Friday, February 01, 2008

Changing the Subject

To our regular commenters: I have a request.

In many of our recent posts — for reasons that aren’t clear to me — no matter what topic is covered by the original posts, the comment threads are showing a disturbing tendency to divert to the topic of race.

I’m not arguing against any particular point of view, nor questioning the right of anyone to hold that point of view.

I’m simply concerned about the fact that posts having nothing to do with race are turned into heated arguments about race.

This is doing damage to our blog.

We have become anathema over the last few months as “enablers of European white supremacy”. Every time you turn a comment thread in to a race argument, it gives fuel to those who want to discount us and marginalize us. It makes it less likely that more mainstream blogs and other sites will link to us. It makes it that much harder to spread the Counterjihad message.

To Dymphna and me, these issues have nothing to do with race. They have to do with culture and ethnicity, in the broadest sense of those terms.
- - - - - - - - -
Even though I disagree with some of you, I’m not denying you the right to posit a genetic component to cultural behaviors. I’m just asking you not to divert comment threads to this topic unless the post is already discussing this topic.

I ask you to indulge me, because what you are doing has a negative impact on the mission of Gates of Vienna, which is to stand against the jihad and roll back the Islamization of the West as effectively as possible.

If you agree with that mission, then I would like you to help us by not diverting the comment threads and thereby negating our purpose.

If you don’t agree with our mission, then this is probably not an appropriate place to be airing your opinions in the first place. There are other sites which specialize in racial topics, places where you would be readily welcomed into the discussion.

Because free speech is important to me, and because I believe that allowing open discussion is essential, I will continue with a policy of not deleting comments that stay within our guidelines (civil, temperate, on-topic, and showing decorum).

However, if commenters continue to divert threads in directions that I consider harmful to our mission, I will close the affected threads to further comments. It’s the only thing I can do, short of shutting down the entire blog.

I’d rather not do that.

Once again, I ask for your cooperation: please stop diverting threads into arguments about race.

Thank you.

64 comments:

1389 said...

GOOD FOR YOU. I agree 100 percent.

[techie talk follows]

I think you may need to consider moving to a different blogging platform that lets you use various automated tools to help you screen out objectionable content. You might ask Foehammer what he is using. There are tools that work without you having to moderate every comment.

That said - I do take the trouble to moderate all comments on 1389 Blog, as well as all comments on my other blog, i.e., 1389 Message Blog. After all, the blog gives detailed information on how to use various legal means to put the kibosh on wrongdoers. We also blog the Balkans... flame bait #1 in the blogosphere.

We post a comments policy that forbids various things that are not in keeping with civil discussion, racist rants being one of them. Even so, we get a fair number of commenters hating on the Serbs, the Jews, and others.

Some of these haters lack reading comprehension skills and/or self control, and naturally they don't read the comments policy. Even so, the comments policy serves as an unspoken answer to any gripes about how we run the blog.

Here's the point: We don't let this contaminate our lives. Hate comments go into the spam bucket and are flushed without a second thought. And that's it! We do NOT owe everybody an explanation for why we are not willing to post their latest Hitlerian rant. We refuse to waste any more of our time or our emotional energy dealing with other people's personal demons.

Charlemagne said...

Hear hear Baron!

Discussions of race expose GoV to the same vilification SD, VB, BNP, et al are subject to by the likes of LGF et al and, although perhaps related to cultural issues, certainly diverts the discussion away from the counter-jihad.

Anonymous said...

Oh my gosh, please please don't ever shut down Gates of Vienna! It's my favourite blog :)

Pogo said...

Thank you Baron!! I am just now recovering from the last game of "a shooter of rum for each mention of the "r" word". My poor rodent head is still splitting. You will however find that the ignorati will be hurling the "r" at whoever does not buy into their "multi culti" bovine scatology.

Unknown said...

Dear Baron,

It's your bat and ball and your backyard. You have every right to establish the ground rules and smack down anyone who breaks them.

Myself included.

1389 has some good suggestions and you might consider them. Good fences make good neighbors.

Years ago, I forget exactly where, I saw a sign posted in a bar. I don't remember the bar but I do remember the sign:

"This my Bar. I make the Rules.

Rule 1: No Credit! If you ask for credit I will kick your sorry ass out.

Rule 2: You will act like a gentleman toward the ladies. If you don't I will kick your sorry ass out.

Rule 3: I don't have one yet but if you give me any ideas I will kick your sorry ass out."

It would not bother me one little bit if such a sign was posted above "The Gates".

Anonymous said...

