Thursday, March 4, 2021

Take the Moralpathy Quiz!

Take the quiz.

The Moralpath.

An initial quiz to determine your moralpathy score. A = 2 points, B = -2 points, C (if present) = 1 point, D (if present) = -1 point. Add together all of your positive and negative points to calculate your final score.

1. You are President of the United States. A foreign power has launched a nuclear first strike against the USA, destroying a significant portion of America’s nuclear weapons, but leaving sufficient such weapons unscathed so as to allow you to launch a retaliatory strike, which would destroy the majority of that foreign power’s civilian population and industrial capacity, as well as seriously degrade their military apparatus.  However, if you launch that retaliatory strike, the enemy would deploy the remainder of its nuclear weapons to destroy the majority of America’s civilian population and much of its industrial capacity. The foreign power, after making this threat of a secondary strike, demands that you surrender without any retaliatory strike against them, a surrender that would eliminate American sovereignty and independence. You are given one hour to decide; otherwise, they will launch the secondary strike. You would:

A. Refuse to surrender, launch the retaliatory strike, and accept the damage from their secondary strike response.

B. Surrender.

2. Statement: To achieve your goals in defense of your people’s interests, actions up to and including war and genocide are justified. You:

A. Agree.

B. Disagree.

3. Your view of morality is:

A. I am a strictly moral person but the moral standards I follow are my own, not society’s.

B. I am amoral; I do as I please independent of any morality whatsoever.

C. I am a strictly moral person, following typical societal standards.

D. I try and follow societal standards of morality, but often fail to live up to them.

4. You are a member of a movement and/or organization. You have some fundamental disagreements with that movement’s and/or organization’s ideology and/or tactics. To openly criticize that entity and its leadership would likely mean that you would lose influence, friends, and associates, possibly no longer being considered part of that entity. Speaking out privately may result in the leadership losing confidence in you and would also be “politically” damaging to you, but not as bad as doing so publicly. Going along with the ideology and/or approach, even though you disagree and are sure that it is wrong and destructive of the entity’s objectives, would preserve your place in the entity. You would:

A. Speak out publicly, either from the outset or after private intervention failed.

B. You would go along with what you think is wrong to preserve your position.

C. You would speak out privately only, but do so strongly and consistently.

D. You would make some mild private criticisms but not push the issue too hard.

5. Those who know you think that you are:

A. Bluntly outspoken, particularly on issues that revolve around your perceptions of right and wrong.

B. You project a sense of getting along with everyone.

C. You sometimes speak out diplomatically on issues of importance to you.

D. You only speak out on issues that affect you personally, but you are outspoken on these.

6. Doing the right thing, according to your perception, even if it may harm you in some way, as opposed to always promoting your own personal interests no matter the cost:

A. You do the right thing.

B. You always promote your own interests, regardless of the damage to others.

C. You rarely do the right thing.

D. You care about yourself only, but you try to minimize the damage to others, if for no other reason than to preserve your reputation.


12 = Strong moralpathy

Numbers increasing to 12 = Increasing moralpathy

Numbers centered around 0 = Typical person who thinks they are “good,” including many SJWs

Numbers decreasing to -12 = Increasing psychopathy

-12 = Strong psychopathy

Wednesday, March 3, 2021

Yellow Math

Anti-HBD facts. And other news. In all cases, emphasis added.

See here.

Tenured academics have job security unparalleled anywhere but in government jobs, and spend most of their time either indoctrinating students with “woke” ideology or lapping up taxpayer money on vanity projects posing as “research.” 

More “movement” lies. Or, at least, partial lies. First, tenure is increasingly rare in academia; here I mean real tenure – much of what passes for “tenure” today is simply a title that has zero effect on job security.  Even with real tenure, rightist professors have been “cancelled” for saying and writing the wrong thing. And the description of academic "activity” does not accurately describe much of STEM. Maybe "philosophy PhDs" spend most of their time like that, I don't know.

I was one of perhaps five white students in the entire program; almost all were Chinese. I felt foreign in an American classroom in my home state, surrounded by students who looked nothing like me speaking a language I couldn’t understand.

That is 100% correct.  Alas, the typical “HBD race realist” – perhaps a bit uncomfortable with a Chinatrix strap-on shoved up his ass – believes that situation is 100% right and proper.

It was during this time that I began to realize that Asians are not, in fact, smarter than or similar to white students. The rampant cheating cannot be understated. It was incredibly obvious what was going on, but the professors looked the other way. This is because international students are a cash cow for universities. 

All true. But the economics of it is not the only reason. Most White academics worship Orientals as do most other Whites. 

Asian students study only to pass the test in the easiest, fastest way possible, not to learn any material. 

Also 100% correct.

This was most apparent when we were sent to find real datasets and work through statistical analyses. Real data is messy — Google cannot help you. It requires an actual understanding of statistics, common sense, and creativity in order to understand what data might be telling you. The Asian students tried to parrot examples from our textbooks which were developed with simple, contrived data, and their results were a laughable mess. They were unable to answer hard questions about their work on the theoretical basis, they were unable, and they didn’t grasp any of the assumptions or limitations of their models. But they always aced the tests.

The same tests that filthy scum like Lynn use to “estimate” the high, high IQ of the Chinese and other Asians.

A simple online search yields hundreds of results of Chinese cheating rings for various college entrance exams, including the one for mathematics. This pervasive cheating cost me admission into several universities, since they only accepted the top decile of scorers on this exam. When Chinese and Indian students cheat their way to a perfect score on this exam, this places those of us who took the exam honestly out of the running. 

Asians cheat. Then the HBDers use the “high test scores” to foam at the mouth about Asian “cognitive elitism.”

As for the Asian students and professors, let me dispel the myth that they’re smarter than white students. Asians almost always head straight for the algorithmic disciplines in mathematics such as numerical analysis or theoretical computer science. This is because they can rack up publication counts by marginally tweaking someone else’s work. There is no creativity or originality of thought, and I saw firsthand their abysmal performance in topics like functional analysis, probability, and modern algebra. If they haven’t seen it first done by someone else, they are stuck. They can recite proofs of theorems professors like to use on exams, but they’re completely lost when confronted with something they’ve never seen.

100% correct. Note that Ted Sallis is proven absolutely correct yet again.

