Thursday, October 02, 2008

We’re All Racists Now

Anybody who has been reading the news about the Austrian elections realizes that the European Counterjihad is moving into a danger zone. Those of us who understand the situation on the ground in Austria know that it’s a little more nuanced than the “LOOK OUT! NAZIS!!!” reaction of the Western press would indicate, but the MSM can only paint these issues in bold, bright, day-glo colors. The Nazis won! The Jews are in danger!! SHRIEK!!!

This doesn’t mean that there aren’t real issues — the ridiculous FPÖ stance on Iran, and its refusal to support Israel — but those weren’t the focus of the election. The significance of last Sunday’s vote is that a huge number of Austrians gave up on Socialism and Socialism Lite (i.e. the ÖVP) and voted for the only parties that seemed to offer any real hope of resisting the Islamic juggernaut that is rolling through Austria and the rest of Europe. The electorate may sour on the FPÖ eventually, or the party may change its positions. But a major earthquake has struck Austrian politics — 7.9 on the Richter scale, with aftershocks likely to roll across the rest of the continent over the next few months.

It’s unfortunate that the only way in which the issues can be presented is through the distorting lens of race. The past cannot be escaped. The present cannot be described clearly. And the future cannot be rationally planned for.

As long as good, decent, ordinary people must cower under the bed in fear of being called racists, change is impossible. Muslim immigrants will continue to pour into Europe, the freedom of European citizens will be further eroded, and the possibility of a non-violent solution to the crisis decreases every day.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In the comments on a post earlier this week, several people discussed the fact that European nations are widely disparate, and to lump them together as a fictive “European” or “white” ethnicity is absurd. That’s one of the problems with looking at all of this through the racial lens, because there are important differences (and similarities) among Europeans that have nothing to do with race.

The English, the Swedes, the Italians and the Czechs are all “white”, but also quite distinct. Yet when the Swedes, the Italians, and the Czechs emigrated to America (and presumably also to Australia and Canada), they assimilated to Anglo-Saxon culture, even as they retained varying degrees of attachment to their ancestral homes.

The same is not true of all other cultures. Not every group assimilates equally well. To the racialists, race is the issue; to the culturists, culture is what’s important. But no matter what the explanation is, the differential ability of groups to assimilate is undeniable.
- - - - - - - - -
Unfortunately, since race is the only framework in which this can be viewed, such plain facts are denied. No one can discuss them without being called a racist. If you’re employed in government or academia and you say these things, you can kiss your career goodbye. Honest factual discussion is completely strangled except in pariah forums like this one.

But it’s true: not everyone assimilates quickly and thoroughly in America. Muslims may be the most extreme example, but other groups — such as the Chinese — assimilate more slowly and less completely than the Dutch or the Poles. In fact, Southern Europeans are just slightly less assimilable than Northern Europeans. The cultural compatibility index seems to be highest among nations ranging from Ireland to Finland and south to Central Europe, Germany, and the Pyrenees.

Interestingly enough, the French are an exception in this, as they are in so many things. Some French immigrants assimilated fully in the United States, while other pockets of them, particularly in the Northeast — this group is often lumped together with the ethnic French “Canucks” from Canada — stubbornly refused to integrate, and were all but monolingual in French well into the 20th century.

However, as a general rule, there is a broad swath of ethnicity that has no trouble becoming American. That’s why “American” is an ethnicity, and not just an idea, whether we like to admit it or not. The “idea” is possible because it’s an idea that is native to Northern Europe, and resonates with most people who come from Northern European cultures. In America these Europeans can recognize something familiar, and vice versa.

But all that is changing now, and will soon be lost. The “idea” of a constitutional republic based on liberty has gradually been deconstructed and replaced with a new idea, an ideology of “diversity”, “inclusiveness”, and “multiculturalism”. America must become more brown and less white, more Muslim and less Christian, in order that the Global Utopia may be realized.

Unfortunately, the latest arrivals from Europe will recognize this idea, too. They know it all too well. It’s one of the main things they attempted to escape from when they left Europe.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In the same comment thread, Fjordman had this to say:

The “white nationalist” label is totally meaningless in a European context. First of all, nobody calls Asians, Africans or others who fight for their dignity and right to exist black, brown or yellow nationalists, so why should we be called white nationalists if we do the same?

Moreover, it’s just plain, factually wrong. Europeans have been waging wars against each other for thousands of years. There is hardly a spot on European soil where a person can stand and not say “You did this bad thing to us X number of centuries ago, and we still hate you for it.” We view ourselves as Italians, Norwegians, Poles, Irishmen etc., not as “whites.” The differences between northern and southern Europe, as well as between eastern and western Europe, are profound. Let us not kid ourselves about that.

