Where pretty lies perish.
Oct 12th, 2020 by
If a symbol becomes associated with implicit Whiteness, any White gathering under the banner of that symbol will be persecuted by the anti-White State.
If a symbol becomes associated with explicit anti-Whiteness, anyone displaying that symbol will be protected by the anti-White State and evidence of the existence of the symbol will be suppressed and ignored.
Would Hitler have Flocked up Germany had the technology existed in the 1930s?
Although Hitler was a national socialist who believed the State should exist to benefit the collective interests of the German people, I doubt he would have ordered Flock cameras all over Germany under the justification that it would reduce crime.
Hitler likely would have concluded that Flock undermined the dignity of Germans by assuming their dishonesty, criminal proclivity, and desire to rebel against German authority.
Hitler never thought the worst of Germans. He always thought the best of his volk.
But he probably would have Flocked the shit out of the jewish ghettos.
The experience of post-colonial India should be a warning to all White nations that the mass influx of Indians to their territories will inevitably degrade White institutions to the Indian norm. And that is an ugly thing indeed.
The race is the culture.
India adopted colonial British laws and institutions, but didn't feel genuine affinity or duty to those British innovations because Indians aren't British. Over time, India has hollowed out those adopted Western institutions and replaced the innards with Indian corruption, nepotism, and cronyism.
British civilization was never more than a veneer on India, quickly shed or altered beyond recognition, once the British left, by a race of people whose souls -- and neurological wiring -- were unequipped to assume the responsibility of maintaining and upholding that imported civilization.
White civilization is quickly made a mockery by nonwhites wherever there is an attempt to export it.
An Indian warns that India is a low trust shithole, and that the British colonial effort to civilize India to Western norms has failed spectacularly.
The written laws and superficial structures left behind by the British—checks and balances, common law, procedure, and the rule of law—remain largely in place. But once these institutions passed into Indian hands, the spirit animating them was inverted. What was designed to restrain power became a machinery of exploitation and expropriation.
The institutions have not vanished. Their outer shells—offices, uniforms, seals, procedures—remain, but their function has been grotesquely reversed. This was not an accident. It was inevitable in a culture still ruled by the iron law of “might makes right,” where expediency is the governing principle and reason, morality, and self-responsibility never took root.
Had Indian society remained in smaller, localized units, a crude but immediate tribal justice might have preserved a minimal order more aligned with its nature. The terrible possibility is that, when the hollowed-out Western scaffolding finally collapses, what rises from the ruins may prove more functional precisely because it is more primitive—however nightmarish it appears to civilized eyes.
This is the slow, inexorable apocalypse of second-hand modernity: imported institutions rotting from the inside until nothing remains but predation wearing the mask of civilization. The forms survive. The soul has already died.
Islam is a religion, which is a loose proxy for race, since the majority of the world's Moslems are MENA Caucasians or Indonesians. In practice, it is more precise to refer to the race of any particular Moslem group under discussion.
judaism is an ethnoreligion. The vast majority of its adherents share DNA and racial attributes affecting behavior, psychology, and phenotype.
Boomers are an American neologism to label the generation born between roughly 1946 and 1964. Given that America during those years was 90% White, the label can effectively substitute as a racial categorization.
Nobody needs an agenda to fixate on race. Race fixates on us, and it is just a matter of separating those who accept the reality of race from those who wish to ignore it because it gives them bad feelings.
A commenter at Unz does a yeoman's job laying out the Holoschmaltz Revisitation case.
Stuff like this is why I can't get very offended by Iran's Rooftop Therapy school of psychology.
I look at that 1920 map, and Southern segregation becomes completely understandable.
I look at that 2020 map, and national separation becomes completely necessary.
The national and collective interest must always supercede the private and individual interests. We're still paying the price of a Faustian bargain made centuries ago.
Fourth, the fact that White Americans are not composed of any single European nation, but are a blend of all White nationalities, with the Germanic element predominating, means that an ideology grounded in a pan-European "Aryan" racial mythos will always find more appeal here than any form of nationalism rooted in the old 19th-century European nation-states.
A related theory I've had about how ethnic White immigration during the late 19th to early 20th centuries shaped founding stock White America's racial consciousness is that the success of incorporating ethnic Whites into the dominant WASP culture may have conditioned White Americans to believe they could incorporate nonwhites just as easily.
It was not an easy assimilation, though. Italians and Irish brought their racial habits with them, and it caused troubles here. But they were close enough, genetically and racially, to the Anglo-Germanic core that incorporation, largely helped along by ethnic intermarriage and mixed-ethnicity children, was successful, after fits and starts.
The problem with that success merging White ethnics with Anglo-America is that it opened a Pandora's Lox of hubris and recklessness. The newly emerged broadly White core of America, stripped of its ethnic boundaries, came to believe that, based on past successes assimilating the White ethnics, there would be no difficulty doing the same with nonwhite immigrants.
And the economic boom that coincided with the years following the ingestion of White ethnics likewise conditioned White Americans to think that nonwhite immigration would provide similar economic benefits to the country.
Our success assimilating White ethnics, ironically became our failure to assimilate nonwhites.
One is the fact that, as a former colonial power, race and racial conflict is central to the lived experience of all Americans. As the country becomes more diverse, this factor is going to become stronger, not weaker—for the same reason race is such a dominant factor in U.S. prisons.
Correct. This is already happening in America. I wrote about this a while ago, making the point that the salience of Whiteness as a personal identifier will increase alongside the increase in proximate racial diversity.
Understanding that White Americans don't have the strong ethnic touchstones which are familiar to Europeans (owing to our high rate of interethnic marriage), it was always more likely to be a broadly White racial identity that would coalesce in the consciousness of White Americans.
In a 90% White America, Whites reflexively preferred to identify themselves by their particular ethnic ancestry, if they thought about their racial heritage at all.
In 60-50-40% White America, Whites will reflexively prefer to identify themselves by their Whiteness, and because of America's influence on Europe, Europeans will slowly inch toward a similar pan-White identity, converging with the racial consciousness percolating in America.