Much is said about the extensive intellectual property (IP) theft from Chinese employees. I can corroborate this. One coworker would disappear for weeks on end, ignoring pleas and calls to see his code so I could verify his published results. Most of his publications acknowledged “help” from people in China. We always suspected that he farmed the work out to people in Asia. We pushed hard enough that he quickly left for Uber. He was probably “double-dipping” and collecting a salary from both companies. This is more common than non-tech workers might think, particularly by Chinese and Indians. Some get caught, but most don’t. I always had to watch for coworkers trying to steal my code.

Copy, copy, copy, steal, steal, steal. But, hey, let’s be “yellow supremacist” “HBD race realists,” right?

The office was almost all Indian and Chinese. I was a stranger in my own workplace, in my own country. Asian managers openly discriminate when hiring, preferring their racial kinsmen over everyone else. This helps them all get away with fake credentials, even though their later job performance gives that away. 

Then the alien Asiatic GNXP filth tell Whites that “ethnic nepotism is not adaptive” and mutter something about “the green beard effect.” Lots of “green beards” among Asians, no doubt.

Math departments are stuffed with two different classes of professors: The woke and the Asian. Anyone else is left to languish in the ghetto of adjunct professorship or squeezed out completely. This has absolutely gutted research in mathematics. Nothing useful or creative comes from the Chinese, who are all in a network trying to steal from each other and everyone else…with the installation of Chinese and Indians at the highest levels of corporate leadership, progress stagnates…

That is completely correct.  HBD IS AN UTTER FRAUD.  HBD is nothing more or less than a political movement to privilege Jewish and Asian interests over that of Whites; in many cases, White “HBD race realists” are motivated by an extreme masochistic psychosexual fetish for East Asian “women.”

Other news:

If you want to see an exemplar of concentrated Type I drivel, then laugh at this.

…get you to pump an untested and potentially lethal mRNA 'operating system' into your body.
Hey, it’s been tested in Sallis. Satisfied?  Do any of these morons realize that we need to get most folks vaccinated for this nightmare to end – but then, by the time these anti-vaxx scum reconsider their “position,” we’ll have mutated vaccination-resistant strains (well, we seem to have that already; thanks, China), and the rest of us will have to go through the “jabbing” again and again.

Listen, you ignorant, willfully moronic, retard. “Potentially lethal” – so is driving your car or breathing next to a diseased, filthy, flat-chested, mosquito-bite-size-breasted, foul-breathed, greasy-haired, flat-faced, broad-nosed, prognathous, yellow-skinned, scabrous Asiatrix (you know, the creatures sleeping with is “a rite of passage” in your “Alt-Right”), so is walking outside, and even more so is contracting the covid-19 plague unleashed upon us by all those high-high-IQ Chinese, each of whom could pass for the alien in the movie “ET.” “mRNA operating system” – hysterical, scientifically illiterate moron – they inject the mRNA, it gets translated into the relevant protein in the cytoplasm, your body has an immune reaction to the protein, the mRNA is degraded, case closed. The adenovirus-DNA vaccine is a different story, I would be hesitant there, but you, you scum, mentioned the “mRNA operating system.”  Moron. Idiot. Fool. How about the “potentially lethal Chinese creating one disease plague after another operating system?” Can’t point the finger at The Holy Orientals, huh?

Hey, scum, if you don’t like it all, BLAME THE CHINESE.  I suppose though that you are all hesitant to do that with Ms. Ben Dover Chinatrix approaching you in a threatening manner. Gotta do some of dat dere “measured groveling,” eh?

Tuesday, March 2, 2021

Mormon Autism Alert

And other news. In all cases, emphasis added.

Laugh at this.

…when I was a teenager, heavy metal was my life and my religion. 

That gives you a good feel for his character, judgment, and intelligence. In contrast, as a teenager, I was already interested in national socialism and fascism. I did go through a period in my early-to-mid-20s where I went in the more "pragmatic" (sic) direction of anti-communist paleoconservatism, but even then, the Far Right was always “my religion.”

Unfortunately, this led to conflicts with my father as he returned to the Mormon Church. 

Those Danes were Mormons?  That explains much, no?

…I gained some important insights on human nature, self-reliance, and perseverance. 

Thus, when someone doesn’t invite you to a party, write a long, self-pitying, and delusional Counter-Currents post about it.

My father came from a broken home in Idaho. 

I thought that these were k-selected high trust Nordics?

As I was practicing my guitar one day…

One can almost hear the “fingernails on the chalkboard” noise.

… my father came into my room and told me that he wanted to take me to the church he grew up in. He then told me about the history of the Mormon Church and how they kept an important “secret.” Long ago, there was a war in heaven between angels and demons. 

Nordics vs. Mediterraneans. Destiny of angels!

The angels had white skin and the demons had dark skin. 

Eyetalian demons!

After the angels won, the demons were cast down into a barren wasteland. 

In other words, into Sicily.

The Mormon Church believed that Africans were the descendants of the demons and that is why they committed so much crime. 

Africa starts at Rome! Or the Alps! Or is it Calais?

This story caught my interest, as I wanted to meet other people that knew about this secret. However, my father explained that due to political reasons, the church had to hide this secret and let Africans into the priesthood in 1978. 

Demon priests?

Some of the boys knew me from school as the heavy metal kid that didn’t have any friends. 

The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh?

After the initial introductions, they started talking about abortion. 

I can imagine that they wanted to ask him - "why the hell didn’t your parents abort YOU?”

This was when I became a rebellious teenager.

Err... wasn’t he already “the heavy metal kid that didn’t have any friends?”

I hated going to church. I didn’t get along with any of the people there. 


Why respect a community that doesn’t respect you?

White ethnics in Der Movement, take note.

When you think of Mormons, you often think of polite, happy, and successful white people. 

Well, now we know why Mr. Ancestry didn’t fit in.

If I wasn’t opening my door to white missionaries, you better believe I’m not opening my door to demons and monsters.

Tell those wops to stay away!  Five foot tall superstitious monsters!  Get Humphrey to stomp ‘em all out!

After my father passed away, I never returned to the Mormon Church. If man is a computer and religion is an operating system, then the Mormon Church was never meant to run on my hardware. Heavy metal was my religion as a teen

Freakshow alert!

Other news:

I was listening to Trump’s CPAC speech, and when he got to the point in which he started talking about every group except for  Whites, I turned it off. Boy, he really learned his lesson from the last election, huh?  What a turd.