The irony is that precisely the kind of verbal and physical attacks we are being subjected to now could potentially change that. Maybe, if this is supposed to be a “post-national” age and we are attacked by transnational ideologies of different kinds, native Europeans will create a “transnational” ideology of their own to defend themselves. This will be an ideology dedicated to the defense of a shared European civilization and to the peoples who have historically created it. I don’t foresee that pre-existing national identities can or should disappear, but there will perhaps be another layer of “Europeanism” added on top of this. Europe as a cultural alliance, rather than Europe as a single nation.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Multicultural regime imposed by the EU and the UN actually produced that which it fears the most? A newly-forged pan-European nationalist identity, but one that rejects Multiculturalism, immigration, and Islam.

Yet another example of the Law of Unintended Consequences. For they sow the wind, and they reap the whirlwind…

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Everything I’m saying here is clearly racist, but it also happens to be true, which is one of the basic problems that we encounter when discussing this topic. What we say here and what the White Supremacists and Nazis say actually overlap.

If neo-Nazis believe that Multiculturalism is a bad thing (and they do), does that mean we should stop opposing Multiculturalism?

Obviously not. One has to accept that people whose other opinions we don’t like may agree with us on this particular issue. It’s discomfiting, but we have to get used to it.

So the discussion will always be fraught with difficulties, and we are all racists simply for joining in it. To prove you are not racist you would have to shun all conversation on the topic.

The best course, in my opinion, is to take a deep breath and say, “I’m a racist. The reason that I’m a racist is that I cherish my own people and prefer the company of my own kind over that of foreigners. I accept my basic racism, and I’m OK with it.”

There. That wasn’t so bad, was it?

Now that we’ve got that out of the way and established that we’re all racists, let’s see if we can find our way through the cultural minefield that this issue has become.

35 comments:

Darrin Hodges said...

This is what is happening in Australia. I'm one of the founders of a political party (Australian Protectionist Party) that seeks to retain our identity as Australians.

Australia was discovered, colonised and built by primarily those of Anglo-Saxon descent, an identity we wish to retain. Along the way there have been others of European descent who have contributed to this country, being mainly Greeks and Italians, whom have assimilated into Australian culture well.

Australia faces the twin dangers of Islamisation and Asianisation. The former has immediate dangerous consequences (terrorism) the latter will alter the Australian identity. As this country was built by those of European descent, so were all it's institutions and culture and as such, can only be maintained by those of a similar ethnicity.

Something that Europeans lack in general is what I call "ethnic solidarity", it was one of our strengths that allowed us to expand throughout the world, but now we have become to atomised, this combined with multi-cultural brainwashing and the fear of being denounced as a racist has all but denuded us of the will to exist.

I'm an Australian Nationalist, not a "white nationalist" or any other type of nationalist. We value human diversity (as opposed to the multi-culturalists), just not all in the same place at the same time.

CzC said...

It's like my father jokingly says: The Czechs are the only true Europeans. Wars have been waged left to right top to bottom, theres all sorts off genetics there. They say Czechs have one third relation to Germans more specificly Germanics, one third to those once vikings in the North and one third Slavic. Those are the most common.

“You did this bad thing to us X number of centuries ago, and we still hate you for it.”

Well then most of Europe could sue Italy for Slavery, opression and Rape for events that happened 2000 years ago.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Time to reiterate my analysis of the Mythical European "Far Right".

This essay is a response to an essay authored by John Matthies and published by PajamasMedia and Middel East Forum. It is part of a broader debate concerning what some maintain is a resurgent (and possibly dangerous) “Far Right” movement, while others maintain that no such thing is taking place, and that the notion constitutes scaremongering based on misunderstanding and misinterpretations of the facts on the ground.

I thought I had a German version, too, but that eludes me at the moment.

Vasarahammer said...

White nationalism is an American concept, which is basically meaningless in Europe.

The language barrier between European countries makes it difficult to analyze an individual political party. There are significant differences between so-called 'far right' parties in various countries and local issues tend to dominate the agenda. The historical background may be different from country to country.

However, there are some common denominators:
- euroscepticism
- opposition to mass immigration
- anti-establishment.

In Finland, mass immigration has not yet happened, which means that the latter two are more important. In Sweden, the problems caused by mass immigration are considerably larger, which means that immigration related issues dominate the agenda.

All 'far right' parties challenge the status quo of existing political establishment consisting of centre-right and centre-left parties, which from an American point of view mostly fall into the 'liberal left'.

