Economics, 11/30/14

An alternative view.

I note that a certain anti-racist, anti-White commentator is shilling for predatory capitalism over at Counter Currents.

A few counter comments.

It is my understanding that the sharp increase in income inequality in the USA began in the 1970s, and really skyrocketed in the '80s and '90s.  In the period of WWII-Watergate, income inequality was at relatively low levels.  That was a period of generally good economic growth for the USA (*); certainly, there were ups and downs - but none of the downs were as devastating at the recent financial crisis and deep recession that took place in the context of today's free trade/high income-inequality regime.

Also, see this and this as well.

Of course, the WWII-Watergate period also saw the solid growth of an American Middle Class, and the 1950s are fondly remembered by American traditionalists as a period of relative cultural stability.

A major argument made by the capitalist shills is one of incentive. In other words, while Mr. Capitalist would make a necessary investment if assured of a $10 million return, he would not make the same investment if the return was only, say, $4 million. We are told that we cannot dictate to Mr. Capitalist that he invests without ending up in a completely controlled environment as in communism.  Thus, economic activity would decline without the unfettered free market, and to the Last Men, economic activity is all.

The problem with that argument is that it looks at the situation from an absolute, rather than relative, sense.  It assumes an absolute threshold for YES/NO decisions about investment; in the case described, it also assumes that Mr. Capitalist has other options for his money that have a better risk/benefit profile than the $4 million return.

Is this true?  While we cannot dictate investment without going to a completely controlled (and assumed stagnant) economy, we CAN create a set of alternatives from which Mr. Capitalist must choose to make the best outcome given those available alternatives.

Therefore, if Mr. Capitalist observes that the $4 million return provides the best risk/benefit outcome for his money (e.g., doing nothing sees his money value eaten away by inflation and/or subject to higher tax rates), then Mr. Capitalist will - if we cherish the "rationality" of the market - make that investment. He may wish he could get $10 million, but if the other alternatives are all worse than the $4 million return, that's what he would do, make the $4M deal - and if some reason he wouldn't do it, someone else would.

The same principle applies to salaries.  A CEO or entertainer will demand compensation in line with what their peers make, and, I agree that they may lose incentive to perform at the highest level if underpaid relative to their peers.  However over - and underpaid are relative terms, given what obtains in a given national economy. If CEOs and athletes and actors/singers routinely earn tens of millions of dollars/year in net income, then that is what they will expect and demand.  If, however, the highest salary is capped at, say, $1 million, then that is the target. Will the CEO play video games all day and let the company crash because he's not getting the $100 million bonus he wishes he could get, but is not allowed for anyone in the new economy?  If so, there are others who can take his place. Will the ballplayer fumble the football or strike out if he's denied a 10 year, $300 million contract no longer allowed for any player? Adjusted to today's money, adjusted for inflation, the great athletes of the past only made a fraction of what modern athletes make. And yet, they still played, still hustled, still made their records. Better than working on the farm or on the assembly line, eh?

Arguments about Israel are also disingenuous.  First, Europeans are not as ethnocentric as Jews, and one cannot equate the effects of capitalism in the two cases. Second, Israel, while being an ethnic-based state, is not a true ethnostate: it has large minorities, a demographically endangered majority, and the same pressures for cheap labor found elsewhere. The only difference is that the greater ethnocentrism of the Israeli majority has eroded the momentum for free movements of labor there. The same does not necessarily hold for the West.

*Granted, the fact that major competitors were devastated in WWII and/or under rigidly Marxist regimes helped; then again, the protectionist and income-equality policies helped as well, and could have been used to preserve the economic advantage, instead of having those advantages squandered through "free trade" and predatory capitalism that outsourced a major part of the American economy.

Crush the Infamy: Day of the Rope

Plain speaking.

First, more rambling by Durocher, King of Mainstreaming.

Let's see now. We can't let the "Mediterranean become a cemetery?"  Really? Does Europe have to be responsible for the well being of these Camp of the Saints invaders?  That mindset reveals the masochistic self-destructiveness of Christianity.

If a Euro-Imperium run according to my principles were in existence, the following would hold:

1. Once the migrant boats passed into European territorial waters, they would be attacked with the full force of naval power. Once a few boats were torpedoed, others would likely stop coming.

2. After a trial by a legally convened tribunal, the Pope would be hanged and the college of cardinals machine gunned. The Vatican can be made into a museum.

And, I don't think that even Catholic believers should object to point #2. These are men, following human sociopolitical objectives, which they cover with the veneer of religious belief. Who says they really speak for the Christian God?  One could argue that, having created the various peoples of the Earth, each in their own territory, that god would object to mass migration and globalization.

