Open Topic 6

Here you can post things of general interest to all readers. Sort of a cyber watercooler if you will. No spam, no self-promotion, no nonsense, no bullshit, and topics of general interest within the general tone of the site only please.

499 Responses to Open Topic 6

  1. tulio
    May 13, 2010 at 11:30 AM

    Interesting article on the boycott of Arizona by some CA cities. Most the article is spot on, but it starts to get a bit too ad-hominem for my tastes on the last several paragraphs.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/california_considers_a_boycott.html

  2. tulio
    May 15, 2010 at 10:48 AM

    This article says France has an IQ of 94. The lowest in Western Europe. Interesting.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article697134.ece

    • Robert Lindsay
      May 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM

      Weird stuff. Maybe all of those Arabs? The Arabs may have IQ’s of around 89 or so in France. Also quite a few Black Africans in France.

      All I can say is that it sure is one Hell of a successful country. So it goes to show you that any group with an IQ average of 94 can probably theoretically produce a quite successful country. It’s actually quite hopeful in that respect.

      BTW, US IQ is now 98.

    • Robert Lindsay
      May 15, 2010 at 10:59 AM

      This is actually hopeful. If France, with IQ of 94, can produce such a great country, then the others on that list should be able to do very well too.

      Czech Republic 98
      Hungary 98
      Russia 96
      Bulgaria 94
      Romania 94

      All of those nations have excellent potential based on their average IQ’s. There’s nothing about their national IQ’s that is holding them back in any way.

      • Car Guy
        May 15, 2010 at 11:49 AM

        Are these numbers an average of multiple studies? People could be pretty inconsistent on their IQ scores.

  3. tulio
    May 19, 2010 at 8:58 PM

    CNN is running an interesting series about racial bias appearing in kids at a very young age:

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/18/doll.study.parents/?hpt=Mid

  4. lafayette sennacherib
    May 19, 2010 at 9:09 PM

    Robert, have you any idea what’s happened to Joachim Martillo’s EAZI site? It’s hasn’t been updated for a couple of weeks, and now I get re-directed to a Chinese page after a ‘wrong URL’ warning. Has he been sabotaged? I thought he was some sort of expert on computer and internet things. I

  5. Lil' Tommy
    May 20, 2010 at 3:11 PM

    On race;

    I’m a dark, Southern European-ancestry, White guy (yes, despite the username which is due to my six-foot, seven-inch height) living in the U.K.

    One thing i’ve noticed here, which might be the case in the U.S, is that even now, there is still a slight social awkwardness when socialising with those of other races/ethnicities/cultures. I’m not a bad guy, I don’t look particularly threatening, and I am always willing and interested to communicate with those of different backgrounds.

    That said, I feel that some ethnic-minority people here are always wary of White people as they realise that they still aren’t accepted as warmly. This is despite the increasing social progress we have seen over here. It’s almost like I have to tell an ethnic-minority/immigrant that I honestly have nothing against them for them to trust me/what to communicate. Just today I talked at length with a nice Arab girl, and learnt a fair bit, but she still seemed quite anxious/uncomfortable at first. Same with EM’s at work- I think that they assume that most Whites hold racist/supremacist views.

    If multicultural and diverse nations are to succeed, we need to break down these walls.

  7. tulio
    June 6, 2010 at 12:59 PM

    Okcupid is a popular free dating site. I’m not a member myself, but they run a blog that is truly fascinating that discusses all manners of things regarding social psychology, race, religion, attractiveness and what these things mean in mating market. I particularly like their blog and analysis because it is so scientific and full of graphs, numbers and anonymously gathered empirical data.

    I was just reading this blog entry here: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2009/09/29/how-races-and-religions-match-in-online-dating/

    It has some eye-opening findings. On a personal level in how we interact with each other and get along, race really does not matter. The members of Okcupid answer a bunch of multiple choice questions(kind of like eharmony does) and from that a personality profile is created. You would think for instance that on average a black man might be most compatible with a black woman, but the difference personality compatibility across races is insignificant. Whites are liked somewhat more personality-wise than blacks, but the difference isn’t much. It comes to the conclusion that we can “all get along” even if in real life we often don’t.

    The religious matching results are also intriguing. Jews have the highest personality likability rating, as do atheist and agnostics. Muslims have the lowest.

  8. tulio
    June 14, 2010 at 9:30 PM

    Interesting video on the Nigerian middle class:

  9. tulio
    June 22, 2010 at 2:32 AM

    I was just reading some comments elsewhere about the latest Laker riot and whites saying why do blacks and Hispanics act so violent after sporting events. Of course whites do it way more than blacks and Hispanics. They don’t in the United States, I’ll grant that, but in other majority white countries, they do. Here are some examples of masses of whites acting violent and stupid after sporting events.

    There are probably hundreds of these on youtube.

    • Lil' Tommy
      June 26, 2010 at 1:01 PM

      Look at some of the moronic (usually White) British football hooligans.

      Brainless, drunken, good-for-nothing, P.O.S, lager louts, the lot of them. Football violence on these Isles goes back centuries.

  10. tulio
    July 5, 2010 at 2:04 AM

    Brazilian Portuguese(especially the dialect spoken in Rio de Janeiro) is just uber sexy when women speak it.

  11. Bay Area Guy
    July 7, 2010 at 11:15 PM

    Here’s an excellent article that does a pretty good job at rebutting pro-illegal immigration advocates.

    http://jtl.org/auster/Huddled.pdf

  12. MikeLevine
    July 13, 2010 at 4:39 PM

    article request: chinese elite immigration into countries outside china. where do these elites come from? which chinese ethnic groups, cities, classes etc. differences in diff chinese groups in the diaspora.

    • anon
      July 13, 2010 at 4:41 PM

      Basically they all come from the southeastern coast of China. Guangdong and Fujian provinces near Hong Kong and Taiwan.

      • Robert Lindsay
        July 13, 2010 at 9:17 PM

        Yes, many are Hakka, Cantonese or Southern Min (Teochew) speakers. They often don’t even speak Mandarin. There was tremendous population pressure (overpopulation) in that region along with terrible wars about 75-150 years ago, hence a lot of immigration.

        Cantonese speakers in SE Asia, Teochew in Malaysia, Hakka in Indonesia. They are all in the US too.

  13. Bay Area Guy
    July 17, 2010 at 9:06 PM

    Here’s an excellent article by the always insightful Paul Craig Roberts, which asserts how the pro-Israel lobby controls the power structure in the U.S.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts12142009.html

  14. Bay Area Guy
    July 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM

    Here’s an entire archive of articles by Paul Craig Roberts.

    http://vdare.com/roberts/all_columns.htm

  15. MikeLevine
    July 18, 2010 at 11:18 AM

    a quick question: who is the most ethnically mixed person in the world? like tiger woods but more so.

    • Robert Lindsay
      July 20, 2010 at 2:13 PM

      Thx for the rightwing propaganda anti-Cuba hit piece, tulio. 1.7% unemployment. Sounds good.

      • Uncle Milton
        August 20, 2010 at 8:53 PM

        To Rob:

        Thx for the rightwing propaganda anti-Cuba hit piece, tulio. 1.7% unemployment. Sounds good.

        How many shoes and shirts does a Cuba get alloted a year..? 2 maybe..? Granted you would probably (and maybe me..) would be quite happy with one or two pairs of pants a year if we could regularly get laid by Cubanas.

        Vive la revolucion! Vive la poon.

        I am such an evil sexist pig.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 20, 2010 at 10:33 PM

          I don’t know about the shoes, but one thing I have noticed about Habaneros is that they usually seem to be quite well dressed. The males are wearing new looking shirts and pants or shorts and the women are wearing new looking blouses, skirts and pants.

          That’s one thing that really struck me – I think there is a good availability of cheap and decent clothing there for whatever reason. The Americans around here where I live are much worse dressed that the typical Habaneros I see on videos. I don’t know about shoes, but in that weather, you probably wear sandals anyway.

          I have seen many East Bloc videos and whatever else you can say about it, everyone seems to be wearing nice, clean, neat, modern appropriate clothing.

          I don’t think lack of threads is a big problem in Cuba, nor was it in the East Bloc.

          Now if you want to talk about beef. Cubans don’t get to eat much beef, unless they have access to dollars. But it’s not very good for you anyway. And Cubans are very well-fed people.

  17. anon
    July 20, 2010 at 2:27 PM

    Hey Robert, you should read Philip Giraldi’s new article “The Ministry of Truth.” Do you think it’s too alarmist or is pretty damn accuarate and scary, especially the part about criminalizing simply expressing an opinion online?

  18. Bay Area Guy
    July 21, 2010 at 9:58 PM

    Although I’m sure Asian anon’s already seen it, here’s Brother Nathanael’s website.

    http://www.realzionistnews.com/

    In his overzealousness, he does make some mistakes, such as claiming that Robin Williams and high ranking Obama administration official Valerie Jarrett are Jewish.

    (Williams is not Jewish, and Valerie Jarrett is one of those light-skinned “passing” blacks. Of course, I think the One Drop Rule and whole notion of “passing” is absurd, but that’s for another post)

    But there is some good stuff on there.

  19. Bay Area Guy
    July 23, 2010 at 10:04 PM

    Here is an excellent article that everyone, particularly Asian anon, should find interesting.

    It’s basically about Leon Trotsky and the rise of Cultural Marxism/Critical Theory.

    We all like to talk about Cultural Marxism, but I think it’s time we actually analyze what it truly is.

    The writer isn’t a PhD professor or scholar, but his arguments are solid.

    http://www.vdare.com/misc/091116_raehn.htm

  20. anon
    July 23, 2010 at 10:26 PM

    Actually what’s strange is that Trotsky talked about dismantling the western empires, yet neocons, who were former Trotskyites, are now the ones clamoring for more wars and extending the empire.
    Something just doesn’t fit.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 23, 2010 at 10:35 PM

      Neocon, Trotskyite, liberal.

      They’re all part of the same bunch to me.

      Invade the world, invite the world.

      That ideology is encompassed in one way or another by all three.

  21. anon
    July 23, 2010 at 10:43 PM

    What do you make of the discrepancy on imperialism though?

  22. Bay Area Guy
    July 25, 2010 at 10:05 PM

    http://www.dailybattle.pair.com/2010/latest_chapter_antiracism.shtml

    This article was so excellent that I just had to store it here.

    Now, if leftists thought like those guys did, I might actually consider joining them.

    However, as long as they continue to act like Tim Wise clones, no way.

    • anon
      July 25, 2010 at 10:07 PM

      So BAG, are you actually leftist on economics and foreign policy?

      • Bay Area Guy
        July 25, 2010 at 10:12 PM

        On economics, I am more of a leftist than a right winger. I believe in ending corporate welfare, ending costly American imperialism, providing a greater safety net to the average worker, providing greater health and other benefits to the average middle class person and below. Providing better funding for schools. Cutting military spending, etc.

        Although many of these positions on economics and foreign policy are also embraced by paleocons.

        Also, since my dad’s a teacher, I’m also leftist on education policy.

        I’m also left on the environment.

        I’m just not left on race and gender issues. I simply cannot embrace an ideology that demonizes and insults me.

        • anon
          July 25, 2010 at 10:19 PM

          You seem have the perfect combo in terms of your worldview.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 25, 2010 at 10:23 PM

          Why thank you!

          I just wish that more people (mainly white people) agreed with my point of view.

        • anon
          July 25, 2010 at 10:30 PM

          You have to admit that the non-paleocon right-wing in America is utterly corrupt and frankly retarded. They actually think Obama is some radical leftist when in reality he is nothing but a Zionist/plutocrat tool who’s race makes it convenient for the PC Cultural Marxists to support. I can’t believe how people like John McCunt, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin actually have any support at all. It must mean that many Americans are in fact retarded.

  23. Bay Area Guy
    July 26, 2010 at 6:57 PM

    I came across something very interesting. I found this one black female paleoconservative writer, who writes for Alternative Right, which in many ways is a WN online magazine, featuring the likes of Alex Kurtagic (the offer of the WN dystopian novel “Mister,” and also a very good writer, btw).

    http://www.alternativeright.com/authors/elizabeth-wright/

    One could say that she’s just another sellout, but I think it’s not that simple. She frequently cites black nationalists such as Marcus Garvey approvingly, and despises integration.

    To me, comes across more as a neo-Garveyite. I mean, heck, Garvey met with the KKK, so I guess her writing for Alternative Right isn’t too surprising.

    http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/sect/1000/article/1023

  24. Bay Area Guy
    July 27, 2010 at 8:35 PM

    I know this photo is kinda gay, but it makes me roar with laughter.

    Thanks to tulio, we can now easily find ways to amuse ourselves!

    http://www.allmystery.de/dateien/uh43048,1229038689,asian-guys-gay.jpg

  25. Bay Area Guy
    July 27, 2010 at 9:37 PM

    Found an interesting article by Paul Gottfried, which deals with Israel and certain partisan reactions to it.

    http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/exit-strategies/the-israel-question/

    Gottfried even admits that he is biased in favor of Israel.

    However, before Asian anon jumps on him, just know that he’s more concerned about domestic reactions to Israel and American politics than actually supporting a Zionist agenda.

    • anon
      July 27, 2010 at 9:41 PM

      If Zionism is simply Jewish nationalism, why don’t the bastards just simply cut themselves off from America’s largesse and stand on their own goddamn feet? If you’re all about Jew pride and Jew supremacism, don’t try to extort money from another country to keep yourself afloat, cuz the hypocristy stinks to high heaven. Oh well, isn’t hypocrisy what they are all about?

  26. tulio
    July 28, 2010 at 1:13 PM

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3891996.story

    Guess we should’ve known it was inevitable. The opposition to the Arizona illegal immigration law would shop the case to some liberal federal judge and get it either repealed or so watered down that it would be useless.

    This is a wakeup call. When I hear people saying that democracy in America is sham, it usually comes from some anarcho-leftist, but I’m starting to think they are perhaps correct. There are forces above us peons that simply aren’t going to allow the border to be closed. They want it open. Doesn’t matter if 70% of Americans want it closed or 99% of them do. They don’t give a damn what we think. They want the borders open. Maybe there’s been some secret deal with Mexico to keep things flowing since 10% of their economy is remittances from Mexicans up here. Maybe “we” get something in return for this deal that benefits the elites. We’ll never know the details since it’s only discussed behind closed doors.

    For those of you that want legal immigration ended or reduced. Dream on. If we can’t even get the ILLEGAL stuff brought to a halt, I’ll be damned if anyone is going to touch legal immigration.

    People will try to say this is Obama’s fault and what not, but this goes beyond parties. The GOP has the same policy with illegals as Obama. So there is no difference between the parties on illegal immigration. McCain was one of the worst supporters of illegal immigration.

    I’m really pissed off that the people simply do not have a voice on this matter and some judge will do whatever the fuck they want no matter what the population thinks.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 28, 2010 at 2:56 PM

      Oh yes Tulio, I just heard about that judge.

      You know, even just over a year ago, I too used to think the whole notion that democracy in the U.S is fake and that the people are completely powerless was just mouthed by conspiracy theorists on both ends of the political spectrum.

      You’re right. This isn’t Obama’s fault or any other one person’s/administration’s fault.

      This is a problem that cuts across party and ideological lines.

      I just find it baffling the way the majority of Americans want this immigration issue to be solved, yet the government just couldn’t give a damn.

      And yet when some state actually wants to do what the federal government refuses to do, the feds sue them.

      These are the same elites who bail out irresponsible banks. These are the same elites who get us involved in Middle Eastern neocon adventures. These are essentially the same elites who bankrupt us, increase the wealth gap, and engender anti-American hatred throughout the world.

      Are these people seriously fanatical enough to destroy their own country?

      I certainly don’t want to advocate violence or any other forms of unlawful action, but all neocon and economic/political elites who have fucked this country in the ass need to be rounded up and executed.

      • anon
        July 28, 2010 at 3:22 PM

        Oy Vey! Hey Moshe, qvickley, this goyim named Bay Area Guy seems to be promoting vioalaance against us. The goyim are wakin up to our svindling of this country.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 28, 2010 at 3:27 PM

          Lol!

          Although as Robert rightfully pointed out, Jews are not the only ones responsible.

          Many white gentiles will also have hell to pay for the ways they have deliberately sabotaged their own people.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 28, 2010 at 3:31 PM

          Man, Asian anon, you always seem to find a way to turn find a way to insert Jews into discussions.

          Whether we’re talking about illegal Hispanics, blacks, or what have you, seems that Jews always find their way into the conversation.

          I think we could be talking about relationships and sex, or even sports, and you would find a way to bring up Jews.

          Of course, you make some good points, but at least when it comes to this conversation (ie. Hispanic immigration), I don’t see how Jews warrant that much attention.

        • anon
          July 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM

          Kevin MacDonald shows how Jewish activists and politicians lobbied for the 1965 Immigration Law that leads to today’s situation, and when you mentioned neocons, well anybody with half a brain know neocons means Jew warmongers.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 28, 2010 at 3:43 PM

          Your points are well taken.

          Though we’ve already focused much attention on the Jewish question.

          I think WN’s need to start holding treacherous and impotent white gentiles more accountable.

        • anon
          July 28, 2010 at 3:44 PM

          By the way, when I talk about jews, I’m referring to Ashkenazis, I have nothing against Sepharid/Mizrahi jews.

  27. LaFleur
    July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

    We don’t have a voice in anything. Most of us are against the wars and the bankster bailouts but it doesn’t matter.

    Aside from the cheap labor, open borders give the native-born majority someone to blame besides TPTB.

    • anon
      July 28, 2010 at 1:53 PM

      I don’t know LaFleur, most Americans seem to be brain-dead zombie lemmings from what I’ve seen.

  28. LaFleur
    July 28, 2010 at 2:05 PM

    Yes, but polls show that the majority of the brain-dead zombies are against those things. They’re just too lazy and fat to get up and do anything about it.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 28, 2010 at 3:18 PM

      I know, we are too impotent and pathetic to do anything about it.

      I told Robert yesterday that I was going to try and become a less angry pseudo-white nationalist.

      But when I continue to read about shit like this, I just cannot. Stuff like this makes my blood boil and drives me back into the nationalist camp.

      Until white Americans unite, under the banner of pan white American unity, this will not change. Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Conservative, these labels are all meaningless.

      We are first and foremost white, and we are seen by others as first and foremost white.

      We are all in this together, whether we like it or not. So all you lovey dovey liberals and rainbow conservatives out there, give it up. You’re white, and will be seen as such and affected as much, whether you like it or not.

      Every other racial group is not bothered by petty quarrels over “liberal” and “conservative.” They know the game. They’re united and are gunning for us (of course, not literally).

      We must work together as one unit. Let’s start voting as a bloc and show these elitist judges the door. Let’s start voting as a bloc and kick these immigrants out.

      It’s time to unite and fight.

  29. tulio
    July 29, 2010 at 12:03 AM

    A very left-wing Latino buddy of mine posted this image on his facebook page in response to the Arizona law:

    http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs184.snc4/37523_136141976425414_100000888363913_171990_7272806_n.jpg

    What’s intriguing to me is that many think that you fall into two camps, you are 1) Pro immigration(which means no enforcement of immigration laws) and anti-capitalism(assuming they are talking about extreme neo-liberal capitalism), or 2) You are anti-immigration(you want immigration laws enforced) and you are rah rah capitalism.

    It’s as if they just don’t understand that many people who oppose illegal immigration equally can’t stand the big businesses that encourage and benefit from it. They think if you are against one, you must therefore be in favor of the other. Maybe I’m opposed to both and seem them both working against the interest of the common American and the long-term sustainability of this country.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 12:13 AM

      It’s as if they just don’t understand that many people who oppose illegal immigration equally can’t stand the big businesses that encourage and benefit from it

      Exactly.

      Personally, I think the law would have been much better had it targeted the employers of illegal immigrants, as opposed to the illegals themselves.

      For one, by targeting the employers, you’ll actually take care of the problem.

      Also, by targeting employers of illegal immigrants, they wouldn’t have opened themselves up to the racial profiling charge.

      I’ve already posted this, but I’ll once again post Lawrence Auster’s excellent article refuting every pro-open borders argument.

      http://jtl.org/auster/Huddled.pdf

      • tulio
        July 29, 2010 at 12:16 AM

        Problem is targeting the employers doesn’t do anything about the ones who are up here on welfare with anchor babies or are hard core criminals and gangbangers.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 12:19 AM

          Well, yes and no.

          But why do illegals come here in the first place? Do they come here because they “love our freedom?”

          Hardly.

          They come here for one reason and one reason only: to work and make money. And they can’t work and make money without an employer hiring them.

          Of course, you are right to insist that such a policy wouldn’t take care of non-working thugs or anchor babies.

          But the way I see it, you sever the head from the body, and the body collapses.

          The employer being the head, of course.

        • tulio
          July 29, 2010 at 1:23 AM

          I have the sinking feeling that there’s just no stopping this thing. It’s a lot like the gay marriage issue. You know gay marriage is inevitable because all the passion is on the pro-gay marriage side. Even though most the country is opposed, those that are opposed are on the defensive and aren’t as passionate in their opposition as those in favor of.

          With illegal immigration, all the people shutting down streets and protesting and threatening boycotts are in favor of illegals. They just accuse everyone on the other side of being bigots and racists and the other side is instantly on the defensive trying to explain why they are not racist. This exasperates those on anti-illegals side and they become less vigorous in promoting their agenda of enforcement.

          I just don’t see any way the anti-illegal side is going to win.

    • tulio
      July 29, 2010 at 12:14 AM

      Hey BAG, have you ever heard of talk radio host Doug MacIntyre? He talks frequently about illegal immigration and he’s the most articulate person on the issue I know of. He’s very common sense on many issues.

      http://dougmcintyreonline.com/

      You can tune in his show on radiotime.com: http://radiotime.com/program/p_50025/Red_Eye_Radio.aspx

      He comes on from 10p-2a pacific time.

  30. anon
    July 29, 2010 at 12:34 AM

    Rob, you should do a post about the Pacific war with Japan. You’ve written a lot about Operation Barbarossa, but you’ve never discussed the war with Japan. Also you should discuss Imperial Japan’s alliance with Herr Hitler against the Anglo-Zionist Rothschild forces.

  31. tulio
    July 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM

    When I first came to this site, it was with guns blazing. I went for the throat and got into some vicious debates with Robert on race leading to me condemning him and his site as racist and I was banned.

    That was probably around a year ago. I still think Robert is racist in a normative white racist type of way, though I don’t think he’s racist of the hateful variety. He’s like your friendly white neighbor next door type of racist. He will be friendly toward blacks that are friendly toward him, but he still has his “race realism” opinions that most will deem racist. I get the sense that he doesn’t hold these opinions out of any malice, but because he just thinks its the truth. It’s hard to hate a man who feels he’s just following the truth.

    I think Robert is a guy you have to read for a period of time to really get what he’s saying. If you isolate some of his post, they sound pretty damn racist and I can see why black bloggers have thrown him in the racist camp. But if you read this blog more consistently, you will see that Robert’s opinions are too nuanced to be singularly declared racist. He’s racist, but anti-racist at the same time as paradoxical as that sounds, but I think overall I don’t think his intentions are bad. Sometimes you see these post that look really racist, but if you haven’t stuck around here long enough to get Robert’s sense of humor, it will fly over your head. He used to make me mad sometimes, but not anymore. I “get” Robert now. He’s an enigma in the racial debate and the honest flow of ideas here is what keeps me reading. Nobody is afraid to say anything, and that’s refreshing.

    • LaFleur
      July 29, 2010 at 1:31 PM

      At the very least, I’d bet that Robert is much more honest than many anti-racist white writers and other liberals. He will say what he thinks. For example, I don’t believe all the open borders advocates are truly crazy about illegal immigration. It’s just taboo to question it. You can’t even discuss the unfairness of forcing working class people to pay the whole tab for NAFTA and imperialism without being called a nazi.

      I really don’t like the WN and other racist stuff I see here in comments, but there is a range of discussion here I haven’t found on other blogs. And some of those people still make good comments about other things. I certainly haven’t seen a blog with people from radically opposed ideologies talking honestly with each other. Political sites tend to become echo chambers, so if you really want an open discussion, I guess you gotta let the WN and anti-Jewish people speak, as long as they can be civil.