I don't want to stir a hornets nest here, but, I have to post my feelings on this. I would like to first of all say, that I try not to be racist, and I have friends of many ethnic backgrounds, but, being against a certain culture is no different than being racist.

I don't think that this is a bad thing, and from an evolutionary, or biological standpoint, it is a natural defense to preserve homogeneous state that we thrive in. It is a self preserving action, that is implanted in our brains.

If a lion attacks a cheetah in its territory, is it a racist? Maybe, maybe not, but it is doing what it is programmed to do. It relies on being supreme in its territory to survive.

Is being against a culture that threatens your existence any different? Not really. I hate the
American al queda spokesman as much as the saudi one, so I am not a racist, but when hatred is for survival what difference does the reason make?

Charlemagne said...

TH - I have to disagree completely with your assertion that to be "against" another culture is equivalent to racism. That is nothing less than the Leftist orthodoxy of cultural relativism. Clearly not all cultures are equal. If they were the West wouldn't be the ONLY culture being overrun by those seeking to escape lesser cultures.

Anonymous said...

Charlemagne, I didn't say there was anything wrong with being against a certain culture or race. I just think its a natural response, and nothing to be ashamed of. I am certainly no leftist, and I would bet all the money in the world that all leftists perceive people by race just as we all do.

It's just a fact of nature is all I'm saying. Some things aren't right or wrong, it's just the way it is.

Layer Seven said...

The guys wearing the swastikas must be OK, then. Thanks; I understand now. I promise not to insult their sensitivities.

Frank said...

There is a huge difference between racism and culturalism. I find the racial superiority meme silly, circular, and pointless, but I can say without hesitation that I believe western culture is far superior anything the east ever dredged up. That makes me a cultural supremacist, to be sure, but not a racist. Two entirely different things.

On Baron's request. It's Baron and Dymph's board, so I'll certainly do my best not to say naughty things, but it's sad to see one more platform of public speech bow under the tyranny of political correctness. If people are wrong to speak about race, then why not allow them to be shown to be wrong? Why has it become so acceptable to merely shut them up? I mean sure, there's the argument that no one has the right to defecate in one's front yard if they are asked not to, and that request should of course be respected. It's just a shame that the request has been made in the first place.

Layer Seven said...

Why, methinks you ladies have caught Charles Johnsonites! What sort of monkeyshines led to it - I hope we never know.

Are you ladies giving up the Jews, officially? Or is it just racially?

Anonymous said...

So Layer Seven, you have never done anything that could be considered racist? I find that hard to believe.

Unknown said...

th72,

Would you kill an Arab simply because he was an Arab? What if he was a Christian?

Being against an ideology is not the same as being a racist.

Islam is not a race. There are incredibly stupid white Anglo Saxons wasting oxygen on this planet who have bought into this hateful ideology. There are also people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali who have rejected it.

If I hate a person simply because of skin color, I am a racist. My hatred has made any other attributes possessed by that person irrelevant. That person cannot change the color of their skin.

If I reject an ideology (as I do Islam), I am not a racist. What happens in the mind and heart may be influenced but is not dictated by the color of the skin. The adherent of that ideology may change his mind and heart and become my friend.

In this area, perhaps more than in any other, it is truly the thought that counts.

Baron Bodissey said...

ScottSA --

Are you being disingenuous, or did you just fail to read my post carefully?

I don't delete comments that I simply disagree with, as you may have noticed. That's why all those threads are still intact.

I don't flinch at being called a racist or a Nazi -- I'm well used to it by now.

But commenters have been dragging three threads out of four into the topic of race, and then arguing about it. This will turn people off, make them less likely to come around here, and make other blogs (which usually have tougher comment rules than ours) less likely to link here.

All of which, as I said, interferes with our mission.

I don't give a camel's intestinal parasite about being called a racist or a Nazi.

But I care about being effective in what I'm trying to do.

I'm interested neither in being doctrinally pure, nor politically correct, nor in proving that I never give in to PC intimidation.

I care about being EFFECTIVE. And the behavior of some of our commenters is interfering with my effectiveness. I don't like that, and I'm asking them to change what they do, for the sake of the mission we're engaged in.

How can I express it any more clearly?

Layer Seven said...

When a "RACE" distinguishes itself so ignominiously as Islam has, I wonder what is "racist" and what is not; or if it matters.

What is the daily toll, in the name of Islam, around the world? Will this daily toll, in the name of Islam, surpass your racial guidelines; your racial norms? On what day will that happen?

My limit is over; with the Down's syndrome slaughter; but I am embarrassed that it took this.

Anonymous said...