The development of 'far right' parties also follows a pattern. In the first stage the party relies heavily on a charismatic, skilled orator like Jean-Marie Le Pen or Jörg Haider, who don't really follow a specific political agenda but who tend to be opportunistic and try to follow 'the mood of the nation'. When the party matures, the importance of charismatic leader disappears and the party becomes ideologically more coherent.

Czechmade said...

czc, the irony is that large areas of Germany, Austria were slavic, Berlin. Dresden, Chemnitz, Rostock, Graz...
are all funny slavic names.
In many cases we mixed again with German speaking GermanoSlavs.

Those folks had the same problem like Kurds or Kopts or Bretons - their native langugage was severely banned for centuries.

Austria is a carneval of Czech family names and still there are many who had or wished to adopt German names - most recently for ex. Austrian politician Waldheim - his Slavic name was not fashionable under nazis so he changed it.
Also under Habsburgs - esp. Josef II - lot of germanization. Nowadays the Swiss complain about "Germanisierung" by empoverished Germans in search of jobs.

German was lingua franca in Middle Europe. The German speakers might easily call themselves Lingua Frankists or Lingua Frankensteinists to celebrate our Jewish heritage as well.

The Austrians love to say that each of them has a Czech grandma (by now probably greatgranma), they stick to this feminine concept for some reason and never celebrate their "Czech roots".

Modern Austrians are also much more opposed to Germans or Germany than we are. Is it not funny?

Monsieur Hitler called us "the arrow in the German flesh", we were surrounded by "Germans" who lived everywhere including the east of us as far as Romania, serbia and Baltics.

Now you misinformed dudes you call us "Eastern European", since Stalin had the fun of changing the borders everywhere. Have the fun to call the Germans "Eastern europeans" as well. We can hardly dream of their eastern locations...and the Prussian-Russian border etc.

Then the Prussian boy Bismarck decided to conquer and unite "Germany" from the East. So that our Bavarians call everything German north of them "Prussians" with a sort of hate we do not understand.

German historians study the connection between Bismarck and Hitler and claim the "Germans" as such are fruit of the WWI. Why? Since the German internal EU=Germanofication took place very slowly after Bismarcks artificial unification project.

Many Germans had an identity problem - esp. outside Bismarckistan propre. They became fierce nazis accepting the nazi quasireligion as a sort of baptism.

Austrians were therefore more nazis than already nazi-tired Germans. And Czechoslovak Sudeten-george orwell-germans worse than Austrians.

Austrians were poor and Hitler did a lot for them. After WWII they were suddenly left out as "not a criminal nation" for various reasons.

This makes our study of modern political parties in Austria quite difficult. Austria has also memories of mass abductions by Osmans/Turks - the smiths for ex. as weapon makers.

Coming back to the gates of Vienna, apart from Poles remember also fierce hussite warriors - their last military engagement was there.
I doubt anybody survived.

John Hus - preceded Martin Luther
in 15th century - linking his scholarship to the English theologian Viklef. This makes us very "Eastern European" indeed.

Finish this little study and we can approach the next stage together - the Byzantine superpower study. Remember that the Turks did not want to change much in the functioning Byzantine administration. So we can consider studying the Byzantines even after the fall of Constantinple. Even now! Do not get confused by historical dates. All changes proceeded much later and very slowly.

Defiant Lion said...

It is a sign of just how well the marxists have succeeded in brainwashing people because whenever the word "racist" is mentioned, you can cut the anxiety over being dubbed "racist" with a knife.

But it is a phantom. There is no such thing as a "racist", it is a marxist construct designed to achieve two objectives:

1. Shame and hatred for your own race. White race that is.

2. Stiffle any criicism of marxist ideology concerning the colonisation of western lands,i.e. if you object to mass immigration you will be labelled a racist even though objecting to masses of aliens colonising your lands and diluting your own culture isn't racist at all. Were it so, non-western countries would all be racist. Because in such lands -e.g. Africa, Japan, China, India, Saudi Arabia etc. - multiculturalism doesn't exist and in many, non-indigenous people are not welcome.

Witness events in Zimbabwe and South Africa for evidence of this, again the work of marxists.

What is glaring about this is that if anyone is racist it is those very people who are fast to label others as "racists" to avoid debate but who continue to knowingly destroy western, predominantly white civilisation, in the name of the holy trinity of Orwellian control words:

Multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance.

Of course, these only apply to the indigenous people of western societies. Other nations around the world are maintaining their own cultures and traditions and a growing indigenous population.