See here - supportive evidence that the ultimate purpose of Goad at Counter-Currents is to bump up page views. Well, having Howard Stern write for you would accomplish the same thing, so why not recruit Howie?

The wages of HBD.

It's impossible to know how the patient acquired the parasitic hitchhiker, although since he made frequent trips back to China, his doctors say it could have been from eating undercooked infected reptile, amphibian or crustacean meat, or from rubbing raw frog flesh on his eyes—a remedy, in traditional Chinese medicine, for sore eyes, the Independent reports.

Very cognitive, very elite.

Get this:

Richard McCullochsays:

March 1, 2021 at 12:19 pm

Your points. like those of Mr. Andrews, are based on the assumption that the White ethnostate will by a rump secessionist state containing a small fraction of the country’s territory and White population, which would then confront a much larger and more powerful multiracial state that would still contain the great majority of the White population and nearly all of its economic and military strength, including the nuclear arsenal, and, by the way, would be the continuation of the United States. This is all very similar to Michael Hart’s proposal, and based on this assumption your points are well taken. But they are not valid for a “National Premise” (as Wilmot Robertson called it) White ethnostate realized by partition, in which the conditions of relationship between the White and multiracial states noted above would be reversed.

See and

It is interesting that so many pro-Whites, in which I presumptively include both you and Mr. Andrews, seem to exclusively conceive of the White ethnostate in the rump secessionist form, and do not consider, or ignore, or are unaware of, other alternatives such as the “National Premise” concept that would be far more advantageous to Whites and their interests and not place them in such desperate circumstances when much better options are still possible. Certainly we should all want the best for our race, which the rump ethnostate concept decidedly is not, as your own points make very clear.

Let’s consider certain excerpts here:

…a rump secessionist state containing a small fraction of the country’s territory and White population, which would then confront a much larger and more powerful…state that would still contain the great majority of the White population and nearly all of its economic and military strength, including the nuclear arsenal, and, by the way, would be the continuation of the United States… place them in such desperate circumstances…

I agree that such “a rump secessionist state” would cause its inhabitants to be placed in “desperate circumstances.” So, what comes to mind are previous iterations of racial separatist plans, from two different individuals who shall go nameless, each of who placed “Mediterranean” (sic) Whites in precisely such "rump state" “desperate circumstances,” in combination with various non-Whites thrown in for good measure (e.g., Puerto Ricans or NECs). So, yes, “desperate circumstances,” indeed. But, hey, the American southwest (a desert that is unlivable except as part of a larger USA that provides to that desert the necessities of life) is “the sun belt” and a New York “Minoria” is, hey, New York, so what are all you two inch tall dago cockroaches complaining about, eh?

In any case, good to see the tacit admission that those previous separatist plans did, as I often stated at that time, place the swarthoids in “desperate circumstances.”  

Here is an interesting and useful analysis, which has political relevance (as commentators note). It would also explain, in general, why movies are typically worse, more childish, and dumbed down, compared to the books (including comic books) on which they are sometimes based, why storylines are changed to appeal to the retarded masses and, possibly, why sequels are typically worse than the originals (an original movie's excellence may be in many cases an unintentional oversatisfying of a [previously unknown?] fan base, while the insipid sequels are intentional attempts to broaden that base through dilution, while trying to hold on to the core fan base).

Compare that interesting Affirmative Right analysis with pathetic Counter-Currents articles by self-indulgent autistics and their navel-gazing laments about why they are not invited to parties. I’m no fan of Liddell, and most of the content of Affirmative Right is, well, rather dull, but to compete with Counter-Currents, it doesn’t have to – dare I say it? – oversatisfy the "movement" fan base, now does it?

Why don’t they sue?

Monday, March 1, 2021

Odds and Ends, 3/1/21

In der news.

Laugh at this.

My family was Protestant Christian, of the gentle Northern European variety…

And now, we’ll see several shoes dropping about that individual and his beliefs and experiences:

…I was fed a steady diet of anti-racism and anti-discrimination indoctrination from a very young age…

…Caribbean blacks…had more in common with white Americans…

…I dated a young black woman from the Caribbean…

But, remember, “movement” “leadership” must – must I say! – come only from “Protestant Christian, of the gentle Northern European variety” stocks, and don’t you forget it!

By the way, any honest White person who has a lot of experience with Blacks will recognize that “Caribbean blacks” are more alien to Whites than are homegrown  “African-Americans.” 

From Liddell’s site:

Early last year [Note: Greg Johnson is mentioned here - I am censoring out the juvenile ad hominem] was even telling everyone that Taylor had put him in charge of vetting Amren. At the time there were denials, and because Taylor's cred is generally good, most of us believed him. But now I'm not so sure.

Good point. We’ve heard about alleged private apologies and private assurances and denials, but if anyone published or openly stated a clear public apology or denial I must have missed it.

Recently, I commented about Griffin covering the Smith College fiasco, and counseled that Nutzis (publicly) steer clear of that – don’t muddy the waters. Almost on cue, we see this.  Let the “life long liberals” figure these things out for themselves.

Now, Nutzis can get involved in democratic multiculturalism now, but it must be via “normie” real life personas. Pseudonymous/anonymous Nutzis can engage in these activities IRL, as long as they keep it completely separate from any and all “movement” connections. However, they really need to avoid the Type I behavior of discussing the details of their IRL life on “movement” forums. 

Very cognitive, very elite.

Of course Trump promises not to start a new party.  That would take too much effort, wouldn't it?

Biden Presidency is "anti-women"  How about anti-White and anti-men?  Can't say that, eh, Antifa Don Trump?  The "wall" "has been amazing."  What wall?

Sunday, February 28, 2021

Statement of Principles Once Again

Once again.

Every once in a while, mostly for the benefit of new readers, I give an overarching summary of the objectives of this blog; in particular, I stress the reasons for the hyperbolic rhetoric and mocking ridicule presented here. This is also important to refute the defamatory attacks of people like Johnson who label me as “insane,” and, overall, people who take comments here out of context to justify their anti-Sallis defamation.