Layer Seven, thats what I mean, we are labeled no matter what we mean to do. We have to cast off our fears and do what we need to do. I don't like the word "hate". I also don't think that most in the free world realize how hated we are. It is not wrong for us to react against things that threaten our survival.

Hal K said...

What I saw in a recent comment thread, "Until the Curved Knives Lie Against Their Throats," was that the subject of race was brought up by an anti-racialist (Jimmy the Dhimmi) and this started a discussion about race. In this situation I suppose Baron Bodissey would says that if someone makes a point that is off-topic and you would like to respond then you should consider letting it go if the subject is race.

It appears that many people think that if you say you don't want so many non-Europeans moving into Europe then that makes you a "white supremacist." This is unfair, and it is unfortunate whenever this mindset is given further validation. Now, since we are not supposed to talk about race I invite you all to not respond to my comment.

This is one of my favorite blogs, and I am sympathetic to the Baron's situation, but I find it unfortunate that the regime of political correctness we are living under makes it necessary to tell people not to discuss something that is clearly important to them.

1389 said...

There is certain legitimacy to those worries about non-Europeans moving into Europe, and it has nothing at all to do with "white supremacy" or the like.

The problem is that some of those people moving into Europe from other parts of the world are racist themselves. They harbor racist animosity toward Europeans, which they have expressed openly, loudly, and often violently.

If children with blond hair feel compelled to dye it darker so that they won't be a target for physical attack, something is wrong.

The issue here is not racism on the part of Europeans - it's fear of other people's overt racism that is being expressed against Europeans.

AngleofRepose said...

Heh. So CJ links to this post and the comments devovle into this:

#225 konservo 2/01/08 7:54:03 pm reply quote report 3

re: #202 Josephine

Imagine there was no Hitler?

WTF? He's on a slippery slope to become an utter sh*thead.



Thick as pig sh*t or too lazy to read beyond the subject line?

Or both?

Eeeeyeah.. I trust these people's judgment. Hope they don't sit on anybody's jury anytime soon.

Dumb@55

Frank said...

Baron:

In no way did I mean to suggest that you were about to delete comments, and I apologize that my poor writing gave you that impression...I can see why you might have thought it.

On another, but related topic, I've just come from a damned good tar and feathering over at GoV for this post:

"I counted between 5 and 10 comments in this thread that qualify as "intelligent." By that I mean they consist of something more than some version of, "Yeah! What Charles said!" or "Baron is a racist!"
I read an essay, quite well written and posted 2nd hand on GOV the other day, describing LGF as a horde of 'yes men', following a leader with no real theoretical or political affiliation. I would hope it's not true, but threads like this, started for no real reason that I can see other than spite, and lapped up like manna by so, so many "lizards", is more like a bloodthirsty bike gang than a political blog.

I sometimes get the sense that if tomorrow Charles were to focus his sights on the dastardly Jew and praise Islamic murder and mayhem, over half of the lizards would pause, think for a minute, and then turn on a dime and blithely begin constructing arguments precisely contrary to the arguments they formulated today. Judging by this thread, they would largely consist of "Yeah, what Charles said!"


And a few others...one explicitely defending you. It's easy to find...it's probably the only one there longer than three lines, and it's surrounded by bloodthirsty bellows and clever one-liners.

Frank said...

Oh, it was in a thread about this post by you.

Anonymous said...

I think the recent discussions in that thread about racial IQs was retarded, not to mention irrelevant to the subject of this blog, but I will never believe it is "racist" for native Europeans to defend their right to remain a majority in their own ancestral homelands, which the LGF crowd clearly believes and wants to bully everyone else to believe in as well. (I would also defend Amazonian Indians etc. of the same right.) "White supremacism" is about taking something away from some other race for the benefits of whites -- it is NOT "white supremacism" to defend what you already have, and have had, for thousands of years.

1389 said...

Angleofrepose,

Intellectual laziness and a near-total absence of reading comprehension skills are what you can expect at that site. You are apt to find more erudition on a middle-school bathroom wall than at LGF.

Frank said...

oops I meant a tar and feathering at LGF, not Gov. acronymophobia...

Anonymous said...

The problem is that some of those people moving into Europe from other parts of the world are racist themselves. They harbor racist animosity toward Europeans, which they have expressed openly, loudly, and often violently.


Indeed. The same is true in America, although you will not get many white Americans to admit it, for fear of being accused of the "r" word themselves. Newly come immigrants from Latin America in the US can be very hostile against both black and white Americans.

Anonymous said...