A good example of this hypocrisy concerns religion. It has been open war on Christianity since the end of WWII but other religions - Islam, Hinduisn, Sikhism, Bhuddism - all alien to the west - are protected by the holy trinity. Islam especially benefits, screaming "racist", "Islamophobe" and demanding "tolerance" whilst going about the business of subjugating the west. A more violent and intolerant ideology you would struggle to find yet the marxists encourage the west to revere it whilst rubbishing and undermining judeo-christian values such as the family unit.

The word "racist" is nothing more than a control word used to silence people from speaking out about their own destruction. It is a shriek of faux-moral outrage, a diabolical, utterly false, wholly cowardly ad hominem attack but an attack that is becoming increasingly bankrupt as more and more people realise the hypocrisy surrounding it, namely this:

That every race in the multiculturalist rainbow nations of the west can fight for their rights, their traditions, their religions and their cultures in the name of the holy trinity.

All except one: The indigenous, prediominately white people whose ancestors built the greatest civilisations the world has ever seen.

If they dare to fight for THEIR way of life, up goes the cry:

"WAYCIST!"

Such is the destructive insanity of the marxists.

Yankee Doodle said...

Interesting article, you racist owner of a pariah blog! (Is that PC enough?)

Racism, to me, implies unfair discrimination for or against someone based on that person's skin color. While I think any person may have some racist ideas, broadly I get the impression that you, Baron, are one of the most fair people in the blogosphere; any racist thoughts you may harbor would be far less than those of the hypocritical name-calling left.

"If neo-Nazis believe that Multiculturalism is a bad thing (and they do), does that mean we should stop opposing Multiculturalism?"

Politics make for strange bedfellows? The enemy of my enemy is my friend? We sided with the Communists against the Nazis once, too.

Bottom line -- they buy into our agenda, we don't buy into theirs.

Good job, Baron!

Fjordman said...

Defiant Lion: I have come to the conclusion that we need to smash the entire concept of "racism" and expose it as an empty word used exclusively as a weapon of psychological warfare against whites. Not only are some cultures obviously better than others, it is perfectly plausible from a scientific point of view to speculate whether genes affect human thinking and behavior. Indeed, it is likely. If you believe in the theory of evolution (which, for instance our friend Johnson at LGF clearly does), then the very concept of racism is essentially meaningless.

"Racism" doesn't mean anything other than that you recognize that there are genetic differences between groups of people (an undisputed medical fact) and ask whether these differences have practical consequences. It is even a scientifically valid question to ponder whether there is a genetic component to culture. It's unscientific nonsense to block any debate of the subject.

I could add that in a traditional, healthy society, the worst thing you can be is not a racist but a traitor. We now have a situation where it is good and normal to be a traitor to your people whereas those who defend their nation and dignity are evil. It's sick, and it needs to be reversed back to normal. We shouldn't have to defend ourselves and say "I'm not a racist, but...." at all. When the Multiculturalists start their sentences with the words "I'm not a traitor to my people, but...," we know we are winning.

Fjordman said...

Here is a comment by British reader DP111:

Britain is under a threat, the likes of which it has never been under. If Napoleon or even Hitler, had conquered Britain, most of our British/Western culture, music, art etc would be unscathed. Islam on the other hand will wipe out everything. In the fullness of time, the very presence of Christianity- cathedrals, minsters, abbeys, will be demolished and razed to the ground (re: Bhumiyan Buddhas). So grave is the threat to the existence, nay, the very soul of Britain, that it is not possible to rule out any policy to remove the Islam threat, just because it may harm some innocent person or group - racial, religious or secular, or ethnic, no matter how sacred. Besides, all of them can be compensated in some form at a later date, once the Islam threat has been removed. This is an existential war, and innocents will, and are being injured or killed. If this means that we need to suspend parliamentary democracy for the duration - so be it. If it means suspending constitutional monarchy - so be it. If it means banning groups from the realm - so be it. All can be reversed once the danger is eliminated. Besides, there is precedent in British history for all the above.

Fjordman said...

BTW: The above quote by DP111 is right on the money, as he usually is. I remember walking through the Vatican in Rome not too long ago, admiring all the beautiful pictorial art as well as the amazing statues. Nothing like this exists in Islam because nothing like this can exits in Islam. All of this priceless art will be destroyed, not just in Italy but across Europe, if Islamization continues. It's inevitable. It WILL happen, the only question is when.