The Sallis Groupuscule has both positive and negative objectives. The positive aspects, at both EGI Notes and Western Destiny, revolve around building a New Movement, articulating strategies for activism, and various other areas of serious analysis. The negative aspects – the ones I discuss and defend here in this post, which are often the targets of my critics, are mostly focused on deconstructing and delegitimizing the “movement” – the "movement" being a fraud that I see as a major impediment to pro-White activism. There is a niche space for pro-White activism, and if this space is filled by the failed “movement,” then it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to get a New Movement established and growing. Therefore, attacking the “movement” is essential.

Some of these criticisms involve issues that should not be relevant to pro-White activism, but must be discussed at this blog because the idiots of the “movement” bring these issues into pro-White activism, where they clearly do not belong. Consider the vaccination issue, for example. In theory, I would see no reason to bring this up in the context of pro-White activism.  But I am not the one who has brought the issue into WN; it is the anti-vaxx crowd who have done so. At one time, anti-vaxx stupidity was mostly confined to White suburban soccer moms with too much time on their hands and various blue-haired SJWs and others addicted to “alternative medicine.” But, Der Right, being influenced by irrational anti-intellectualism and paranoid ideation, has proven fertile ground for all sorts of anti-scientific lunatics, liars, and frauds, thereby associating Far Right pro-White politics  with the anti-vaxx agenda.  This being so, I have an obligation to speak out against that agenda, and to establish the Sallis Groupuscule as an outpost of sound, scientifically informed, rational discourse. Someone needs to confirm that not everyone on the Far Right is a tinfoil hat moron. The same applies to moon landing hoax stupidities and other laughable conspiracy theories.

I often criticize HBD, which I term a political movement aimed at privileging Jewish and Asian interests over that of Whites. I have always stated that this does not imply that all or most HBDers consciously pursue that agenda – although some undoubtedly do – but that the real world net effect of HBD race realism is indeed “privileging Jewish and Asian interests over that of Whites.” Engelman of Amren is often quoted here since he is a caricature of HBD; I couldn’t devise a better parody of HBD if I tried. Apparently though, Engelman is serious and not a secret anti-HBD troll (but if he is, I congratulate him on his success in this regard).  HBD race realism is opposed to the kinship-based racialism that I espouse; kinship-based racialism being the only objective (from a biologically-relevant adaptive fitness perspective) form of identity politics.

What about the somewhat vulgar sexual innuendo about “Ben Dover” with respect to HBD, the Alt Right, and Silk Road White nationalism?  Well, let us consider. I’m not the one who wrote that Derbyshire engaged in “measured groveling” to his Chinese wife – Derbyshire himself wrote that. I’m not the one who posted pictures of Chris Brand and his Chinese wife – Brand and Ray did that. I’m not the one who wrote that “dating Asian women is a rite of passage for the Alt Right” – an Alt Righter wrote that. I’m not the one who posted a picture of black booted Chinese women soldiers with guns as representative of Silk Road White nationalism – the folks at Majority Rights did that. So, perhaps Der Right should worry more about its disturbing fixation on Asian women rather than worrying about people like me who point out, and mock, that fixation.

What about homosexuality? While I don’t go as far Andrew Joyce in my opposition to homosexuality, there are reasons for concern. I was warned as far back as the early 2000s about a homosexual cabal in the “movement” and everything that has happened since then has done nothing but confirm that warning. Around the same time, I was warned by another individual that a prominent racialist is a closeted homosexual; there has never been any open evidence for this in the meantime, but, also, circumstantial evidence since then is suggestive of supporting that accusation. The Pilleater tape was also highly disturbing (and not only about homosexuality and homosexual sexual harassment but also about drug use), and what can one say about The Homo and The Negro and My Nationalist Pony?

What about my comments about Quota Queens and affirmative action? Let us consider together. Does anyone truly believe that, say, someone of Italian, Greek, or Slavic descent would have the same potentialities in the “movement” as someone, say, of Anglo-Germanic ancestry, such as a founding stock WASP?  Can anyone be so delusional?  Look at Spencer and his rapid rise, and being made President of NPI, apparently with limited to no real qualifications. Then we have Johnson careening from one disaster to another, yet still at the top of “movement” "leadership."  How is any of that different from an incompetent Negro being elevated in the corporate world due to affirmative action?

My criticisms of Nordicism are well known and need not gone into here in detail, but as we see, McCulloch continues with his bizarre alphabetical phenotypic charts, and we now see the new permutation of HBD Nordicism, which “jumped the shark” by “explaining” to us how Swedes are very collectivist because they are very individualistic. All laughable and worth being ridiculed.

My overall criticisms of Der Movement – so named to mock its Germanocentric Nordicism – are similarly justified. The same goes for criticisms of Trump.  With respect to individuals in the “movement” such as Johnson, I believe that everything I have written justifies that criticism. Note that Johnson “banned” me from Counter-Currents for discussing the Nordicist origins of the Herrmansson disaster (I didn’t even bother to mention the homosexual connection, which I suppose would have provoked him even more); further, he has refused to debate me or engage with my criticisms – even though anti-Sallis critics like Silver told him he should do so. Instead, he defames me as “insane” and labels me a “paranoid piece of crap.” In toto, I believe that my criticisms of Johnson are legitimate. I can go on, and note my contempt for the hypocrisy of the ethnonationalists who invade other people’s nations, and why that is justified. The semi-autistic over-earnestness of certain Counter-Currents writers is also, I believe, fair game for criticism.

I also make an issue of the tin cup panhandling of the “movement.” “Leaders” and other “activists” like to complain that they “have no money” despite the large sums of money that have been poured into the “movement” over the decades. Now, in a relative sense, there is some truth there; compared to the Left, the “movement” is deficit with respect to financial (and other) resources. However, in an absolute sense, it is a lie and what makes it worse is that the bulk of the money seems to go to the worst and most useless directions. There is one entity that shall go nameless here that has garnered millions of dollars, with its “leader” getting several hundred thousand dollars in compensation.  In their filings, this entity claims its objective is running an online publication. If you believe that this objective justifies that enormous intake of relatively scarce funds, then I must say that it seems that you have low expectations indeed.  I personally think this is a disgrace and a complete waste. What has the “movement” accomplished with the money it has already received? Maybe they should show some actual accomplishment before rattling the tin cup yet again?

In any case, this is a summary explaining some of the memes posted at this blog. Remember this post the next time one my critics labels me as "insane" and  "paranoid."

Saturday, February 27, 2021

Odds and Ends, 2/27/21

In der news.

Laugh at this. Once again, a question for Greg Johnson – what were Richard Spencer’s qualifications for being made President of the NPI?