BTW even left-wing Guardian readers are starting to sound like GoV posters, check out the comments on this thread: Link Sample post: "Indeed, if this great swathe of immigration had occured in pretty much any of the countries where the migrants themselves come from, there would be real anger, disorder and probably bloody violence. (Imagine if these immigration patterns occured in Pakistan or India!) We in Britain, must accept it, start to dismantle our own heritage and lose our own sense of cultural identity." It continues in the same vein for quite a while, even from people who identify themselves as "lefties."

AngleofRepose said...

Well 1389, based on their use of pictures as 'evidence', I imagine bathroom stall graffiti is quite useful for them.

Picture books are a real hit!

"Look ma! Clifford was a red dog! We all know what that means!"

xlbrl said...

If we could trade twenty million anti-patriotic, liberal-socialist-marxist-multiculturalist caucasion Americans for twenty million people of any color yearning to be free and assimilate, we would have solved most of our problems.
When we finally finished a generations long death strugggle with communism, the enemy within did not go away, and this fifth column will not go away if we are to win this struggle with Islam either. Let those consumed by ethnicity understand that it is the sickness within our own ethnicity that is our greatest danger, and the most renewable.

no2liberals said...

Race?
Hey,the Daytona 500 is coming real soon!
My formula for race relations is, if someone tries to take my line, I'm driving him into the wall.
Baron, if you notice, I stayed well clear of that discussion the other day. Too many bizarre directions for me to follow.
OT, from my favorite Iranian Expat essayist, Amil Amani---Muslim Victim Mentality.
I think I understand better now, why leftists are unable to grasp the problem Islam presents, they identify so closely with the victim mentality.

leadpb said...

xlbrl said

"Let those consumed by ethnicity understand that it is the sickness within our own ethnicity that is our greatest danger, and the most renewable."

This is exactly right and it also far outweighs the topic of race. Baron's entreaty seems very clear: there is really no avoiding race or racism or racialism *on occasion* but getting bogged down in it detracts from the main subject. This is an internal problem (misleading ourselves or turning each other off) as well as an external one-- if my first look at GoV had been a random peek at the rambling "r" threads it would have been a while before I bothered to check in again.

As it is Gates of Vienna almost always strikes just the right chord for me and obviously others by way of its format, information and commentary. I will do my best to refrain from any impulses to contribute my marginal thoughts on race. It doesn't feel right anyway (at this blog) and the primary mission that concerns us all should not be overshadowed by any tangential issues.

Frank said...

"This account is blocked"

Apparently Charles doesn't like criticism. I suppose he assumes the introduction of reasoned discourse and opposing opinions might interfere with Borg harmonics.

I would urge any of the LGF swarm who come here to examine, carefully, whether you want to be a part of that kind of lockstep movement. If you do come here, you'll know that 90% of the allegations in the LGF swarmthreads are not just false but laughable. How many times have both Baron and Dymphna disavowed, explicitely, all forms of "racism?"

Whether you agree or disagree with what is said here, it is, after all, said. It is not hushed up or the utterer banned. Contrast a polite request by Baron with the ongoing purges at LGF. Which is more representative of western democracy?

Fellow Peacekeeper said...

Theres two things that political correctness does permit me to hate :

One is rascists,

the other is white people.




Grievous, ain't it?

John Rohan said...

I agree with you Baron, but keep in mind it's not entirely the fault of people who read your blog. If your opponents on may of these issues (like CAIR, the Muslim Council of Britian, etc) didn't bring the subject of race up so often, and weren't so loose with their accusations of "racism", then I believe the subject wouldn't get so much attention.

dienw said...

Average Joe,

Rather sexist if you ask me; there needs to be a Rule #4: You will act like ladies toward the gentlemen. If you don't I will kick your sorry ass out.

Afonso Henriques said...

"In many of our recent posts — for reasons that aren’t clear to me — no matter what topic is covered by the original posts, the comment threads are showing a disturbing tendency to divert to the topic of race."

Well Baron, I will try to elucidate you. The reason for that phenomenon is that the posts are intimately related to race despite not being explicitly racial.

As your own words:

"To Dymphna and me, these issues have nothing to do with race. They have to do with culture and ethnicity, in the broadest sense of those terms."

Ethnicity, Culture... Race is intimateley conected with both weather people want it or not. That's why it can be said that there are an Afro American culture and a chicano culture in the United States but we can not talk about a Italo-American or Deutch-American culture in the U.S.A.

Two more aspects are essencial in all this race question:

1) Freedom of speach. When you aproach so openly a taboo like race, people will behave like children who learnt that poo and pee are not so pretty words.
People will tend to abuse it because you gave them space to debate something they are not allowed to debate in other serious places. And Gates of Vienna is a serious place, not a marginal "site specialized in racial topics" frequented by loosers who want to blame the Jews for having lost their jobs.