      I really value the discussion about the cultural Marxism and bourgeois anti-worker nonsense rampant on the so-called left in America. I’ve been researching it for a while and it has been bothering the hell out of me. Almost no one on the left sees what a terrible problem it is, and I appreciate it being discussed in depth here.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 1:35 PM

      He’s an enigma in the racial debate and the honest flow of ideas here is what keeps me reading. Nobody is afraid to say anything, and that’s refreshing.

      That’s what I also love about this blog. One second, Robert is condemning black radicals and anti-racists, and a second later he’s attacking white nationalists.

      On the one hand, he agrees with Kevin MacDonald, but he also is a bit of a philo-semite.

      He’s a leftist on economic issues, but not racial or gender issues.

      I honestly have trouble completely figuring him out, though I think I have a pretty good handle on his views now.

      I love this blog because you can say whatever the hell you want on a variety of interesting topics. Don’t attack Robert or Alpha, and you’re fine.

      Many other blogs are anal in terms of their commenting policies.

      Not here.

      Robert and I certainly disagree on many things (such as my pseudo-white nationalist views. Although as I told Robert on a previous post, I’m going to try and become a more confident, less angry white person from now on and just brush off whatever black anti-racists say)

      But much of what he says resonates with me.

  32. LaFleur
    July 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM

    Netroots Nation is a yearly convention for milquetoast liberal bloggers.

    At this year’s convention, a Mexican-American blogger named Nezua decided to stage a mock immigration checkpoint where they racially profiled European Americans.

    A couple of bloggers, including John Aravosis from Americablog, reacted angrily.

    http://theunapologeticmexican.org/elmachete/2010/07/29/news-with-nezua-the-illegal-europeans/

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 6:15 PM

      a Mexican-American blogger named Nezua decided to stage a mock immigration checkpoint where they racially profiled European Americans.

      Some pathetic castrated cracker did that as well.

      All I know is that if they tried that shit with me, I would have done more than voiced a few objections.

      I’m guessing that those random white people were in on it. There’s no way he could have randomly profiled them and gotten away with it.

      Or could he have?

      • Bay Area Guy
        July 29, 2010 at 6:18 PM

        I would have kicked his half beaner ass.

        Yeah, I know, I cautioned Asian anon against using racial slurs, but it’s appropriate here.

        Man, don’t minorities in this country have so many rights? They can randomly harass and profile members of the so-called “dominant group.”

        Man!

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 6:19 PM

          In case you’re wondering what is other half is, it’s Jewish (I think. Either that or normal white).

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 6:20 PM

          Yeah, I called Nezua a beaner.

          So sue me! :)

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 6:22 PM

          Beaner is pretty mild as far as slurs go. Spic is a real slur.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 6:59 PM

          Yeah.

          To me, “beaner” just sounds funny and evokes humorous images, while “spic” is harsher on the ears and more offensive.

          For blacks, “n***er” is of course pretty bad. But jigaboo and spearchucker sound funny.

          For Asians, “gook” sounds harsh, but “zipperhead” sounds funny.

          For whites, “honky” sounds goofy, but “melanin challenged” and “caveman” (used by some black nationalists as an allusion to the so-called barbaric history of Europeans) piss me off.

          A lot of it depends on rhetoric and how it sounds when you say it.

        • nezua
          August 26, 2010 at 10:50 AM

          Don’t whine, dude. It makes you look weak.

        • nezua
          August 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM

          also, Bay Area Guy, are you really threatening violence to people you’ve never met over a little bit of political street theater? take a breath, lay down the meth. the ugliness is not called for! on the other hand, i spar multiple times a week, and i love it. so i’m not at all worried about internet tuff guys puffing up their chest to defend whiteness, and if this is what you do to make yourself feel strong, go ‘head.

        • LaFleur
          August 26, 2010 at 2:25 PM

          Googling yourself is fun.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 28, 2010 at 9:57 PM

          on the other hand, i spar multiple times a week, and i love it. so i’m not at all worried about internet tuff guys puffing up their chest to defend whiteness

          Yeah, and I’ve taken martial arts. Not that I ever wanted to fight you for no reason. I’m just saying that if you randomly harassed me in the street with one of your anti-racist stunts, I would not have taken too kindly to it.

          But Nezua, when you can do better than harass a bunch of pathetic Daily Kosniks, then come and talk to me.

          Yeah, real “revolutionary” shit there!

          *rolls eyes*

          And no, I don’t do meth, or any drugs for that matter. And yeah, since I am white, I’m going to defend my people.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 28, 2010 at 10:11 PM

          Don’t whine, dude. It makes you look weak.

          No, claiming to be a revolutionary while linking to a bunch of yuppie blogs and messing with a bunch of wimpy white liberals makes you look weak.

          When you can pull that stunt with a white militia or skinhead group, then I’ll be impressed.

  33. LaFleur
    July 29, 2010 at 8:04 PM

    I assumed they were just being guilty white liberals, too afraid to question it. I found it funny that Nezua spent all this effort confronting people AT A LIBERAL CONVENTION. They’re already terrified of being considered racist or opposed to open borders. What the hell was the point? I liked when they all started yelling “white privilege” at the guy who told them to piss off.

    I looked at his blogroll – the few blogs that aren’t race-related are yuppie liberal blogs like Digby. It doesn’t appear to be the “Revolutionary’s Rag” it claims to be. I Googled several terms on his website, and couldn’t find any class analysis. I also couldn’t find any discussion of how unemployed Americans are supposed to feel about undocumented workers.

    He talked pretty tough at the end of the clip: “Keep being unapologetic” – right buddy, it takes real balls to confront a bunch of DailyKosniks. Liberal fail!

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 8:20 PM

      LaFleur, you’ll notice that most of these anti-racist types, as Robert pointed out, are essentially middle/upper middle class bourgeois types.

      You rarely hear these people talk about poverty and unequal economic opportunities plaguing blacks.

      Most of the time, you hear them whining about Hollywood or the media, and how they unfairly portray non-whites. Or you’ll hear them complain about the occasional white person who says something like “you’re not like other black people.”

      Or they just spend most of their time complaining about the “white privilege” displayed by certain online commenters.

      In short, they don’t seem to actually give a shit about the issues affecting flesh and blood peoples’ lives.

      Like Robert said, these bourgeois blacks and Hispanics are just pissed off because they don’t feel they have it quite as good as bourgeois whites.

      Anti-racists are really just a bunch of privileged (in terms of real privilege, not these Cultural Marxist constructs of privilege), self-indulgent elitists.

      right buddy, it takes real balls to confront a bunch of DailyKosniks. Liberal fail!

      You know, I’m honestly wondering if these types are really as “unapologetic” as they claim.

      I highly doubt that Nezua or Ank Mie are really this tough and confrontational in real life. Just because they can come up with their cute little anti-racist terms and be sarcastic and “unapologetic” towards a bunch of online commenters or liberal wimps doesn’t actually make them tough.

      I’d love to see Nezua try that stunt with a skinhead group. Now that would be impressive!

      By the way, how did Nezua not get in trouble for that stunt? Since he’s no law enforcement officer, wouldn’t he get in trouble for harassing citizens and disturbing the peace.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 8:27 PM

      And yeah, as commenter Thaddeus has repeatedly pointed out over at Abagond’s blog, it seems that very few Americans, black or white, are actually willing or able to talk about class, or other issues.

      It seems that these bourgeois anti-racist types can solely focus on race.

      Unemployed Americans, black and white, who are negatively affected by illegal immigration?

      Who cares! The feelings of a bourgeois, middle/upper middle class Hispanic like Nezua are obviously more important than that!

      *sarcasm off*

      But yeah, to reiterate, it would have been a bit more impressive had Nezua done that with a white militia/skinhead group, or shit, even a regular white conservative enclave, as opposed to harassing a bunch of pathetic liberals.

      • fpy3p
        July 29, 2010 at 8:38 PM

        I think we can safely say that there are 3 types of blacks/Hispanics in America: the first type is the bourgeois cultural Marxists who hate YT for superficial reasons, the second type is the Uncle Tom or Uncle Rios (made that one up), finally the third would be the Malcolm X, leave us the hell alone type. I would say Asians are mostly in the leave us the hell alone type, and stop fucking with us on the media.

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 8:39 PM

          Of course the fourth type would be the simple ghetto gangbangers, I can’t believe I forgot about them.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 8:45 PM

          Out of all those types, I respect the Malcolm X, leave us the hell alone types.

          Most American Indians fall under that category, and for that, I have greater respect for them than blacks and Hispanics.

          Although for Hispanic sellouts, I think “Tio Taco” is the Hispanic equivalent of Uncle Tom.

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 8:47 PM

          What’s interesting is that the Malcolm X types, similar to white nationalists, do NOT dig the Jews, which is why George Lincoln Rockwell actually met with Malcolm and said they shared the same goals.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 8:55 PM

          which is why George Lincoln Rockwell actually met with Malcolm and said they shared the same goals.

          No, Malcolm X didn’t really have a high opinion of white nationalists, and adopted a very confrontational approach towards them

          Rockwell actually met with Elijah Muhammad, and even spoke at an NOI rally in the early 60s.

          As far as similar goals, while they both did in fact despise Jews, their similar goals were more focused on racial separation between whites and blacks, as opposed to attacking Jews.

          Although both black nationalists, (who believe that integration was a Jewish plot to subvert blacks, as evidenced by the NAACP) and white nationalists (who believe that integration was a Jewish plot to weaken, divide, and distract whites) both didn’t have a very fond opinion of Jews.

          You would be interested to know that iconic black revolutionary Angela Davis was mentored by Herbert Marcuse, and that under his tutelage she essentially had a Marxist outlook, only she substituted race and gender for class (ie. Cultural Marxism).

          (information on Angela Davis and Marcuse courtesy of Abagond commenter Thaddeus)

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 8:58 PM

          That’s what I meant: desires for racial separation and dislikes of Jews often seems to go hand in hand. That’s because Jews are fundamentally a cosmopolitan, rootless, people who like to subvert and weakenen Gentiles’ strong sense of identity and cultural independence, while hypocritically maintaing their own self-centered identity.

  34. Bay Area Guy
    July 29, 2010 at 9:11 PM

    Lately, I’ve been reading the work of Croatian scholar Tomislav Sunic. He provides a very interesting, Eastern European perspective to American racial issues.

    (In the interest of full disclosure, just FYI, he is very close with white nationalists, and has been a guest a few times on The Political Cesspool)

    Anyway, here’s an archive of his articles.

    http://www.tomsunic.info/essays.html

    • fpy3p
      July 29, 2010 at 9:15 PM

      Eastern Europeans are interesting in that they’ve never really have had much experience with non-whites historically, with the exception I guess of Asiatic nomads and Siberian natives.

      • Bay Area Guy
        July 29, 2010 at 9:19 PM

        I’ve heard that slavic peoples have a small amount of Asian admixture, or more of a Eurasian mixture than other Europeans.

        Well, considering they’ve been invaded by the Mongols and Turks, that’s not too surprising.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 9:23 PM

          Of course, I still consider slavic peoples white without hesitation.

          I don’t subscribe to the One Drop Rule, and even if I did, the rule was only really meant to apply to blacks.

          Whites can have a small amount of Asian or Indian blood and still be considered white by me, no problem.

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 9:24 PM

          Actually, it’s a bit complex because the Slavs were the original Aryan Indo-Europeans, who moved into Europe from Central Asia and Siberia. If you look at their paternal genes, they are not too different from western Europeans, but a significant minority of them have Finno-Ugric genes. The Finnic peoples are interesting because although they have the hair, eyes, and skin color common to Nordics, their facial features are somewhat Asiatic, in terms of cheekbones and more narrow, longer eyes. Think of Vladimir Putin. On the other hand, Europeans near the Mediterranean often have Arab, North African admixture.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 9:35 PM

          By the way, this article couldn’t be linked to from his website, but here’s an excellent article by Tomislav Sunic critiquing the obsession with “anti-semitism.”

          You’re bound to like it.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 9:36 PM

          Ooops, I forgot to actually post the article!

          Here it is.

          http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-Anti-Semite.html

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 9:41 PM

          Thanks. Great article. By the way, from a racial perspective, who would you consider more “white”: a person from eastern Europe or Finland who had blonde hair, blue eyes, pale skin, but with somewhat Mongoloid features, or a swarthy, Mediterranean from Sicily or Greece who had obvious Arab or Berber admixture with huge, bulging eyes, olive skin, somewhat Jewish-like.

        • Bay Area Guy
          July 29, 2010 at 9:51 PM

          To me, they would both be white.

          But subconsciously, I’d go with the blond-haired, blue-eyed, somewhat mongoloid whites.

        • fpy3p
          July 29, 2010 at 9:55 PM

          What’s interesting is the Baltic region, Finland, and northern Russia is populated with those kinds of folks. I’m not sure it’s because of actual Asian admixture, it could just be adaptation to the climate and natural environment of North East Europe.

  35. LaFleur
    July 29, 2010 at 9:14 PM

    You would be interested to know that iconic black revolutionary Angela Davis was mentored by Herbert Marcuse, and that under his tutelage she essentially had a Marxist outlook, only she substituted race and gender for class (ie. Cultural Marxism).

    It’s been years since I read “Women, Race and Class”, but this wasn’t my impression of Davis’ thought. My impression was that Davis’ feminism and black advocacy were rooted in a strong Marxist class analysis. I’ve been meaning to re-read it. I think it was people like Tim Wise and Robert Jensen who removed the class analysis from the work of people like Davis and Fred Hampton, to make it more palatable to the white and black bourgeoisie who comprise their audience. Like another poster here said, race and gender are a part of socialist class politics, not a substitute for it.

    I need to reread the book, but just because Davis studied with Marcuse, doesn’t mean she adopted every aspect of cultural Marxism as it exists today.

    • Bay Area Guy
      July 29, 2010 at 9:55 PM

      Like another poster here said, race and gender are a part of socialist class politics, not a substitute for it.

      Well, that would be the ideal situation. But far too often, that isn’t the case.

      When I went to a stand-up comedy club in Oakland that bordered Berkeley, one of the comedians was this hippie like woman, who was making fun of radical feminists. Essentially, here’s what she said:

      “You know, feminists are always complaining about how women are seen as too emotional and not given proper respect. And during the heyday of feminism, they were all about taking the ‘men’ out of ‘women,’ and replacing it with ‘womyn.’ No, they weren’t interested in helping women in poor countries receive education and health care. Nope, gotta have the Y. And they wonder why people think they’re too emotional.”

      While this deals with radical feminism, the point is still the same.

      Many radical anti-racists and feminists are essentially substituting race and gender for class.

      They couldn’t actually give a shit about the struggles of poor and working people.

  36. Bay Area Guy
    July 30, 2010 at 3:02 PM

    I just found out that NBA star forward Amare Stoudemire has (or thinks he has) Jewish heritage.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=5423084

    Maybe I should get a DNA or some other form of heritage test. I might be surprised by what I find!

    Nah, I doubt it. I’m pretty sure of what I am.

  37. tulio
    August 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM

    I was just chatting with a Brazilian girl on another forum and we were talking about race. I mentioned to her that Rashida Jones, daughter of Quincy Jones is considered black in the U.S. She said that in Brazil, she’d be considered white, whether she has a black father or not.

    Do you guys consider this woman white?

    http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/rashida-jones-blades-of-glory-los-angeles-premiere-0ge6zF.jpg

  38. LaFleur
    August 1, 2010 at 5:20 PM

    I don’t know about this picture, but I’ve seen other pictures of her where she looks more black.

    http://entimg.msn.com/i/gal/WorldClassBeauties/RashidaJones_400.jpg

    http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTI2ODE0NTQ1M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDE3MDE3MQ@@._V1._SX332_SY400_.jpg

    Hey, I didn’t know her mom Peggy Lipton was Jewish. You learn something new every day.

    Is the color system in Mexico similar to Brazil? Most of the Mexican elite has pretty light skin. Are they considered white there?

  39. Bay Area Guy
    August 2, 2010 at 6:14 PM

    Here’s Paul Craig Roberts’ newest article.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07302010.html

    • fpy3p
      August 2, 2010 at 6:18 PM

      Once agan, Paul Craig Roberts hits a home run. I love how his writing containst visceral moral outrage. Just by reading him, you can feel his righteous anger and disgust.

    • LaFleur
      August 2, 2010 at 6:24 PM

      I could puke when I hear Democrats refer affectionately to Clinton, the architect of NAFTA, as “the Big Dog”. He’s a dog all right.

      I like Roberts’ writing for Counterpunch. I see he now regrets what the Reagan revolution led to. At least he can admit his mistakes.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 2, 2010 at 6:31 PM

        I see he now regrets what the Reagan revolution led to. At least he can admit his mistakes.

        I don’t know about that.

        To me, he’s more anti-neoconservative, George Bush, etc.

        He believes that neocons hijacked true conservatism.

        I don’t know where exactly he criticizes the Reagan Revolution. If you can point that out, I’d appreciate that.

        And yeah, how was Clinton a great president? He gave us NAFTA (which, to be fair, was proposed by the president of Mexico), the bombing of Serbia, etc.

        Democrats, Republicans, they’re all scum to me.

        • LaFleur
          August 2, 2010 at 6:49 PM

          This is a great article too:

          http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07232008.html

          If I could have looked into a crystal ball and seen that under a free trade banner, Republicans would enable corporate executives to pay themselves millions of dollars in “performance pay” for deserting their American work forces and hiring foreigners in their place, thus destroying the aspirations and careers of millions of Americans, I never would have helped the Republicans.

          Maybe he didn’t regret everything he did in the Reagan administration, but free trade was a big part of the Reagan revolution, right?

          Republicans have no sympathy for anyone but their own kind. How many Republicans do you know who care a hoot about the plight of the poor, the jobless, the medically uninsured? The government programs that Republicans are always adamant to cut are the ones that help people who need help.

          That sure doesn’t sound like something Ronald “the government is the problem and welfare queens be stealin’ your money” Reagan would have said.

          Macho patriotic Republicans are perfectly content for US foreign policy to be controlled by Israel.

          I think Reagan’s head would explode at that.

          Unfortunately Roberts was wrong to think that the Democrats had any intention of changing course.

          Looking at the Republican mess, I doubt that Democrats, try as they may, can equal it.

          They’re doing a pretty good job of that so far.

  40. tulio
    August 4, 2010 at 7:12 PM

    What do you guys think of the prop 8 overturn? It reminds me of the judge shutting down the Arizona sb 1070. It seems like liberal judges are just going to throw out any law they don’t like.

    • LaFleur
      August 4, 2010 at 7:31 PM

      Gay people getting married don’t hurt anybody. If anything it would be good for the economy. Weddings are expensive. So are divorces, LOL.

      I’m a Christian, but I don’t want to hear sleazebag politicians like Obama invoking “God in the mix.” Give me a secular government and stay out of my religion and my bedroom.

      This doesn’t compare to the Arizona thing. It’s just culture war bullshit, a distraction.

      • tulio
        August 4, 2010 at 8:35 PM

        We have a lot of laws that stop people from doing things that “don’t hurt anybody”. I’m not allowed to marry my mother, or marry 3 women. Neither of those would hurt anybody. I’m not allowed to walk down the street in the nude, that wouldn’t hurt anybody either beyond just the shock of seeing it. It’s illegal to say “Fuck” on TV, but nobody every dropped dead because they heard the world “fuck”. It’s illegal for two 17 year-olds to have sex, but if it’s consensual they certainly aren’t hurting anyone. I could go on and on.

        Saying something “doesn’t hurt anyone” has never been a basis for much of anything and it’s a pretty vapid argument and provides little impetus for people to change their sentiment that it is nature’s intention for men and women to be together and procreate, and perhaps our society through it’s culture and laws should reinforce that.

        • erranter
          August 4, 2010 at 8:54 PM

          I’m not really against Gay Marriage either. I can see the points to each side. I’m not gay but know and like the company of a few gays. We’re not really in an era where we need more reproduction, so it’s all fine in my book. No religious reasons to dislike it. I dunno. Rob doesn’t seem to like gayism that much either, but I see no real reason to be against it. Illegal immigration–that’s a different story.

        • David
          August 4, 2010 at 9:10 PM

          We have a lot of laws that stop people from doing things that “don’t hurt anybody”.
          Most of these laws probably should not exist.

          I’m not allowed to marry my mother, or marry 3 women. Neither of those would hurt anybody. I’m not allowed to walk down the street in the nude, that wouldn’t hurt anybody either beyond just the shock of seeing it. It’s illegal to say “Fuck” on TV, but nobody every dropped dead because they heard the world “fuck”.
          It’s not really clear to me that any of these things should be illegal.

          It’s illegal for two 17 year-olds to have sex, but if it’s consensual they certainly aren’t hurting anyone.
          I don’t believe this is true for any jurisdiction in the United States.

          Saying something “doesn’t hurt anyone” has never been a basis for much of anything
          I guess, but this is not pertinent to the Prop 8 decision. It has nothing to do with “hurting anyone” or “not hurting anyone.” It has to do with the way the judge is interpreting the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. You are free to disagree with this interpretation, just as people are free to disagree with Loving v. Virginia decision (another open interpretation of due process and equal protection by liberal activist judges).

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 5, 2010 at 12:19 AM

          I support gay marriage 100%, though it’s a divisive issue and I don’t see why we should be pushing it at this time. All it does it make working class people vote Republican.

  41. tulio
    August 4, 2010 at 8:27 PM

    You guys might find this article interesting. It’s from a black man in Jamaica writing about why whites rule the world. He seems to be a race realist. Interesting read. Just about all of his blog posts are good.

    http://xenlogic.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/how-white-men-conquered-the-world/

  42. Robert Lindsay
    August 5, 2010 at 12:20 AM

    How can you even be around those gays, erranter? Don’t they constantly try to have sex with you? If that’s you in your pic, you’re a good looking guy.

    • erranter
      August 5, 2010 at 10:14 AM

      My aunt and younger brother are gay. So was my great-grandma. I believe in the genetic basis. I hope my brother doesn’t do much searching for me on the Internet . . . Basically, I wish he weren’t gay, but there’s nothing I can do about it. It’s probably genetic and runs in our family. Supporting gay marriage/gay culture would lead to a genetic decline I believe because gays would not have kids/have fewer kids they don’t want. My aunt had four before she “figured it out”. Still, as you point out, the situational gayness rate will increase.

      In truth, I don’t have that many gay friends. Just one or two old college friends who I don’t talk to that much any more. In college a lot of gay guys seemed to be trying to get me to be gay. I went to college in SF, so the gay culture was strong. I was getting a lot of girls at the time, so I was pretty comfortable with my sexuality. I experimented in osculation but disliked the scruff and general everything guy/gay about it. You kind of felt left out for not being gay at some parties. It sounds pretty gay now, but I made an attempt to be maybe a little gayer for maybe a month or so. You kind of had to, even if you were faking it just to get girls. But I don’t think that’s necessarily that gay. It was just a more Indie version of Metrosexual. Anyway, I’m rambling. I might be pretty good looking, but gays have gaydar and look for a kind of weird, gay look. The guys straight guys think are good looking they think are “too straight” though they’ll admit are good looking. Kind of like girls and their “types”. I don’t know exactly what gays look for, though. There’s a certain set of facial features but I can’t pin them down. Gaydar’s just a recognition of those features, but being straight I really dont know what they are.

  43. erranter
    August 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM

    Interesting Amiri Baraka Poem. Wonder what peopled would think of it, as he is quite influential. I was forced to buy some of his books in college.