What a silly juvenile idiot this guy is.

Derbyshire’s Arctic Alliance in action again.  And again and again.  Never forget – while Sallis has the cordon sanitaire, Derbyshire is praised, promoted, and paid by Der Movement. Tell me again how the affirmative action program is merely “paranoid ideation.”

A comment based on that China story:

Asmodeous Rex 

Translation of this story: China is an enemy of the West. All those that keep praising the Chinese as high IQ gentle people are hypocrites and liars promoting a false narrative for reasons only known to themselves.

If this person would read this blog, the reason the liars have for “promoting the false narrative” would be known to him and not only “to themselves.” Those liars are HBDers, in many cases motivated by a masochistic sexual fetish for Asian females (“measured groveling,” in their own words). Mr. Rex should read the comments of his fellow Amren commentator, the “race realist” Engelman, who, in virtually every comment post, talks about his literal love for Asian “women.” They openly admit it themselves. So, why do you need to wonder?  The essence of HBD can be summed up by: “Ben Dover.”

Laugh at this. Well Jared, if you have been reading EGI Notes, you could have learned a long time ago that Asians absolutely HATE Whites and are part of the rising tide of color against White interests and White survival. But, hey, keep on inviting Derbyshire to speak (to the “latrine flies”) at Amren conferences about how well the Arctic Alliance is going.

Does anyone wonder why I really can’t take any of these guys seriously? I mean, it’s an amazing and shocking discovery for them that Asians are exactly the same as other coloreds (if not worse) with respect to anti-White hatred, when some of us have known it, and have been preaching it all along, for many years.  Remember what I always say about judgment?

Complete “movement” insanity.  Yes, sir, feudalism in our hobbit hole!  That’ll keep dem dere Chinese at bay!  Decentralization!  Break out your muskets and shoot down dem dere Chinese ICBMs!  To the forest!

I give credit to Griffin for covering this story, which I have been following very closely. I haven’t commented much about it, since I don’t think it is a good idea for Nutzis to muddy the waters here at this point (*) – it is best to let the “normies” get “redpilled” first (sorry about using Pepe-Kek language, but I want to get my point across to all the Type Is out there).  But, to be brief, this – particularly Shaw’s battle – is exactly what I’m talking about with respect to democratic multiculturalism, although it is only an initial step. This initial step is battling against the excesses of Colored multiculturalism; the next step is demanding White rights as part of the multiculturalist agenda (I’ve outlined all of this before and I’m not going to repeat myself here). Note that this can lead to coalition building across various non-“woke” parts of the political spectrum.  Shaw, for example, is a liberal who used to be a “democratic socialist” – a person of the Left.  

*So, it is good for Griffin to call attention to it, but I counsel letting things play out among the “normies” for a while, for now, the Far Right should stand by and watch, and let the civic nationalist types like Carlson beat the drum about it. Sooner or later, all these people will learn that it is ALL about race, and that democratic multiculturalism is only a means and not an end. Ultimately, the choice will be Nutzis vs. Woke, and there is no place for any normal White people among the Woke. Now, Nutzis aren’t too normal either, but my hope is that a New Movement can make Nutzism more palatable.

I note that my take on Johnson's political acumen in Der Movement finds support in some of Liddell's comments on the same subject matter.

Thus, Sallis:

Johnson, for all his manifest faults, is very, very good at playing the political game – or at least as good as someone who has horrifically bad judgment and who likes feuding can be...Alliances are formed and broken, one feud is engaged in and won, former allies then become foes, new allies are recruited, etc...Johnson is also good at “glad-handling” and having friendships with “movement” bigwigs that – for as long as they last before falling apart – provide a cushion of support and prevent those bigwigs from calling out Johnson’s faults. 

Now, Liddell:

...despite his many character flaws, Johnson is one of the most intelligent and disciplined people in the Alt-Right. He is good at networking...

When two people who differ as much in their views as Sallis and Liddell come to the same conclusions on a subject, that's a hint that you should look more closely at the subject matter and carefully consider the validity of the opinions offered on that subject.

Thursday, February 25, 2021

Kaufmann: Promoting Genocide

In my personal opinion, Kaufmann, who I view as a monster, should be put on trial for the promotion of genocide. The rationale is described below. Excerpts from Kaufmann’s despicable screed below, emphasis added, with my replies.

See this.

In this piece, I argue for a new way of conceiving national identity and ethnic relations. This entails a porous ‘melting-pot’ ethnic majority, which is informal and social, within a personalized national identity that includes virtually everyone.

As we’ll see, the “virtually" means that folks like me who disagree are to be excluded, but any other featherless biped, with any “personalized national identity," no matter how petty and absurd, would be included. How convenient for a person of mixed-race like Kaufmann. And how inconvenient for people who want to preserve their people and civilization and who want the freedom to live amongst their own kind.

My view is that nations with ethnic majorities are more stable than polycentric multi-ethnic nations like Trinidad, Kenya, Belgium, or Guyana. 

And my view is that nations that are racially homogeneous are more stable that multiracial ones, even those with “ethnic majorities.”

In polycentric nations, ethnicity is the basis for political parties and the ‘normal politics’ of left and right is submerged. Federations which have ethnic majorities tend to endure much longer than those where there is no majority. Higher ethnic diversity correlates with lower economic development, which is a major reason why many sub-Saharan African countries — which are generally the most ethnically diverse in the world — have struggled compared to East Asia.

And how is that criticism of ethnic diversity compatible with “a personalized national identity that includes virtually everyone?”

American Ethnicity

Ethnicity is not the same as race, even if race is sometimes used to tightly demarcate one ethnic group from another, as with the ‘one drop’ rule in the pre-Civil Rights American South, which stipulated that even those with a fraction of African ancestry could not be considered white. 

Can you stop talking about the unscientific and absurd “one drop rule” that was specifically formulated to prevent people with fractional Black slave ancestry from being assimilated into free White American society? It is completely irrelevant to any informed and rational discussion of race and ethnicity. By the "one drop" standard, Europeans and Asians are Neanderthals because of the relatively small number of Neanderthal genes those groups have assimilated; they are Neanderthals and not modern humans and are a different hominid species as are those without that low level Neanderthal admixture. What idiocy.

However, in parts of Latin America, the color line was not drawn so tightly. 