This is why it annoys me when the LGF crowd keep talking about how "Euro-Fascists" make up an equal or greater threat than the Muslims. We do have Fascists in Europe. It's called the European Union. If you talk about the groups that LGF refers to as Fascists, they are generally quite marginal for the simple reason that people don't like them. Moreover, all the great cultural treasures of Italy survived Mussolini. The Communists were more destructive than the Fascists when it came to art, especially Christian religious art, but even they didn't destroy all the traditional art within their territory. What we are facing, the combination of Multiculturalism, mass immigration and Islam, constitutes the greatest threat to European civilization has ever faced. We will simply cease to exist as distinct peoples if we don't defeat this threat.

I hope I never have to choose between Fascism and Islam, that's why we have this website. But if I had to choose, I would choose Fascism. Fascism is reversible. Islamization usually isn't. Islam is worse than any creed that has ever existed on this planet, with the possible exception of the Aztec religion.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Regarding Britain, I know the situation is really bad. It looks like British identity is getting dismantled by the neo-Marxist elite, which stifles natural responses by the English, Scots and Welsh to Islam.

Reading Theodore Dalrymple has been a slow revelation to me. It also teaches some lessons about human dignity that are hard to find elsewhere.

When Islamists complain about the frivolity and breakdown of morality in the West, they are .. right. Islam offers at least some alternative, albeit an utterly rotten one, to the moral and cultural void that Formerly Great Britain finds itself in.

But I do not believe it will be possible to stop Common Purpose before an extensive breakdown of society takes place. If one was to try, however, looking at the utterly stale welfare state might be a good place to start.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Agreed with Fjordman, Fascism isn't nearly as bad as Islamism. Fascism is an outgrowth of Proggressivism, kindof like an "Engineers' Dictatorship" run amok, and certainly less bad than Communism, (not to mention Nazism).

Significantly, Fascism isn't a racist ideology (Mussolini spared his Jews), and it does respect the principle private property to some extent, which Communism doesn't. Further, it's secular, which means there's no "divine authority" behind it, and thus it's easier to get rid of.

Mussolini's really bad move was to align himself with Hitler. That is unforgivable.

Ultimately, these collectivistic ideas may be traced back to the French Revolution, which Fjordman rightly called something like "the worst disaster of European history".

Hopefully, the openness of the Internet will be the final death blow to all strains of fascism.

The ideological opposite to Fascism is Conservatism, which Fascism utterly despises in its rush for 'Change', 'Hope', 'Progress' and 'Renewal'. Worth remembering :)

Afonso Henriques said...

"It’s unfortunate that the only way in which the issues can be presented is through the distorting lens of race. The past cannot be escaped."

What past?

The SVP in Switzerland, and now these two in Austria. Next will be Norway... The most civilised Nations of Europe are turning to the right. At least the Nations which are small. But, what's the result? I don't know, but I haven't seen any!

"To the racialists, race is the issue; to the culturists, culture is what’s important. But no matter what the explanation is, the differential ability of groups to assimilate is undeniable."

And there are the "good" Nationailsts: in the middle. Those who argue that race and culture are intimately conected. Which is, in my view, true. It's not only about culture nor only about race. One thing shapes the other.

"That’s why “American” is an ethnicity, and not just an idea, whether we like to admit it or not."

I have my doubts on that... But I've heard people here saying that "Colombian" and "Venezuelan" are ethnicities too...

"Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Multicultural regime imposed by the EU and the UN actually produced that which it fears the most? A newly-forged pan-European nationalist identity, but one that rejects Multiculturalism, immigration, and Islam."

It is indeed ironic. And that is what is happening.

Good post.

Afonso Henriques said...

Now me playing:

Darrin Hodges ou say: "I'm an Australian Nationalist, not a "white nationalist" or any other type of nationalist."

The world would bo much easy if whites did not exist. Let's call us Europeans. You are an Australian Nationalist who wants to maintain Australia Australian and thus, European.

That's what all Nationalists of European background want. What is attacked is not whiteness but Europe - wherever She is.

The white (racist) nationalism has thus become a weapon to everyone who wants to defend Europe.

-----------------------------------

Czechs, after some arguments with Bela over Russia, I came to the conclusion that you and the Finns and Greeks are more Eastern Europeans than Western Europeans (otherwise, I'd have to accept Latvians and Estonians as Western Europeans). However, you have always been a bridge between East and West.
But you know what, we are all Europeans, West and East are nor Civilisations, it is all, Europe that has a Civilisational merit.

And the Westerners usually manipulate Easterners as if being Western European was to be more European than to be Eastern European...

Yeah, tell that to the Greeks, Serbians, Czechs and Finns...

Western Initiatives said...

Great post, Baron. Developments in Europe should be a wake-up call to fence-sitters and boy scouts: You may not be interested in racial matters, but racial matters are interested in you. You can not escape the issues of race, immigration, and culture. At some point, you will have to make a choice. Which side are you on? Looks as if at least some of the people in Austria made the right choice.