    “Black Art

    By Amiri Baraka

    Poems are bullshit unless they are
    teeth or trees or lemons piled
    on a step. Or black ladies dying
    of men leaving nickel hearts
    beating them down. Fuck poems
    and they are useful, wd they shoot
    come at you, love what you are,
    breathe like wrestlers, or shudder
    strangely after pissing. We want live
    words of the hip world live flesh &
    coursing blood. Hearts Brains
    Souls splintering fire. We want poems
    like fists beating niggers out of Jocks
    or dagger poems in the slimy bellies
    of the owner-jews. Black poems to
    smear on girdlemamma mulatto bitches
    whose brains are red jelly stuck
    between ‘lizabeth taylor’s toes. Stinking
    Whores! we want “poems that kill.”
    Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
    guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
    and take their weapons leaving them dead
    with tongues pulled out and sent to Ireland. Knockoff
    poems for dope selling wops or slick halfwhite
    politicians Airplane poems, rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
    rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . .tuhtuhtuhtuhtuhtuhtuhtuhtuhtuh
    . . .rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . . Setting fire and death to
    whities ass. Look at the Liberal
    Spokesman for the jews clutch his throat
    & puke himself into eternity . . . rrrrrrrr
    There’s a negroleader pinned to
    a bar stool in Sardi’s eyeballs melting
    in hot flame Another negroleader
    on the steps of the white house one
    kneeling between the sheriff’s thighs
    negotiating coolly for his people.
    Aggh . . . stumbles across the room . . .
    Put it on him, poem. Strip him naked
    to the world! Another bad poem cracking
    steel knuckles in a jewlady’s mouth
    Poem scream poison gas on beasts in green berets
    Clean out the world for virtue and love,
    Let there be no love poems written
    until love can exist freely and
    cleanly. Let Black people understand
    that they are the lovers and the sons
    of warriors and sons
    of warriors Are poems & poets &
    all the loveliness here in the world

    We want a black poem. And a
    Black World.
    Let the world be a Black Poem
    And Let All Black People Speak This Poem
    Silently
    or LOUD”

  44. tulio
    August 5, 2010 at 4:58 PM

    Usually you hear about Mexican on black hate crimes, but in Staten Island, it’s the other way around:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/31/nyregion/31staten.html

  45. LaFleur
    August 6, 2010 at 1:23 PM

    Some interesting links:

    http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2010/08/illegal-immigration-selfinterest-disguised-as-morality.html

    Meanwhile, those of us who support illegal immigration would never live in the same neighborhoods as illegal immigrants. Instead, we live in rich, white enclaves. We pay high rents and fat mortgages to live with People Like Us. If we really cared about the poor, we’d downsize our homes. We’d donate the difference between what it costs to live in Whitesville and Brownsville, to charity.

    This old Left Business Observer article argues that immigration has little effect on wages and employment for the native-born. I’m not sure how 125,000 Mariel boatlift refugees or 900,000 Algeria-to-France repatriations compare to 20 million plus illegals in the US, but here it is:

    http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Immigration.html

    Mo’ treason:

    http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/integration/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=226500202&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

    Despite President Obama’s pledge to retain more hi-tech jobs in the U.S., a federal agency run by a hand-picked Obama appointee has launched a $36 million program to train workers, including 3,000 specialists in IT and related functions, in South Asia.

    New Paul Craig Roberts, “The Year America Dissolved”:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26029.htm

  46. David
    August 10, 2010 at 3:37 PM

    In case nobody knows yet (I just learned myself a few minutes ago), Christopher Hitchens has been diagnosed with esophagal cancer which apparently has already metastasized. There is an excellent statistical likelihood that he will be dead in less than a year.

    Here he is talking with Anderson Cooper:

    • LaFleur
      August 10, 2010 at 5:00 PM

      I stopped paying attention to Hitchens after he turned neocon. He used to be an entertaining writer, if shallow and self-mythologizing. I still have a funny Vanity Fair article he wrote about his TV appearances during the week that Princess Diana and Mother Teresa croaked.

      Though a Christian myself, I agreed with his take on Teresa, the “ghoulish 14th century vixen”, as he called her. Unfortunately, his book, “The Missionary Position”, was a mere 100 pages long and read like he dashed it off between a five martini lunch and happy hour. He had enough talent (and evidence) to really take her apart, but couldn’t be arsed to do more than a bitchy diatribe. He lacked the discipline to be half the writer he probably thought of himself as.

      Why do so many Trotskyists turn right in their old age? Is there something about Trotskyism in particular that attracts shallow people like Hitchens, who are mostly in love with the idea of being seen as a radical?

      I’m not going to watch this video. If there were any justice he’d be forced to spend the rest of his life looking at pictures of the Iraqi and Afghan victims of the war he shamelessly cheer leaded for.

      As this blogger notes, CNN.com has made no mention of the dramatic increase in cancer rates among Fallujah children since the deadly US bombardment of the city in 2004, yet can find time to waste on this piss artist and his “brave” battle:

      http://jhnbrssndn.tumblr.com/post/926809016/christopher-hitchens-cancer-celebrity-and-obscenity

      I wouldn’t wish cancer on anyone, but he’ll at least be well supplied with painkillers, something most of the victims of his last crusade will be denied.

  47. tulio
    August 12, 2010 at 12:13 AM

    Just heard on a radio show that 8% of all births to America, nearly 1/10th are to illegal immigrant mothers. Wow.

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 12, 2010 at 12:17 AM

      Damn, if that’s true, that so sucks.

      • tulio
        August 13, 2010 at 2:21 AM

        I believe it cost about $8,000 to delivery a baby. Then factor in that educating that kid cost about 10 grand a year. That shit adds up.

        It’s the Walmart mindset across America in full effect. Cheap price is all that matters, no matter what the social consequences. These idiots that hire cheap nannies and gardeners don’t seem to put two and two together and realize that they are paying the social cost in other ways.

        • LaFleur
          August 13, 2010 at 8:17 AM

          By the time they realize that illegal immigrants aren’t escaping the third world, but bringing it with them, it will be too late.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 13, 2010 at 3:06 PM

          It’s the Walmart mindset across America in full effect. Cheap price is all that matters, no matter what the social consequences.

          Well, like Lafleur said, they’re really just capitalists who disguise their bourgeois politics with Cultural Marxism.

          In terms of how they treat the working class, they’re no better than the right wingers they frequently deride.

  48. Bay Area Guy
    August 12, 2010 at 4:07 PM

    Here’s some good analysis from Alternative Right that discusses Omar Thornton.

    http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/zeitgeist/whitey-made-him-do-it/

  49. Bay Area Guy
    August 13, 2010 at 12:03 AM

    Oh, it turns out that Omar Thornton was with a white woman.

    This just keeps getting better and better!

    http://actingwhite.blogspot.com/2010/08/omar-thorton-mass-murderer.html

  50. tulio
    August 13, 2010 at 12:00 PM

    I was just reading this note that NPR posted on facebook about the debate around the 14th amendment. I was looking at all the comments people left, which were in the multiple hundreds. The majority of them were the type saying, “unless you are Native American, then you are here illegally too” type shit. IOW, people who couldn’t care less about illegal immigration or stopping it and actively oppose those that want to stop. Granted, most of NPR’s listeners(and perhaps even the Facebook community at large) are liberals so I doubt this is a random sampling of America.

    I feel I truly understand the liberal and conservative and realist positions. By that, I mean I understand where all positions are coming from even if I don’t agree with them on a particular point. What I like about liberals is their anti-racism. I hate racism. I hate that people will dislike someone because of their racial background, or that the cards are stacked against certain groups for no reason than their race. I respect liberals for being against this shit. Conservatives are more likely to be racist and nativist, however they seem to be more common sense to me in things like border protection, not allowing our taxpayers to be exploited by millions of people illegally entering the country, being realistic about the social implications of mass immigration, etc.

    I wish there a strong middle position of anti-racism + realism on immigration. I don’t think immigration should have restrictions based on race, but it should be realistic in realizing that there are social consequences of say, the U.S. becoming majority Hispanic. With the NPR/mainstream liberal crowd, to even say that much is considered racist. I’m not the least bit racist against Latin-Americans(yes I know Latino isn’t a race, but here in California its strongly associated with mestizos from Mexico, not whites from Cuba). I like Latin America, I’m most attracted to Latin American women, I would even love to spend extended time in a Latin country, so I don’t come from any position of hate. But why can’t we talk realistically about the social implications of mass immigration from the poorest sectors of Mexico? Why do we allow people to come here illegally and then have anchor babies? Why can’t we have a serious discussion on the 14th amendment and what it was truly intended for? Why is it that for liberals, the immigration issue is completely untouchable. It is taboo for liberals to say anything critical of immigration whatsoever, esp non-white immigration. I have mentioned in another post that I’m not an ideologue. I don’t believe in getting wrapped up in ideology. That is, some sort of “belief system” that dictates to you what your values and positions should be, because it is often at war with Realism, i.e. accepting reality for what it is, not what you wish it were and then wrapping your worldview around lofty notions such as “America is a nation of immigrants” and then extrapolating from that that no restriction on immigration(legal or illegal) is ever warranted, no matter what the social or economic consequences. That is the danger of ideology.

    http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/11/illegal-immigrants-bear-8-children-born-us

    Nearly 1 in 10 babies born in America is born to an illegal immigrant! Mull that over for a moment and think about what the implication is for this country’s future. Where is all this money going to come from? $8000 to the tax payer for each birth in the county hospital. $10,000 a year for k-12 for these kids that aren’t citizens. Now multiply this by millions upon millions. Also consider that this demographic also has a very high drop out rate and consider what the implications will be to America’s global competitiveness. The liberal thinks this is something to cheer on. Once again, I have nothing against Latinos or Latin-American immigration. However, when we are pulling in immigration from the most impoverished sectors of Latin American society, we are doing ourselves in. What if we took all of our blacks in the projects and all our whites from the trailers, and poor Latinos in the barrios and just shipped them off to Canada. Millions and millions of them. Can anyone imagine liberal Canadians cheering this on??

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 13, 2010 at 1:40 PM

      What if we took all of our blacks in the projects and all our whites from the trailers, and poor Latinos in the barrios and just shipped them off to Canada. Millions and millions of them. Can anyone imagine liberal Canadians cheering this on??

      Well, the Canadian equivalents of anti-racist philosopher king Tim Wise would.

      And so would many liberals. Of course, so long as they didn’t actually have to live near white/black/brown trash.

      • LaFleur
        August 13, 2010 at 2:10 PM

        It looks like Canadians are having this debate as well.

        http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Illegal+immigration+must+stopped/3394021/story.html

        http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/need+freedom+move+around/3394022/story.html

        The liberal columnist’s argument sounds typical of what we get here:

        When did it become OK to declare a person “illegal?”

        I do not believe any laws permitted French and English colonization and settlement of what we now call Canada. So how is it fair, now that us great Canadians are here, for us to say that someone else cannot live here too?

        I am by no means advocating an unmonitored free-for-all of global human mobility, but our current approach to immigration seems far out of touch with reality. Like the rest of the natural world, we are prone to move around, to migrate.

        If we tried to stop geese from migrating south in the winter time, that would likely have dire consequences for them. Likewise, when we impede our fellow humans from migrating, we do them harm.

        This is exacerbated with our current immigration system that explicitly privileges people on the basis of their class, education, age, nationality and language.

        First he says:

        I am by no means advocating an unmonitored free-for-all of global human mobility

        but then says:

        when we impede our fellow humans from migrating, we do them harm

        What is this, Jonathan Livingston Seagull? I hate this kind of emotional gibberish!

        • tulio
          August 13, 2010 at 2:28 PM

          That’s typical left-wing thinking on immigration. They will never just come out and say they are for open borders, but they’ll do anything they can to prevent the borders from being enforced, yet fail to see their own hypocrisy.

    • LaFleur
      August 13, 2010 at 2:00 PM

      The long-term Democratic plan is a permanent Democratic majority. If they have to throw US working class citizens under the bus to get it, that’s okay with them. That’s why they want mass immigration and amnesty.

      As for other liberals and leftists, a lot of them are just concerned with being PC. They seem to think too emotionally to consider the long term results of their actions. The liberals who support open borders are affluent enough that it either benefits them or doesn’t directly affect them. When it affects them, and eventually it will, they will care. But then it will be too late.

      I share the liberals’ anti-racism, but their stance on illegal immigration is hypocritical “let’s you and him help the poor” stuff. Wealthy liberals are not affected by the strain illegals place on the safety net that should be reserved for US citizens. They haven’t seen their jobs like construction and factory work taken over by cheap illegal labor. I’m tired of liberals on other boards spouting propaganda like “they only take the jobs Americans won’t do” which is untrue.

      Conservatives like the Teabaggers are often racist and care more about the cultural stuff, like speaking Spanish and waving the Mexican flag, than the effect on American quality of life. Liberals like Keith Olbermann try to lump all opponents of illegal immigration in with the Teabaggers, which is dishonest. I think there are a lot of liberals of all races who are secretly disturbed by illegal immigration, but are afraid to speak publicly for fear of being called racist, or don’t want to be seen siding with racist nativists.

      Nearly 1 in 10 babies born in America is born to an illegal immigrant! Mull that over for a moment and think about what the implication is for this country’s future.

      Yes, it’s going to be a disaster. The immigrants are not escaping the third world, they’re bringing it with them. Eventually rich white liberals won’t be able to white-flight themselves away from the problems they helped create, and they’ll be very upset. They’re fine with it, though, as long as it’s only the working class who have to deal with it.

      Sure, America is a nation of immigrants, but this isn’t 1910. The real unemployment rate is probably 22%. Allowing mass immigration during a depression is insane. In a deteriorating economy, I fear that violence similar to the 1982 murder of Vincent Chin in Detroit could result.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Chin

      Also consider that this demographic also has a very high drop out rate and consider what the implications will be to America’s global competitiveness.

      The treasonous elites are fully aware of this. That is why USAID is using taxpayer money to train IT workers in Sri Lanka and Armenia:

      http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/integration/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=226500202&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_News

      Illegal immigration is just another weapon in their class war against all of us. They’re turning the US into another banana republic, with an impoverished, powerless majority dominated by a tiny elite. Capitalists are in the process of destroying everything the labor movement achieved and returning the US to the gilded age or worse. Liberals are knowingly or unknowingly playing their game.

      What if we took all of our blacks in the projects and all our whites from the trailers, and poor Latinos in the barrios and just shipped them off to Canada. Millions and millions of them. Can anyone imagine liberal Canadians cheering this on??

      Of course not. Canada, like most western countries, is very picky about who it allows in. This is why liberals like Tim Wise, who say it “eviscerates the working class” if labor can’t move across borders as freely as capital, are full of shit. They know that US working class citizens have zero mobility to cross borders. We’re stuck here. We can’t go to Canada unless we have the skills they want and a certain amount of assets.

      That’s why it pisses me off when Latino elites like Shakira complain about SB 1070. They love shipping all their poor people to the US so they don’t have to deal with them.

      I’m disturbed by the racial profiling that could result from SB 1070 and the idea of building a fence, but what are the other options at this point?

      • tulio
        August 13, 2010 at 2:51 PM

        Le Fleur, you sound like my ideological kin on the immigration issue. I really appreciate your balance of realism and anti-racism. People like us I feel are depressingly rare. I have so many liberal friends just given the part of the country I live in that are like you describe, just too PC to ever break from the liberal party line on immigration and risk fear of being associated with nativists. And then my Latino friends are just being pro-Latino first which essentially means they care more about their own group than America at large. They tend to be left-wing as well and have sort of a Howard Zinn meets Che Guevara view of America so they really don’t give a shit about America as anything but a place to live and make money. They don’t care much about preserving anything uniquely American about America. It’s just about circling the wagon and doing what’s in their best interest of their people, i.e. fighting immigration laws and getting and getting as many other Latinos in the country as possible and calling opposition racist in nature. Of course that causes the liberals that deep down ought to know better to just shut up as they don’t want to be seen as part of the racist/nativist camp. Even many conservatives are constantly on the defense trying to explain why opposition to illegal immigration is not racist. If you want the 14th amendment modified, that is now considered racist too of course.

        There really needs to be a rationalist movement on immigration.

        • tulio
          August 13, 2010 at 2:55 PM

          Ooops duplicate, can you delete this one above Robert?

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 13, 2010 at 3:01 PM

          Well Tulio, that’s interesting.

          the problem is that when it comes to immigration, you’re either a WN like me, or an open borders lefty.

          Even though Lafleur probably disagrees with much of my ideology, I respect him because he’s an original thinker who can blend economically/generally progressive views with realism on issues such as immigration and Cultural Marxism.

          Same thing with Thaddeus. Even though he’s an anti-racist, and would disagree with the overwhelming majority of my views, I don’t see him as a self-hating white.

          If for no other reason, I respect him for being an original and scholarly thinker, as well as the very rare white anti-racist who actually is willing to challenge blacks on their bullshit every now and then.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 13, 2010 at 3:23 PM

          Lol!

          Yeah, I was visiting relatives in the Midwest for a week, and didn’t have access to wireless internet there.

        • tulio
          August 13, 2010 at 4:31 PM

          I still have a hard time believing Le Fleur is a woman. It’s weird, even when women write very logically and avoid emotional overtones, I can still tell it’s a woman. But with you, your writing/thinking style is indistinguishable from a mans.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 13, 2010 at 4:36 PM

          Yeah, I still have trouble thinking of Lafleur as a woman, even though I know it to be true.

          Although I guess masculine and feminine writing styles don’t differ that much, or simply don’t exist.

          For example, both Abagond and Ank Mie are black radicals. But I somehow always knew that Abagond was male and Mie female.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 13, 2010 at 4:37 PM

          I guess I kind of contradicted myself. I meant to say that while feminine and masculine styles don’t exist that much, I can still somehow tell whether or not the writer’s a man or woman.

  51. LaFleur
    August 16, 2010 at 7:23 AM

    40 Bizarre Statistics That Reveal The Horrifying Truth About The Collapse Of The U.S. Economy

    http://www.countercurrents.org/truth150810.htm

    A few random fun facts:

    7 – This is what American workers now must compete against: in China a garment worker makes approximately 86 cents an hour and in Cambodia a garment worker makes approximately 22 cents an hour.

    14 – Only the top 5 percent of U.S. households have earned enough additional income to match the rise in housing costs since 1975.

    28 – More than 25 percent of Americans now have a credit score below 599, which means that they are a very bad credit risk.

    35 – One study found that as of 2007, the bottom 80 percent of American households held about 7% of the liquid financial assets.

  52. Bay Area Guy
    August 16, 2010 at 10:12 PM

    This article on Multiculturalism and its roots in traditional Marxism is an absolute gem.

    The best explanation of Cultural Marxism that I have yet to read.

    http://www.amren.com/ar/1999/11/#cover

  53. Bay Area Guy
    August 17, 2010 at 12:44 AM

    Here’s Edmund Connelly, good as usual, analyzing how non-white killers of white people always receive sympathetic treatment from the media.

    http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?p=3105

  54. fpy3p
    August 17, 2010 at 1:14 AM

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Film-Images-Whites.html

    In this article, Connelly wrote that he sympathized with Asians in their efforts to fight negative media portrayals. Amazing isn’t it? A white nationalist (supposedly a hater of all non-whites) is expressing more sympathy with Asians than do the uber-liberal, PC jewish rats that like to put on an air of moral superiority.

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 17, 2010 at 1:26 AM

      Wow, that was simply an incredible article.

      Yeah, mainstream Asians are at least speaking out against this crap.

      Where’s our Ronald Takaki? Yeah, we have some fringe WN’s, but where are the mainstream whites who speak out against this?

      Answer: They don’t exist.

      Of course, Connelly left out “I am Legend,” and other Will Smith savior films.

      Like I’ve said, I’ll continue to see movies, but I’ll never look at Hollywood the same way again.

      However, I say we ought to put our money where our mouth his. White and Asian Americans should create their own film companies independent of hostile Jewish influence.

      We currently possess the financial capital to do so. So I say, why not?

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 17, 2010 at 1:27 AM

        To clarify, I’m not advocating a joint white-Asian alliance (which is a bit unrealistic, although I am living testament to white-Asian friendship/unity), but rather that whites and Asians separately create their own film companies.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 17, 2010 at 1:35 AM

          A white nationalist (supposedly a hater of all non-whites) is expressing more sympathy with Asians than do the uber-liberal, PC jewish rats that like to put on an air of moral superiority.

          Well, that’s because as nationalists, we understand peoples’ desire for self-determination, racial pride, etc.

          Far from being “supremacists,” we’re the ones who want to end American imperialism. We’re not the ones who wish to bomb millions of brown people around the world.

          (see Sam Francis articles on 9/11 and the Price of Empire)

          So yes, I can relate to Asians. Also, as someone who had many Asian friends growing up and who is surrounded by Asians at my UC, of all the non-white groups, I have the greatest respect for them.

          On another note, speaking of films, I refuse to see “The Other Guys,” which features cool black cops, but wimpy white ones.

          I’m guessing that for you, you refused to see “The Last Airbender” and other nonsense.

        • fpy3p
          August 17, 2010 at 1:47 AM

          Why is a white-Asian alliance so unrealistic? Considering the other non-whites in this country (ie., blacks and mestizos) not to mention the hostile jewish minority that frankly hates ALL Gentiles, I see it as the most likely of all possible racial alliances.
          If you go to the Statsaholic blog, with Reginald Thompson as the owner, he once wrote an article to that effect, but with a global focus (ie., China, Russia, independent Europe against ZOG.) Thompson is also a contributor to Occidental Observer.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 17, 2010 at 1:53 AM

          Well, I personally would not mind a white-Asian alliance.

          The problem is that other white nationalists are more dogmatic than I am (ie. they’re white only). And, of course, non-white nationalists don’t even think about these issues.

          Also, a good number of Asians buy into this whole “people of color” Critical Race Theory thinking.

          But hey, if you can arrange the alliance, I’ll gladly join.

          I do believe that the U.S and other western countries should cultivate positive relationships with China and other rising Asian powers.

          Of course, everyday Americans getting rid of the Zionist neocons and rebuilding their fractured infrastructure would be the ideal solution, but that’s wishful thinking on my part.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 17, 2010 at 1:55 AM

          Also, a good number of Asians buy into this whole “people of color” Critical Race Theory thinking.

          To clarify, the good number of Asians that I know are not into this stuff.

          But at least at my UC, you have Asian Critical Race Theorist activist types. Of course, you also have the Ronald Takaki/Frank Wu types.

          Still, at least based on my experience and perception, whites (myself included) get along WAY BETTER with Asians than any other non-white group.

        • fpy3p
          August 17, 2010 at 1:56 AM

          There may be Asians who buy into Cultural Marxism, but it is really shallow because as soon as their relatives or themselves are mugged in the streets by a black, they know the deal. Trust me, most East Asians, in America and within their own countries, are not fond of blacks; with mestizos, we simply don’t have that much experience with them to form an opinion.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 17, 2010 at 2:01 AM

          Well, as Jared Taylor once pointed out, one’s tolerance for diversity is directly related to his distance from it.

        • tulio
          August 17, 2010 at 9:29 PM

          “Well, as Jared Taylor once pointed out, one’s tolerance for diversity is directly related to his distance from it.”

          Empty platitude. Gee, why do I have a huge multicultural, multiracial group of friends that all get along fine?? Heck some of them are even in interracial relationships! The horror! Something must be seriously wrong with me!

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 17, 2010 at 11:10 PM

          Gee, why do I have a huge multicultural, multiracial group of friends that all get along fine??

          Hey, that’s me you’re talking about! Although, at least in high school, we frequently verbally sparred.

          But the Asian kids I hang out with at college are cool, and we all get along.

          The horror! Something must be seriously wrong with me!

          Well, not knowing you personally, no comment on my part.

          On another note, I know this will really surprise you, but on an individual level, I’m a really fun and easy going guy.

          As long as you avoid topics pertaining to CRT, politics, or other controversial issues, I’m really pleasant to be around!

          Honestly.

  55. Bay Area Guy
    August 17, 2010 at 1:35 PM

    Excellent article by Jared Taylor.

    http://www.alternativeright.com/main/the-magazine/the-political-structure-doctrine/

    I especially love this quote: “The great legal irony of the 20th century is that American whites institutionalized racial discrimination against themselves at a time when they were the overwhelming majority both on the bench and in Congress.”

    I mean, wow. What other majority group would kiss so much minority ass? And we’re still seen as horribly oppressive.

    • fpy3p
      August 18, 2010 at 12:44 AM

      Looks like Sunic hit another home-run. Does Sunic currently live in America or Croatia? And what do you make of the irony that jews who oppose neocon imperialism and ISrahell tend to be left-wing? Personally, I’ll take Norman Finkelstein over some warmongering prick. I think Brother Kapner is one of the few jews who are neither neocons nor leftists.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 1:02 AM

        Sunic currently lives in Croatia. Apparently, he didn’t get the academic promotion that he wanted in the States, so he moved back to Croatia. He continues to speak throughout Europe.