And how are those nations doing compared to the USA?

Meanwhile, a number of ethnic groups cross conventionally defined racial boundaries. 

No, they do not. Kaufmann ironically mirrors the solipsism of the Far Right here; to their “minds,” reality is whatever they say it is, the “Lathe of Heaven syndrome.”  “Conventionally defined racial boundaries” – defined by who, Kaufmann?

Some central Asian Turkmen look ‘white,’ others East Asian.

It doesn’t matter what they look like, it matters what they actually are. Want a “conventionally defined racial boundary?”  Then White = European, which very conveniently represents a combination of genetic, phenotypic, and cultural-historical metrics all taken together. Thus, “central Asian Turkmen” are not “White,” regardless of what Kaufmann thinks “they look like.”

Some Pashtuns look South Asian and others ‘white.’ 

Same as above. A South Asian, regardless of what Kaufmann thinks they look like, is not European, as any genetic assay, or genealogical investigation, can definitively ascertain.

Some African Americans pass for white and are only recognized as black when they are known to have African ancestry.

It doesn't matter what Kaufmann thinks they "pass" as, it matters what they actually are.

What is Ethnicity?

Ethnicity is based on a subjective belief in common ancestry, as well as a shared collective memory… In defining ethnicity, ‘objective’ cultural markers such as race, religion, and even language are secondary to the subjective myth of ancestry. 

Ancestry is not a “subjective myth.” Ancestry can be traced genealogically and leaves its trace in our genes, which today can be assayed for anyone who wishes it (although one must be careful how to interpret the data). Kaufmann is, in my opinion, being maliciously dishonest. Ethnic groups can be distinguished genetically, at least to some extent, racial groups definitely so.

These markers often blur at the boundaries between groups. Think of the line between light-skinned blacks and dark-skinned whites

As if skin color is the only marker of race. Do African albinos look White? I realize that Kaufmann has some Jewish ancestry, and thus mendacity comes as naturally to him as breathing comes to all of us, but this is just too much.

part-Anglo Hispanics with Anglo first names (Ted Cruz, George Zimmerman), and English-speaking Hispanics like former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson…

What do their first names or language have to do with anything?  What is this utter nonsense?

…between assimilated Kurds in Turkey and ethnic Turks…

Two different ethnic groups.

…between Italians with German surnames and ethnic Germans with Italian surnames in Italy’s South Tyrol region.

The same.

It’s clear that some critical mass of markers is needed to tell one’s group apart from others. You may not look white, but you act, speak, or dress ‘white.’ Or you may look white, but you dress in a turban and have a foreign accent and surname. Each combination may put you on one side or another of a line. That line may vary depending on the observer. It may change when people talk to you and find out about your ancestry, as with a white-looking person who relates that their father is African American and is thereby accepted as such.

Identity is an overall combination of biological (genetic) ancestry, phenotype, culture, etc.  All are important.  A “white looking person” with an “African-American father” is not White in the European sense. What is Kaufmann babbling about?

America’s ethnic majority is white American, which is a category that expanded its membership criteria in the 1960s from being white, Protestant and ‘colonial stock’ (British, Dutch, or French Huguenot) to include German and Scandinavian Protestants, as well as white Catholics and Jews. This happened mainly due to intermarriage and a decline in sectarianism, but also because of the growing power of a pan-ethnic white American mass culture.

Does this absolute idiot think that occured in the 1960s?  The 1960s?  Before 1960, German-Americans were not considered "white American" (ignoring Ben Franklin here)? Is he insane? Dwight Eisenhower was of part German stock - a foreigner! Before 1960, Charles Lindbergh was not considered a "white American?" Really?  Was Joe DiMaggio considered not a "white American" before 1960?  To the Negro Leagues, Joltin' Joe!  I suppose JFK was lucky he ran for President in 1960; in 1956, he would have been not a "white American!" Kaufmann is a ludicrous joke.

And, legally speaking, all of those groups (unfortunately including Jews) were always considered "White" with respect to immigration, citizenship, and intermarriage. As regards popular culture, there was of course disagreement, but I note that baseball's "color line" - dating back to the 19th century - never excluded "White ethnics" and indeed allowed "White-looking" Hispanics (and, strangely enough, pure and mixed Native Americans). Since Kaufmann apparently believes that sports can be an important part of national identity (see below), it would seem that is as valid a marker of popular belief as any other. That is just one example of the fact that most people did not consider any Europeans to be "non-White."

The Civil Rights revolution may have elevated race as a more politically salient marker for northern whites than religion. I think the jury is still out on this, as it is difficult to argue that race didn’t matter prior to the 1960s. I reject the notion, from Critical Race Theory, that Catholics and Jews ‘became white’ because a WASP power elite decided they were useful for shoring up a white power structure. They were already legally and socially white in a way blacks, American Indians, and Asians were not. What changed was that they became part of a newly defined ‘white American’ ethnic majority as well as being racially white. That is, the ethnic majority expanded from being narrower than all racial whites to being coterminous with all racial whites.

It they "were already legally and socially white" - as I argued above - then what is the point of Kaufmann's assertions here and above? A distinction between being "White" and being a member of a "White American ethnic majority?"  Does anyone else get the feeling Kaufmann is just trying to confuse and obfuscate White American identity so he can maliciously deconstruct it?

Putting aside the Jewish question, he is making a logical mistake in thinking that it is possible to continuously expand the concept of "ethnic majority" beyond the boundary of race, just because previously it was possible to expand up to that boundary.

Looking ahead to the next century, when a majority of Americans will be mixed-race, I would expect ancestry (having some European background) and culture to eclipse race as the key criterion of membership. This would of course mean that many African Americans (80 percent of whom have European origins) could become ‘white’ if they adopted ‘white’ cultural codes.

This is an excellent example of Kaufmann’s promotion of White genocide.  First, he takes it for granted that “a majority of Americans will be mixed-race,” thus likely hoping to convince Whites that this mongrelization is inevitable and attempts at racial preservation are doomed to fail.  Worse, he redefines the White American people out of existence. White Americans no longer are a distinct racial group - specifically, European Americans. Instead, we have a reverse “one drop rule” of fractional European ancestry, coupled to some vague expectations of “acting White” (“white cultural codes,” whatever that means). Kaufmann invokes African Americans. Since a majority of these are fractionally European, then they all can be “White” if they “act White” in some mysterious way that meets with Kaufmann’s approval (perhaps if they show up to work on time and if they refrain from having fifty children each before they reach the age of ten). 