2) Because race is indeed a factor in this "war(?)". In Europe and in America it will get more and more obvious as the time goes on. You can not dissociate race when you have an all white group and another all brown group. Even if race is not determinative whatsoever for the formation of those two groups, people will say it is racial segregation.

I hope I have made me understand and I hope you to consider those two topics I advanced.
Also, Dymphna crying racist to a commenter some posts ago, does not help at all, specially because, despite being a "loose comment" the guy in question was not being racist.

You want to clean up your image, Baron, even if you have done nothing wrong?
It´s easy, comdemn a true white racist action. Make a post about such event when it happens, something that disgusts us all.

Please, consider all this that I am telling you, for the sake of this great blog.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Hmm, looks like Charles Johnson is picking up the ball:

The Definition of Irony

One thoughtful poster at LGF writes:
Is Bodissey really such a lout that you have to hurl demeaning epithets at him. I just read the piece Charles linked to and it seems sincere and absent the bilious hatred I detect on this thread.

Someone else retorts:
Baron wrote:
"I invite other bloggers and commenters to take the Pledge:

Ha! The fact that he even has to say that demonstrates that there's a serious problem.

See? Everything we do, every evidence we bring, every comment we make that takes these smears seriously, get used against us. The 'anti-racist' witchhunt goes on, even against people who've always considered racism too stupid to even worry about.

I suggest we do the 'Big dog' thing and ignore the shouting from LGF. We've pleaded a very solid 'Not guilty' and that's it.

If anyone from Little Green Footballs reads this, here's a suggestion:

Read Liberal Fascism. That will give a solid understanding of what fascism is about, as well as a stockpile of interesting ammunition to use against the US liberals - when they try to revive fascist ideas, which they frequently do. It's election time, and everyone's entitled to have some fun - particular of the constructive kind. Good luck :)

Afonso Henriques said...

"I find the racial superiority meme silly, circular, and pointless, but I can say without hesitation that I believe western culture is far superior anything the east ever dredged up. That makes me a cultural supremacist, to be sure, but not a racist. Two entirely different things."

Not quiet, you are a racist because you are implicitly saying that the people who creaed Western Culture are superior to the ones who didn't. It has some similarities with the Hitlerian concept of the Aryan race whose biological superiority is manifested trough the cultural superiority.

And we are all racists again! It's all a taboo again!

For me a racist is someone who acts against (atack) someone based soley on race.

Afonso Henriques said...

"It appears that many people think that if you say you don't want so many non-Europeans moving into Europe then that makes you a "white supremacist." This is unfair"

Funny... I think the problem isn't real just that.
The problem is that when some European say he wants all non Europeans out of Europe he will be viewd as a "white supermacist" but,

when blacks kicked near all whites of Africa or South East Asians kicked virtually all whites off South East Asia they were just fighting the just fight.
For much less, the Jews were exterminated from Europe countless times. But now we're Progressivies, aren't we?

Afonso Henriques said...

Queen,

"it is NOT "white supremacism" to defend what you already have, and have had, for thousands of years."

Is it white supermecism then, to fight for what you had, but have los? Like an homgenuous Europe where the people of the Nations share the same interests, culture, history, and yes, race or ethnicity?

Is it white supermacism to fight the European Union?

Henrik R Clausen said...

"But now we're Progressivies, aren't we?"

Uh - Progressives..?

I've just read up about them. Eugenics and sacrifice of the individual for the common good. 'War Socialism' and crackdown on dissent.

Count me out :)

Annoy Mouse said...

queen,
good link

"People won't - and shouldn't - care about the category of migrant. What they care about is the effect that migrant have upon their community. So for example, where I live, Poles are quite popular with a lot of people, because they come to the pub, and have halved building costs. Bengalis are less popular, because they ghettoize and have an incompatible culture. Do I know the exact conditions under which either of these groups are permitted to remain here? No. Do I care? No. Do I want them to stay? Just the Poles, thanks. ...Am I a vicious Nazi for hoping for a cohesive, equal society? Well, I don't feel like I am."

Afonso Henriques said...

Henrik I was being ironical.

Baron, please make a post lecturing Charles Johnson.
It can not passed unnoticed.

Tell him that quantity does not equal quality, and quality is something Gates of Vienna has in mcuh, but much more quantity than LGF will ever have.