Lack of Professionalism at VDARE: Implications for the "Movement"

Another Old "Movement" fail.

In a very real sense, VDARE is not part of the "movement" proper. It is not openly racial nationalist, and prominently features such anti-WN writers as the anti-White Steve Sailer and miscegenator John Derbyshire.

Nevertheless, VDARE is, at least, on the periphery of the "movement," has influence over at least the more conservative and mainstreaming of activists, and is often considered part of the "movement" by those hostile to the continued existence of European people and their civilization.

Thus, VDARE is fair game to criticize in the context of deconstructing the pathetic failure known as the (American) "racial nationalist movement."

Hence, I call your attention to this article and the accompanying picture.  At this point, I need to clarify my position. I am not one of those folks asserting that a major problem with the "movement" is that it "needs to attract more women" and I certainly don't think racial nationalists should "tone down" "extremism" to accomplish that. No doubt that if, at some future time, the "movement" has ideas about more broad-based support, it will need an increased proportion of female followers - but such followers may naturally come as a consequence not a cause of increased popularity, and as regards building a leadership cadre a specific appeal to women is not required (if any women are naturally qualified as [lower-level] leaders, fine, but no "affirmative action" based on sex - decades of affirmative action based on ethnicity has already ruined the "movement"). So, I am not at all concerned about what effect these types of VDARE posts might have on female supporters. I am concerned about the message it sends to serious-minded, professional men, who wish to read informative articles without being exposed to the author's juvenile prurient interests.

Here is the point: activists need to act professionally. They need to avoid superfluous activity, unnecessary behavior that makes racial nationalism (and its peripheral hanger-ons) look bad, they need to avoid anything that superfluously opens up the cause to scorn or ridicule.

So, yes, it is a good idea to avoid looking like sweaty perverts, like sex-starved giggling adolescents with a "Beavis and Butthead"-style snickering: "look at 'dem tatas."  And it seems Fulford articles have a history of this, which gives a swarminess to otherwise serious topics, a focus that would be appropriate among the "game" crowd, but which doesn't belong elsewhere. And here's Allan Wall joining in the "fun."

Just another "fail," another reason for the "Old Movement" to be deconstructed, destroyed, and replaced.

Another Defense of Democratic Multiculturalism

Some points.

I’d like to defend the idea of “democratic multiculturalism” from its detractors, who take the initial rhetoric at purely face value and who believe that such a policy - as ONE of a varied set of approaches in the activist toolkit – means that Whites will be reduced to just another minority begging for scraps from the diversity table.

Let’s consider some points from Duchesne (emphasis added):

I believe that if we are interested in preserving and advancing the ethnic interests of European Canadians, it is better to work within the existing framework of multiculturalism than to promote assimilation…

…In the words of Will Kymlicka, humans (= immigrants) have a “very strong bond” to their culture and ethnicity; therefore, Canada should tolerate their ethnocentric tendencies and European Canadians should embrace multiculturalism.

We need to reply to multiculturalists that European Canadians also have a “very strong bond” to their ethnicity and historical ancestry, and in this way demand (within the framework of multiculturalism) the right of European Canadians to enjoy a group identity within Canada rather than being reduced to abstract units with individual rights only.

…The best strategy is to unify all our economic, environmental, and cultural concerns about immigration under a pro-European ethnic group strategy that is operational within, but recognizes the limitations of, multiculturalism in Canada…

…It is odd that the very same people who created multiculturalism have precluded themselves from enhancing their own group interests, preferring to speak only of their individual rights while granting both group rights and individual rights to other ethnic minorities.  In fact, we have practically criminalized any form of European ethnic attachment, treating it, and only this ethnocentrism, as "a pathological condition". We need to break out of this mental prison house…

…We will NOT be arguing in favor of multiculturalism as a minority to advance our group rights, but will be arguing within multiculturalism in order to make Europeans aware that they are the founding peoples and that Canada is their homeland and that we intend to keep the country majority European. By working within multiculturalism, locating its weak points, "preserving and enhancing" our culture, demanding our rightful place as the majority Canadian culture…
 

Thus, multiculturalism as it is currently practiced promotes (Colored) minority group mobilization combined with (White) majority passivity and atomization. The System recognizes that ethnic identity and group solidarity are important to minority groups. Whites must demand that the System also recognize, acknowledge, and respect that the ethnoracial identity of Whites is important to us, that Whites have collectivist and communitarian group interests, and are not just a haphazard collection of disinterested (and pathologically altruistic) individuals. Once we force the System to bend to that demand, to recognize – in a politically relevant manner – White Group Identity and Interests, then the "ball will rolling” and there will be a building momentum that can lead to positive outcomes, including and especially a deconstruction of the entire multiculturalist enterprise itself.

