as well)?

Here is a little thought-experiment I would like you to try. Imagine what America would be like if you could overnight magically remove segments of the population (this is hypothetical to make a point, I am not advocating genocide against any group).

What would America be like if you took away all of the blacks?

We can know a few things for certain. The prison population would shrink dramatically as blacks are wildly over-represented in prison (because they are wildly over-represented in crime). The violent crime rate would drop by a huge percentage as something like 3% of the population, young black men, commit around half of all murders. It would be a long term positive for our economy. As it stands right now, the average black is an enormous net drain on our economy. Vox Day posted The Cost of Black America and shows that the average black receives a net three quarter million dollars in benefits from the system over the course of an average lifespan whereas Whites pay in over $220,000. More on that in a moment. Other than diversity hires at universities and corporations and a contingent of largely low-skill, low-wage workers which could easily be replaced by the increasing number of prime working age White males who are out of the workforce, there would be nothing but benefits if America were suddenly bereft of blacks.

What about Hispanics? A lot of the same things are true as they are heavily over-represented in crime and prison. They are largely lower wage, lower skill workers but at least they do fill a niche but one again that could be filled by unemployed/underemployed Whites. Like blacks they are net takers from the system, although at a lower rate ($7,298 for Hispanics versus $10,016 annually for blacks). So again the result would be a net benefit to the U.S..

Well what about Whites? Remove the White population and America collapses. Immediately. We make up the vast majority of the tax base in our role as tax cattle for minorities. We make up the vast majority of professional jobs, executive positions and the skilled trades. Education, academia, the arts, the "culture", all are dominated by Whites. Who would feed America as Whites make up most of the farming population especially outside of South? Well sure you might say, Whites are the majority of the population so we couldn't do without them! Even if you could swap average blacks or Hispanics one for one for Whites, it wouldn't be the same. Blacks and Hispanics, especially blacks, simply have a lower average IQ and sit largely on the lower end of the bell curve for intelligence. In spite of untold billions spent to try to bring minorities closer to the same academic achievement level as Whites and Asians, it has been an utter failure and in many ways is getting worse. Those who shrug off or even openly welcome the eradication of White majority status don't seem to understand, or are too rich and connected to care, that aging Whites that will depend on Social Security and Medicare are going to be in trouble as the White tax cattle retire and are "replaced" by low-IQ, low-wage minorities. When push comes to shove and Whites are no longer the majority, do you think that given the choice of funding retirement benefits for old Whites or current welfare benefits for "people of color" that the new non-White majority is going to be appreciative of the society Whites bequeathed to them?

It is inescapable that when Whites are no longer the majority of the developed world that the developed world itself will rapidly collapse. Whites and the developed world go hand in hand. That doesn't necessarily mean that there is no place for non-Whites in the developed world, simply that one cannot replace Whites with non-Whites and end up with an equivalent society. If you replaced the population of India with a White population, India would inevitably change. The same is and will be true in the West. We are about to discover this first hand but unlike something trivial like fashion we will not be able to go back to normal pants when we realize bell-bottoms look stupid. Once the developed world is transformed, it will never go back and the balance of power will shift to places like China/Japan/Korea and Russia and Eastern Europe. For those of us who are left behind, the only question left is what to do about it. Sitting back passively hastens the collapse so our only options are to fight back against the tide of White hatred and suicidal White self-loathing or to seek an Exodus to homes more hospitable to Whites. I am not sure how feasible either of those options are right now but the alternative is for Whites to see America turn into post-apartheid South Africa on a much larger scale and that ought to horrify anyone who cares about the future of our civilization and our culture. 

Repost: Welcome and some thoughts on anonymity on the internet

This was my first post on my prior blog and where I share some ideas about anonymous posting. In our world now with violent leftists of all stripes from black bloc to antifa to Black Lives Matter and everywhere in-between, not to mention any discussion of these issues being cancer among polite society, it is a sad necessity to have to post anonymously at present.



While I have been blogging publicly for more than a dozen years, this is a new venture for me. It is a lot more controversial in some ways than what I have written in the past and consequently it is the first time I have done any blogging anonymously using a pseudonym.  I am not linking to my regular blogging venues nor my social media accounts and am not even using my own name. Before I start posting on the main topics I am interested in, I thought I should talk a bit about why I am posting this way.