Anonymous said...

maybe we should invite Charles Johnson on holiday to sunny England, Oldham, so he can visit a Muslim enclave. See how long it takes him to flee back to sunny, safe California, with his tail between his legs, back to his trolls and lizard lovers. The man is a fraud .

Henrik R Clausen said...

"Henrik I was being ironical."

Cool :)

Almost noone in Europe would have any idea what the 'Progressive' movement really was. It just sounds good, like just the kind of thing we need. Thus, the word becomes seductive.

Don't worry if I don't pick up irony. It's a weak spot of mine.

Baron Bodissey said...

I posted this on the other thread, but no one's over there any more, so...

Henrik, others --

Actually, the trouble started on the "curved knives" thread, not on the "Grand Mufti" thread. But it has been building up for weeks. It just came to a head in the last few days.

If I write a post about the Nazi regime (which I do sometimes, because I like to write about history), discussion about Nazis is fine and appropriate, obviously.

But let's not compare anyone contemporary with ourselves with Nazis, even if it's apt. The whole idea has just been pounded into us so much that it's become essentially meaningless to compare anything to Nazism.

Same with race. If I write about race, let's discuss race. Otherwise, why not leave it be for a while?

I say: European countries (and any other countries) have a right to control their borders, and to decide who is allowed to settle in their countries, using any criteria they wish.

That assertion obviously includes the right for them to exclude people based on race, religion, shoe size, or whatever.

But it doesn't mean that we have to follow it with a thread that obesesses about race.

This is about focus, and having a sense of proportion.

We're kept under constant scrutiny here by people who wish to do this blog harm. I don't want to hand them any more ammo than is absolutely necessary.

I don't want to tell any of you what to do or say. I want to remind you that you (or most of you) have joined these discussions for the same purpose that I have, and that we want to be effective in that purpose.

Being effective sometimes means tempering one's speech for practical and pragmatic reasons.

This doesn't mean you're being censored or suppressed. It means that you're behaving like adults, and consciously deciding to engage in purposeful activity with a particular end in mind.

Voluntarily relinquishing your inherent right to say whatever you want, and doing it in order to achieve a long-term goal, is called "prudence".

xlbrl said...

Goethe
The fire that enlightens is the same fire that consumes.
Juan Jiminez
No great truth has ever been shouted.
Hofer
A few drops of venom to a half-truth and you have an absolute truth.
Hazlitt
Malice often takes the garb of truth.
Burke
As in the exercise of all virtues, there is an economy in truth. It is a sort of temperence, by which a man speaks truth with measure, that he may speak it longer.

no2liberals said...

I don't discuss race, unless it is about NHRA, Formula One, or MotoGP.
I'll discuss behavior, culture, heredity, intelligence(or lack of), politics, and religion, but I don't discuss race.
The one thing I've observed over time about people, irrespective of their skin color, some are good/some are not so good/some are bad.
I think the human genome project explains the essence of humans, not their conditioning.

Anonymous said...

Why are you trying to appease CJ with this post?

Baron, you could become Pope and he'd still smear you as a Nazi.

Wonder what he thinks of THE pope?

Just continue with your blog, CJ is not the leader, he's not the cool guy in class. From what i've been reading online, he was chased out of Hawaii for unsavory sexual habits, which I will not go into here. I'll leave it to other blogs to break the story.

Eleanor © said...

Your international readership may be confused as to the use of the word "race," as it has more than one meaning.

My dictionary's #2 definition:

"those that share the same culture, history, language, etc."

They suggest using the alternatives of "peoples" or "community," which are not entirely satisfactory.

Whiskey said...

I agree Baron that the ultimate issue is European self-determination: Do Britons, Spaniards, Italians and the French have the right as a free people to determine who will join them in citizenship and/or residence, and who will not?

The principle of self-determination has been a guiding one since Wilson's endorsement of the same at the end of WWI. Every free people have that right. It is one of the guiding principles of freedom.

As a practical matter, self-determination is difficult to enforce in an age where mass movement of people's is common. Difficult does not mean impossible. Mexico, Singapore, and yes nations like Malaysia and Tunisia have struggled with this. I would argue that Europeans serious about self-determination and how it might be accomplished through both law AND custom should consult these nations that have already struggled through it.

Identity IS important to people, "diversity" used to Balkanize a population is IMHO an assault on freedom and should be treated as such. And the emphasis on Constitutional Freedoms for those who are profoundly different than the majority should hinge on the security of the identity and preservation of self-determination.

Conservatives should push back on the argument that "when native Europeans are in the minority we will be treated nicely" made by leftists, and point out that notion guarantees racial violence and extremism to preserve self-determination, and that tolerance of people with profound differences ethnically, racially, religiously, and so on requires security for self-determination. Which means bluntly the identity of the nation.