Bela said...

Even though the Los Angeles Times is considered as a leftist paper - "Pravda West" - I found this interesting opinion piece today:

"Opinion
Europe's far-right revival isn't Nazism
Much of the support for the right-wing parties springs from a resentment of long-ruling political elites.
By Ian Buruma
October 3, 2008 "

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-buruma3-2008oct03,0,4132430.story

Czechmade said...

It must have been an outstanding achievement
to cultivate some eastern something with the help of catholic or protestant church right from the beginning and German-speakers, Habsburgs and our Luxembourg ancient connection, Italian guest workers/architects throughout rinascimento/renaissance, Swedish invasion (looting here 360 years ago they learnt how to use/steal our toilets and arts) and German speakers
operating even hundreds km east of our lands. Can you name some Czech genies or craftsmen going to Russia or other exotic countries in droves like Germans, Poles and French to participate in the life of Eastern postMongolian elites? Zero exchange. Sorry. Monsieur Voltaire or signor Casanova had a lot more contacts with Russia. Let the French be the bridge. The Germans are already there - respected unlike Americans.

Even during Soviet times our contacts with Russians were very limited, no freedom of movement and always suspicious of us - some Russians were even jailed having contacts with us in the frame of our ideological friendship. We made excellent spies in the West, since our poor Russian big brothers did not know how to behave in the West...you were lucky - after 1968 some of the key guys defected to the West.

I dont like to be a bridge personally, I sell the idea readily. Let us be "judges" instead bridges making fun of the Eastern and Western cabarett politics.

The real key to the Easternness is the Orthodox church. Something we should study and know better.

Then remember Krakow (Poland), Lvov (West Ukraine), big parts of Romania used to be Habsburg Austrian territory. Later also Bosnia, Croatia was part of Hungary.

I am ready however to be a bridge to Ukraine. In your Western megalomania and confusion you keep forgetting that there you have a reliable big friendly partner devoid of Eastern Russian megalomania/expansionism, hard working people rebuilding their country and drifting steadily away from their Russian ex-overlord.

Creating no troubles the Ukrainians are seemingly not good enough for you...sorry for such inconvenience.

Is it politically/intellectually so difficult to switch your attention from Russia to Ukraine?

Why do you need a professional chronical West-hater to fulfill your dreams?

vince said...

America must become more brown and less white, more Muslim and less Christian, in order that the Global Utopia may be realized.
---------------------------------

I don't agree with you on this.
Yes, America is becoming more brown and less white. But when it comes to religion, it's becoming more catholic and less protestant.
Muslims as a minority are insignificant in the US, and their profile is quite different from the ones in the US. The muslims in the US are in general (excluding the converted negroes) well educated professionals while in europe, they are basically, the waste and social garbage of their countries of origin.

So in america, the priority and problem number one now is not the muslims, but Las cucarachas, the Mexicans.

vince said...

Sorry, in the comment above what i tried to say was:

...Muslims as a minority are insignificant in the US, and their profile is quite different from the ones in europe...

Afonso Henriques said...

Vince,

Catholicism is not what it once was. It is getting worse and worse. And while there are many good old fashioned Catholics in all Latin America, from all races, you should be aware of the danger of the Mexican Catholicism slowly becoming the Andean Catholicism which almost has replaced Jesus by Che Guevara.

Another thing. You said "Las cucarachas"
Las cucarachas = the cockroaches? You were making a joke? If so, it was a good one.

I don't know Spanish that well but I thought it was "La cu carachas!" equaling the Portuguese "Aí com o caraças!" meaning "Oh what the hell". "Caraças" being enormous ugly heads to play with during Carnival... at least it made sense in that word (the translation is only valuable in my demented mind):

La cu carachas - with the hell
La cu Carachas - with the hell
Ya no puedo caminar - I can no longer walk
Porque no tieno - because I do not have
Porque me falta - becaust I lack
Marijuana que fumar - Marijuana to smoke

half rebel, half joking on the Natives...

Afonso Henriques said...

Czechmade,

take it easy.

"I dont like to be a bridge personally, I sell the idea readily. Let us be "judges" instead bridges making fun of the Eastern and Western cabarett politics."

I did not meant to offend, nor to divide Europe between East or West. Also, if you read my comments you will see that I am quiet a Russophile, and I believe that the East is more sane than the West right now. Yeah, I am not speaking about money...
The French are a bridge already between North and Southern Europe. Take for instance the (culturally) Northern European city of Lille (or even Geneva?) and the (culturally) Southern European city of Marseille wich nowadays is too Southern too litle European but that's how our brave new world truly is today...
By the way, all what you said were "pretty Eastern European features"... It will do for another post over the vast differences of Europe.