Turkey for Thanksgiving, 11/26/14

The other shoe is starting to drop.

Following up on this, we see this.  Anyone who understands the real power relationships of the world will also understand that Turkey will have unending problems with the USA and NATO until such time that the Turks grovel to Israel.  These things can be predicted with mathematical certainty.

Also, looking at Erdogan's Asiatic features should be enlightening to the "cherry picked photos" crowd who want to argue in favor of the "Whiteness" of Turks.

An Interesting Online Comment From a White Man Ex-Democrat

Agreed, but realize this: the GOP despises you too.

Comment:

I used to be a Democrat years ago. My mother and father were proud FDR and Truman Democrats. Neither left this world as such. Today, I wouldn't vote for a Democrat for dog catcher. The Democrat party made a decision long ago to throw the white working male and their wives for that matter, to the dogs. According nearly every Democrat you listen to, we all are racists, sexists and homophobes. We are responsible for every single ill this country has. We are "bitter clingers" in the words of the current leader of this party. The Democrat party since LBJ has thrown it's lot in with any group that they can get dependent on a government controlled by them. They've become the party of the EBT (single) mom, the illegal immigrant and the ignorant and guilt ridden rich of Hollywood and Silicon valley. They can save their breath when it comes to expecting us to support them. They despise us and we despise them. Working white men and their wives don't vote democrat and we won't be fooled by their lies.

Unfortunately, well-meaning people such as this commentator do not understand that the GOP isn't really any better.  In some ways they are worse - since they are deceptively fooling Whites that they are somehow (implicitly of course, all winks, nods, and dog whistles) on their side, as they in reality pursue the same anti-White agenda as the Democrats. 

Here's an immensely important (*) point: people like this commentator, all Whites, particularly White men, have more power than they think - they are enabling their own dispossession and destruction, since the System absolutely depends on White men for is proper function. If a significant fraction - not all, and perhaps not even a majority - of White men withhold their consent to the System, refuse to play the game, and actively oppose it, if they say, AS A GROUP, with cross-supporting group solidarity: NO! - if they refuse to be the cooperating cogs in the System machine, then the anti-Whit system breaks down, comes to a halt. The paradox for the System, and a source of real power for Whites, is that while the System hates White men, and wants to dispossess and humiliate White men, the System absolutely depends on White men for its own continued existence. Somewhow we need to enlighten folks such as this comment writer on these realities, and motivate them to begin to withdraw their practical support for the System that is destroying them.  Easier said than done, I know. I really don't know how to reach these people. Convince them that diversity threatens their supply of chips and beer?

*It may not seem so at first reading. People used to reading my pontifications about High Cultures and EGI may not immediately see the point. But, consider it from a practial perspective. 

The Wrong Side of History

Leftist pablum.

One of the most annoying memes coming from the Left is the oft-used statement that all of the pale stale rightist White guys are "on the wrong side of history" with respect to whatever the issue is under consideration: immigration, civil rights, whatever.

By an amazing coincidence, the people making such comments are themselves always on the "right side" of history and those they oppose are always on the "wrong side."  Funny how that works. You'd almost imagine there was a self-interested lack of objectivity there!

When the Left makes comments like that, they betray their communist roots, as the idea that history has some sort of "end point" that we are all supposed to strive toward - that "right side" - is a purely Marxist doctrine. The true and rational Right (not Spenglerian hocus-pocus) instead believes that we make history, history is something created by the human will and by our own efforts, it is not a pre-ordained scenario we are destined to fulfill, it is not a road we are inexorably forced to follow.

You see, to the Left, the "right side of history" is the subjugation and displacement of Europeans, it is the future world of coffee-colored mongrels lorded over by hook-nosed Tribesmen.  And all the steps along the way to that end: all the humiliations of Whites, all the defeats of the West, all the degradations Whites are forced to endure - that's part of the "right side of history." To be enjoyed and savored by hate-filled leftists, coloreds, and their Levantine masters.

Whites overcoming this genocidal agenda, forming an Imperium, and reaching the stars, is being on "the wrong side of history."

Analysis of the sordid Leftist mind completed.

Hadrian vs. Durocher

I pick Hadrian.