This is the Conservative argument and like conserving the natural environment and not polluting it with ugly development pell-mell, I think it has much appeal to many people.

Baron Bodissey said...

Willow Tree --

I'm not trying to appease anybody. I've looked at our traffic statistics, and have made a guess that some people are being turned off by the almost constant and off-topic arguments about race in our comments threads. These are counterproductive and not helpful.

CJ is not important, and is not a factor in this. I'm aiming at people that I really have a chance of reaching, people who might be willing to listen to reasoned discussion.

Change can only occur at the margins. I want to communicate with people who are on the fence, which means staying focused and presenting a reasonable and broad-based approach.

It's a strategic decision, with a particular end in mind.

Anonymous said...

Baron

I agree 100% but no matter what you say, you will always be painted as a supporter of neo-fascism for your support of decent european nationalists, nationalists who have absolutely nothing to do with the far right neo nazi movement. CJ has ruined the allied movement against islamic jihad. He has united the majority of US bloggers against European nationalists. All I hear about regarding European nationalist parties is slogan, "White Supremacist".

Baron, have you noticed how we never have to confront the far left anymore? Do they besiege our blogs, our web sites? Do we have hundreds of jihadists brining down jihadwatch or LGF or anti-jihad sites? No, why? because they have the likes of CJ's army to spread hate against us and our cause, which is to free Europe from Islamic Jihad.

Go research Blokwatch, CJ is a part of that far left movement.

He is not an ally. He is a menace and uses "black" propaganda, the type the CIA and the Soviets used to discredit opponents and political rivals.

Baron Bodissey said...

Willow --

Well then, what do you recommend? Should I encourage our commenters to assert that the dysfuctional "brown-skinned" cultures in the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa become that way due to genetic influences?

Would that help our traffic?

Would more people read Gates of Vienna because I did this?

Would it be more likely that people would be convinced that resisting the jihad was a good idea?

Would people say, "Well, that Baron Bodissey may be a racist, but at least he's not intimidated by political correctness! That makes me want to listen to what he has to say."

Seriously, how likely do you think that would be?

Afonso Henriques said...

Baron, you gave us a place where free spech thrives, intalligent free spech above all, what is extremely different to find. I am grateful for that.

The thing is, did your commenters turned neo nazi? I don't think so, we were just debating an issue.

I agree with you, we should not fall all that easy into racial debates but we do it because it is so controversial and does indeed need to be debated in this "movement".

If you want to avoid such debates you can not post topics related to it.

It will be a loss to see Gates of Vienna and you Baron limited by any kind of anything.

I hope you can go on doing the good work you have been done and you may have to be more assertive in relation to us, the commenters.

Just do not blame us for that, at least, not us as a whole.

i hope you can catch my draft.
Regards.

Afonso Henriques said...

* difficult to find.

Anonymous said...

Baron

I would suggest that you intelligently decide for yourself what you believe to be a post that contains racial hatred or is from a white supremacist, and then simply delete the post. You could place a notice on your blog stating that this is not a white supremacist site and you are against racial hatred.

Lastly, when was the last time that you received a post from a marxist, a far left supporter or a muslim?

So far on my blog I have received one muslim supporter with his own anti sharia web site, a few posts from fellow anti-jihadists yet the majority have come from within our own ranks, people that once stood united with us but have split the movement in two because certain people claim that we are white supremacists and anti-semetic far right supporters.

Nationalism, as you know, is not a belief in neo nazism, nor is it the ideology of white power.

Keep up the great work Baron.

Baron Bodissey said...

Willow --

Actually, we've had quite a few lefties over the years. The best was an anti-jihad anarchist -- he left a fine comment, which I made into its own post.

We've had a few Muslim trolls, and several "moderate" Muslims, Eteraz being the most famous one. We haven't seen him around for quite a while, though.

nikolai said...

It's a bit of a catch 22. Forty years of brain washing re "racism" have made it a touchstone issue that repels neutral or apolitical people. It's akin to being denounced as a witch four centuries ago.

On the other hand the definition of "racism" has been extended to include defending any aspect of national or cultural identity if the people doing it are umm...white. Anti-racism has become anti-white racism either by accident or design.

This leaves a very narrow strip of political ground for people who want to defend their culture but don't want to be Nazis. However, stepping outside that narrow strip triggers the pavlovian reaction created by the mass media since the holocaust. I forget that pavlovian reaction myself sometimes but it is important to remember it exists.

Henrik R Clausen said...