I am old enough to have been in the vanguard of the internet explosion which led to the blog world where anyone and everyone can publish their thoughts for the world to see and from there to the social media world. In general I have never been a fan of anonymous posting on the internet. My position is that if you believe in what you are saying, you should have the courage of conviction to stand behind it publicly. If you are unwilling to say who you are when you say something, maybe you ought not say it. So it bothers me to be putting my opinions and rantings out for public dissemination while seeming to hide behind a pseudonym.

It would be nice to be able to write whatever one wants without concern over retaliation.That isn’t the world we live in. If I were a single guy, a loner with no one to hurt and nothing to lose, it wouldn’t matter much but thankfully I am not. Quite the contrary, I have a wife of many years. a household full of kids and a job. While I don’t think my job would be impacted by using my real name, you never can tell in this world. I am quite certain that writing what I plan on writing using my real name would lead to all manner of threats, harassment and even outright harm to my family. You can do whatever you want to me but I don’t see the value in dragging my kids and wife into the fray. When they get out on their own they can do what they want but while they are in my home their safety and well-being is my top priority and my calling as a father. You might see that as a cop-out or hypocritical. That is your call.

So that leaves me with three options. One is to use my real name and take my chances. As stated above that isn’t feasible or prudent for family reasons. Two is to just keep my opinions to myself and that isn’t palatable given the state of the world in general and America in particular. So that leaves me with this compromise. Maybe someday that will change but given the trajectory of the U.S. I really doubt it.

A brief note on my pseudonym. I used the name of a character I played in a MMORPG for many years, El'geherg, although I am currently inactive in that game. I happened to have an email set up with that name to keep my gaming stuff distinct from my real life and already had a Google profile so it was relatively quick and painless to use. 

So that is that. Now on to the main event!

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Repost: The Alt-Right And Christianity

This is a repost from a post on my prior blog. I plan on bringing a few more over as time permits. While I don't fully identify with the alt-right ideology and their methodology, I do identify with many of their goals. The rising tide in some small circles of the alt-right that seeks to drive out Christians is counter-productive and I am glad there is a lot of pushback. On the other hand I think many of us are looking for alternative expressions of our goals.


Christianity and the Alt-Right have a troubled relationship. On the one hand, issues of race realism and nationalism are clearly seen as a threat by people like Russell Moore as shown by the completely random and unnecessary condemnation of the Alt-Right at the recent annual gathering of the Southern Baptist Convention. Evangelical Christianity and conservative branches of Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy (for clarity, I don't consider Catholicism or Orthodoxy to be genuine expression of Christianity, to a lesser extent than outright heretical movements like Mormonism) are also the single greatest source of potential recruits as they are dominated by White men who are also politically conservative and less likely than the average Joe to be completely cucked. On the other hand, there are plenty of loud voices in the Alt-Right who seem hell bent on denigrating the Christian faith, preferring a thoroughly secular movement, or at least one that elevates ancient and dead pagan religions or demands, ironically like the Left, that Christians keep their mouths shut about their faith if they want to get into the alt-right treehouse.

This is self-defeating and destructive.

If this imagery isn't central to your vision for
a White future, your vision is empty and hopeless.

What does the Alt-Right in particular and any hope of rescuing and preserving White European culture more generally need? It needs a lot of White men with wives and children to pass on our values to the next generation and it needs numbers. What does it seem to have and attract a lot of? Unmarried and/or childless bitter young men who don't seem able to distinguish between male headship in the home and church versus garden variety frustration fueled misogyny. There are actually a lot of guys in the alt-right who produce great material that have families but some of the loudest voices are hardly poster-boys for family values and the commenters on those sites are often equally vicious and ignorant when it comes to faith.

How do we bridge the gap between the more garden variety Breitbart conservatives and the Alt-Right? I am not really interested in how to appeal to the Wall Street Journal Republican or the National Review Republican. The WSJ crowd is consumed with tax cuts and tax breaks that may be good policy but are entirely targeted toward a very small, very wealthy group. The NRO crowd is mostly concerned with starting new wars to appease their Jewish neo-con masters. I am concerned with making a place for people who are slowly being driven out of their denominations and political parties and right now the alt-right is kind of a hostile place for them. The future growth of the alt-right and I believe the only hope for our people is not found in bored rich kids who amuse themselves by being an edgy racist and advocate for socialist economic policies or in anonymous internet trolls who have a chip on their shoulders about religion. It is in garden variety, salt of the earth working class and middle class Whites and the reality is that these Whites go to church in huge numbers and that is to their credit. Yammering about Odin worship or accusing all Christians of being complicit in the Catholic priest sex abuse cover-up is going to drive those people away and since they have nowhere else to go it is most likely going to black pill these people and cause them to disengage entirely. Having a majority of Whites blackpilled serves just as well as having them totally cucked.