        I just find it ironic the way Eastern Europeans, despise living under Communism, are more nationalistic, proud, and willing to speak their minds than those of us in the so-called “free world” (ie. U.S. and Western Europe).

        In many ways, Eastern Europeans are light years ahead of us.

        On another note, I’ll also take leftist Jews over warmongering neocons, although I absolutely despise Cultural Marxists.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:04 AM

          *despite living under Communism*

        • fpy3p
          August 18, 2010 at 1:06 AM

          It’s not ironic if you think about, because the Soviets installed nationalistic Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and the USSR was nationalistic communist. By the way, I think having leftist jews like Finkelstein onboard is better than right-wing jews who are also neocon-like being on your side. If leftist jews are onboard, the WN’s appear more humane and open-minded. On the other hand, no possible benefit could be gained by joining with warmongering scum. It seems jews who are neither leftist nor imperialist neocons are extremely rare, although they do exist.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:09 AM

          Well, I don’t think that either leftist Jews or neocons can participate in any WN movement.

          While most leftist Jews agree with WN’s in opposing Israel, they would strongly disagree with them on other issues.

          The few Jews I would accept in the WN movement are Jew Among You, Paul Gottfried, and a few others (those are just the two that immediately come to mind).

          As I’ve said before, if Jews want us to accept them, they’ve got a lot of ‘splainin to do.

        • fpy3p
          August 18, 2010 at 1:13 AM

          I’m not saying they should participate in WN, just collaborate with them on propaganda and opposing the ruling establishment. What is JewAmongYou’s stance on US support for Israhell, wars in the MidEast, and US imperialism in general?

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:19 AM

          JAY is anti-neocon and anti-Jewish/Israel lobby.

          He does believe in Jewish nationalism, and believes that a Jewish state should exist in Israel.

          However, he believes that the formation of Israel was shameful and did great harm.

          In a nutshell, he’s not some lunatic, “anti-semite!” screaming Zionist.

        • fpy3p
          August 18, 2010 at 1:22 AM

          What do you think of people like Kevin MacDonald, Edmund Connelly, Tom Sunic etc., collaborating with jews like Finkelstein, and Brother Kapner on getting the message out and fighting the neocon, Wall Street establishment?

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 1:30 AM

        Wait, do they collaborate with Finkelstein? Because I think that a leftist such as Finkelstein would despise WN’s.

        But yes, while he makes some factually inaccurate statements, Brother Nathanael and those like him are indeed very useful, and their work is very much appreciated.

  57. Bay Area Guy
    August 18, 2010 at 1:11 AM

    By the way, the more and more I read of Edmund Connelly, the more I’m impressed.

    I mean, he GETS IT!

    He just confirms with solid evidence what I have long suspected.

  58. tulio
    August 18, 2010 at 3:53 AM

    BAG’s nightmare anti-white future dystopia! I think MIA did this video just for BAG, lol:

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xd2w3j_m-i-a-born-free-video-official-real_music

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM

      Interesting video.

      Although I don’t exactly think that this is an anti-white dystopia per se. The cops were white, and only redheads were targeted (with a few blondes thrown in).

      Something tells me that this is more of an allegory. Since M.I.A. is Sri Lankan, perhaps this is related to the struggles of her people.

      But yeah, there’s a reason why I’m a white nationalist. We must stand up and fight now, or it will be too late.

      • Robert Lindsay
        August 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

        It is an allegory for the Tamil genocide in Sri Lanka, yes. I support the Tamil armed struggle, 100%. It’s sickening with the Sinhalese did. They are fascists. And the whole Western media, and every single Western government, supported the genocidal Sri Lankan state to the fuckin hilt.

        Sickening!

      • tulio
        August 18, 2010 at 12:34 PM

        Well, you can pretend that the cops were Jewish. ;-) Some of the cops were non-white, one looked maybe SE Asian.

        Anyway, the director Romaine Gavras seems to have a talent at making videos that scare the shit out of white people.

        http://vimeo.com/9518258

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 12:59 PM

          Oh yes, France is going to have a racial explosion sooner or later. Oh wait, they already did in 2005!

          But yeah, something whites should certainly keep in mind.

          http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/malinvestments/the-black-underclass-time-bomb/

        • tulio
          August 18, 2010 at 1:08 PM

          That’s one of the most sloppily reasoned articles I’ve read in a long time. Really, this guy believes blacks are the verge of exploding because of the economy? I see no evidence of it. Shows how out of touch many WNs are with reality.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:09 PM

          Well, blacks have exploded in the past. And yes, tensions do seem to run high during poor economic times.

          Like during the early 90s, when we had the L.A. Riots.

        • tulio
          August 18, 2010 at 1:18 PM

          Just speaking for Los Angeles, the general anger and racial discontent levels are nowhere near what they were in the early 90s. Many blacks felt that what happened to Rodney King was very common but that was just the one time it was captured. There was lots of black rage against the Darryl Gates run LAPD. There was also the Latasha Harlins incident that was fueling the rage. The tension was reaching a fever pitch at that point. After the King verdict, that was the straw that broke the camels back and we saw an explosion of something that had been building for awhile. I can tell you that the tension that led up to the L.A. riot doesn’t exist right now in this city. At most, you may have some idiots after a Laker game burning trash cans, but a full scale race riot isn’t even on the horizon. The tension isn’t there.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:22 PM

          Fair enough.

          As someone who lives in L.A. I’ll take your word for it.

          You’re right. I forgot about Latasha Harlins being killed by the Korean store owner.

          Well, I guess I should clarify. I didn’t say that a full scale uprising would DEFINITELY happen. I’m just saying that one should be alert to what’s going on, because it COULD.

          I just figured that with changing demographics, a completely shitty economy, and other factors, that there’s going to be an explosion in the future.

          Who knows, it could even come from whites!

          Hey, like The Clash said, “white riot, I want a riot, white riot, a riot of our own!”

          No, I’m not advocating violence or saying that we should riot just for the heck of it. But I’m just so sick of whites being a bunch of emasculated wimps.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:23 PM

          What’s ironic is that The Clash was generally leftist and spoke out against rising WN in the UK.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 18, 2010 at 1:28 PM

          He’s a damn fine director, don’t you think? He’s done movies too.

        • tulio
          August 18, 2010 at 2:12 PM

          Yeah, his directing is brilliantly cutting edge. I’ve never seen anything as raw as this.

  59. LaFleur
    August 18, 2010 at 10:53 AM

    So Tim Wise has issued a pronouncement about racism on the liberal left:

    http://www.timwise.org/2010/08/with-friends-like-these-who-needs-glenn-beck-racism-and-white-privilege-on-the-liberal-left/

    He does make some true if obvious points about the hypocrisy of liberal “colorblindness”.

    However, how does Wise think that racism can be addressed in a country where the bottom 80% own only 7% of liquid assets without also confronting class? He suggests that leftists with a solid class analysis dismiss race entirely. So much for Adolph Reed and Glen Ford.

    Wise seems to take the same Manichean approach that he accuses (unnamed) leftists of taking. How is Wise’s “race first, then class” approach supposed to work? There seems to be no plan of action beyond re-educating white people in an endless series of seminars headed by well-paid academics like Wise. How does a rich man like Wise think he can address the “psychological wage of whiteness” that a white WalMart employee or unemployed person receives? As unemployment and the wealth gap rapidly metastasize, when will Wise think it appropriate to discuss class-based programs?

    Note how snotty Wise is to an Asian American guy who challenges him in the comments:

    And Yan. I’m betting that I’ve written more about — and publicly spoken out more about — white racism against Asian Americans in the job market, etc than you have, frankly, and certainly more than the forces who oppose aff action. I write about it in my new book, in my last book, and in my book on aff action actually, extensively…perhaps you should read them…

    Woe betide anyone who challenges his expertise! I don’t suppose it occurs to him that he sounds here like the typical white male squarehead he often ridicules.

    • fpy3p
      August 18, 2010 at 11:00 AM

      His response to that Asian guy was pretty clumsy, where did his “compassion” go?

    • tulio
      August 18, 2010 at 11:05 AM

      I have had disagreements with Tim Wise before and he has spouted off on me. I got in a debate with him on whether the founding fathers should be judged by the standard of their time or if they were just evil racists. I fall under the position that historical figures have to be judged against the normative sentiments of their era. He didn’t like that!

      I like much of what he says but he doesn’t seem like a guy I would get along with on a personal level. He can definitely come off as sanctimonious and rigid. I think he is brilliant however and he understands the psychology of racism better than even many blacks do. I think his contributions to the racial debate are valuable overall.

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

      Tim Wise is a piece of shit. I’ve noticed that on a personal level, all these anti-racists are pieces of shit. Macon D, Ank Mie, you name it.

      And then they wonder why most white people are unwilling to discuss race with wonderful souls like them?

      Fuckers.

      • tulio
        August 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

        I’d say that the ratio of assholes on the racist side is much higher than the ratio of assholes on the anti-racist side. People like David Duke, Tom Metzger, whoever that freak is that runs the Christian Identity movement and Buchanan don’t seem like people I’d want over for dinner either.

        Me and Robert had a conversation about this topic once. I was wondering if racist just seem mean when discussing race, but are actually nice people otherwise if you stay away from the topic of race. We concluded that racists tend to just be miserable people period. Their racism is just a natural extension of their overall nastiness.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM

          I was wondering if racist just seem mean when discussing race, but are actually nice people otherwise if you stay away from the topic of race.

          Well, I think that outside of race, I’m a pretty fun guy!

          As long as a black person doesn’t display “the tude” and go all CRT on me, I’m fine with him.

          I recall a time when I struck up a random conversation with a black guy on a plane, and we spent most of our time having a pleasant talk about sports.

          I’m no one-trick-pony. You just have to avoid the trick that ticks me off.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

          “Robert and I” please. ;) If you want to sound educated, that is.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

        I’d say that the ratio of assholes on the racist side is much higher than the ratio of assholes on the anti-racist side.

        Well, the extreme skinheads, yes.

        But on a personal, non-racial level, I would much rather spend time with Jared Taylor, James Edwards, Alex Kurtagic, and Tomislav Sunic than Tim Wise, Macon D, or Ank Mie.

        Believe me, anti-racists are simply self-righteous assholes. I have yet to encounter a calm one. They all think that they have a sacred mission to purify white people, and their arrogance is quite insufferable.

        I know that a common tactic employed by the left (which you are using right now) is to pathologize all forms of white nationalism by accusing the people of being mentally ill, miserable, unbalanced, etc.

        Well, okay, I’m using similar tactics against the anti-racists, but hey, gotta fight fire with fire, right?

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 12:24 PM

      where did his “compassion” go?

      He never had any compassion in the first place. If you’ve studied anti-racists as long as I have, you’ll know that they are a bunch of arrogant, self-indulgent pricks.

      They honestly think that they are the most moral and important people since Jesus.

    • LaFleur
      August 18, 2010 at 12:26 PM

      Much of what Wise says is absolutely true. I agree that being white in America amounts to a subsidy. However, poor and working class white people don’t take well to being lectured by some rich guy on how privileged they are. Wise may understand much about the psychology of racism, but he appears to understand nothing of the psychology of working class as opposed to upper class white people. It’s odd considering the background he claims to be from.

      Many middle and upper class whites seem to dig him, but I have yet to speak to a working class white person who can stand him. And as Joe Bageant points out, contrary to liberal stereotyping, working class whites have much more everyday involvement with people of color than middle class white people do. I think their revulsion toward Wise has something to do with his approach, including his frequent Christian-bashing and use of white trash stereotypes.

      • tulio
        August 18, 2010 at 12:52 PM

        Comparing poor whites to middle class blacks makes no sense. You compare poor blacks to poor whites and middle class blacks to middle class whites.

        It’s funny when we’re talking about IQ scores, and upper class blacks scoring better than low class white, HBDers will say that you have to compare IQs of poor blacks to that of poor whites and IQs of rich blacks to rich whites otherwise you’re talking apples and oranges. So why is it that they understand this principle when talking about IQ, but don’t understand the same principle when talking about class and white privilege?

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 12:57 PM

          Let’s just put it this way, Tulio.

          No poor or working class people want to hear about how “privileged” they are.

        • tulio
          August 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

          Sure, I can totally understand that. However, the lion’s share of whites are neither working class nor poor. So the white privilege argument from the CRTs is being directed at middle/upper class white America, who makes up the majority by far.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 1:06 PM

          Well then, let’s just say that the CRT’s have a very interesting definition of “privileged.”

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 12:35 PM

      I agree that being white in America amounts to a subsidy.

      Well, I’ve had millions of debates with Tulio about this. For one, I think that “white privilege” is grossly exaggerated.

      Secondly, all “white privilege” means is not having to put up with the headaches blacks put up with. To me, lack of disadvantage is hardly a “privilege.” I define privilege in ABSOLUTE, not RELATIVE terms.

      But that’s enough on that.

      I’ve heard him make vicious attacks on whites (ie melanin challenged, pale face, etc), but I cannot immediately recall anti-Christian, anti-white trash stereotypes.

      Maybe you could point it out.

      But yeah, I don’t think he actually grew up poor in a lousy apartment as he claims. For one, his attitude betrays his elitism.

      Two, I know I’m reveling in stereotypes, but with very rare exceptions, there’s no such thing as a poor Jew. I think that his Jewish grandfather even made money through owning a liquor store in a black neighborhood (at least according to reviews of his memoir on Amazon).

      (yeah, I know, Jews like to point out that over 10% of Jews live in poverty, but I’m willing to bet that most of those poor Jews are Yiddish speaking immigrants who have a poor command of English)

      I mean, I just find it funny how he gets so angry and vicious and anal when people point out Jewish privilege, even though he’s an agnostic. Guess it shows that Jews, at least Ashkenazi ones, are more than “just a religion.”

      Why am I talking about Jews? I think that his Jewish identity has much to do with his anti-white, anti-Christian attacks.

      (unlike “white privilege,” which is very relative privilege and simply means the majority not having to put up with certain majority headaches, Jewish privilege in absolute terms is very real, as evidenced by their grossly disproportionate power as a small minority)

      • LaFleur
        August 18, 2010 at 6:53 PM

        BAG: To me, lack of disadvantage is hardly a “privilege.”

        The way most CRT people seem to frame rights that everyone should have as something that should be taken away from white people does seem off. Most liberals would say that everyone should make a livable wage and have decent housing. However, I don’t hear Tim Wise, a rich guy who lives in a big house, say that he should make less money or live in a smaller house.

        I think the subsidy gets more negligible the lower down the income scale you go. For an example, however, even though I am currently below the official poverty level, as long as I dress neatly, I am not likely to be followed around a store or hassled by a cop. I can disappear into a crowd in much of America, and I enjoy that. I don’t think, though, that this “privilege” means much in the face of my current poverty and lack of health care. I think Wise’s apparent intent to knock poor whites down a few pegs because they have advantages in certain situations over POCs is helpful to no one.

        The income gap is growing, and the lower 80% of Americans are getting poorer rather than richer. Though most of the elite 20% are white, most white people are not elite. I think Wise is making a mistake in focusing exclusively on the gap between black and white wealth instead of additionally on the obscene gap between rich and poor.

        Wise is the ultimate one-trick pony. His articles are a torrent of statistics all saying the same thing: despite any problem you as a white person may have, there’s a POC somewhere who’s got it worse, so shut up. Statistics have one use for him: to be used to beat white people into feeling guilt and shame, never to encourage them to find common cause with people of color. He works quite hard to dissuade working class white people from daring to think they have anything in common with working class POCs. Wise claims to be a leftist, but this approach is counterrevolutionary and guaranteed to alienate working class whites.

        In another thread, Robert and I discussed the way right wing populists use abused private sector workers as a cudgel against public union workers. It seems to me Wise is doing the same thing: using the struggle of African Americans as a cudgel against economic leftists and working class white people, who happen to be the largest segment of the working class.

        Tulio: However, the lion’s share of whites are neither working class nor poor.

        That depends on whose definition you use. Michael Zweig thinks that 62 percent of the population is working class, based on their lack of power over their labor. According to Ruy Teixeira, white working class people make up about half of the electorate.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 18, 2010 at 7:45 PM

          This is a great comment. Wise calls himself a Leftist, but does he ever talk about class. Has he ever empathized with working class or even middle class Whites?

          In Tim Wise’s world, White people of all classes are exploiters.

          Rich Whites exploit rich POC’s.

          Middle and upper middle class POC’s exploit middle and upper middle class POC’s.

          Working class Whites exploit working class POC’s.

          Poor Whites exploit poor POC’s.

          I don’t see any real class analysis at all in this silly hogwash. And according to classical Marxist analysis, race is really not that important. Class is pretty much everything (and they are correct).

          Bottom line is that Tim Wise is basically a Contra. He’s a counterrevolutionary, and he may as well be a rightwinger. He’s carrying their water for them all right.

  60. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 1:26 PM

    Let’s just put it this way, Tulio.

    No poor or working class people want to hear about how “privileged” they are.

    Yes! Especially when the Blacks and self-hating Whites who are lecturing us on our privilege seem like they are all making a Hell of a lot more $ than we are!

    It’s really makes me see red, honestly.

    Upper middle class bourgeois Blacks and self-hating Whites lecturing me, a guy on a low income, how I’m fuckin privileged and apparently how I need to “give up stuff.” Fuck that! It’s almost enough to make me to to a Tea Party rally!

  61. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 1:32 PM

    That’s one of the most sloppily reasoned articles I’ve read in a long time. Really, this guy believes blacks are the verge of exploding because of the economy? I see no evidence of it. Shows how out of touch many WNs are with reality.

    I agree. That’s idiotic. The Black Underclass has been in a time bomb situation forever, especially since the 1960′s. But most of the rioting is over, and now the ghettos are just wastelands full of wasted people, burned out on dope, drink, prostitution or whatever. In order to have a revolution, you need to get up early in the morning. Ghetto dwellers can probably hardly drag themselves out of bed before noon. Ain’t gonna be no ghetto revolution, sorry.

    It’s pitiful how frightened WN’s are about our poor, downtrodden Blacks. The Black Underclass is more pitiful than anything else. I’m not terrified of Blacks at all. I hardly waste one second thinking about that. I’m wary around a lot of them, but that’s it.

    The more WN stuff I read, the more I think these people are mentally ill.

    • fpy3p
      August 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

      Actually most WN’s view jews as the real threat, they just view blacks as inferiors, not a real threat.

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

      Okay, to clarify once again, the point I was trying to make wasn’t that it would DEFINITELY happen, but that it COULD.

      Robert, I’m personally more wary about the bourgeois Abagond types than the black underclass.

      Just stay away from ghetto areas and you don’t really have to worry about the black underclass. Still, I’m just saying that it wouldn’t be wise to ignore them.

  62. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 1:39 PM

    Sure, I can totally understand that. However, the lion’s share of whites are neither working class nor poor. So the white privilege argument from the CRTs is being directed at middle/upper class white America, who makes up the majority by far.

    tulio, that video you hated so much by the White standup comic was actually about White privilege and I think he made a good point.

    But White privilege isn’t all it’s cracked up to me. Exactly how many extra points do I get for being White in this 67% Latino city I am living in. I mean, sure, I dig being White totally and fuck yeah I think I’m better, but what good is it if hardly anyone agrees with me?

    Can you explain to me how I benefit from White privilege, other than internal self-esteem, in this Latino city I live in?

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 1:41 PM

      Uh-0h, Robert, you shouldn’t have asked him that?

      Now he’s going to go all CRT on you.

    • tulio
      August 18, 2010 at 2:04 PM

      I can’t speak to what benefit YOU personally get in life due to being white as that’s a very individual thing that can be influenced by endless variables.

      What we speak of are general trends of life chances, assumptions and treatments and the way you are valued in the hierarchy of race.

      It’s kind of like the difference between weather and climatology. The former can be very localized and influenced by many variables. You can have cold snaps in Florida and heat waves in British Colombia, but climatology deals with the general trend that Florida is *generally* warmer than British Colombia. White privilege is a general trend that has measurable results. Pointing out a white guy in a bad situation is like the global warming deniers saying, “See! See! It was 45 degrees in Miami last week, how can there be global warming!” while ignoring the overall trend.

      So I don’t have a specific answer as to what gain YOU personally get. But I do know that society values whiteness most, and vilifies blackness the most with Asians and Hispanics somewhere in between. If you are black, you will *generally* have a tougher time in life than an average white. If you are black, you will in general make less money than a white of similar credentials. If you are a black woman that’s attractive, you will be seen as the equivalent of a white woman that is average, if even that. If you are black, your behavior will be seen as more aggressive and threatening than it is in reality, whereby if you’re white, your behavior will be seen as more benign than it is in reality. That video I posted with the bike thieves recently demonstrates this. If you are white, you can be a flight attendant that curses out the passengers, grabs a beer and jumps out the emergency chute on the tarmac and be consider some kind of Joe 6 pack folk hero for not putting up with the bullshit. A black doing that would would be seen as impulsive, bitter, having an attitude, probably racist towards whites and irresponsible. People would use it as an example of why you shouldn’t hire blacks. I could go on and on…

  63. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 1:44 PM

    I just figured that with changing demographics, a completely shitty economy, and other factors, that there’s going to be an explosion in the future.

    Who knows, it could even come from whites!

    Hey, like The Clash said, “white riot, I want a riot, white riot, a riot of our own!”

    There will be no explosions from Blacks, Whites or anybody else. The closest thing to the White riots you are discussing is this reactionary Tea Party shit, and that’s not any kind of real ordinary people’s rage or anything. It’s fascist-like rightwing populism bullshit, and it won’t make anything better. In fact, it’s guaranteed to make everything worse. Americans are too stupid to form any real resistance movements to this economic crisis like even the Greeks are doing.

  64. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 1:46 PM

    But yes, one thing that you can say about us WN’s is that we’ll NEVER lecture you on how “privileged” you are.

    I guess you are good for something. :/

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 1:47 PM

      Why thank you, Robert!

      Still, let me just ask you something: If you had to choose between Tim Wise and Jared Taylor, which one would you pick?

      • Robert Lindsay
        August 18, 2010 at 1:54 PM

        I know Taylor. I talk to him pretty regularly. He has some pretty extreme views, but he’s friendly. He has a lot of liberals in his social circle, so he doesn’t mind them at all.

        I won’t get along with Tim Wise at all. I’ve known many types like that, and they all call me RACIST or FASCIST and every one of them has ended our friendship so far. I think Taylor is a nicer guy than any of those CRT buttheads, but that’s just because I can’t get along with CRT weenies at all. To them, I’m the enemy!

      • Hacienda
        August 18, 2010 at 7:57 PM

        Tim Wise’s prescriptions lead to nowhere and are self defeating. White racism will only end when black racism, Asian racism, Mexican racism end. And I don’t see how that can happen under current parameters. Ending white racism won’t end black on white crime, Mexican reconquista, Asian opportunism. Wise is a silly man. A silly Jewish man. He seems to think the lot of colored folks will also be improved by ending white racism. This too is a fantasy. I think most Asians prefer a certain background noise of white racism and Asian racism just for clarity’s sake.
        There’s also something infuriating about his whole presence. The empty eyes, mind spinning around his own vacuous logic games, the hand knife gestures.

        Jared Taylor actually points out some real problems. But he’s a political hack. His strategy is academic and demeanour listless. His focus on IQ is a non-starter politically. Dead on arrival. No black, hispanic, even white will enter cell block arrangement with NE Asians on top floor, whites on ground, Mexican’s and blacks in basement. His academic gentlemen white presentation puts blacks and Mexicans to sleep. And turns off all most non-academic types. And his constant harping on Japan probably embarrasses the Japanese. So he unintentionally alienates what he thinks is a natural Asian alliance.

        I think both are losers. There is a third option. It isn’t clear yet, but it will appear.

        • LaFleur
          August 18, 2010 at 8:35 PM

          There’s also something infuriating about his whole presence. The empty eyes, mind spinning around his own vacuous logic games, the hand knife gestures.