"The real key to the Easternness is the Orthodox church. Something we should study and know better."

Yes we should. But I don't think the Orthodox differ so much. I think there are bigger differences which are Historical-cultural and not painly religious.

But maybe I can tell you what Traditionalist Catholic Priests think (they are almost extinct) and they are right to some extent. They say that Christianity was stabbed in the back three times and that every penetration of the knife is one step we go down on Civilisational terms.
1st stab - The 1054 cisma and the creation of the Orthodox false Church
2nd stab - The Luteran and Protestant movement and the creation of the Protestant false Church
3rd stab - The Council Vatican the Second and the subvertion of the True Chirch of Christ. There is no True Church any longer...

But wait, in 1917 Our Lady the Mother of God appeared in Fátima, Portugal, to three shepards and there she revealed three secrets, the keys of the XX century.
The last is very interesting, it is "the fall of Communism and the convertion of Russia to the True Church of Christ" and according to the prophecy, this is to happen in a "time of madness".

You can read this if you want. I haven't had the time to do it yet.

Yankee Doodle said...

Fjordman,

You point out the comments by DP111, quoting the following:

"So grave is the threat to the existence, nay, the very soul of Britain, that it is not possible to rule out any policy to remove the Islam threat, just because it may harm some innocent person or group - racial, religious or secular, or ethnic, no matter how sacred."

This basically means that the end -- surviving Islam -- justifies whatever means.

You then comment:

"The above quote by DP111 is right on the money"

I am surprised. You are incredibly intelligent and well-versed in topics of great importance, and I find your essays and your comments educational and persuasive, but this time, you're dead wrong.

If the good guys do whatever it takes -- including becoming like the bad guys -- to win, then the victory will be very hollow, as one evil that threatened us will be vanquished, only to be replaced with a new one.

The ends do not justify the means. To win, the first thing we must do is make sure we are not destroyed, and corruption of our values -- whether in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism, or whether in the name of doing whatever it takes to defeat militant Islamic extremism -- is corruption nonetheless, and destroys what makes our culture worth fighting for.

Such a philosophy of doing anything to survive Islam will destroy us just as effectively as the mujahideen, until we find that we have destroyed our own culture, and become an enemy ourselves.

Don't fall into the trap that Bush fell into "pursuing" Sheikh bin Laden.

Afonso Henriques said...

"If the good guys do whatever it takes -- including becoming like the bad guys -- to win, then the victory will be very hollow, as one evil that threatened us will be vanquished, only to be replaced with a new one."

Hey Yankee,
Whar are your views over the second world war?

Nagasaki, Dresden... the fact that Germany had not attacked the West...

It's like you're asking a wolf to stop hunting and only eat already dead bodies. It's imoral to kill... are you a vegetarian?

Conservative Swede said...

Afonso,

(the translation is only valuable in my demented mind)

Yes indeed. Great perspective though :-)

Furthermore "Porque no tengo". And "Marijuana pa fumar" where "pa" is short for "para". And where in the child version this last line is "La patita pa andar". Nevertheless you scored a B+ in your Spanish test.

Bela said...

afonso h:

La cucaracha means cockroach in Spanish
La Cucaracha (Mexican Cockroach Song)

Chorus:
La cucaracha, la cucaracha,
Ya no quieres caminar,
Porque no tienes,
Porque le falta,
Marihuana que fumar.

Chorus:
The cucaracha, the cucaracha,
Doesn't want to travel on
Because she hasn't,
Oh no, she hasn't
Marihuana for to smoke.

Robin Shadowes said...

I agree with DP111 and Fjordman. As they utterly loathe everything with our non-islamic culture, I have no soubt what-so-ever, that all our cultural heritage will be destroyed by them. Not only would all our old churches, castles and other distinct cultural buildings be razed to the ground but all our litterature, art, music and so on will be forever burned and destroyed. Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Goethe, Bach and many others, means nothing to the them. It's simply kafir-stuff to them. Why should they care about it? But the worst thing is, how much easier it will become for them to mold the natives to their ideology, once their old culture is gone, and after a few generations of brainwashing in madrasas, completely forgotten. And that is why we as europeans cannot afford to loose this war. Because if we do, it will be the end of our civilisation. Howabout that for a nightmare worthy of Freddy Krueger?

islam o' phobe said...

This basically means that the end -- surviving Islam -- justifies whatever means.