There are some good voices in the alt-right that balance being a faithful Christian with being a race realist but they are not nearly as popular as others.

For the vision of the alt-right of true self-determination for White Europeans to come to fruition it needs to be a popular movement. Being a fringe movement of internet trolls, memes and based tweets is nice if you want to "be right" while your country burns down around you and your people are exterminated. If you want to see a real future for European people and culture, you need to hit a critical mass of people and the people you need the most are White Christian families. It might not matter to the highly energized but largely impotent people who prowl blogs all day offering what they think is cutting commentary but a guy who works hard building houses for a living to provide for his family and goes to church faithfully on Sunday is not impressed by your juvenile humor nor is he swayed by your clumsy anti-Christianity rhetoric. He also works for a living and could probably snap most pasty basement dwelling internet trolls in half with his bare hands. The people who will make or break this movement are Baptists and Presbyterians as well as Catholics and Russian Orthodox and Mormons and the alt-right drives them away to its peril.

If the alt-right is going to expand beyond a liberal bogeyman and a small cadre of  celebrity racists and their sycophantic followers, it is going to need a lot more people and a whole bunch of those people are in church today. Facts are inconvenient things but that doesn't make them less true. The leaders of the alt-right better figure this out pretty quickly or the alt-right will be just another scalp in the belt of the SPLC and find itself on the ash heap of history next to the skinheads and eventually the White race itself.

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Segregation Graph Porn!

You need to use the restroom, get a cup of coffee and sit down to ingest the latest from Those Who Can SeeSegregation: Our Most Cherished Myths. It is simply stunning in the detail but it is time consuming, as many of the posts there are, because of the sheer volume of data to be absorbed. The big takeaway is that in spite of decade after decade of attempts to force the races together by means of shaming and court orders, we still, both black and white, prefer the company of others like ourselves. When Whites do this, it is of course a sign of racism.

The topic of segregation, like virtually every topic that touches on race in America, is usually so muddled with political and monetary considerations that it is nigh impossible to get the facts. The post I linked above helps to cut through the nonsense and give you some real data to work through and is to be commended for that reason.

Are We Still A Nation And Can We Be Without Being A People?

Pat Buchanan penned an article for Independence Day that covered a lot of the same ground that I did in my post yesterday and asked a very serious question, Is America Still A Nation?. That is a question a lot of people are asking and alongside that question we are revisiting the topic of what it means to be a people. Pat quotes the references to being one people from the Declaration, the Constitution and even from the Federalist No. 2 and specifically speaking of the words of John Jay he asks:
If such are the elements of nationhood and peoplehood, can we still speak of Americans as one nation and one people?
We no longer have the same ancestors. They are of every color and from every country. We do not speak one language, but rather English, Spanish and a host of others. We long ago ceased to profess the same religion. We are Evangelical Christians, mainstream Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists, agnostics and atheists.
Federalist No. 2 celebrated our unity. Today’s elites proclaim that our diversity is our strength. But is this true or a tenet of trendy ideology?
Pat then comes to the same question that so many are pondering today. In the Declaration of Independence the words used spoke of dissolving the bonds that unite us and Pat wonders "Are we approaching such a point? " of dissolving those bonds once again. I think we all know deep down that we are. People of traditional American stock, White Europeans of various sorts, increasingly have nothing in common with each other much less with minorities and not only little in common but the competing groups are openly hostile toward one another. Scratch that, only some groups are allowed to be openly hostile. The rest of us are so far relegated to online ranting and a slow, simmering burn. When the people who built this land and provided a superior way of life to so many ungrateful net takers have now been reduced to tax cattle, government controlled livestock permitted just enough sustenance to keep us showing up to work and paying taxes to fund benefits for others, it is only a matter of time before that simmering resentment explodes.

Pat Buchanan has been kind of a lonely voice for many years on the public stage. Once relegated to the wilderness for his political incorrectness, he now is back in full force. At 78 he has lived long enough to see a lot of what he warned us about coming true. If he lives another 15 years one wonders if he will survive to see the United States of America dissolve and/or collapse. It is not the outcome he hoped for but it is the outcome he was prescient enough to see coming. I guess we should have listened to him a few decades ago. I wonder what this country would be like if Pat had won the GOP nomination in 1996 and run against Clinton instead of Viagra-popping, stage falling off, self-referencing automation Bob Dole. If he had won the general election, would we be in this state? Perhaps but at least we would have had a fighter in the White House.