          What is it about those dead fish eyes? I find them utterly repulsive. There is no spark of love or compassion or playful humor in them. The fake black preacher cadences fail to conceal the barely restrained, teeth gritting rage I sense from him.

          Where’s it come from? Apparently his father was a drunk. His whole damn career probably boils down to daddy issues.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 18, 2010 at 8:41 PM

          Didn’t Wise experience anti-Semitism from White Gentiles as a young man? I wonder how much of that is behind what’s basically a jihad against White Gentiles. His basic argument is White People (White Gentiles) Are Evil. I can’t help but think that that relates back to those guys calling him Jewboy at school.

          Anti-Semitism really is so counterproductive. We’re mean to these Jews when their kids, they never forget it, and they go on anti-White (anti-White Gentile or anti-WASP) jihads for the rest of their lives.

          A lot of this could have been avoided if we treated these Jews decently in the first place.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 9:42 PM

          I think he also is personally guilty. At least based on Amazon reviews of his memoirs, his ancestors were Indian killers, and his Jewish grandfather owned a liquor store in a black neighborhood.

          @ Hacienda

          Wise is a silly man. A silly Jewish man.

          Lol!

  65. tulio
    August 18, 2010 at 6:40 PM

    This is an intriguing article on race in Brazil:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6284806.stm

    The thing is, it’s hard to say who is really what in a place like Brazil. You can have a guy like Neguinho da Beija who looks like a normal black guy, but his DNA test reveal him to be mostly of European descent. Then you have someone like Adriana Lima who looks mostly European but still has a lot of black genes. Seu Jorge to me looks black as the ace of spades, I thought he was like pure African, but he’s 15% white!

    These DNA tests show that we aren’t always what we think we are.

    • LaFleur
      August 18, 2010 at 6:59 PM

      That’s definitely true. Look at the way siblings in a mixed race family will differ in appearance. I know a guy who is half Mexican and half Irish. He looks like a tall red-headed white boy, though his siblings look mestizo. You’d never know his dad is a short Mexican dude.

  67. Bay Area Guy
    August 18, 2010 at 10:06 PM

    Paul Craig Roberts’ newest article appeared on Alternative Right.

    I wonder if he’ll continue to wright for AR.

    http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/malinvestments/the-ecstasy-of-empire/

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 10:07 PM

      *write* ugh!

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 18, 2010 at 10:38 PM

      What’s he doing writing for Alternative Right? That’s White racism at best, White nationalism at worst. It’s run by an explicit WN named Glen Spencer. I would not be caught dead writing for them.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 10:45 PM

        Well, it shouldn’t be too surprising. Roberts is a paleocon and he also writes for VDare, which is a pseudo-white nationalist site. He’s also appeared on The Political Cesspool three times.

        Although I hesitate to call him a fellow white nationalist. While he’s opposed to 3rd world immigration, Cultural Marxism, racial double standards in the media, Brown v. Board, affirmative action, and other issues that white nationalists also are opposed to, he doesn’t advocate white nationalism.

        Either that, or he’s just good at hiding it.

        Although this article sounds like it could have been written by a white nationalist.

        http://www.vdare.com/roberts/whams.htm

        Well, regardless of labels, Roberts is one of my favorite intellectuals/thinkers. That article of his is one of the reasons why.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 18, 2010 at 10:50 PM

          What?! He’s opposed to Brown vs the BOE?! Are you sure? Show me a link. Do you realize how outrageous it is to take that position in 2010?

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 10:52 PM

          In the last election, the urban vote in a relatively few counties matched the vote of the entire rest of the country and gave Al Gore a chance to steal the presidency.

          That’s the one part of the article that I find objectionable. I surely hope that he wasn’t endorsing Bush. I sincerely hope that he didn’t vote for him in 2000.

          Although, I’m willing to cut more slack to those who voted for him in 2000, because they didn’t know what they would unleash. I place far greater blame on those who voted for him in 2004.

          Besides, Roberts has always been a big critics of Republicans, neocons, “the war on terror,” etc. I hardly think that he was endorsing Bush.

          I guess the point of that was just to illustrate the increasing power of non-WHAM’s and their WHAM allies.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 10:54 PM

          What?! He’s opposed to Brown vs the BOE?! Are you sure? Show me a link. Do you realize how outrageous it is to take that position in 2010?

          Well, one of his books, “The New Color Line” spends a great deal of time attacking Brown.

          There’s also this.

          http://vdare.com/roberts/brown.htm

          Personally, I really don’t see what’s so horrible about that.

  68. Bay Area Guy
    August 18, 2010 at 10:31 PM

    This article by Roberts on neocons and the evil they have committed is quite illuminating.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts197.html

  69. Robert Lindsay
    August 18, 2010 at 11:15 PM

    Well, one of his books, “The New Color Line” spends a great deal of time attacking Brown.

    There’s also this.

    http://vdare.com/roberts/brown.htm

    Personally, I really don’t see what’s so horrible about that.

    Wow, that’s simply stunning. In 2010, this nutcase is opposing Brown v BOE. Out-fucking-rageous. That’s completely out of the bounds of civilized discourse in this day and age. I imagine that the vast majority, if not all, Republican Congressmen would not dare to publicly oppose Brown v BOE. That proves it right there. JPR is a racist crazy. I can’t understand why Alexander Cockburn lets this racist kook write for Counterpunch. If I were Alex, I’d fire this guy yesterday.

    That whole line comes straight out of Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance magazine. Taylor is an old style segregationist, so I suppose all of those carefully honed arguments are simply segregationist cant honed over decades.

    Sure, Brown v BOE was a sleazy decision in a lot of ways but so what? It was the right thing to do. Besides, I’m a judicial activist.

    This Roberts guy is a rightwing nut. WTF is he doing writing for Cockburn?

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 18, 2010 at 11:30 PM

      If I were Alex, I’d fire this guy yesterday.

      Fire him?! I don’t think he exactly gets paid much to write for counterpunch.

      The articles he writes on counterpunch are the exact same ones that appear on VDare, so I guess he just gives them permission to post his articles.

      Wow, that’s simply stunning. In 2010, this nutcase is opposing Brown v BOE. Out-fucking-rageous. That’s completely out of the bounds of civilized discourse in this day and age.

      Well, his book was written in 1995, and those two articles come from 2004. Over the past few years, he really hasn’t written about race much.

      But anyway, seriously Robert, why do you have such a thing for Brown v. Board? You act like it’s the greatest thing since apple pie.

      Sure, Brown v BOE was a sleazy decision in a lot of ways but so what?

      Not even going to bother responding to that one. But hey, I guess I can do sleazy things in the future, so long as it’s the “right thing to do.”

      Courts are supposed to interpret the law and make LEGAL decisions, not sociological/moral decisions. Of course, there is a place for moral conscience in the court, but decisions should be based on the LAW, not sociology.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 11:31 PM

        I mean Robert, actually refute Roberts’ arguments.

        Don’t just go on a typical rant about how “racist and outrageous this is.”

        Refute his points with reason, not rhetoric.

      • Robert Lindsay
        August 18, 2010 at 11:39 PM

        This is a totally phony argument BAG, and you know it. You don’t oppose Brown v BOE because it was improperly decided in terms of law (this is also the sleazy fake argument used by JPR and Jared Taylor). The real reason that you, Taylor and JPR oppose Brown v BOE is because you are all racists! With a capital fucking R. We know that you and Taylor are racists, and with this outrageous opinion, JPR is outed too.

        Counterpunch is a good liberal to Leftwing magazine. If it’s about anything, it’s about anti-racism. I’ve never seen a remotely racist article posted there. It’s basically Tim Wise plus the Abagondsphere. Now they’ve got this blatant flaming fucking segregationist racist writing for them? WTF man. Cockburn ought to be lynched. I wonder if his readers know about this.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 18, 2010 at 11:42 PM

          The real reason that you, Taylor and JPR oppose Brown v BOE is because you are all racists!

          *yawn*

          Yes Robert, we are racists. And yes, we’re not exactly big fans of racial integration.

          However, that doesn’t refute our arguments. That’s pure ad hominem on your part.

          Now, actually try to refute our arguments.

  70. Bay Area Guy
    August 18, 2010 at 11:32 PM

    WTF is he doing writing for Cockburn?

    His anti-Israel articles are very popular with them. Since counterpunch is strongly anti-Zionist/anti-Israel, his views on that matter are welcome there.

    His articles on counterpunch (and everywhere for that matter) lately have not discussed race.

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 18, 2010 at 11:41 PM

      If I were Cockburn, I’d ask him if he still felt the same way about Brown v BOE, and if he said yes, I’d fire him right there. Bye bye. I’m starting to view his other articles in a worried light too. This guy’s an extreme White racist, a conservative, and he’s attacking Israel? Why? Smells like anti-Semitism.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 18, 2010 at 11:45 PM

        and he’s attacking Israel? Why? Smells like anti-Semitism.

        Wow, just wow. You’re starting to sound like a neocon now!

        This guy’s an extreme White racist, a conservative, and he’s attacking Israel? Why? Smells like anti-Semitism.

        Extreme? Yeah, nice hyperbole on your part.

        I don’t recall him every saying anything negative about blacks, Hispanics, or other groups. He certainly doesn’t subscribe to the tenets of racism, as he doesn’t arrange different races into a hierarchy, with superior and inferior races.

        If opposing Cultural Marxism, excessive diversity, and destructive court decisions makes you a racist, so be it.

  71. Bay Area Guy
    August 18, 2010 at 11:50 PM

    It’s basically Tim Wise plus the Abagondsphere.

    And you like that aspect of counterpunch?

  72. Bay Area Guy
    August 19, 2010 at 12:24 AM

    All right, enough with Roberts and Brown v. Board.

    We’ve already discussed this a million times. Let’s move on to something more fun!

  73. tulio
    August 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM

    Time for some pagination on this page if WordPress allows for it. It’s getting difficult to load with so many responses.

  74. Bay Area Guy
    August 20, 2010 at 12:33 PM

    This is hilarious!

  75. Bay Area Guy
    August 20, 2010 at 2:17 PM

    This article by Alex Kurtagic is excellent.

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Kurtagic-Women-As-Allies.html#AK

    While this article pertains to the need for more female participation in white nationalism, I think it can generally be said that ALL nationalistic movements are mostly male affairs.

    That will have to change if these movements are to succeed.

  76. Bay Area Guy
    August 20, 2010 at 7:18 PM

    Lol, this house negro is fucking hilarious. I wonder if Aaron McGruder ran into this guy before he created the character Uncle Ruckus!

  77. tulio
    August 20, 2010 at 7:30 PM

    Now this is pretty damn funny!

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 20, 2010 at 7:36 PM

      Eh, it was okay. I was expecting to laugh out loud.

      But man, black people are so scary that even the native Japanese in one of the most homogenous countries on earth get intimidated when she says “what u lookin’ at?!”

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 20, 2010 at 7:38 PM

        Funny how she was wearing a Pikachu suit. Gee, I don’t know, maybe that’s why they were staring at her! Although I’m sure she would stick out like a sore thumb anyway.

        But you know how in pokemon certain pokemon have signature moves?

        Well, I think “what u lookin’ at?!” is black peoples’ signature move.

      • tulio
        August 20, 2010 at 7:46 PM

        It was a skit. I thought that was obvious. I just thought the scenario was funny.

        If it wasn’t a skit, then damn, Asian men are even more ball-less than I thought.

        • fpy3p
          August 20, 2010 at 7:48 PM

          She should try that with these guys.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 7:49 PM

          Chances are it probably was a skit.

          Although skit or no skit, she’s getting stared at!

          And skit or no skit, that guy’s going to look away when she says “what u lookin’ at?!”

        • fpy3p
          August 20, 2010 at 7:53 PM

          I see we are into making generalizations about another race of men when you yourself don’t like it when people consider, ghetto savage behavior as indicative of black behavior.

        • Hacienda
          August 20, 2010 at 7:57 PM

          Asian men aren’t ball-less guy. White men respect us because they’ve seen us in wartime. When it counts. In peacetime, we’re polite. Understand, okay?

          BTW,

          This is hilarious:

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 8:01 PM

          I’ve seen that video. What a pathetic white girl! She’s a disgrace to the race.

          For starters, I would have laughed him off and just ignored him.

          But if I did talk to him, I’d say, “yeah negro, we enslaved you weak-ass motherfuckers, what u gonna do about it?!” :)

          Don’t ever take any shit from a black. You gotta be tough with them.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 8:04 PM

          Oh, she was Jewish liberal.

          Okay, screw it. Let her be verbally annihilated by angry blacks.

          It’s what Jewish liberals deserve for deliberately undermining whites and disingenuously supporting black causes in the past.

        • fpy3p
          August 20, 2010 at 8:07 PM

          Did you notice that snide remark by tulio? That’s another characteristic of Negroes. They are ever so sensitive about slurs or slights, yet they themselves have no problem insulting other races. By the way, I think the entire “Civil Rights Movement” was a Jewish effort to crack open the doors of the Establishment 100% for them to enter, with blacks being pawns. Blacks always get used by non-blacks.

        • Hacienda
          August 20, 2010 at 8:13 PM

          BAG,

          Yeah, that was the fun of it. Jewesses take if for granted the black men will bend over for them at the slightest show of affection. She got her head handed to her. Knock Out. Smack. Right on the big Jewess nose.

        • David
          August 20, 2010 at 8:17 PM

          >Asian men are even more ball-less than I thought.

          >Blacks always get used by non-blacks.

          I am sensing an Asian-Black fight coming on.

          Tulio, fpy3p: I declare that the two you two shall engage in a fight to the death as pawns in the satiation of my diabolical Hebraic pleasures.

        • Hacienda
          August 20, 2010 at 8:47 PM

          fpy,

          I have a lot a respect for the Civil Rights movement. I don’t think it was a Jew conspiracy entirely for Jewish ends. Just a whole confluence of factors coming in at that time. Superpower rivalry, communism vs. capitalism, decay of nuclear family, Asian trade, wide dispersal of television, stagnation in Vietnam, end of Europe as central force.
          You can’t lay it all on the Jews. Sheesh.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 10:09 PM

          By the way, I think the entire “Civil Rights Movement” was a Jewish effort to crack open the doors of the Establishment 100% for them to enter, with blacks being pawns.

          Yes and no.

          Much of the Civil Rights Movement was initiated by blacks. The blacks did indeed fight for their own self-interests, Jews or no Jews.

          That being said, Jews indeed played a role. But before anyone thinks that Jews are wonderful, enlightened souls who care about other peoples’ suffering, I’ll quote Malcolm X for you:

          “I told him all I held against the Jew was that so many Jews actually were hypocrites in their claim to be friends of the American black man, and it burned me up to be so often called ‘anti-Semitic’ when I spoke things I knew to be the absolute truth about Jews. I told him that, yes, I gave the Jew credit for being among all other whites the most active, and the most vocal, financier, ‘leader’ and ‘liberal’ in the Negro civil rights movement. But I said at the same time I knew that the Jew played these roles for a very careful strategic reason: the more prejudice in America could be focused upon the Negro, then the more the white Gentiles’ prejudice would keep diverted off the Jew. I said that to me, one proof that all the civil rights posturing of so many Jews wasn’t sincere was that so often in the North the quickest segregationists were Jews themselves. Look at practically everything the black man is trying to ‘integrate’ into for instance; if Jews are not the actual owners, or are not in controlling positions, then they have major stockholdings or they are otherwise in powerful leverage positions-and do they really sincerely exert these influences? No!
          And an even clearer proof for me of how Jews truly regard Negroes, I said, was what invariably happened wherever a Negro moved into any white residential neighborhood that was thickly Jewish. Who would always lead the whites’ exodus? The Jews! Generally in these situations, some whites stay put-you just notice who they are: they’re Irish Catholics, they’re Italians; they’re rarely ever any Jews. And, ironically, the Jews themselves often still have trouble being ‘accepted.’ Saying this, I know I’ll hear ‘anti-Semitic’ from every direction again. Oh, yes! But truth is truth.”

          (Autobiography of Malcolm X, pages 379-380)

          If you don’t understand that quote, you will never understand why Jewish organizations such as the ADL support open borders, multiculturalism, and “tolerance” here.

          Do they actually have any love for blacks, Hispanics, or other groups? Hell no!

          They just give lip service to promoting black interests as a way to camouflage their Jewish agenda.

          They give lip service to fighting intolerance, but spend most of their time whining about how poor Israel is criticized for its crimes. They even link people to AIPAC as a good site for combating anti-Semitism, even though we all know that AIPAC is solely a Zionist organization.

          The ADL and Jews like them (liberal on domestic racial and social issues, but supportive of the apartheid state of Israel) are just like the Jews Malcolm X described.

  78. Uncle Milton
    August 20, 2010 at 7:48 PM

    “Well, maybe it’s not their signature move, but I’ll wager that blacks say “what u lookin’ at?!” more than any other group.”

    It’s fairly close to being a signature move in Oakland. Seems to be part of the ‘tude game…. Alpha is from Mississippi where Black people are generally more civil. (I’ve also met some very nice Black people from Oakland also… generally the 50 and older set who are also often quite religious, the younger generation tends to act like they got dropped on their head when they were born…)

    One Vietnamese friend of mine’s response to “What you lookin’ at…” was “I am looking at your gold teeth…” He often got looks when he said that but he was looked like an Asian gangster (Vietnamese gangsters often are packing..) and was pretty well built and could look quite mean.

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 20, 2010 at 7:52 PM

      Oh, don’t even get me started on blacks in Oakland.

      You even look in their VICINITY, and they’ll yell “what u lookin’ at?!”

      If I had a nickel for every time that happened to me in middle school.

      Maybe I just need to spend time around old black people. They may have that Jim Crow bitterness, but they don’t display the same ‘tude that younger blacks do.

  79. Bay Area Guy
    August 20, 2010 at 8:07 PM

    Now this shit is funny!

    Yeah cholo, think twice before you fuck with a geeky looking white guy!

    • tulio
      August 20, 2010 at 8:15 PM

      That’s a pretty good one. Though the weird thing is when he started swinging, I didn’t see any Kung Fu technique, it just looked like a wild punch, and not even a hard one that knocked that cholo down. I hate cholos with a passion, so anything that got him on his ass is an accomplishment to me.

      • tulio
        August 20, 2010 at 8:18 PM

        As someone that’s done martial arts for the last five years, I don’t think that guy knew what he was doing. You don’t go into a form as a prelude to a fight. I think he was expecting to intimidate him by going into that form, which he was at first, but the cholo still hung in there till that sloppy punch. And I know what a real kung fu punch looks like. That was not one. He had the Kung Fu stance, but not the strikes. Really weird fight!

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 9:35 PM

          Yeah, I’ve seen real martial artists, and this guy isn’t one of them.

          I bet I could have whupped that white guy’s ass.

          But yeah, always nice to see a cholo get beaten down.

  81. Uncle Milton
    August 20, 2010 at 8:41 PM

    To David:
    Tulio, fpy3p: I declare that the two you two shall engage in a fight to the death as pawns in the satiation of my diabolical Hebraic pleasures.

    I’ll manage the ticket sales and promotion.

  82. Uncle Milton
    August 20, 2010 at 8:50 PM

    To Hacienda:

    Jewesses take if for granted the black men will bend over for them at the slightest show of affection.

    Oh hardly, but she should have known that she wasn’t going to have a rational discussion with such a malcontent.

    She got her head handed to her. Knock Out. Smack. Right on the big Jewess nose.

    Well he just shouted over her (with that White invented microphone, amplifier, and speakers..) and he spouted a bunch of half truths. That said asking a guy like that if “he loves his country…” is pointless. This kind of guy of thrives on being pissed off.

    • Hacienda
      August 20, 2010 at 9:06 PM

      She was crying. Crying like a little baby. I’d say he struck a nerve.

      and “White invented microphone…”? What’s next, you’re gonna point out I’m communicating with you on the “white invented internet”. Do we have to go through all of that just to make some points?

  83. Uncle Milton
    August 20, 2010 at 9:27 PM

    To Hacienda:

    She was crying. Crying like a little baby. I’d say he struck a nerve.

    Yeah he struck a nerve. Not because he was spouting “the Truth” but because he was so aggressive. He claims that Blacks were over represented in US wars… no… rather under represented until Vietnam. (They weren’t trusted to be good soldiers.. racist yes.. but that’s the reality…) Most Jews were never German. (Although he was correct that most German Jews supported Germany in WWI but at that time Jews were treated fairly well in Germany especially compared their enemy Czarist Russia. So basically he was criticizing German Jews for not being able to predict the future. Jews in the allied powers France, Great Britain, and the US supported their respective countries as well..)

    “and “White invented microphone…”? What’s next, you’re gonna point out I’m communicating with you on the “white invented internet”. Do we have to go through all of that just to make some points?”

    If a guy wants to rant at me about history of evil White folks (as if I did it..) I’ll point out that he’s using a White invention. If he wants to give me credit for all the bad shit White folks did in the past 400 years (and yeah I know there has been plenty of bad shit..) then I’ll point out the good shit. Sure it’s a cheap shot but most of his points were cheap shots. Quid pro quo.

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 20, 2010 at 9:41 PM

      Yeah he struck a nerve. Not because he was spouting “the Truth” but because he was so aggressive

      Bingo.

      I honestly don’t think that most blacks get this. Whenever a white person reacts negatively to their statements on race or overall demeanor, they attribute it to white racism, white delusion, white peoples’ “inability to handle the truth,” etc.

      But what most blacks don’t realize is that they can come across as very aggressive/abusive in terms of their language and demeanor.

      Of course, the Abagond types dismiss this as “the tone argument,” but blacks really need to understand that NOBODY LIKES BEING YELLED AT, truth or no truth.

      What blacks need to learn is that you cannot brow-beat people into respecting you and listening to you.

      That’s why the Ank Mie types (she’s really just an afrocentrist/pan-Africanist who possesses sarcasm and the ability to regurgitate Critical Race Theory cliches) will only preach to the choir.

      • Uncle Milton
        August 20, 2010 at 10:31 PM

        To BAG:

        I honestly don’t think that most blacks get this.

        I think a certain percentage certainly do… it’s an extension of street thuggery. Exhibit enough ‘tude and you win. (Although the less harsh methods remind me a little of Black preachers..the most prominent Black civil rights leaders have a religious base..)

        Of course, the Abagond types dismiss this as “the tone argument,” but blacks really need to understand that NOBODY LIKES BEING YELLED AT, truth or no truth.

        IF I have personally done something that has angered someone I am willing to tolerate some amount of aggression. However if someone wants to lambaste me because of my phenotype and the history of my phenotype (like stuff that happened before I was born…) then I won’t take any rant, (if directed at me), too seriously.

        I can believe that White privilege exists but ranting at Whites who live in trailer parks in Mississippi or West Virginia about White privilege absent any discussion of class privilege is not constructive. You’ll just alienate them and they’ll ignore you. You can proselytize to an employer about hiring Blacks but at the end of the day… he is basically looking to see who makes him the most money
        for the least cost. As you have seen in California it’s Latinos in construction and landscaping who are winning this game (and not Whites or Blacks…) and for the IT industry it’s Asians. Or if it comes to factory work for the past 20 years it’s not Americans (of any color..) who are winning that game but Asians (China, Vietnam, etc..) and Latinos. (mostly Mexico..)

    • Hacienda
      August 20, 2010 at 10:32 PM

      UM,

      I enjoyed the video. It was fun. I guess it wasn’t fun for you. I posted it for enjoyment purposes. No amount of arguing is gonna rob me of the pure fun I get out of this video. LOL.

      Does it smack too much of Schadenfreude for you? Especially at Jewish expense? If so, sorry. But blame Hollywood and the Jew media. Look in the mirror. Jews get plenty of that kind of entertainment.

      Payback, baby. Payback. The internet is free and it is sweet.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 20, 2010 at 10:44 PM

        Is Uncle Milton Jewish?

        • Hacienda
          August 20, 2010 at 10:47 PM

          Yeah. He said so in the Tim Wise thread.

        • Uncle Milton
          August 20, 2010 at 11:05 PM

          To BAG and Hacienda:

          Is Uncle Milton Jewish?