What on earth are you talking about? In war you kill the enemy. No one here is promoting sadism or bloodlust. If evil people are attempting to wipe out your civillisation then killing and decisively defeating them is not immoral.

Actually I'd prefer to just deport every one of them and avoid war but lots of people on blogs consider mass deportations a "Nazi" tactic. Allowing yourself to murdered is not moral.

Afonso Henriques said...

Conservative Swede & Bela,

Thank you for the clarification in español. A B+? You are being too generous...

It is in situations like this that I feel dumb for not knowing much of Italian or Latin...
Cucaracha? From where in the world were the Spanish to develop such a word!?

Here in Portugal it is "barata". In Galiza, I have already heard something like "baratxa". So I went to figure out "cockroach" in English Wikipedia. Then, I changed to Portuguese to confirm. It was ok. Then, Italian, it is "scarafaggi". And finally Spanish: "cucaracha".

In the meanwhile I found this information: "del latín: Blatta"

So, I don't know what the hell have the Spaniards been eating to jump from "Blatta" to "Cucaracha" leaving my "Barata" lost in the middle...

I may be an ignorant, but as you can see, I am a refined ignorant...

Take care.

Yankee Doodle said...

Alfonso,

"Whar are your views over the second world war?

Nagasaki, Dresden... the fact that Germany had not attacked the West..."


I guess you missed the year 1940 when studying history?

Regarding the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you might be interested to read what I wrote on the anniversary of those attacks this year, and on Hiroshima Day last year.

By the way -- I am not against killing.

And, by the way again -- even vegetarians kill.

Afonso Henriques said...

Yankee,

"If the good guys do whatever it takes -- including becoming like the bad guys -- to win, then the victory will be very hollow, as one evil that threatened us will be vanquished, only to be replaced with a new one."

"I guess you missed the year 1940 when studying history?"

Maybe I did. What happened in 1940? And what happened in September 1939? Who declared war to whom? This is nonesense. Just be carefull with my first quote from you.

Yankee Doodle said...

Alfonzo,

"If the good guys do whatever it takes -- including becoming like the bad guys -- to win, then the victory will be very hollow, as one evil that threatened us will be vanquished, only to be replaced with a new one."

I wrote what I meant, and I meant what I wrote.

You wrote above:

"Nagasaki, Dresden... the fact that Germany had not attacked the West..."

Germany did attack the West, in 1940. Germany hit Denmark and Norway, the Low Countries, then France, then began the Battle of Britain -- all in 1940.

How do you figure Germany never attacked the West?

Yankee Doodle said...

Oh, and my apologies on spelling your name wrong!

Afonso...

:)

Afonso Henriques said...

Yankee. What is the West?

Look, Germany invaded Poland in 1939 and then the U.K. and France declared war to Germany.
If they had did that in 1938 in relation to the occupation of "Traditionally" Czech lands to which Germans had little to no reivindications, I would not mention it but cowardly they did not.

Drôle de Guerre... it was a drôle de guerre to the French. Why did they came to not find it so funny after 1940?

When I said West I did not mean to say West but Britain and France. Sorry for that.

What I am saying is what Fjordman said, you don't became what you fight.

BGD said...

Surely the obvious thing to do when someone tries to back you into a corner with a supposed killer blow of "that's / your racist" is to say “the term racist is either mentally lazy or malicious ad hominem abuse so please explain exactly what you mean by racist” and getting an answer somewhere along the lines of (in descending order of shock value) a belief in the benefits of genocide (!), a belief in racial supremacism, a belief in racial superiority, a belief in racial differences or a preference for one’s own kind then the debate can be continued from that point.

rebelliousvanilla said...

Yankee Doodle, discrimination isn't related to racism. Racism is a combination of hate and prejudice. I can refuse to do business with blacks or Asians and not hate them nor be prejudiced.

You also fail to realize one thing. Morality aka in being good or bad isn't an independent, universal thing. What is moral is what furthers the individual and collective values of the members of my group. What doesn't is immoral. And it's simple. I refuse to lose my homeland because silly people are chasing social justice and other garbage concepts like that. When it's about survival, anything is on the table.

In case you didn't realize, the bombing of Japan or the de facto raising of the German cities would be immoral in your view, even though this is the only way the Allies could win without bigger losses on both sides. The whole idea behind just war is a farce and the only concept that should be entertained is total war, which will push your enemy into unconditional surrender. In the same way, I think the US had the moral authority to obliterate the Muslim countries that supported and houses Obama in order to discourage the civilian population(which doesn't exist in wars, by the way, since they participate in the war process) from supporting terrorism. The message should have been that if you support terrorism you won't have schools, you won't have homes and you won't have mosques.