In response to a rambling and incoherent essay by Durocher at The Occidental Observer, an insightful commentator ("Hadrian") writes

The majority of those Germans, French, Britons, Greeks, etc. love their black and Muslim “immigrants” and have no problem with “multiculturalism” despite the fact that it’s leading to their own genocide. They consider those non-Europeans to be just as “German,” “French,” etc. as they are. If Europeans can be brainwashed to love and accept non-Europeans then what makes you think they can’t be convinced to love and accept their own race? 

Nationalism and ethnic/linguistic divisions will only weaken Europe and make individual nations vulnerable to exploitation by the YKW. Exactly how different are the various European peoples? China has never had a problem with uniting its various ethnic groups and different languages into one national identity. 

European nationalists are in the wrong here. American white nationalists have it right. Europe will be united racially under one government, or it will die as individual nations. Always remember that the jews and their leftist lackeys don’t hate us because we’re German, French, Irish, or Swiss. They hate us because we’re White.

Agreed.  Durocher has a mindset that I notice is prevalant in the "movement" - the idea that a putative future WN state would be just like today's America or EU except the coloreds would be gone and  a nationalist government in charge.

I reject that. There needs to be a complete "spring cleaning" of the European psyche, a rebirth, a "New Man" as the Legionaries were saying back in the '30s.

In any WN state I envision, in a Euro-Imperium, the lazy, hedonistic, incompetent, Schettino-like behavior currently extant in Southern Europe would not be tolerated.  The colored-loving pathological universalist altruism extant in Northern Europe would not be tolerated. The semi-Third World dysfunction and chaos extant in Eastern Europe would not be tolerated. Blood and Iron, Discipline, Authority, Racial Loyalty, and Productivity - and anyone not capable of getting with the program would be dealt with harshly. Totalitarianism? I would say that it is true Freedom - the Last Men flushed down the toilet of history, allowing superior talents and instincts to flourish. No compromise and no pandering to the lowest instincts among Europeans. We may as well be upfront about it now. Let's separate the men from the boys, so to speak.

A Rough Back of the Envelope Calculation on Executive Amnesty

Cash or check?

What is the economic cost, based on EGI, to White Americans of allowing 5 million illegals to stay in America rather than deporting them?

The following is a very rough calculation, with lots of estimates and coarse graining, but nevertheless gives a ballpark figure.

Let's estimate that the average illegal has the genetic profile of a 50:50 mestizo.  Most of the illegals are mestizos. Some may be genetically closer to the White American average (e.g., Irish illegals), some more distant (e.g., Negro illegals).  Let's call all of that a "wash" and go with a mestizo genetic average.

We'll use the child equivalents from Salter's work.  Now, the genetic data from there may be a bit out-dated, and I believe his estimate underestimates the damage, due to genetic structure not being taken into account. But, let's use Salter's estimates for our conservative calculations.

The loss of child equivalents to a European Caucasian from an Amerindian is 1.6.  We can halve that for the mestizo situation to 0.8.

Estimates of the "value of a human life" (e.g., for economic risk, etc. purposes) vary - a reasonable average of those estimates is $5 million.

Thus: 5 million illegals x 0.8 child equivalents x $5 million = $20 trillion.

Therefore, each and every White American is owed $20 trillion in compensation for Obama's executive amnesty.  Of course others are owed similar - American Negroes would be owed trillions of dollars apiece as well, but that's their problem.

So - cash or check?

Note: that is $20 trillion in today's currency value.  Therefore, paying off such a debt is impossible: printing hundreds of quintillion dollars will obviously make it all worthless.

You can't put a price on genocide.

Boycott Delta Airlines

Call for boycott.

Read here.

Similar to the situation with General Mills, my take is that if Delta Airlines wants to promote policies that hurt White Americans, then White Americans should boycott Delta Airlines. Let them earn their profits off the "Latinos" they so obviously prefer.

This all should tell White Americans the contempt corporate America has for them. Usually, you'd think that businesses wouldn't take the chance of offending customers. But when it comes to hating Whitey, politics trump profits. Further, they believe - with justification - that Whites will take abuse unlimited and that there actually will not be any harm to profits.

A thought experiment: if a major corporation openly stated that they support the total extermination of Whites, would that cost that business any White customers?  It's doubtful.

Attention HBDers: Asians Show Their True Color, 11/22/14

That color's not "white."

Read here.

Asians are so hostile to "shrinking, aging Whites" - particularly conservative ones - that they'll reject efforts that are actually in the interests of Asian students and families. Racial animus towards Whites, the racial group interest of Asians to remain part of the "rising tide of color" against Whites, seething hatred towards everything Western and European - that, my friends, is the Asian.