          Actually most Jews do not consider me Jewish nor do I consider myself Jewish.
          My father converted (nominally) to Christianity when was young (and living in Mexico..) but then became serious about as he grew older. Jews have pointedly told me I am not Jewish (and not just Orthodox Jews….) However I would have been Jewish enough to have been killed by Hitler and his game. That said it is true that I am do not consider myself Christian but I am not going to get into anyone’s face about it.

        • David
          August 20, 2010 at 11:19 PM

          So you are half-Jew patrilineally?

          The whole Jewish fetishism with the matriarchal bloodline leads to some pretty confusing results. Like I was having a conversation with someone the other day who is, genetically speaking, 75% Jewish, as his mother is a half-Jew patrilineally and his father is full Jew.

          However, due to the fact that his mother is not technically a Jew (as her mother was not Jewish), many Jews (and all orthodox Jews) would consider me to be the “true” Jew as my mom is Jewish, even though I have only 50% Jewish genes and he has 75%. Quite bizarre.

          On a side note, Karaite Judaism actually traces Jewishness patrilineally, but there are only a few scattered tens of thousands of them in existence currently.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 11:21 PM

          Although I’ve read that according to traditional Jewish, once someone is born a Jew, he will forever remain a Jew, even if he doesn’t practice Judaism or becomes a Christian.

          Doesn’t the attitude of JEWS THEMSELVES towards Jewishness refute the whole “Judaism is not a race” nonsense.

          I mean, after all, if you’re forever a Jew regardless of how you practice religion, then didn’t Jews conceive of Jewishness as a matter of blood?

        • David
          August 20, 2010 at 11:33 PM

          Doesn’t the attitude of JEWS THEMSELVES towards Jewishness refute the whole “Judaism is not a race” nonsense.

          I mean, after all, if you’re forever a Jew regardless of how you practice religion, then didn’t Jews conceive of Jewishness as a matter of blood?

          I don’t think that many Jews at all dispute the fact that Judaism exists simultaneously as both a religion and ethnicity. The word “Judaism” is usually reserved for talking about the religion, and “Jewishness” for the ethnicity. The fact is when you say that someone “is a Jew,” it could really have three different meanings (an ethnic Jew with the Jewish religion, an ethnic Jew with no religion or a different religion, or a convert to the religion of Judaism).

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 11:36 PM

          Hmm, I guess that at least for Ashkenazi Jews, I see them as more of an ethnic group than a religion.

          That explains why Tim Wise calls himself Jewish even though he left the religion of Judaism a while ago.

      • Uncle Milton
        August 20, 2010 at 10:59 PM

        To Hacienda:
        I enjoyed the video. It was fun. I guess it wasn’t fun for you.

        Well why did you think it was fun..? I though it was a bit boring. I am wondering why he was outside with a microphone and why she even bothered to talk to him.

        Especially at Jewish expense? If so, sorry.
        Probably the more important operative here is that she was a White female. He probably had something up his sleeve for a White gentile woman also.

        But blame Hollywood and the Jew media. Look in the mirror.
        Blame Hollywood for….what..? Hollywood turns out all sorts of stuff.

        Jews get plenty of that kind of entertainment.

        They do..? Can you clarify..? Towards Germans… yeah ok.. I can see that. Towards Asians…? Certainly under represented. (at least the men…) One of most dickless (Long Duk Dong in 16 candles…) Asian male characters was created by a White Gentile. The atrocious casting and directing of Mickey Rooney as a buck toothed Japanese landlord was also Gentile. John Cho’s first big hit:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_%26_Kumar_Go_to_White_Castle Written and directed by the tribe. John Cho beds and impregnates White (Lesbian..) women and is engaged to a hot Black woman. Partially created and produced by Jews:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FlashForward

        That said, I am sure there have been some stereotypes perpetuated by Jewish directors and/or screen writers towards Asians in film and TV over the years but I see this attitude as going along with the general flow of American anti-Asian prejudice as opposed to be at the root of it.

        • Hacienda
          August 20, 2010 at 11:26 PM

          UM,

          I’m this close to going all K+KE up your +ss.

          Do NOT argue like a jewess. All squirmy and coy and trickeried up.

          Simple, how many Asian men have you ever seen f_ck a jewess or white women, let alone in kiss in a Jew Studio movie. Like 3 or 4. Versus how many the other way. Like 4000.

          Does this reflect US society? Course not. Damn it, Jew. The gentiles are cowed and impressed with your tricks. But Asians KNOW you.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 11:37 PM

          Damn it, Jew. The gentiles are cowed and impressed with your tricks. But Asians KNOW you.

          Lol!

          So Hacienda, what specifically do you Asians know about Jews that we whites should know?

          This information could be vital in the future!

        • David
          August 20, 2010 at 11:54 PM

          If y’all don’t mind, I’m gonna elevate this Jews Control The Movie Industry discussion to a bit of a meta level:

          Jews have got money, sure. But so do shitloads of Gentiles, and shitloads of Asians. Why have they never formed their own “competing” movie industries or film production companies to combat the Jew ones?

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 20, 2010 at 11:59 PM

          Why have they never formed their own “competing” movie industries or film production companies to combat the Jew ones?

          Because most are awed by Hollywood and have not yet caught on that Jews really call the shots in the film industry.

          The discussions we have here would NEVER be featured in most mainstream publications or media outlets.

          Once we inform the public, we can then create our own film industries independent of Jews.

        • Uncle Milton
          August 21, 2010 at 12:01 AM

          To Hacienda:
          Simple, how many Asian men have you ever seen f_ck a jewess or white women..

          You mean in porn..? What can I say Ron Jeremy is a embarrassing douche. But plenty of porn distributors, were or are gentiles. Bob Guccione of Penthouse is of Italian decent, Hugh Hefner (Playboy) and Larry Flynt (Hustler) White Gentiles. Mitchell Brothers – (Beyond the Green Door..) White Gentiles. One can use (and has been able to use for more than a decade…) the internet for more than a decade to distribute porn. What’s stopping you or any Asian guy with a video camera (and a few hundred dollars for “the models”) from making his own Yellow on White porn film? Have at it.

          PS I have seen a mixed Japanese/Irish guy (my bother in law) kiss a half Jewish woman .. at my sister’s wedding.

          Let alone in kiss in a Jew Studio movie. Like 3 or 4. Versus how many the other way. Like 4000.

          What are the numbers for non-Jewish movie studios? (Sony (Japanese), GE (Anglo-Gentile) (Which owns NBC and Universal..) and Time-Warner (Dutch-Gentile, before that Jewish, before that Black, before that White Gentile. ..)

          That I agree that Asian men are under represented (especially as viable love interests….) in American film.

  84. Uncle Milton
    August 20, 2010 at 9:38 PM

    To Hacienda:
    Asian men aren’t ball-less guy. White men respect us because they’ve seen us in wartime.

    True, until the British had sexually repressed White women in power (Queen Elizabeth and then Queen Victoria..) the largest empire known to man was achieved and run by Asians. (The Mongols..)

    • Hacienda
      August 20, 2010 at 10:41 PM

      UM,

      Oh yes. The Mongol Empire. Thanks for reminding me. Those were the good ole’ days. Sheesh.

      I was thinking more along the lines of the Korean War and Vietnam. But you’re spot on. The Mongol Warriors are an even better example. Fanaticised the Teutons, don’t you think?

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 20, 2010 at 10:43 PM

        Don’t forget the Huns.

        Although they were more of a Central Asian/Turkic people as opposed to East Asian.

      • Uncle Milton
        August 21, 2010 at 12:21 AM

        To Hacienda:

        The Mongol Warriors are an even better example. Fanaticised the Teutons, don’t you think?

        Fanaticised the Teutons..? They never made it to Germany.. or what became Germany. Ripped some new ones in what became Russia, the Ukraine, Hungary, and Poland however.

    • fpy3p
      August 20, 2010 at 11:07 PM

      During much of the 19th Century, the main imperial rival to Britain was TSarist Russia. Britain was a naval, maritime power while Russian Empire was a continetal, land-based power with the same huge territory as the USSR, minus Finland.

  85. Uncle Milton
    August 21, 2010 at 12:15 AM

    To BAG:

    This information could be vital in the future!

    Evil Jews will just circumvent this by changing our names to things like McLovin:

  86. Uncle Milton
    August 21, 2010 at 12:29 AM

    To David:

    So you are half-Jew patrilineally?

    Yes, since I wasn’t raised with the religion (and grew up in absolute podunk..so not much influence from Jewish peers…) nor much of the culture…(My dad’s family emigrated first to Latin America..) I don’t consider myself Jewish. When asked or challenged however, I’ll pipe up.

  87. Bay Area Guy
    August 21, 2010 at 2:37 AM

    Just finished watching Chinese war epic “Red Cliff.”

    I’ve come to like foreign films more and more. If only I could find a good source for foreign films. I’m hard pressed to find many Asian films that I haven’t liked.

    You know, we complain about Hollywood, so I say let’s put our money where our mouth is.

    A concerted effort to watch only foreign and independent films would make a statement, if large numbers of people did it.

  88. Bay Area Guy
    August 22, 2010 at 8:58 PM

    Wow, I really want to see this film! Is there a way to watch it online for free?

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Nowicki-Shamir-Foxman-ADL.html

    • fpy3p
      August 22, 2010 at 9:06 PM

      Youtube has all the parts on I believe.

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 22, 2010 at 9:08 PM

        Really? You cannot actually watch it on youtube itself. Youtube provides a link where you can watch it, but you have to sign up, give your email, maybe even give money, and it’s bit of a pain.

        There ought to be an easy way to watch this.

        Maybe I could find it at Blockbuster…Maybe.

        • fpy3p
          August 22, 2010 at 9:11 PM

          Do you have a youtube account? I watched the entire film with no problem. Are you sure about the money?

        • LaFleur
          August 22, 2010 at 9:13 PM

          If you are willing to install the Veoh video player, it looks like you can watch it here:

          http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/activism_non_profit/watch/v198382839c8bfejy

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM

          Hmm, maybe I should try again.

          I especially love this section from the Occidental Observer, because it’s really maddening.

          In a particularly galling moment, we witness a meeting between Foxman and a government delegation in Ukraine, who want to know how to get along better with Jews in the Western world. During this meeting (which Shamir, incredibly, was allowed to film), Foxman high-handedly lectures the delegation that people of their country have no right to use the word “holocaust” to describe the killing of up to five million of its people by Stalin by deliberate starvation in the 1930s. “You need to be sensitive… be careful that it (the Ukrainian famine/mass murder) not be played as ‘your genocide,’ because that would be counter-productive,” the ADL-leader intones, like a principal sternly admonishing naughty pupils. And of course, the members of the delegation solemnly nod and snivelingly agree, knowing that their interests are served by pleasing the likes of Foxman and his ilk, however outrageously out of line their demands might be. None of them thinks to ask why the murder of millions of Jews matters more than that of millions of Ukraine nationals. One hopes the reasonable question at least crosses their minds.

          Following the meeting, Shamir asks Foxman why, if anti-Semitism is so potent a force in the world today, people care so much about pleasing the ADL and its sister organizations. Dishonest Abe then shows his flair at sophistry: it’s anti-Semitic in itself, he maintains, to even think that the Jews are so powerful as to be feared, so the fact that people like this pitiful delegation of yes-men are so eager to do his bidding just shows how anti-Semitic the world has become! Once more, Shamir dryly acknowledges this “logic,” letting its absurdity speak for itself.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 22, 2010 at 9:21 PM

          Is this part one? Will I then be able to click on part 2 after finishing the first segment?

          If so, thanks! This is awesome!

        • fpy3p
          August 22, 2010 at 9:23 PM

          If you want to see the part where the fat prick lectures the Ukrainians, scroll over to 3:20.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 22, 2010 at 9:26 PM

          Thanks.

          But is it possible for you to find parts 1, 2, etc and upload them here?

          For some reason, I just cannot get it with a simple youtube search.

        • fpy3p
          August 22, 2010 at 9:32 PM

          Type in “Defamation Astonishing” and it will come up, except part 1, which you can get just by typing in Defamation. Did you watch the scene with the Ukrainians? What an arrogant cunt!

  89. Shawn
    August 26, 2010 at 5:32 AM

    Are all if the comments lost from your original Blogspot blog? (Before the RL Returns one.)

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 26, 2010 at 3:38 PM

      They’ve been doing this for a long time now. Before the Indians, they had actual slaves. These animals only got rid of slavery in 1962. There is something horribly wrong with Arabs.

      • fpy3p
        August 26, 2010 at 3:41 PM

        Do you still want to put them in the Caucasoid category? Let the blacks have them; I would be ashamed of being in the same category as these sand primates. By the way, Levantine Arabs are much more civilized.

        • Robert Lindsay
          August 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM

          Of course they’re Caucasians, most of them anyway.

          There’s niggers in all races. Wiggers, Mexiniggers, the real deal. A nigger is just a scummy person. It’s not synonymous with Blacks at all. There’s Blacks, and there’s niggers. Difference. A nigger is a Black lowlife. A wigger is a White who needs to move to Compton. A Mexinigger is a scummy Mexican, like the two-legged refuse that infests my zip code. There’s capital T trash in all races.

          When you call all Blacks niggers you throw them all together, the ghetto trash and the millions who probably act better than you or I do. It’s so wrong.

          In some ways, Gulf Arabs act quite good. Their societies on some level are very civilized. A woman I knew lived in Arabia. She would go out shopping or walking down the street at midnite without a fearful bone in her body. There was nothing to fear. There is very little of the garbage type street criminals like we have. Street crime is pretty much nonexistent.

          The big cities of Arabia look like Phoenix. My hat is off to any society that can create a city that looks like Phoenix where crime is as rare a 4 leaf clover. Any ethnic group that can create crime-free cities is doing something right. It’s a monumental testament to their deep level of civilization.

          Groups that habitually create societies with tremendous crime are deeply fucked on some profound karmic level. Street crime takes the fabric that binds society and rips it to shreds, leaving us desperately clutching rags to cloak ourselves in protection against the winds of diabolical chaos.

        • fpy3p
          August 26, 2010 at 4:00 PM

          What about Levantine Arabs? Aren’t they better?

  91. Robert Lindsay
    August 26, 2010 at 4:10 PM

    What about Levantine Arabs? Aren’t they better?

    They’re somewhat less backwards in the homelands, but an Arab’s an Arab, bottom line. There’s a base brutality to Palestinian, Jordanian and Syrian society that’s prit near as shitty as the Gulf.

    We have Gulf and Levant Arabs in this town, Palestinians and Yemenis. They act exactly the same. They are some of the finest citizens of this place, though it’s true they are backwards. They’re miles better than the Blacks, the Latrinos or even these low Whites around here. They and the Punjabis are like the pinnacle of High Civilization around these parts.

    Those groups cause zero I mean zero problems, are kind and friendly, work very hard, have good strong moral values, commit next to zero crime and have nothing to do with gangs.

    I don’t get White racists who hate these people. What’s to hate? They’re a model for Whites to aspire to.

    • fpy3p
      August 26, 2010 at 4:24 PM

      Why didn’t you mention Lebanese? And do the Palestinians that you know look and act like Ashkenazis? If Palestinians are indeed Jews who converted and changed their identity, they should look pretty similar to Ashkenazis right?

      • Robert Lindsay
        August 26, 2010 at 4:30 PM

        A lot of Lebanese, like the Maronite idiots, refuse to admit that they are Arabs. They are actually “Phoenicians” LOL and they seriously hate Arabs. I mean seriously. Even religiously, they look to Rome. They are probably the only neoliberals in the Arab World, which shows how White, Europeanized and fucked up they are. Basically a bunch of wannabe American Republicans. Assholes.

        Palestinians do not really look like Jews. They look more like…Greeks. Something like that. Some are quite dark. They have some Black in them, like 13%. Black blood from Black slaves of the Islamic era. Christian Palestinians are Whiter looking.

        Jews have no Black blood in them at all, making them the purest Whites of all, which ought to give them an honorary membership on Stormfront, right?

        • fpy3p
          August 26, 2010 at 4:34 PM

          Do Syrians also like to think of themselves as “Assyrians” rather than Arabs? And if Palestinians look like Greeks, shouldn’t they be also similar to Jews? Greeks and Armenians both resemble Ashkenazis alot.

  92. fpy3p
    August 26, 2010 at 11:16 PM

    In the interview Tom Metzger did with the Wyatt, the white working-class guy, Wyatt said that all the “Jewish revolutionaries” all became yuppie capitalists and Zionists after the Vietnam War came to an end. Wyatt was involved in anti-Vietnam War activism and he said the Marxist Jews who were putting on a show about how radical they were turned into spoiled yuppie Zionists. What does that tell you about the “Jewish left”?

  93. Reality Check
    August 28, 2010 at 4:23 AM

    When did American schools stop subjecting their students to those “duck and cover” drills?

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 28, 2010 at 4:25 AM

      Dunno. We had them all through the 1960′s until at least 1967 or so. They were a trip. You mean you folks never experienced that?

      I think that idiocy was for a nuclear war. Like getting under your desk and covering your head is going to help you in a nuclear war. LOL! What was the purpose of that crap anyway? To keep the people terrified so the elites could push their bullshit projects?

  94. Reality Check
    August 28, 2010 at 4:30 AM

    What might the long-term psychological effects be? And why is that America was the only country to do that to their children?

    • Robert Lindsay
      August 28, 2010 at 4:35 AM

      I don’t know what the long-term effects were. I guess you end up like me and my generation. I experienced it from 1962-1967 at least. Honestly, we usually thought it was a big joke, even as little kids. We would all be under our desks covering our heads laughing and making faces at each other.

      I think other countries have done similar things during wartime anyway. Would not surprise me. I bet a place like North Korea does that to its citizens. Maybe even South Korea does. Who knows. Or Israel. There are some pretty paranoid countries out there, sometimes for good reason.

      I’m still trying to figure out how being under that desk was going to save me from that atom bomb? Anyone have any ideas how that works?

      • Reality Check
        August 28, 2010 at 4:52 AM

        Well, back then America was very technologically advanced; maybe you guys had nuclear fission-resistant school-desks and just didn’t know it. It’s not like these days, where bridges collapse, levees get breached, chads hang….

        Would it surprise you to learn that the USSR never did the “duck and cover” drills?

  95. Bay Area Guy
    August 28, 2010 at 10:02 PM

    Close to finishing reading Norman Finkelstein’s “The Holocaust Industry.”

    http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation-Suffering/dp/185984488X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1283058060&sr=8-1

    Pretty good stuff. Read this, and you will NEVER be afraid of being called an “anti-semite” again. Of course, Finkelstein wouldn’t exactly sympathize with me or FPY, but that doesn’t mean that he provides valuable information.

  96. Bay Area Guy
    August 28, 2010 at 10:02 PM

    *but that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t provide valuable information*

  97. David
    August 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM

    More bullshit from the Israeli equivalent to Hamas (Shas party):

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/shas-spiritual-leader-abbas-and-palestinians-should-perish-1.310800

    God I fucking hate Haredis. They are scumbags.

  98. fpy3p
    August 29, 2010 at 4:59 PM

    Rob, you’ve wrote a lot about Operation Barbarossa and the Germans. How come you don’t write anything about Imperial Japan and their conquests? And what do you think were the main factors that brought Germany and Japan into an alliance before and during WWII?

    • Reality Check
      August 29, 2010 at 9:52 PM

      One of them days, Hitler had a grassy epiphany that the Japanese were good, fine Aryan specimens – in yellowface.

  99. Bay Area Guy
    August 29, 2010 at 8:09 PM

    Interesting new interview on Brother Nathanael’s website.

    A bit too paranoid and apocalyptic, even by my standards. But he raises some important points.

    http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=543

  100. Bay Area Guy
    August 29, 2010 at 8:51 PM

    This post on the silliness of many women by that black Jamaican blogger Xenocrates (that Tulio mentioned a while back) is absolutely hilarious, and true!

    Points #7 and #2 are especially good.

    http://xenlogic.wordpress.com/2010/05/22/top-10-strangest-things-women-do/#more-2366

    I especially love his disclaimer:

    Let me state a few obvious things for all the single, man hating, feminist trolls and their gay male friends hiding in the closet as stay at home dads that will predictably flock to this post like fat people to a cake stuffed chicken sale.

    and his conclusion:

    I am grateful that these strange behaviors are not all representative of the majority of the female stock – just a substantial enough of the population to warrant a concerned double take. Otherwise, men would not have developed the capacity to treat women as equals – unless we were collectively deceived.

    Or were we? Oh shi…

    • fpy3p
      August 29, 2010 at 9:10 PM

      BAG, that interview with Kapner scared the bejeezus out of me, and the comments below even more so. If what’s in that interview is true, the kikes are truly an evil, Satanic bunch. “Holocaust” my ass!

      • Bay Area Guy
        August 29, 2010 at 9:20 PM

        Well, I’m no holocaust denier. It DID happen.

        That being said, if this is true (and while I think there is an element of truth to it, I also think that it’s a bit exaggerated), then shame on them indeed.

        You should really read “The Holocaust Industry” by Norman Finkelstein.

        • fpy3p
          August 29, 2010 at 9:23 PM

          That interview was like reading a horror novel. What about it made you think it was too alarmist or apocalyptic? Cortina seems pretty damn convincing, with his lists of laws already passed.

      • Robert Lindsay
        August 29, 2010 at 9:24 PM

        Joe Cortina is a flipped out, insane, whacked out anti-Semitic lunatic, first class.

  101. Olive
    August 29, 2010 at 9:32 PM

    Fp3yp:
    If you knew what Brother Nathanael did with the “donation” money, you’d shit. It is not uncommon for a jew to pander to the enemy-and laugh all the way to the bank.

    • fpy3p
      August 29, 2010 at 9:34 PM

      What does he do with the money?

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 29, 2010 at 9:36 PM

      If you knew what Brother Nathanael did with the “donation” money, you’d shit. It is not uncommon for a jew to pander to the enemy-and laugh all the way to the bank.

      Yeah, I’ve heard other people say that he’s just doing what Sacha Baron Cohen (Ali G, Borat) do: Put on an act, fool the gentiles into paying you, and then laugh all the way to the bank.

      Well, while his articles and videos are interesting, you won’t see me giving him any money!

      Not for the fear that he’s really a Zionist Jew in disguise, but I’m just not the type to give money.

  102. David
    August 29, 2010 at 11:32 PM

    Sounds like a fun vacation.

  103. fpy3p
    August 30, 2010 at 3:08 PM

    In memory of those brave warriors who, on June 22, 1941, made an attempt to destroy Judeo-Bolshevism in its cradle.

    • Reality Check
      August 30, 2010 at 10:59 PM

      In memory of those brave warriors who, on June 22, 1941, made an attempt to destroy Judeo-Bolshevism in its cradle.

      FYI, dipshit, your well-poisoning “heroes” were about a century too late.

      • fpy3p
        August 30, 2010 at 11:04 PM

        What do you a mean a century too late? What about 1841?

        • Reality Check
          August 31, 2010 at 1:02 AM

          Gosh, fpy, must you take everything so literally? No, there was nothing special about 1841. It’s called approximation. By 1941, Bolshevism, oh, excuse me, “Judeo-Bolshevism” was already well underway. Besides, you said that you are pro-USSR post 1948. So why are you trying to “credit” the Nazis for what the USSR did?

  104. Bay Area Guy
    August 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

    This is definitely a film that I WON’T be seeing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machete_(film)

    Pro-illegal, Mexican vigilante, kill whitey film, no thanks!

  105. fpy3p
    August 30, 2010 at 10:56 PM

    That famous Jewish tolerance is once again in display. Only Jews could get away with incitement to genocide.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1307353/Influential-Israeli-Rabbi-calls-Palestinians-perish-world-ahead-crunch-peace-talks.html

    • Bay Area Guy
      August 30, 2010 at 10:58 PM

      Well, he didn’t exactly get away with it, since even Netenyahu had to denounce him.

      At the same time, Benny’s “peace plan” is pretty outrageous as well.

      • fpy3p
        August 30, 2010 at 11:01 PM

        He’s an influential Sephardi rabbi with millions of followers in the Shas PArty, so he can afford to ignore these weak “condemnations.”