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

John Jay And The Blessings Of A Homogeneous Culture

In keeping with the one of the themes of this blog, I wanted to share something from John Jay, one of the Founding Fathers, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and one of the authors of the Federalist Papers.

In Federalist Number 2, Jay addressed the question of whether we should have a Federal government, i.e. a centralized national government, or a loose confederation of states. Obviously since he was writing for the Federalist he argued in favor of the ratification of the Constitution and the creation of a reasonably strong but still incredibly limited by our standards Federal government. I am quite certain that he would be appalled at what has become of the Constitution and the Federal government today. The idea of a central government that dictates and controls every single aspect of every citizen's life would be abhorrent to Jay, Hamilton and Madison. I would also guess that Hamilton and his counterparts would not find it entertaining or amusing to have one of the most important works in their lives and in the lives of this country made a mockery of in a Broadway play where, among other grotesqueries, Alexander Hamilton was played by a Puerto Rican sodomite infected with a sexually transmitted disease that I am confident has never read the Federalist Papers.

Jay's argument for the adoption of the Constitution is eloquent and impassioned. One portion in particular stood out for me because in it we see at one time both the great strength of America and in turn what is leading to her downfall. Along with being an incredibly rich and beautiful land, the America of Jay's time was populated by a marvelous people, emphasis is mine:
With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
This combination of a bountiful land and a unified people descended from the same ancestors made the system of government described in the Constitution work. Indeed the people are what makes our system work, not the other way around. But the converse is also true.

A democratic Republic can only function when those being governed share a common sense and reality of ancestry, history and culture. In other words they share the reality of being one people united by something other than all having Social Security numbers.

When those governed do not share a common ancestry, history and culture and indeed is made up of competing groups with very different cultures antithetical to one another, a free Republic cannot long survive. The most populous of the competing groups will eventually form voting blocs that will use their electoral power to take from other groups. This is the situation we find ourselves in today in the United States.

While America has always had a mixture of people, and of course for a century a large population of colored chattel slaves, it was governed and populated by a people with a shared religious faith, even when divided between the various Protestant groups. I was a little surprised to see a statistic cited that only around 1% of White Americans were Roman Catholic as of the American Revolution. Much later, in the 19th and 20th centuries, we saw a major influx of immigrants from places like Ireland, Italy, Germany and Poland. Along with speaking different languages in most cases and notably being Roman Catholic, they were White and shared European history with the current residents. Even with a common race, shared history and holding to an ostensibly similar faith, the influx of immigrants causes a great deal of strain on the United States. Even as recently as the early second half of the 20th century, ethnic differences among Whites were still palpable. Marrying another White outside of your ethnic group was not unheard of but it could be a source of conflict within families. Italian parents wanted their sons to marry a nice Italian girl, and Irish parents wanted their daughters to marry an Irish boy.

The differences between an Italian and an Irish causing strife seems almost laughable today but for 100 hundred years it was very serious indeed. Little wonder that as we essentially shut off immigration from majority White, culturally Christian European nations and open the floodgates to people from Asia and Africa and South America that it is causing strain on this country that threatens to destroy it once and for all. Our ethnic European heritage has been reduced to something we are told we ought to be ashamed of and our cherished ethnic celebrations are little more than occasions to get drunk and for deviants and perverts to demand the right to prance around in parades putting their debauchery on display.

The states that are the most stable today are typically homogenous states. Japan is almost entirely Japanese and suffers from virtually no terrorism and has so little significant crime that their police are looking for things to do. Iceland, Switzerland, etc. Actually allow me to amend that because when states are homogenous and that homogeneity is White, or sometimes Asian, my statement holds true. When a nation is a homogenous black or Hispanic nation that of course is not the case.

The United States is not merely an agreed upon set of principles because those principles can change and mutate into something unrecognizable as we see today. We originated as a people and as a people we created a system of government and a society that would function for us as a people, a White, European and at least nominally Christian people. That system is wholly unsuitable to the people who live in America today and the result is political strife, political violence and an obvious coming apart at the seams for the entire nation.

We have failed to understand what was created for us and unless we take steps to recover the national heritage of the United States we will destroy what so many worked so hard to create, maintain and defend. Our heritage was of necessity was largely based on ethnicity and race and if we pretend it was not the United States will end up on the ash heap of history alongside other great empires that destroyed themselves from within.