So, in theory, the entire population of America can be composed of African Americans, with all European Americans eliminated, and as long as some of those African Americans have “drops” of European ancestry, and as long as they “act White,” then America is an all-White nation! Presto!  Who needs actual Whites, living, breathing, European Americans, when we can redefine that group to exclude the actual original group and instead include their replacements? By this standard, Neanderthals are not extinct, since Europeans and Asians have small fractional Neanderthal ancestry, and I can say that some of them “act Neanderthal.” QED.

How about trying this with other racial groups?  Let’s convince the Chinese that replacing Han Chinese with Blacks that have fractional Chinese ancestry is perfectly fine, as long as those Black Chinese eat with chopsticks and create plagues to bedevil mankind. Or perhaps we could be so crude as to propose an Israel full of Arabs and Blacks that have small amounts of Jewish blood from the overwhelmed and assimilated original Israeli Jewish population, with that race replacement being acceptable as long as the new occupiers of the territory are dishonest neurotics who wear little hats on their heads.

The new ethnic majority group might even evolve into a twin-stranded ‘American’ ethnic group based on a fusion of Anglo-European and African descent, much like Mexico’s 90 percent Mestizo majority. Most other lineages would be airbrushed out of the collective memory


Just as the ethnic majority expanded from being narrower than all whites in 1920 to coterminous with all whites in 1970, it will likely expand to being wider than all whites in 2050 or 2100.

Not if we have anything to say about it.

Thus far I have largely discussed American ethnicity. But not everyone must join the ethnic majority: assimilation should be voluntary, and there are other long-established groups, notably African Americans and American (Native) Indians, which are also poles of attraction, with their own melting pots. Some might move between categories or combine them. We need a superordinate category that encompasses virtually all citizens: the nation.

Kaufmann confuses “nation” with “state.”  A “nation” presupposes a distinct people, at least on a broad racial basis, not an amorphous mash of every type of hominid currently extant on the face of the Earth.

The American nation must include everyone from the most recent immigrant from Somalia to an Amish farmer from Ohio, an African American in the Mississippi Delta to a Navajo from Arizona or a Mayflower descendant from Oregon. It must bridge an ideological divide between socialists and libertarians, nationalists and cosmopolitans. 

It “must?” Why? Simply because Kaufmann says so, because that is what he wants? But there is no objective reason why this dark and twisted – dare I say truly evil – vision of America “must” be actualized. I can say instead that the American nation must include people of European ancestry only and to hell with the rest. Why is that vision objectively less valid than Kaufmann’s?  From the standpoint of European American ethnic genetic interests, we can argue that my vision is objectively more valid from the standpoint of biological fitness.

‘Freedom’ and the American Creed are important touchstones, but so are the ‘everyday’ symbols of American nationhood from landscape and history to sports, cars, and place names; regional cuisines and architecture to popular culture. Having people construct their own ‘personal nationhood,’ with no version viewed as the ‘correct’ way of identifying with the nation, will help make nationhood more meaningful, more tolerant, and more cohesive — all at once. Of course, this doesn’t mean that symbolic competition over the meaning of nationhood will cease: each side will push its cherished constellation of symbols, myths, and memories. The conversation over which version of nationhood is a truer reflection of its essence can be cordial; this struggle, as John Hutchinson notes, almost always reinforces the idea of nationhood.

"...sports, cars, and place names; regional cuisines and architecture..." - is this meant to be serious?  A retarded middle school student could, I think, make a better argument than this drivel.

By contrast, a compulsory ‘hymn sheet’ civic nationalism flattens the differences in how people meaningfully attach. Many Americans with deep ancestral and cultural ties to the land will not appreciate their identity being defined abstractly in terms of a universalist idea which rejects the importance of the ethnocultural aspects of their Americanism. Other Americans — immigrants or liberals — may view urban cultural diversity as an important aspect of their American nationhood that is flattened by the notion of nation-as-idea. Alienating people through forcing all into a truncated Americanism tends to reduce both freedom and unity.

So, to Kaufmann, even an aracial civic nationalism is too restrictive! Everyone will simply have their own version of what is means to be an American, and all of these racially alien, and mostly mongrelized, “Americans” will “cordially” disagree with each other, and that will form the basis of an inclusive national identity. That is not only profoundly subversive and destructive from a prescriptive standpoint, but is absurd from a descriptive standpoint. What in American history, particularly today’s extreme division, makes anyone believe that an inclusive and stable sense of national identity can be forged from racially disparate peoples with competing personal (and often petty and superficial) versions of “nationhood?” This idea is really particularly stupid. Once there would be no binding ties of race and ethnicity, no ties of blood and of a shared historical civilizational history, then the ONLY thing left is the idea of nationhood, and even this Kaufmann rejects. Can he really be so stupid as to not realize when those ideas are the only means of identity self-expression then the differences between them will become existential, and the focus of enmity and hatred? There will be nothing tying the nation together other than a paper citizenship and the fact of sharing the same territory. That is a recipe for unending bloodshed. Kaufmann's intellectual mediocrity, and/or mendacity, is on full display here. It should be transparently obvious that such a "nation" is doomed to fail.  And note his lack of self-awareness:

Many Americans with deep ancestral and cultural ties to the land will not appreciate their identity being defined abstractly in terms of a universalist idea which rejects the importance of the ethnocultural aspects of their Americanism. 

Yes, and "Americans with deep ancestral and cultural ties to the land" will also "not appreciate" rootless mongrels like Kaufmann redefining White American racial identity to include any person who claims to have a "drop" of European blood and who "acts White" according to Kaufmann's mysterious standards. Kaufmann's whole agenda rejects the "ethnocultural aspects" of White "Americanism," so he can criticize himself. His essay is so breathtakingly sloppy and inconsistent that he does nothing but reinforce racialist stereotypes about the racially admixed.

Minorities’ identification to the nation differs symbolically from the way majorities identify to the nation. That’s fine. There should be no one way to be American.

So, not only will “Americans” have no binding ties of blood and race, they won’t even have any common symbols or beliefs. It’ll just be a territory full of disparate peoples and mongrels of every hue and race and face, each with their own distinct and equally valid definitions of nationhood. That’s a nation? That’s stable?