        • David
          August 30, 2010 at 11:10 PM

          Dead wrong. Haredim number 650,000 in Israel. Shas has 9% of the Knesset.

          Unfortunately, however, Haredim are breeding like flies. Government welfare to them needs to be halted.

    • David
      August 30, 2010 at 11:05 PM

      Secular Jews (the majority of Israel) despise the Haredim and hope they burn in hell.

      Fpy3p, since you like to pretend all Jews are the same, can I start pretending you are an Opus Dei Catholic that flagellates himself every day?

      • fpy3p
        August 30, 2010 at 11:10 PM

        Yes but secular Jews still support the same foreign policies as the religious nuts, including war with Iran. And Jews are a cohesive ethnic as well religious unit, whereas Catholics come in all colors and ethnicities. Since I’m no Spaniard, I am obviously not an Opus Dei member. I’m not even strongly religious, although I do believe in God.

        • David
          August 30, 2010 at 11:17 PM

          >secular Jews still support the same foreign policies as the religious nuts

          Dead wrong again. 53 percent of US Jews as a whole support military action against Iran.* That’s American Jewry as a whole, including batshit insane Orthodox (10%) and asshole Conservatives (30%). Taking only Reform and Seculars the number is without question a minority.

          *http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.5915517/k.D620/2010_Annual_Survey_of_American_Jewish_Opinion.htm

        • David
          August 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM

          *Conservatives only 24% according to this poll, but I’ve read higher elsewhere.

        • fpy3p
          August 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM

          I was referring to secular Jews in Israel. And frankly it doesn’t matter what the polls say; the Jewish elite have their own agenda and they will relentlessly push it.

        • Bay Area Guy
          August 30, 2010 at 11:22 PM

          I’m not even arguing for or against FPY’s point here, but I’ve never trusted polls in general.

          The wording of questions, target demographic, and so many other variables can paint an unreliable picture.

  106. Olive
    August 30, 2010 at 11:21 PM

    David not all orthodox are batshit.
    Many are educated, have professions etc.

    • David
      August 30, 2010 at 11:26 PM

      They’re overwhelmingly ultra-Zionist and conservative in their politics, however.

      A huge number of the batshit settlers derive directly from the ranks of American Orthodox.

  107. Olive
    August 30, 2010 at 11:28 PM

    David
    There is no difference in the attitudes of Conservative and Reform.

  108. Olive
    August 30, 2010 at 11:32 PM

    No, the majority of Modern Orthodox are liberal except for support for Israel. Most oppose the current wars.

  109. David
    September 2, 2010 at 6:07 PM

    Illegal immigration declined by around 65% in the period between 2005 and 2009.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/01/AR2010090106940.html

  110. nobody
    September 4, 2010 at 12:05 PM

    I’ll be able to see Tim Wise speak for free in the relatively near future. Should I go? I feel like I’ve read so much about him that it might be interesting.

  111. randy
    September 4, 2010 at 5:25 PM

    i created this Yahoo Pipe which filters out the “repost from old site” posts. i read more often when i don’t have to sort through all that stuff.

    anybody else who’s using a feed-reader can use the pipe that i created.

    the url is: http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes/pipe.run?_id=eddd95138c5999e2b6fca0d6e7387554&_render=rss

  112. Bay Area Guy
    September 8, 2010 at 12:27 AM

    Okay, just some last food for thought. This should dispel anyone still laboring under the illusion that Jews are “just a religion.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/not-jewish-enough-to-marry-a-cohen-1.150715

    WRONG. They are a race.

    • David
      September 9, 2010 at 11:27 AM

      lol, Haredim.

      • Matt
        September 10, 2010 at 7:54 AM

        That brings up something I always wondered about. If the Russians and the USSR were as antisemitic and unfriendly to Jews as they were (and are) said to be, why are just about all recently emigrated Russian Jews in Israel and the U.S. of mixed Jewish/Slavic blood? Obviously the antisemitism didn’t extend to marriage and sex.

  113. David
    September 8, 2010 at 9:00 AM

    “Early Use of Cannabis May Improve Cognitive Functioning in Subgroup of Patients With Schizophrenia”

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/727681

  114. David
    September 9, 2010 at 4:22 PM

    I just wanted to wish all the commenters on this blog, the Semites and the Anti-Semites, the Communists and the Libertarians, the Fascists and the Swedes, the Zionists and the Reasonable, and everyone in between a shana tova as well a premeditated Eid Sa‘eed, and a plenitude of personal blessings and good fortune for the year to come. May peace and justice reign alongside from Palestine to Colombia to Sudan to Burma.

  115. Bay Area Guy
    September 9, 2010 at 8:11 PM

    It’s interesting.

    Alan Dershowitz and other Zionists circulate the claim that the Palestinians collaborated with Hitler during WWII.

    In other words, even if the Jews did displace and kill the Palestinians, they deserved it because they supported the Nazis before the formation of Israel.

    http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs/hizbullahssrealgoalisracist.htm

    An analysis of that claim would be a good post.

  116. Bay Area Guy
    September 12, 2010 at 1:55 AM

    This debate between Norman Finkelstein and James Petras is very interesting.

    I used to think Finkelstein was hot stuff following his debate with Alan Dershowitz. But then again, beating Alan Dershowitz in a debate isn’t exactly a monumental achievement.

    I have to say that I think Petras gets the better of him here. I guess watching Finkelstein debate a bunch of turds inflated my opinion of him.

    When he has to actually debate a fellow scholar and leftist like Petras who is actually willing to violate taboos related to Jewry, he comes across as defensive and in denial.

    Well, I guess even anti-Zionists like Finkelstein and Chomsky are blind when it comes to Jewish influence, but that’s understandable.

    http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=978

    Although I’m not here to criticize Jews now. Having watched several episodes of Seinfeld, it’s hard to be in an angry mood when it comes to Jews! ;-)

    If I arrived here from Mars and the only Jews I knew were the likes of Jerry Seinfeld, Larry David, or the Amazing Racist Ari Shaffir, I would be a mega philo-semite!

  117. Bay Area Guy
    September 16, 2010 at 12:13 AM

    This is very interesting.

    http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-51340420100907

    Guess what the stressful cities have in common?

    Guess what the least stressful cities have in common?

    I’ll leave it at that. See if you can figure it out!

    • LaFleur
      September 16, 2010 at 8:42 AM

      BAG, have you noticed the recent backlash in the Abagondosphere against Tim Wise?

      http://www.ankhesen-mie.net/2010/09/for-poc-with-tim-wise-issues.html

      http://rvcbard.blogspot.com/2010/08/dear-tim-and-other-white-anti-racist.html

      http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_feminism/337807.html

      When a white person is the face of the anti-racism movement, then clearly, that white person did not defer to PoC properly but instead overstepped their boundaries.

      *munching popcorn*

      • Bay Area Guy
        September 16, 2010 at 1:31 PM

        Lol, I love it!

        Even the biggest black ass kissers such as Timmy Wise get taken to task.

        That ought to tell you something about those on the Abagondosphere right there.

        • LaFleur
          September 16, 2010 at 1:46 PM

          I can’t say I’m surprised or that I blame them on some points. I was surprised at how bitchy he can be in the comments on his website with POC who disagree with him. He’s very quick to let them know who is the expert:

          And Yan. I’m betting that I’ve written more about — and publicly spoken out more about — white racism against Asian Americans in the job market, etc than you have, frankly, and certainly more than the forces who oppose aff action. I write about it in my new book, in my last book, and in my book on aff action actually, extensively…perhaps you should read them…

          Tim Wise explains it all for you!

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 1:54 PM

          Yeah, his arrogance is incredible.

          He truly thinks of himself as some incredible social scientist and savior.

          I’ve noticed that many of these anti-racists are self-indulgent and condescending.

          Even the most mild disagreement with him will result in nasty remarks.

          Wow! Now all of a sudden I’m in a very good mood!

      • Bay Area Guy
        September 16, 2010 at 1:41 PM

        And I just love Ank Mie’s assertion that the Chinese understand racism better than white Americans do.

        Here source? A Chinese government source. Well duh, the Chinese government has always been trying to dig up dirt on the U.S. as ammo. Of course if you take enough time to do the research, you’ll figure it out.

        That’s like me saying that American human rights experts know more about China’s abuses against its Tibetan and Northwest Muslim minorities than your average Han Chinese person does.

        It’s not relevant.

        Another one of Ank Mie’s bizarre assertions is that Obama got elected because the white American establishment wanted to appease the likes of Russia and China, because, of course, they like non-whites more than whites.

        WTF is she smoking! She should see how Russia treats its own black people! And China, well sure, they like Obama, but they’re hardly fans of black people!

        This is why I no longer read anti-racist blogs. I’ve already learned all that I can.

        The more I read these people, the more I think they’re clinically insane.

        • LaFleur
          September 16, 2010 at 2:07 PM

          Ankhesen Mie makes about as much sense as Frances Cress Welsing. Like Welsing, she just pulls her analysis out of her ass. I can’t take Mie seriously after the nonsense she wrote about the black beer warehouse shooter.

          There are black political writers I like a lot, but they have a class analysis. I think there’s something about the no-class-please-we’re-CRT field that leads to mental imbalance. To them you’re only as good as your level of racial oppression. This can lead to some comical overcompensation on behalf of those from upper middle class and up backgrounds.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 2:12 PM

          You’d like Boyce Watkins.

          He’s a black finance professor who writes about issues of racism.

          But at the same time, he includes a heavy class analysis and focuses on issues of black economic empowerment and financial literacy/independence.

          One of his comments that registered with me was that he was disturbed by the whole Obama/Henry Louis Gates incident. He said (paraphrase), “Obama would never raise his voice is a poor black male from the inner city were shot dead by the cops, but when his fellow Ivy Leaguer gets harassed then he all of a sudden voices outrage. This revealed a disturbing elitism on his part.”

          He also pointed out that this country is more of a capitalist country than it is a racist one. He was also one of the activists behind the firing of Don Imus, and as he pointed out, by going after his money, the network execs cut Imus loose, regardless of race.

          Yeah, you would find Boyce Watkins and his analysis interesting. He certainly makes a hell of a lot more sense than the Abagondosphere.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 2:15 PM

          To them you’re only as good as your level of racial oppression. This can lead to some comical overcompensation on behalf of those from upper middle class and up backgrounds.

          Lol! Exactly. In their minds, Kobe Bryant is more oppressed than an impoverished white worker.

          CRT/anti-racism is really a pursuit for a bunch of self-indulgent, bourgeois blacks.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 2:17 PM

          Rather than continue to get worked up, I’ve just ceased taking these black types seriously.

          Now, they’re more humorous than anything else.

        • LaFleur
          September 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM

          Lol! Exactly. In their minds, Kobe Bryant is more oppressed than an impoverished white worker.

          CRT/anti-racism is really a pursuit for a bunch of self-indulgent, bourgeois blacks.

          To make myself clear, I wasn’t referring exclusively or specifically to black people with the remark about overcompensation, since CRT is not restricted to them.

          Furthermore, I think Ank Mie is extreme even for CRT types.

          I think they do have a point; their mistake is that they think they can get what they say they want in the current system. As it is, even if the top 20% of the population who own 85% of the wealth were racially proportionate, most POC, especially black people, would still be SOL.

          Slugging it out over a lousy 15% of the wealth is not my idea of a good time.

        • tulio
          September 16, 2010 at 9:05 PM

          “Obama would never raise his voice is a poor black male from the inner city were shot dead by the cops, but when his fellow Ivy Leaguer gets harassed then he all of a sudden voices outrage. This revealed a disturbing elitism on his part.”

          Obama never “raised his voice” about Gates incident. The question was thrust upon him at a press conference. He was speaking on the topic of heath care, and then a reporter asked for his opinion on the Gates incident, esp being that Gates is a personal friend of his. It’s not like Obama forced the issue on his accord. He goes out of his way to try and avoid racial matters, much to the chagrin of his black voters.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 9:27 PM

          It’s not like Obama forced the issue on his accord. He goes out of his way to try and avoid racial matters, much to the chagrin of his black voters.

          Oh, I agree. I remember the incident. You’re right, it wasn’t like Obama forced the issue, and you are definitely right about how him avoiding these issues ticks off black supporters.

          I think the point Boyce Watkins was trying to make was that Obama wouldn’t even THINK about speaking out on behalf of inner city blacks.

          In other words, Obama’s a bit of an elitist. His words, not mine.

        • tulio
          September 17, 2010 at 12:43 AM

          Keep in mind, Obama had a history of community activism before he was a household name. I think he avoids race or appearing to close to the black community because he will instantly lose white support and no black candidate can win without at least 45% of the white vote assuming non-whites vote in bloc. He can piss off some whites who would never vote for him anyway, but he can’t lose those swing voter whites who are often conservative Democrats. Those type of whites really don’t like blacks and Obama coming off as “too black” is going to drive them to the right.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 17, 2010 at 2:22 AM

          Well Tulio, that’s smart on his part.

          I mean, why would any white voter want to support a candidate who’s openly pro-black and will support black interests?

          I certainly wouldn’t.

          (yeah, I know I’m setting myself up for a smart retort by saying “I certainly wouldn’t,” but oh well)

          Personally, I don’t know who I’m going to vote for. I hate Democrats and Republicans.

          What to do, what to do?

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 17, 2010 at 2:27 AM

          I think that white voters are willing to support black candidates, but not if they perceive them as hostile and promoting a black agenda.

          And again, why would they?

          I think Obama does have a good strategy. I bet that blacks will monolithically support him once again (unless there’s another black Democrat in the race), so he doesn’t have to worry about them.

          It’s whites he has to win over.

          (and again, nothing wrong with that)

      • Bay Area Guy
        September 16, 2010 at 1:44 PM

        Okay, my fellow white people, let this be a lesson to you: DO NOT EVER TRY TO WIN OVER BLACKS AND KISS THEIR ASS. No matter how much you kiss their ass and bash your fellow whites, you’ll STILL be taken to task by them.

        But, oh man! Gotta love Timmy Wise getting attacked by his former followers.

        The only white person cool in Ank Mie’s mind is John Brown. Basically, if you’re not killing and getting violent with your fellow whites, you’re not cool.

        Again, naive whites who want to help blacks should keep this all in mind.

        • Robert Lindsay
          September 16, 2010 at 2:45 PM

          I got a soft spot in my heart for John Brown. Lot of us Leftist Whites do. Of course, I’m still a racism to the Left. I could camp out on John Brown’s grave for a month and I’d still be a racist to them. They’re so hopeless.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 2:53 PM

          I could camp out on John Brown’s grave for a month and I’d still be a racist to them. They’re so hopeless.

          Which ought to tell you something right there.

          DON’T try to appease these people or help them.

          As far as I’m concerned, white people (and I mean ALL white people) need to collectively give black activists the silent treatment.

          The media should no longer report on Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Those in the white establishment need to completely ignore those in the black establishment (such as the NAACP), and whites overall need to stop caring whether or not a black person thinks they’re racist.

          When my father briefly teaches his anthropology unit, he goes over 3 methods of dealing with an irritant.

          1) Positive reinforcement
          2) Punishment (negative reinforcement, but reinforcement nonetheless)
          3) Extinction (ignoring and disregarding them)

          I used to practice #2 when it came to black radicals, but that just made things worse.

          From now on, ALL whites need to start practicing extinction when it comes to rowdy blacks.

          (of course, if we’re talking about violent blacks such as flash mobs and other thugs, then we ought to practice punishment, and lots of it!)

        • Reality Check
          September 16, 2010 at 2:58 PM

          This reminds me of how even the most antisemitic Jews are not considered trustworthy by gentile whites.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 3:00 PM

          This reminds me of how even the most antisemitic Jews are not considered trustworthy by gentile whites.

          I don’t know about that. Anti-Semitic white nationalists love Brother Nathanael, Israel Shamir, and Henry Makow.

          Brother Nathanael was even on The Political Cesspool, which is certainly no philo-Semitic program!

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 3:01 PM

          Even Kevin MacDonald likes Brother Nathanael, and in fact has been frequently interviewed by him.

        • LaFleur
          September 16, 2010 at 3:05 PM

          Maybe you can camp out with Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Robert. They visit Brown’s grave every year, heh heh. I bet you’d have some great bull sessions with them over roasting marshmallows.

          I admire Brown too, but I don’t think he’s the only white man who was ever worth a shit, like some people.

        • Reality Check
          September 16, 2010 at 3:37 PM

          They are accused of being controlled opposition, disinformation agents, etc.

        • Gay State Girl (formerly Olive)
          September 16, 2010 at 6:15 PM

          I agree with abagond on this. Blacks should advocate for their own economic and political equality. Whites have no place in the black civil rights movement.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 7:37 PM

          Well Gay State Girl, if you’re advocating black nationalism, then I agree with you.

          But if you’re talking about Civil Rights style integrationism, then whites very much have a place in the movement. You cannot exclude whites and then demand to live with them.

          I’m all for black nationalism Louis Farrakhan style.

          But alas, Abagond is no black nationalist.

        • Reality Check
          September 16, 2010 at 9:40 PM

          What do the WNs make of Jews like Henry Makow, who is supposedly pro-regular Jews?

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 9:50 PM

          What do the WNs make of Jews like Henry Makow, who is supposedly pro-regular Jews?

          Ask them.

          Personally, I don’t know a ton about Henry Makow, except that he’s an anti-Zionist, anti-Jewish power Jew.

          He also interviewed Brother Nathanael.

        • tulio
          September 17, 2010 at 12:45 AM

          I always found this John Brown painting to be really scary looking when I young:

          http://obit-mag.com/media/image/hf-john-brown.jpg

        • Hacienda
          September 17, 2010 at 8:32 AM

          Tulio,

          “Those type of whites really don’t like blacks and Obama coming off as “too black” is going to drive them to the right.”

          Obama is POTUS. That means he’s no longer black or white.

          POTUS, baby, POTUS.

  118. Matt
    September 16, 2010 at 8:36 PM

    I don’t look at these CRT people at all. I got enough white guilt back in the late 80s, early 90s, thanks. But Asians are getting in on it now? Nobody is more racist than Asians. Asians hate black people like no one else, and they basically regard anyone who’s not an Asian, or more precisely their type of Asian, as less than human. I guess that’s a matter of concern when China sells us food laced with neurotoxins or toys made from nuclear waste, but otherwise I don’t care. But then you have these arrogant little zipperhead shits lecturing whites on how they treat the blacks? Fuck them.

    • Bay Area Guy
      September 16, 2010 at 9:35 PM

      But then you have these arrogant little zipperhead shits lecturing whites on how they treat the blacks? Fuck them.

      Yeah, you should see how Asian countries treat their OWN MINORITIES. Of course, I know that Asian Americans are not responsible for policies in Asia, but they and their kinsmen are hardly more enlightened regarding minorities than we are.

      And unlike blacks and Hispanics here, minorities in Asia don’t have the same freedoms and opportunities. There’s no way Ank Mie or even Asian CRT’s here would be able to run blogs in China critical of the Han Chinese.

      But in general, I don’t think that most Asians are CRT’s, at least based on my personal experience. Most of them are pretty cool with white people.

  119. Gay State Girl
    September 16, 2010 at 8:45 PM

    Bay Area Guy
    I am not advocating Black Separatism. I am just saying we are not in a position to decide what is good for blacks. They need to make their own decisions. You have stated that it was inappropriate for jews to be running the NAACP in the 1960′s and I agree.

    I would not want non jews saying that jewish nationalism was a mistake and jews should therefore assimilate into another society. Lindsay suggested the solution is that all Israeli jews move to America and integrate into American society and I am somewhat disappointed with him. I find it condescending. Are we not a valid culture and therefore should not have a country to preserve and develop it. By the way, I support the relocation of Israel to Western Australia.

    • Bay Area Guy
      September 16, 2010 at 9:30 PM

      Lindsay suggested the solution is that all Israeli jews move to America and integrate into American society and I am somewhat disappointed with him.

      What?! It ought to be the other way around!

      The ADL, AIPAC, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, JINSA, and all those other Zionist Jews and their organizations ought to pack up and move to Israel, and stop fucking up our domestic and foreign policy (particularly foreign policy).

      By the way, I support the relocation of Israel to Western Australia.

      Fine by me, Australia willing. Just get them out of the turbulent Middle East and get them to stop screwing up American interests.

      • Gay State Girl
        September 16, 2010 at 11:09 PM

        “By the way, I support the relocation of Israel to Western Australia.

        Fine by me, Australia willing. Just get them out of the turbulent Middle East and get them to stop screwing up American interests.”

        Paid for by the Iranians because Ahmadinejad suggested it first :)

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 16, 2010 at 11:48 PM

          Well then good for Ahmadinejad!

          All I know is that Israel has been nothing short of a disaster, both for the U.S. and the world.

  120. LaFleur
    September 17, 2010 at 8:09 AM

    This guy summed up beautifully what I think about Tim Wise and his fellow neoliberal anti-racists:

    http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/2010/09/avant_la_lettre.html

    It’s forest for the trees anti-racism. His emphasis is narrow; his facts are correct.

    Black investment bankers will die preventable deaths at a much greater rate than white investment bankers. They’ll die preventable deaths at a greater rate than less wealthy, less secure, less credentialed whites. This is true and the outcomes hold true throughout the exploitation food chain. The lower down the food chain you go, the worse it gets until, at the very bottom, you get slow motion genocide. It’s attributable to institutionally entrenched racism.

    But wealthier, more privileged whites here will die preventable deaths at greater rate than their direct counterparts in countries where the exploitation food chain is more buffered.

    So, doesn’t this at least suggest that the existence of the exploitation food chain is a very serious problem?

    As another commenter said:

    The Shirky Principle seems fairly universal.

  121. Bay Area Guy
    September 18, 2010 at 12:05 PM

    Hey, Brother Nathanael’s going to be on TPC tonight.

    He might have something to say about this.

    http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/six-jewish-companies-own-96-of-the-worlds-media/

  122. Shawn
    September 21, 2010 at 8:54 AM

    Robert/readers, advice please.

    My mom died of incurable cancer recently. I inherited a $230,000 middle class house free and clear (was worth $270 a couple years ago). My sister is receiving ~$21k (and this is all she is getting) and me ~$31k. Sister is upset that she is not receiving as much as me. She is threating to take me to court but the will is rock-solid and I have been told there is no way she could win. I am just having problems thinking this through and yes, even sleeping at night. I feel really guilty about anything when I feel like something may be immoral. Party because the assets were all supposed to be spit 60-40 but then towards the end I was given the house (a little more than 3 months before she passed).

    Background: My sibling was made to leave the house at age 18 (senior yr of HS) because of constant arguments. Both sibling and mom had some psychological issues, but neither were retarded in that sense (although mom ending up being a little slow — she was technically disabled and had an IQ at about 70 (mentally) (note initially she was not she was just it the last 15 years or so of her life)). My sister would not talk to my mom for a little over 10 years. I think my mom tried to mend things, but my sister would not want to unless my mom admitted she was wrong about kicker her out of the house; neither was willing to budge in their stance. So that was it. Hardly any communication what so ever. I was her trustee (unpaid), which means I managed her finances–I only spent 10 hours a year doing this and I don’t really consider it a real job. About once ever two-three weeks since I moved away from home I would stop over and visit her, and sometime help with yard work. I talked with her and had a decent relationship with her–most of the time. During the last 5 months of her life I moved in with her to help her out–because of her medications she could not drive so I brought her to docs and helped her out in other ways, planning etc. I think this is part of the reason she may have given me the house (I big stickler with my sister) and I feel like I may have be over-rewarded, and so I feel guilt, like I do about unfairness, if this situation is indeed unfair–something I am trying to figure out.

    I have had a pretty good relationship with my sister & my mom did have some mental health difficulties–was my sister justified in cutting of communication and not helping her out with stuff over the years? Should I sacrifice 50% of my nest egg or just some, or none at all? Some people are just plain impatient–at times myself; but, I could put up with the slow and at times irrational behavior of my mom more than my sister, am a pretty easy-going guy. That’s why I was able to get along better with my mom and at times hang out around her.