Sunday, July 2, 2017

The East/West Divide In Europe And What It Teaches Us About The Future Of European Civilization

When you are my age, you remember well life as a young child under the seemingly imminent threat of the Commies. I went to an elementary school that was a fortress with the ominous sign that we all knew well:

In the event of a Soviet nuclear bombardment you could hide out at my elementary school, even though it wasn't in a town that was on many Soviet strategic plans. We knew who the good guys were (America of course, NATO, Canada I guess) and we knew who the bad guys were (The Soviets and the rest of the Warsaw Pact and the Chi-Coms). Pretty much if you were a country represented by a villain in a Rambo movie, you were bad.

So I find no small amount of irony when looking at the situation in Europe today. While Germany, the U.K. and France, along with smaller countries most notably in Scandinavia, are in some sort of contest with each other to see who can exterminate their White population and any trace of their heritage the quickest, the former Warsaw Pact is doing their level best to keep the hordes of refugees economic migrants out of their countries and, no surprise, don't have the weekly terror attacks that the enlightened Western European countries enjoy. Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, all are trying to keep some semblance of order. Even Mother Russia, when they are not "hacking our elections", seem to have a real resurgence of the Christian heritage while in Western Europe churches and cathedrals are being converted into mosques. Black Pigeon Speaks has started a series on this topic, here is the first video:

I like BPS most of the time in spite of his weird views on religion.

Here is my take on why the East seems so much more realistic, and therefore more likely to survive, than the West.

The people of Western Europe lived in freedom since the end of World War II, a freedom overwhelmingly provided by the deterrent provided via the taxes of U.S. citizens in the form of our military. This freedom quickly became decadence and the memories of what it was like to live under the threat of totalitarianism quickly faded. It has been so long that now it seems far more important to virtue signal on a national scale how enlightened and liberal you are than it is to protect and preserve your nation.

In the East the memories are far more fresh. While the end of World War II was more than 70 years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall was less than 30 years ago. Adults my age grew up as kids behind the barbed wire. We worried about getting nuked, they worried about being informed upon and getting an all expenses paid trip to a glorious re-education camp. They lived for more than half a century without a national identity, not being a people but just a satellite of the Soviet empire. Having regained their identity and their right to self-determination, they are not going to give it up now and replace a brutal communist dictatorship with an even more brutal caliphate.

The hard truth is that in winning World War II and then winning the Cold War left the West and especially America soft and bored. Life was easy. We paid our workers more and more and gave them ridiculous pensions and benefits for life because no one else could compete. We got softer and lazier by the year until 9/11 and even with that wake-up call we slipped back into complacency pretty quickly, in large part because during the soft years of the 50s, 60s and 70s our entertainment, education, media and government filled up with people who not only don't want to preserve our way of life, they hate everything about it (except for how it has enriched them of course) and would love nothing better than to see America collapse. The same thing is happening in Western Europe and while it might be possible to save the U.S., nothing short of catastrophic bloodshed will save Western Europe.

We are victims of our own success. The very culture that created Western civilization and America, the civilization that the rest of the world is trying to invade and steal, now seems hellbent on inviting in people incapable of maintaining that civilization. Somehow we have elevated cultural suicide to a mark of pride. This picture was making the rounds on social media a few months back and I think it is appropriate. We are definitely in the weak men phase. I just hope we still have enough men with the potential to be strong to carry us through the hard times to come.

Saturday, July 1, 2017

From The "Didn't See That Coming" Files

On checking the news this morning when I got up I saw an ominous headline, Arkansas club shooting: 25 shot as rap concert erupts in gunfire (it was "only" 17 this morning and didn't mention the rap concernt). On seeing a mass shooting at a nightclub my first thought was Muslim terrorism, as in Orlando. When the news made it clear that it was not terror-related I made the same leap of logic everyone else made and sure enough I was correct as usual. The shooting happened in Little Rock at a club called the Power Ultra Lounge and on looking up their Facebook page I was greeted with this image ironically promoting the very concert last night where the shooting occurred:

Wow. A mass shooting you say?

And there was a "dispute" that led to 25 people getting shot but apparently none fatally. How do you fire that many times in a crowded building and not kill anyone? Maybe stop holding your pistol sideways and your aim would improve.