"For me a racist is someone who acts against (atack) someone based soley on race."

What about the 'Affirmative action' programs and the like? People who get priviledges based on their .. skin colour?

Afonso Henriques said...

Henry, it is an offensive action based soley on race and as so I consider it to be racist.

If it was based in culture... I wouldn't consider it racist, but it is based on race.

Anonymous said...

I do not expect the backlash against hypocrisy and double standards to subside any time soon. It will most probably intensify. The selective outrage we see on display with groups like the UN, NOW, and much smaller entities like LGF goes a long way in exposing the honesty of their cause and their need to kill the messenger with smear campaigns. They cannot defend their hypocrisy. Their highly selective outrage, upon closer examination, appears to be more about self-aggrandizement, personal gain, or marching to an indoctrination than any sort of true justice or altruism.

I do not wish to throw any more gasoline on this fire, but I am finished with enduring the nonsense of hypocrites. America abounds with overtly racist organizations - La Raza, NAACP, MeCHha, etc, and yes, even Barak Obama's very racist Trinity United Church of Christ (Google it yourself) well as many race-specific magazines, radio stations, televisions, etc. And then there's race Hucksters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson that have created an entire racism industry. I won't even get into the outrageous media filtering and whitewashing that goes on daily. To me race is not the issue. It's the blatant hypocrisy and double standards. It's counterproductive.
And in light of this, it's outrageous for Americans to be pontificating to Europeans about how they should be running their affairs.

What applies to one should apply to all. But it does not. Truth and honesty should never be subordinated to an agenda. But they are. I'm done with tolerating it.

But if GoV elects to capitulate to what seems so obviously wrong to me, I will respect your right to do so.

X said...

And in light of this, it's outrageous for Americans to be pontificating to Europeans about how they should be running their affairs.

Not to mention ironic, given the sort of (entirely justified) reaction one would expect from that specific crowd to the European left trying the same thing with the USA.

KG said...

The enemy (and by that I mean islam and the left) will continue to define as "racist" whatever suits them, thus narrowing the terms of acceptable debate to the point where we will--in effect--have to consider what they will find acceptable in our debates.
For too long the left has been allowed to frame the debate by its bully-boy tactics and PC intimidation and the effect has been to neuter opposition to them.
Blogs released us from this straitjacket for a while, but now it appears they're able to use the same tactics and with some success.
I respect the Baron's opinion and his property rights and will therefore comply with his request, but Crusader Rabbit will not give one millimetre to the left and the islamists and the PC cowards and hucksters.
If that means we err on the side of nationalism and support for white supremacists, then so be it. The alternative is too awful to contemplate, because that alternative is surrender.We need all the allies we can get for this fight and I, for one, will take them where I can find them and sort out their relative ideological purity afterwards.

turn said...

Race. Culture. Ethnicity. Genetics. Intelligence.

I suspect I'm about to get jumped (outdated American vernacular for assault) so I'm going to lead into this gently.

In the hollers (local vernacular for small, steep sided valleys) of the state immediately to the west of the Baron's there are many people who, before they were a spouse, would call each other cousin. These people are of European descent--whites. They are known to be (in polite terms) backward. This has been ongoing for many years and many generations.

It's even spawned a whole genre of jokes--only one of which would be appropriate here.

"West Virginia: One Big Happy Family ... Really!"

Mostly this was before good roads made travel to the fourth or more holler away possible but the effect lingers on.

This was never a cultural issue--it was a convenience before travel was possible.

Mankind has known of the perils of inbreeding for many millennia and tribal societies have gone to great lengths to avoid it.

With the exception of Islam where marriage to cousins is seen as reinforcing family ties. I have no idea if this practice was in place before the time of the prophet. (I did learn earlier today in the course of researching today's post at Your Daily Paine that the custom of honor killings probably does precede Mo.)

What could a thousand years or more of this practice result in?

Moreover, might it not be an expression on a deep psychological/genetic level of the prevalence of rape in areas where Muslims and others coexist? A biological imperative to spread seed outside the family?

I don't give a hoot about the race of the people that practice this--but the effect may be one of the reasons they are socially backward and unable to assimilate, compete and contribute compared with people that do not practice this.

This past December Baltimore experienced two horrific acts of violence that took place aboard public buses. One involved a group of middle schoolers against an adult passenger and her companion. MSM minimized the racial aspect of the account.

Baron, I would hope that no thread spins out of control in anything like racism or bigotry. When the race, culture, ethnicity, etc. of specific incidents or conflicts need to have the above included in order to be understood, I can't see disinclusion of relavent facts.