There are limits to the national menu. Those who reject equal treatment under the law and individual rights should be seen as violating a condition of national membership. 

Because Kaufmann says so. Policy as personal fiat. There is no actual argument to support that position.

But this stipulation should be drawn loosely, allowing room for ideological differences to be accommodated. All but the most extreme antisocial dissenters and anti-liberals should have a way of being American.

In other words, White nationalists and others who reject Kaufmann and his genocidal vision should not be accommodated and should not “have a way of being American,” but some afro-mongrel who defines Americanism as rap music and Afrocentrism should be so accommodated.

Immigration is also pertinent here. Immigration tends to increase diversity while ethnic assimilation reduces it. As diversity increases, the anxiety of members of the ethnic majority who care about unity and continuity with the past grows. In survey experiments, telling conservative American or British voters that immigrants will melt into the ethnic majority, leaving the country little-changed, tends to reduce opposition to immigration. Telling them that the majority is shrinking and that the country is becoming ever more diverse, and that these are great things, tends to heighten anxiety and sow divisions.

You see, the entire agenda is how to trick the White majority to accept their racial dispossession and destruction.  What matters to Kaufmann is not that the ethnic majority is actually preserved, but only that they wrongfully believe that they will be preserved as they are actually being replaced.  Thus:

Calibrating the immigration rate to the assimilation rate is important for national unity. Doing so permits voluntary assimilation through intermarriage and acculturation to take place, which tends to increase the size of the ethnic majority. By contrast, rapid immigration tends to reduce the share of the population comprised of the ethnic majority. The problem is that it typically takes several generations for deep assimilation to take place. When it happens, as in America in the 1960s when ethnic neighborhoods began to dissipate and intermarriage took off, it happens very quickly. This is mathematical: the children of mixed offspring are automatically mixed, and so the curve of mixed-race population is exponential. The share of mixed-race Americans will still be a minority in 2100 but will be a clear majority of at least 75 percent by 2150.

This is genocide, the replacement of the unmixed population with racially alien mongrels. Kaufmann is a proponent of genocide.

State integration policies can do little to accelerate the process, and there are few if any examples of state policies that do more good than harm. This means that periods of rapid increase in the foreign-born share, as today or a century ago, should be followed by periods of immigration reduction — such as that of 1924-65 — which slow down the rate of change. When assimilation takes off, the immigration taps can be loosened once again.

Note that last sentence. First, lull Whites to sleep, then open the floodgates to genocidal race replacement immigration.

In his 1916 essay, ‘Trans-National America,’ Bourne urges his fellow WASP Americans to shed their ethnic identity and find the ‘cosmopolitan note.’ On the other hand, he warns Jews and other immigrant groups not to become assimilated ‘cultural half-breeds’ but to ‘stick to their faith.’ The conceit that ethnicity is wonderful for minorities but toxic for majorities spread widely with the 1960s countercultural explosion as universities and television expanded. Meanwhile the anti-WASP animus of left-modernist intellectuals has morphed into anti-white sentiment. It has since become de rigeurfor elite whites to repudiate their own group and encourage minorities to assert an oppositional form of identity. What Matthew Yglesias terms the ‘Great Awokening’ involves a surge, since 2014, in the share of white liberals who believe racism and white supremacy are major problems in American society.

I’m not sure why Kaufmann is painting all of that in negative terms since what he promotes is a natural extension of those ideas.  

Going forward, slower immigration and continued assimilation through intermarriage can make the vision of an inclusive-majority-within-an-inclusive-nation a reality. 

In other words, boil the White frog slowly so it doesn’t realize it is being killed.  What a despicably evil creature this Kaufmann is. 

Moving from the state-led assimilation drives of the past to voluntaristic multivocalism is the best way to make this model work in the twenty-first century. This can help erode the historically high diversity which has both increased conservative anxiety and emboldened left-modernism.

Erode diversity by making everyone into coffee-colored “White-acting” mongrels?  Or will the "nation" tear itself apart before it reaches that point?

A prerequisite for change, however, is to shrink the outsized influence of left-modernism in the meaning-making center of U.S. society. This ideology, which has reached a peak of influence since its inception more than a century ago, encourages minorities to adopt a hostile posture toward the ethnic majority and national traditions while simultaneously teaching whites to repudiate their heritage and wallow in guilt. The net result is to stoke cultural division and populist backlash, all of which underpins today’s increasingly toxic level of affective polarization.

Kaufmann must really be stupid if he thinks that stopping “teaching whites to repudiate their heritage and wallow in guilt” is going to lead to the aracial future he wishes. Suvorov’s Law says otherwise. So, while Kaufmann is, in my opinion, an unspeakably evil monster, he can also be a useful idiot as long as Whites don’t drink the Kool-Aid and instead just concentrate on the legitimacy of majority group expression. Then we’ll see where that leads.

Let us now consider Kaufmann’s criminal responsibly vis-à-vis genocide.

See this.  

UN Genocide Convention [Note: Parts particularly relevant to Kaufmann's culpability emphasized]:

Article I  The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II  In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III  The following acts shall be punishable:(a) Genocide; (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide; (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide; (d) Attempt to commit genocide; (e) Complicity in genocide.

Article IV  Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Let’s consider Julius Streicher. Streicher was put on trial, convicted, and executed at Nuremberg for “incitement to genocide”; in other words, his crime was his ideas, writings, and speeches that promoted Jewish genocide, rather than any direct, physical actions promoting that goal.

Let us consider together. Let us perform a thought experiment. Imagine a Nazi German propagandist named Kek Pepeler. Herr Pepeler was making the following arguments to the German people: “Don’t worry about all of those full-blooded Jews disappearing from the national community. Remember, according to the Nuremberg Laws,1/4 (or less) Jewish ancestry is considered to be German, so we still have in our community people with fractional Jewish ancestry, some of whom may be acting Jewish!  So, nothing has changed! Full Jews, quarter Jews, what’s the difference? Let’s keep on with the process of changing our national demographics with the gradual elimination of the full Jews.”

Now, what do you think the Allies would have done with Herr Pepeler after the war?  The answer is obvious.  Pepeler would have been considered akin to Streicher and would have been put on trial, convicted, and executed in like manner.

Now, carefully consider Kaufmann’s work and its implications and carefully consider Kaufmann’s potential criminal responsibility with respect to the UN Genocide Convention.