Some would angrily assert that assuming the race of the victims and perpetrators based on a headline is a sign of a racist mindset. Normal people like me would retort that it was a pretty safe assumption based on a lifetime of experience. For example, as pointed out in this article from AmmoLand, The Truth About Gun Violence:
53% of all firearm-related murders are by black men under 30. That’s 3% of the population doing more than ½ of the killing....So let’s be blunt. Murders with guns a rare and an unlikely event unless you live in an inner city, are dealing drugs, or you belong to a gang.
The article largely uses terms like "Gang related murder"and "inner city" but we know what that means. If you remove the violent crime, especially murder, perpetrated by blacks and Hispanics, the violent crime rate in America would plummet. Of course we can't just wish it away and gun control only impacts law-abiding citizens, mostly White citizens, so it is clearly not the answer.

The U.S. doesn't have a gun violence problem. As the article points out more than half of all murders take place in 2% of U.S. counties and more than half of U.S. counties have zero murders.
Our problem isn't gun violence, our problem is violent minorities.
When people point to places like Australia and suggest that is the way forward for the U.S., I point out that Australia (at least for now) doesn't have the same demographic problems we do. That is why a place like Switzerland with wide-spread gun ownership has essentially zero gun violence. Switzerland is overwhelmingly White European and oddly enough they seem able to own guns without shooting each other in droves.

As long as we are unable or unwilling to talk honestly about the issues that really cause problems, instead of focusing on bogus narratives like police stalking young black men just minding their own business and shooting them, we will continue to see a misleading appearance that America suffers from an epidemic of gun violence caused by our "gun culture". The reality is that a nihilistic sub-culture that glorifies violence and the worst social behavior among a population that is a huge net drag on the U.S. is the root cause of a massively racially disproportionate violent crime problem.

If we want to reduce gun violence we should be focused on stamping out and ceasing to subsidize the worst behaviors in black and Hispanic "cultures" that contribute to the perpetuation of gun violence and concentrate our energy in calling out the real problems. When you have a concert featuring a bunch of rappers advertised by a poster of a thug pointing a gun, you should absolutely expect violence to break out. You should really only be surprised if it doesn't happen. Instead our cultural elites are focused on disarming law-abiding White citizens. It is almost as if (((someone))) fears an armed and informed White populace more than they do minorities gunning each other down in the streets.

We have a lot of really serious problems in this country. People like me owning guns isn't one of them.

A Bit About Me

This is a slightly edited repost from my prior blog to introduce myself.


I figured it wouldn't hurt to put some basic information about me to give the rare reader that accidentally stumbles onto this page some insight as to where I am coming from. Hopefully as my writing improves and I get on more solid footing more people will intentionally come here to read my ramblings so I expect this to be a "living document" as I work out what I am pondering and I plan on moving this to a perma-linked location.

Without divulging too much in the way of personal information, I am a middle-aged White guy who lives in the Midwest and I have been married for quite a while. We have a large family, more than pulling my weight in the quest to stave off our impending demographic disaster.

Here is why I am as of right now on some issues of note. I am still in the process of forming my positions on some of these areas that I previously didn't permit myself to think too deeply about.


Nothing really matters more to me than my faith. When I identify as a Christian, I don't mean that I go to church on occasion or that I was "baptized" as a baby or that I mark "Christian" on surveys. I mean that I approach every topic via the lens of Scripture and my faith must inform everything I believe. I not only own a Bible (actually quite a few of them), I also read it regularly.

This has also been my biggest stumbling block to work through as I begin exploring topics of nationalism and racial identity. This is way too complicated an issue to bullet point but it is something I have thought a lot about, well before I started blogging in this new venue. In short I think that a lot of the common platitudes thrown around in Christian circles on issues of race are driven by poor exegesis, general Biblical illiteracy and heaping helpings of misplaced White guilt.


Believe it or not, I don't hate anyone. That makes no sense in our culture. Unless you bow and scrape at the altar of multiculturalism, you obviously hate everyone. Regardless of the dichotomy of unquestioning acceptance and obsequiousness versus outright hatred that our culture demands we accept and form every conversation through, I simply don't hate people because they are a different race or ethnicity or religion. I can prefer the company of people I share a common heritage and common values with and not automatically hate people who do not have that in common with me. I can also dislike aspects of other groups without hating them and even say that some cultures are superior to others in objective ways. None of that is hate.