    If I did not get married, I could rent out this home for ~$2,000 a month, and could rent an apartment for myself or live with friends for under $750 (maybe under $450 if I really wanted to be thrifty). If I decided to not have a family I could just live off the difference and travel around, and have a property management company handle everything (at a cut of ~10%), and life a comfortable life (for me anyways) on about $1,200-1,500 or so without really working, with the exception of repairs on the home (some minor fixes now & future ones which may or may not be handled by someone besides me). But anyways I want to have a family so I will still have to work even if I rent out the place.

    What should I do? No snide remarks please. Imagine you were me and wanted to have a relationship with your sibling. Some relatives think I should “keep the peace” some think I should stick to my guns, etc. I don’t know what to do or what is right. My main sense of guilt comes from the fact that she changed gave me the house is the last ~3 months or so but she swore I had no influence over her, but at times I think I may have. For me and my family, this kind of money is a lot for us and can really make the difference in lifestyle. Thoughts appreciated.

    • Hacienda
      September 21, 2010 at 11:49 AM

      She is your sister, so that’s got to mean something. Especially if she took a lot of flack and that meant you didn’t have to. A lot of families are like this. One sibling takes all the bullshit from the parents making it easier for the others. If this is case with you, then she definitely deserves more. Also your mother wasn’t mentally fit to make a proper will. This may explain the problems of guilt you are having. Guilt has a way of punishing people. It’s got a life of its own. So you probably want to get a handle on it.

      You definitely “lucked out” with the house. It gives you so many options, it has basically set you financially free. But this may end up being a very bad thing. You’ll find you’ll lose a lot of edge. And edge is priceless. But then, it doesn’t sound like you have a lot of edge to begin with, judging from your posts. So maybe it doesn’t matter.

      It all depends on the kind of person you feel your sister is, how financiall well off she is, and the type of relationship you want have with her.

      I might give her more money, but I sure wouldn’t part with the house. Too valuable.

      • Shawn
        September 21, 2010 at 12:37 PM

        Hacienda:

        My current plan is to give the sibling some money over a span of years. By the way, in your answer, you don’t have to come across as being such a jerk. BTW, I would give it all up if it meant that my mom was still around.

        • Hacienda
          September 21, 2010 at 6:54 PM

          Shawn,

          Sibling advice is hard. Money always gets in the way wrt family. I personally think doling money over a span of time to a sibling is probably the worst kind of thing you could do. Could lead to a lot more problems. Do it once and get it over with if possible.

      • Reality Check
        September 21, 2010 at 6:54 PM

        Hacienda makes a good point about “lightning rod” siblings.

        • Robert Lindsay
          September 21, 2010 at 7:38 PM

          I agree with Hacienda. Giving this bitch money slowly over a period of years will just keep her simmering and angry. It will never be enough, and she will be an ingrate. She well get angry every time that check comes in and always demand more from you. Plus the guilt crap will be ongoing and she will play this guilt thing up to the max.

          We Whites, including you, Shawn, experience way too much guilt as it is.

          You’re in the right here, and you have all the guilt. Your sis is in the wrong, and she has no guilt. This is typically the way guilt works. The best people feel the most and the worst folks feel little or none.

          Give her $5K, say, Now, look, we both got the same amount of cash, so be quiet. The house is mine. Take me to court. Go for it. She will be furious and you will feel guilty, but only for a while. She will stay pissed, but it will be over something receding away into the past.

          She will look like an idiot bitch stewing over a past insult. You will be able to move on and put it behind you as over and done with. The sis will be the one stewing over something dead and gone.

          *Just say, I’m making up my mind, right, wrong or indifferent.*

          I made my decision and it’s final. Your bitch sis is preying on you because you’re nice. You suffered a lot for your Mom and stood with her in her worst moments with a lot of pain to yourself, and that’s why she gave you the house. You were a good Christian (I know you’re a Christian).

          This is what doing *the Jesus walk* is all about. What would Jesus do? He would have stayed with your Mom, not bailed on her like your sis did. He also probably would have split the money with sis like an idiot, but Jesus had some masochistic tendencies that we can overlook.

          Who’s the good person here who did the right thing? You are!

          Who’s the bad person here who did and is doing the wrong thing? Your bitch sis, with whom you rightly should have no relationship anymore anyway.

          Relationship with sis should be reinstated on grounds that she forgives you or at least refuses to hold your decision against you. If you continues to bitch about this, you are going to cut her off. Lay down the fuckin law and make her obey! She won’t go along with this, because she’s a bad person, and bad people never say they’re sorry and never admit they were wrong. It’s too humiliating.

        • Reality Check
          September 21, 2010 at 8:56 PM

          The Jesus way is to sell everything you have and give it to the poor, as well as to hate and leave your parents. Honoring your parents is a Torah thing, fit only for the Judaized Gentiles.

    • Robert Lindsay
      September 21, 2010 at 6:27 PM

      Give the sister $5000 of your money to shut her up. Keep the house. Don’t give the sister any more money than that. Hell with her. Let her take you to court. Forget about these keep the peace types. Your sister is being a serious bitch and there is nothing to preserve with her. I would not want to continue to have a relationship with a sister who did that to me. Just say bye bye. There are currently 2 siblings who I am more or less on the outs with. I really don’t care if I ever see them again for the rest of my life!

      And you know what? It’s all their fault, too! LOL. Hehe. :D

      • Reality Check
        September 21, 2010 at 6:36 PM

        How many siblings do you have?

      • Shawn
        September 22, 2010 at 6:09 AM

        Thanks for the analysis. I do agree that Whites are more prone to guilty feelings. I also agree that good people tend to feel guilt. Criminals probably feel little to none despite their actions. As crazy as it seems, I am probably going to give the sibling a certain fraction of the home value when it sells or gets rented–like maybe 1/3 or something. It’s hard to get everything across in a post and explain everything without being face-to-face. One of those things. Still I’m trying to figure things out & it may take awhile.

  123. Bay Area Guy
    September 21, 2010 at 11:52 AM

    Hey, this Denmark Vasey guy would be a good president! Or at least would have been.

    DENMARK VESEY FOR PRESIDENT 08

    1. Troops Out Of Iraq Immediately. Like By Monday. 2. Money Owed To Haliburton and War Contractors Be Given Directly To The Iraqi People 3. Complete Electoral Reform 4. No Corporate Conglomerate Will Be Allowed To Control More Than 5% Of News Market 5. Federal Reserve Abolished 6. For-Profit Prison Industry Abolished

    If those are his exact policies, he’s got my vote.

    • LaFleur
      September 21, 2010 at 1:28 PM

      Hmmmm. I don’t know about this. It’s easier for gentile greedheads to not draw attention to themselves. Much of the corporate behavior of the past 30 years was pioneered by one Jack Welch. Look at the astonishing amount of fuckery Bill Gates alone is responsible for. Rupert Murdoch. Warren Buffett. The Bush crime family. The Vatican has a sweet deal, being its own country and exempt from audit by anyone. Where would drug dealing and human trafficking be without the Vatican Bank?

      I find it amusing that Nathaniel’s first post in the comments is a plea for $$$$$$. It looks like he’s exploiting Jew-hating for fun and profit.

      All I have to say about the rest of the article itself is fuck Thomas Friedman:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/opinion/21friedman.html?_r=1

  126. Bay Area Guy
    September 23, 2010 at 12:04 AM

    Finkelstein and Mearsheimer go at it!

    I think that Mearsheimer got the upper hand. He also came across as way more respectful. Sorry Norm, but you should stick to the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Holocaust Industry, because both James Petras and Mearsheimer defeated you in Israel Lobby/foreign policy debates.

    I used to have a very high opinion of Finkelstein, but perhaps that’s just because he was debating turds like Alan Dershowitz. When he has actually debated heavyweights like Mearsheimer or Petras, I think he looks bad and defensive.

  128. Gay State Girl
    September 23, 2010 at 12:11 AM

    Gay Area Guy
    If jewish control of the media is responsible for the manipulation of the American public to go to war in Iraq, how do you account for the fact that the most pro Israel News Station is run by a non jew and that jewish owned news stations tend to be more liberal on Israel than FOX

    • Bay Area Guy
      September 23, 2010 at 12:25 AM

      If jewish control of the media is responsible for the manipulation of the American public to go to war in Iraq, how do you account for the fact that the most pro Israel News Station is run by a non jew and that jewish owned news stations tend to be more liberal on Israel than FOX

      Yeah, and that’s why the “liberal” New York Times was part of the chorus whipping up hysteria against Iraq.

      And sorry, but to me, being “more liberal on Israel than FOX” hardly says much.

      As for Murdoch, who knows? On that one I have to grant your point.

      • Reality Check
        September 23, 2010 at 12:44 AM

        Do you know what percent of American Jews were in favor of the Iraq War?

      • Bay Area Guy
        September 23, 2010 at 12:55 AM

        Do you know what percent of American Jews were in favor of the Iraq War?

        That’s not the point, Reality Check.

        Just so you know, I do happen to know that the majority of Jews were opposed to the war.

        However, those who were pushing for the war were primarily neocon Jews and their think tanks.

        So yes, many to most Jews had nothing to do with this or other negative movements, as even Brother Nathanael has been willing to concede at times.

        But you know what? Only 2% of white Americans owned slaves, and yet whites as a whole get castigated and demonized for slavery. Only a minority of whites actually harassed Elizabeth Eckford and other black students at at Little Rock Central High, and yet whites as a whole are blamed for vicious racism.

        The logic? We didn’t “speak out,” “silence is complicity,” by refusing to actively combat the evil, “we’ve chosen the side of the oppressor,” etc.

        Much of this collective guilt, Cultural Marxism, and other demonizations of whites/anti-white measures have been/are being pushed by Jews, as Robert has admitted in the past.

        (if you don’t believe me, Robert, I can quote you)

        So you know what? If we goyim are going to be assigned collective guilt for everything from slavery to the holocaust, then dammit I’m assigning Jews collective guilt for all the negative things Israel, the Israel lobby, and neocons have done, including getting us involved in the Iraq War.

        I know that the majority weren’t involved, but dammit I don’t care. I’m just using their own logic against them.

      • Reality Check
        September 23, 2010 at 1:11 AM

        I guess I didn’t phrase the question properly; I meant what percent of American Jews were in favor of the Iraq War as opposed to what percent of American gentiles were in favor of the war?

      • Bay Area Guy
        September 23, 2010 at 1:13 AM

        I understood your question, and as I pointed out, I KNOW that most American Jews were NOT in favor of the war.

      • Reality Check
        September 23, 2010 at 1:33 AM

        My point is that a significantly lower percent of American Jews than gentiles were in favor of the Iraq War. In fact, even among Muslims, the approval rate was higher. White Christians had the highest rate of approval, at about 70%. They were the ones who gave Bush the mandate for the invasion. If the approval rate among the general public was the same as it was among American Jews, the Iraq War never would have happened, regardless of what the “Israel lobby” may have wanted.

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 23, 2010 at 1:51 AM

          White Christians had the highest rate of approval, at about 70%. They were the ones who gave Bush the mandate for the invasion. If the approval rate among the general public was the same as it was among American Jews, the Iraq War never would have happened, regardless of what the “Israel lobby” may have wanted.

          That’s nice and all, but without the Israel Lobby, there wouldn’t have been a war IN THE FIRST PLACE.

      • Reality Check
        September 23, 2010 at 2:02 AM

        So you’re denying the fact that white Christian Americans played an integral role in the Iraq War invasion?

        • Bay Area Guy
          September 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM

          Let me just put it this way, Reality Check.

          The white Christians who supported the invasion were dead wrong and I’m ashamed on account of them. The war still would have happened, but it could have ended sooner had it not been for their support. That I won’t deny.

          But…I like to look at the source. And while these white Christians were not exactly anti-war, they weren’t exactly architects of this war.

          That would be our neocon friends.

  129. Bay Area Guy
    September 23, 2010 at 1:47 PM

    Mearsheimer has some interesting things to say about China.

  130. Bay Area Guy
    September 23, 2010 at 6:17 PM

    It seems that Russia Today has incurred the wrath of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

    http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/fall/from-russia-with-love

    The SPLC is willing to take on Russia Today or anti-Muslim attitudes in Europe, but you cannot find a single article there devoted to Israeli racism or oppression.

    Gee, I wonder why.

    You see, it’s shit like this that makes me angry with Jews.

    (and make no mistake, the SPLC is a Jewish organization)

  131. Bay Area Guy
    September 27, 2010 at 11:51 PM

    My fellow white Americans, the thought police have conquered Britain.

    Unless we stand up and fight now, the very same thing may happen to us.

    Read this and try to avoid puking.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1314438/3-year-olds-labelled-bigots-teachers-250k-children-accused-racism.html#ixzz10mh0NcIr

    Believe me, I sincerely hope that this article is a big lie. I really do.

    But alas, why am I not surprised?

  132. Bay Area Guy
    September 28, 2010 at 11:58 PM

    My fellow white Americans, this is what mainstream “conservatism” and pro-white news amounts to.

    White conservatives need to get off the Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, and Beck drug and start getting their news from Alt Right, The Political Cesspool, and even far left sources such as counterpunch every now and then (which I read every now and then).

    The state of the mainstream left and right is pathetic.

    If for no other reason, I like Nader because he, along with the likes of Pat Buchanan, stands up for workers and speaks out against outsourcing and neoliberalism.

    Though I’m skeptical about Ralph Nader because he helped Bush win in 2000, he’s a lefty that I kinda like. He certainly didn’t back down from from that fruitcake Shephard Smith.

    (Nader, along with James Petras, is one of the few lefties that I like)

  133. Bay Area Guy
    September 29, 2010 at 12:14 AM

    Lol! Anyone know what movie this is from?

  134. Bay Area Guy
    September 30, 2010 at 8:34 PM

    Oh my god, it looks like King James (for you sports illiterates out there, that’s basketball star LeBron James) is a victim of…can you guess it?…racism!

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5633199

    Oh, poor King James! Can’t a brotha get a break?

    Man, it’s just like during the days of slavery!

    (okay, to be fair, he didn’t say that it was a huge role or try to compare it to slavery. But still, these racism charges are getting a little old. At the very least, it blacks want to charge racism, they need to pick and choose their battles, and stop screaming over the perceived hostility towards filthy rich athletes)

    • LaFleur
      September 30, 2010 at 9:02 PM

      Sports are so irrelevant. Runaway slave? That’s too stupid to even get mad at.

      Here’s my tribute to the Detroit Pistons Bad Boy era:

    • Bay Area Guy
      October 1, 2010 at 12:31 AM

      Speaking of sports, my Giants are just one win away from clinching the division and making the playoffs for the first time since 2003!

      I’m really excited!

  135. Bay Area Guy
    October 1, 2010 at 12:46 AM

    Yet another white guy beaten up by mobs of blacks. First flash mobs, beatings of random whites around the Denver area, and now this.

    This “polar bear hunting” is getting old. It’s time for us whites to unite, fight, and kick some serious black ass if they ever try this shit again.

    No more Mr. Nice Guy.

    http://www.news-gazette.com/news/courts-police-and-fire/2010-09-28/former-tv-weatherman-victim-unprovoked-attack.html

    Oh, but wait! While blacks are the thugs here, just know that they are the REAL victims! You see, it’s “institutional racism” and wicked white people that force black people to do this.

    Blacks are just lashing out in the only way they know how!

    Oh, and if you disagree with that above statement, then you’re a racist too, and also deserve to get beat up!

    (sarcasm off)

  136. Bay Area Guy
    October 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM

    Hilarious video courtesy of Thad.

    Can anyone guess who the hamster with the rod of righteous retribution is? ;-)

  137. chicnoir
    October 10, 2010 at 5:04 PM

    Gene Cranick of Obion County, Tennessee

    hey robert google that.

  138. tulio
    October 20, 2010 at 5:02 PM

    White racists are on order of magnitude worse than black racists. It’s not even comparable. As far as black racists go, this guy(he’s dead btw) Khalid Muhammed a former Nation of Islam leader that was so radical even Farrakhan gave him the boot met with a white reporter. Muhammed was able to sit down and have lunch with a white and have a fairly even-tempered conversation. Even was able to joke with him a bit and show a sense of humor. Later in the video, you find that Muhammed accepts a man that’s clearly white(even though he won’t say that he’s white) but Muslim. Now this guy is as bad as it gets when it comes to black racists.

    Now do you think the worse white neo-nazi racist like a Metzger or skinhead type would sit down with a black reporter and have lunch and joke with him and even have a black friend?

    Whites that try to say black racism and white racism is the same are delusional.

    • johnUK
      March 16, 2011 at 3:22 PM

      I think Khalid Muhammed looks like a black Yul Brynner.

      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000989/

    • Bay Area Guy
      March 16, 2011 at 5:35 PM

      Now do you think the worse white neo-nazi racist like a Metzger or skinhead type would sit down with a black reporter and have lunch and joke with him and even have a black friend?

      Actually, as a matter of fact, Metzger has spoken in front of the New Black Panther party and even befriended a certain black nationalist (I forget his name)

      And as I recall, George Lincoln Rockwell, who was as crazy as they come, met with Alex Haley and permitted him to interview him.

      Whites that try to say black racism and white racism is the same are delusional.

      I’m not going to have this debate with you, Tulio, because I’m done debating CRT’s like yourself.

      I will just say that I think you’re wrong.

  139. FG
    February 1, 2011 at 9:36 PM

    I hear alot of people in this country saying these days that “we’re turning into Brazil.” I think in some ways this is true but not in others. First, economic inequality is growing gangbusters, and that’s very Brazilian. Second, there is a major expansion of racial and ethnic diversity,and that too is Brazilian. However, from what I understand, crime and violence continue to fall in the US. It seems hard to imagine that we’ll a situation in which police helicopters are routinely shot down by gang members in NY or LA. Thank goodness! Furthermore, Brazilians and Latin Americans in general seem to be really into their mixed heritage. But this is still pretty unpopular in the US. Even many Latinos in the US don’t broadcast their mixed race origins and often disassociate themselves from non-Hispanic biracials because they don’t want people considering them part-black and associating them with American blacks. So it seems as though we’re becoming Brazil in some ways but not in others.

  141. tulio
    March 28, 2011 at 4:05 PM

    Question here, esp for the whites.

    1) How many whites do you think you think are genuinely racist? To simplify things, I’ll define racist as having a feeling of hatred or strong dislike for another race. I won’t get into the murkiness of say, race realists who don’t necessarily hate or who are self-aware enough to treat people respectfully as individuals while still holding group generalizations.

    2) Do you think white racism is on the rise?

    I’m asking this because it seems as though I’m seeing more and more white racism in blogs and forums. I remember a time you didn’t see much of this stuff. Back around 94 was when I first got on the internet. I used to frequently post to usenet groups. Back then there were no blogs or web-based forums so usenet was where you went for discussions. I used to post frequently in the African-American forums and it was a place for black people to discuss issues. Everyone there was educated and civil. Sometime around the turn of the century, more and more white racist trolls started trickling in. Until it got to the point that there were more white racists on the forum trolling than there were blacks until all the black got tired of it and just left. Last I remember, virtually all of the posts on the forum were from the same type of people you now would see at a site like chimpout.

    It seems like there is an explosion in HBD type blogs that are hell bent on proving black people are a lower form of life. Even things like celebrity blog site are full of racism. And it’s ALWAYS white people. Youtube is probably the worst. Just about any video that has a black person in it in any way will be filled with racist comments unless the author of the video actively censors. I feel like the whole web is becoming like the youtube comments section anywhere that race is brought up and comments are unmoderated. So what is it that we are looking at here? Is this a broad cross-section of white America? Or is there a dedicated minority of extremely zealous white racial “activists” that just troll forums and youtube all day? I’m sure you guys know the type of posters I’m referring to. How representative are they of white America in general in your opinions?

    • Wade in MO
      March 28, 2011 at 5:31 PM

      “How many whites do you think you think are genuinely racist?”

      Not sure. There are many ignorant white people, but not all of the ignorant comments have to do with ideas of biological races. Many people dislike muslims for no really good reason. (I’m not saying there isn’t good reasons to not like muslims, but they aren’t the ones normally heard.) There are other forms of ignorance too, that aren’t confined to whites. Example: http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2011-03-12/1299939359054.jpg If I had to guess the percentage of people who are openly racist and hateful I would guess 5 – 10 percent. If I had to guess the percentage who held opinions that would be called racist by many but aren’t particulary hateful it would be much harder. ?You can’t tell with some people until they say something dirently. I have and uncle who seems to dislike people who are racist against blacks, but he has no problem with calling people dagos and other such names. If people aren’t particularly violent or influential it’s not worth it to confront them about such a thing because you’ll spend a lot of time and energy arguing such a thing and even, if by a miracle, you manage to change their minds, you’ve only changed the mind of a person who will have no effect on anyone else. It’s best to just ignore these people. they like the confrontation because it makes them feel important.

      “Do you think white racism is on the rise?”

      My theory is this: When non-mainstream ideas are met with shunning and punishment by the status quo it will create much resentment by those affected. Some will be weak and think that they were in the wrong for having such ideas. Some will keep their ideas and live in silence and resentment towards the status quo. Other will be be vocal and tend towards more radical ideas. These last people will be the types who will found websites and such. Many of the second group will flock around such a thing as long as they can do it in secret. They may not be extreme like the site founders, but they will have no where else to go and society will tell them that any devation from the status quo makes them just as bad as neo-nazis, so there will be no reason to try to moderate yourself anyway. The first group will be angry at the third group for having the will to speak out while they are pussies.

      Basically, the radicalization of mainstream society will push a lot of regular people towards radicals because there is nowhere else to go. As the stuck up self-righteous representatives of the status quo claim that they are superior and that anyone who disagrees is a stupid redneck it will further increase the resentment. When the status quo has the nerve to call themsleves some sort of revolutionaries it will push people to extremes. I can tell you that when someone who is rich tries to tell someone who is poor or lower middle class they they have some sort of privelige and that the rich person is so moral and against the supposed privelige of the poorer person it will make that person extremely angry. I think resentment amongst those poorer people against the richer ones is definitely on the rise.*

      The metaphor of the pendulum is useful here. It has been swinging in the direction of the radical CRT marxist types for decades and a lot of people are just fucking sick of all the crap they hear from them.

      * The problem here is that people are directing their rage in the wrong direction. While I’m not saying that non-whites aren’t potentially harmful to them, the reason they are in many cases is because the rich have set it up that way. For example, illegal mexicans are a threat to american workers because the rich hire them and lobby the government not to enforce immigration laws. The rich managed to misdirect the white populace into largely voting for the Tea Party movement and lower taxes. What whites should have really been voting for is a party that supports taxes that would bleed these assholes dry. 90+% percent income taxes and such. They should have yanked the silver spoon right out of their asses. As it stands, the people of Manhattan benefit from different financial scams carried out by banks while some poor guy form appalachia get called a hick and an imperialist by the very same assholes.

      “Back around 94 was when I first got on the internet. ”

      I believe the predecessor for Niggermania is quite old. It;s called alt.flame.niggers or something like that.

    • Wade in MO
      March 28, 2011 at 6:22 PM

      “And it’s ALWAYS white people.”

      Not true. I’ve seen several comments and videos from ignorant blacks. The afrocentrist “community is quite active online. It seems that almost all the pseudo intellectual moron movements have militant online wings (ie nordicists, militant atheists, extrme HBDers, libertarians, etc).

      You should also take a more global approach to the problem. In a way, the internet and the widespread use of the english languages has brought groups of people who don’t like each other closer together than ever before.

      Look at some of the comments on some of the international videos out there. There are large internet conflicts between different groups online. Greeks and Armenians against turks is a big one. Russians against americans is another. Lately I’ve been following the Tajik vs. Uzbek “war” where I can find it.

      Read some comments on these:

      My sense form reading different comments of people on the internet (among reading many ohter things) is that people from Turkic speaking areas (with the possible exception of Iranian Azeris and Gaguaz people) are just pieces of garbage. They are some of the most brain washed people on Earth. The internet can offer insight into what some of the commoners really think. White americans aren’t high on my list (as can be seen from some of their comments) but they are far from being as bad as some other groups of people.

  142. FG
    March 28, 2011 at 4:31 PM

    I’ve noticed the HBD sites tend to be run and patronized by middle class educated white people who would probably not dare to utter anythng un-PC in public.