Racism is the contemporary boy who cried wolf. When everything and anything is racism, pretty soon most people see nothing as racism because it is a meaningless term. In fact the result has been the precise opposite of what the public intent of pummeling the American people with White self-loathing and collective guilt is supposed to lead to. Instead of creating a perfectly flaccid society that where people who never owned slaves stand shame-faced in line to pay reparations to people who were never slaves, this constant drumbeat has instead made people so tired of being called a racist that they stop believing it. I am prime example of this. By indirectly calling me a racist over and over the forces of forced multicultural compliance have actually immunized me from caring about it and now I feel free to speak my mind because it just doesn't matter if leftists think I am a racist. In other words, if they are going to call me a racist no matter what I do, unless I abandon every shred of dignity and intellectual honest, then why should I care what they think at all? Hunter Wallace put it well in his post, The Real Racists Suffer From Negro Fatigue:
Rod Dreher’s readers are clearly suffering from an advanced case of Negro Fatigue. What is the diagnosis of Negro Fatigue, you ask? It isn’t *hating* black people so much as it is a feeling of exhaustion. It’s like you tried and you are done. More than anything else, it is a feeling of total indifference among White people to whatever radical black activists like Ta-Nehisi Coates or John Lewis are agitating about on any given day. Are you rolling your eyes when you hear ‘Civil Rights Icon’ John Lewis or ‘Civil Rights Leader’ Rev. Jesse Jackson? If so, you are coming down with Negro Fatigue.
John Lewis & Co. have maxed out the ‘racism’ card. They have spent their moral authority. It won’t be transferable to the next generation of ‘civil rights leaders’ like Ta-Nehisi Coates, DeRay and Talcum X Shaun King. White America has too much Negro Fatigue after eight years of Barack Obama. The Alt-Right is only the canary in the coal mine.
That is pretty accurate. Many, many White people have long instinctively understood that blacks and Whites are different, just as Asians and Hispanics are different from us and from each other. We also largely know that there are some pretty troubling and common characteristic among blacks, including a propensity to crime, especially violent crime, lower average IQs, serious issues with lack of impulse control, a willingness to take from society rather than to contribute, and on and on. When I was younger we talked about these issues rather openly, if in an admittedly less than subtle and nuanced fashion but as we have grown older these issues, which are still at least as serious and common, are shoved into the shadows so that it seems perfectly reasonable for the Department of "Justice" to focus on alleged police misconduct and abuse of power in Chicago (which undoubtedly exists as it does in every manifestation of the Federal government) while at home White people read about the DOJ report and wonder why the primary concern is not blacks murdering each other by the hundreds. Of course we don't say anything out loud. Even in my own home for the longest time we would often make a comment when blacks were predictably involved in some heinous crime and then sort of try to pretend we didn't actually say anything at all.

All that to say that while I don't hate anyone for their race or ethnicity or religion, not hating them does not require me to unreservedly and enthusiastically embrace everything about them. I do expect to write a lot about race because it is the biggest divider and the most serious issue we face, even after 8 years of a (half) black President or perhaps it is more accurate to say because of 8 years of a (half) black President. The normalization of sexual deviancy is a close contender in second place but race is still the greatest issue, not least because the shifting demographics in the U.S. mean more racial tension in the coming years while there is only a finite pool of perverts, homosexuals, pedophiles, etc. although I will grant that they are increasingly bold, vocal and capable of extreme viciousness.

One last rather sweeping statement. I am increasingly convinced that the various races, especially blacks and Whites, inhabit different worlds while supposedly living in the same country and that this cannot be solved by diversity training but rather by accepting and embracing our differences even to the point of being separate from one another.


Like virtually all Americans, I come from a family of immigrants, in my case, as is the case with most White Americans, European immigrants. My family and my wife's family came here in the 19th and 18th centuries. They came here on boats, legally and in the light of day. They learned English and worked and raised families. They did not sneak into this country, hiding from the authorities because they knew they were breaking the law.

Immigration is a multi-faceted issue. I am all in favor of creating very serious, criminal penalties for employing illegal aliens, perhaps a very stiff penalty for each alien in your employ the first offense and then 30 days in the local jail for the second offense. I guarantee that meat packing plants would stop hiring illegal aliens in a heartbeat if the managers and HR staff were facing a month in jail and a felony conviction on their record for doing so. The flip-side is the difficulty in stopping border crossers who often get sent back again and again with no consequences or who end up in detention centers on the American tax payer's dime for extended periods.

One of the biggest obstacles to keeping illegals out of our country is the seemingly endless supply of low paying jobs that "Americans won't do" so there is always demand for these illegals. In fact it is often stated that since Americans "won't do" these jobs, cracking down on immigration means no tomatoes for American consumers, no landscaping around homes or businesses and Chicken McNuggets that cost $10 per nugget. What I have always found weird is that we have all of these jobs that Americans "won't do" but we also have millions upon millions of Americans that we pay to not work at any job at all. How many men and women sit on the couch collecting government benefits and yet would laugh in your face if you suggested working in a work environment like a meat packing plant? It seems to me that if we a) have a high demand for certain kinds of jobs, so high that people risk arrest, deportation and even death to come get those jobs and b) we have an enormous surplus of labor that is currently doing nothing, both problems cancel each other out and solve themselves.

I don't know of anyone even remotely serious that is suggesting that we halt all immigration or that we send back people who recently legally arrived here. The immigration position most people seem to advocate is that we get serious about screening people we allow to come here, enforce the law for people who have overstayed their permit and be sensible in the numbers of people we allow in. This is a sovereign nation with legal borders, a nation allegedly founded on the rule of law and there is absolutely no obligation for America to allow anyone to emigrate here. People who have as their first act in this country willful law-breaking have no place in America. I am not sure what to do about people who keep coming back repeatedly after being deported. I know what I would like to do about it but that would probably be considered inhumane.

The "Jewish Question"

This is a tough one because I haven't done enough research on it. I know that the JQ is supposed to be a make or break issue for a lot of people on the alt-right, etc. but it interests me less than questions of race realism, the ethnostate, immigration control, etc. Part of my issue is that as a generally conservative, patriotic American and especially as a conservative Evangelical Christian, the Jews are supposed to be our greatest friends. Israel can do no wrong, the Jews are God's chosen people, etc. For someone to question the disproportionate influence of Jews on Western cultural institutions or to suggest that maybe Israel is occasionally too heavy handed is tantamount to shoving a little old Jewish lady into an oven.

Like I said this is one that I haven't had as much time to think about compared to race and immigration.

Family and Gender

The "nuclear family" or traditional family or whatever you call it is one of the foundations of the White European society and culture. As it has imploded so has our culture. While the Negro social structure has been a dumpster fire since well before Daniel Patrick Moynihan's infamous report, more and more we are seeing White Americans adopting the same pattern of single mothers, deadbeat dads, generational dependency and general sneering dismissal of the importance of family. Girls raised by single mothers getting knocked up and becoming single mothers, grandparents raising grandkids, etc. are all symptoms of a sickness in our culture. Make no mistake, this is not unintentional. The effort to dumb down our society, to emasculate men and de-feminize women, to subsidize behavioral choices that were culturally shameful a few generations ago, the effort to separate children from the influence of their parents by storing them in government run propaganda camps/feedlots called public school and pushing moms into the workplace, all of this is a program designed to rot the core of our cultural foundations. Having said that, the greatest force for undermining the family is not public schools or atheism or feminism. It is self-emasculating men who refuse to lead their families. We have men like that, simpering and soft men who creep around our society and their own homes like house elves at Hogwarts, in spades. We need more men who act like men, like husbands and like fathers.

If the various movements that fall under the umbrella of White nationalism, the Alt-Right, the New Right, etc.  fails to champion the White family, it will be doomed to be just another flash in the pan movement.

Gender is not something malleable or subject to personal choice or whim. It is the most basic biological fact as even a cursory study of the natural world would confirm. Likewise human sexuality is clearly defined, and is binary. With rare physiological mutations aside, there are men and there are women. The basic survival and perpetuation of humanity depends on this, it is how we were created and how we flourish. Homosexuality, transgenderism, pedophilia, the entire universe of sexual deviancy that denies basic human created sexuality and replaces it with perversions that at their essence deny the created order subvert and degrade the essential building blocks of European culture and it is therefore no surprise that family and traditional human sexuality are areas of life most under assault by the progressives and globalists who want consumer sheep instead of free men and women.

This is why I don't get the infatuation about Milo. Milo is amusing because he is so un-PC and makes liberals nuts because he is a protected class but I can't see how embracing him serves the cause. He is sort of like a court jester, he makes us laugh now and then but you wouldn't want him to marry the princess (or prince in this case). Anyway, if we lose the White family, the party is over. A culture with lots of White degenerates is not sustainable and not remotely appealing.

The Ethnostate

This is more of a placeholder because I need to think a lot more about this issue and read a lot more before I can start to make a reasonably informed opinion on it.

So that is just a few of my initial thoughts. More to come!