And no amount of pathetic HBD fanboy hand-waving will change those facts.

Left vs. Right, 11/21/14

A contrast in attitude.

In light of executive amnesty, some observations can be made. Note that two weeks after a crushing electoral defeat (*), the Left wins a great moral victory, they are the ones celebrating, and the victors of election day are pouting and fuming, and impotently scheming on how to salvage some dignity after having defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. This tells us much about the difference in spirit between the (broadly defined) Left and Right.

Left: always fighting, always on the offensive, never gives up, is never satisfied, is always demanding. When they win, the ask for more. When they lose, they simply dust themselves off and get right back into the fray. They always think big, always pushing. If they are crushed electorally, they will still push their agenda as if nothing happened, and they will never disavow their base of support. They view the other side as the enemy and aim for that enemy's total defeat.

Right: always surrendering, always on the defensive, easily gives up, is easily satisfied, tentatively asks (never demands) and shrivels in fear if denied. When they win, they declare victory, go home, and do nothing. When they lose, they wallow in despair and aim to change their entire belief system. They always think small, always looking for the easy way out.  If they are crushed electorally, they disavow their base of support (who they not-so-secretly despise) and want to re-invent themselves in imitation of the victors. They view the other side as potential friends and believe that mild debate and the outcome of an election or two can transform implacable foes into bosom buddies.

The Left: eternal winners; the Right: eternal losers. And that will continue until the Right imitates the Left in the ONE thing they should be imitating - the Leftist spirit of fervor, moral crusade, and refusal to ever surrender. For that, we need the radical, revolutionary far-Right, not timid mainstream conservatives.

*Yes, I know: the GOP is a sham opposition, and these mainstream elections are sound and fury signifying nothing (in a practical sense). But here I am talking about attitude, about spirit, about morale. Let's step back from our Olympian "movement" (or in my case, ex-"movement" and/or Neo-Movement) perspective and look at it the same way as ordinary mainstream White Americans. What do they see?

On Executive Amnesty, Impeachment, and the Movement

What now?

Read here.

Several brief comments. First, one hopes the White voter understands the utter uselessness of the GOP and of "mainstream conservatism" - fighting and losing battles from decades ago, the paragons of surrender.

This blog endorses impeachment, which is the only way for the Republicans to salvage the slightest microscopic scrap of honor and dignity. Yes, I understand: mainstream politics are useless, the GOP is useless (with or without impeachment), and in the end it is sound and fury signifying practically nothing. And, yes, there would never be a conviction.  Nevertheless, impeachment would have some spiritual and moral value: it is the right thing to do, it sends a message that the beta race is at least making a token attempt to stand up for itself, and, most of all, it is a morale booster for Whites - and here I talk about normal, everyday, healthy-minded "mainstream" Whites and not "movement" Nutzis - Whites who are sick and tired of "their side" always surrendering (*) without a fight, always betraying, always sacrificing honor for expediency, always being "moderate," always being fearful, always pandering and placating. While it is always best to win - and we desperately need victories - at the very least, if you are going to lose, at least lose with dignity, lose after making an honest fight of it. In that way, your side can hold its head high, retain some morale, and be ready to fight another day. However, rank cowardice and outright surrender - the stock-in-trade of "Conservatism, Inc." - leads to despair and acceptance of lower-caste, subaltern status. Impeachment may be a lost cause, but it will at least give the "troops" some sense that the battle has been joined,

As regards the "movement?"  Once again, this event, anther victory for the anti-White left, underscores the stupidity and impotence of the Nutzis, obsessed as they are with cephalic indices and gene frequencies, with dubious racial histories and the fantasies of gnostic traditionalism, of tinfoil hat conspiracies and sweaty fetishes.  The Left deals with real world practical issues, they win real-world victories, they make policy that affects our race and speeds us on the road to extinction. And the Nutzi response is esoterica, nitpicking, attacks against fellow Whites who don't meet some imbecilic standards, obsessions about sub-fractional "admixtures" or cherry picked photographs of celebrities, Hitler as the "man against time" or "above time" or whatever other insanity demented cultists spewed from the fevered swamps of their addled thought processes - stupidity and more stupidity. The Left makes history, the mainstream Right cowers before history, and the far Right onanistically obsesses over an invented comic book version of "history." Guess who wins, who loses, and who behaves as if they belong in the madhouse.

*White America has had a masochistic relationship with Hispanics for a long time. Instead of insisting that everyone in America speak English, we've turned America into a de facto bilingual nation to accommodate aggressive Hispanic demands - why would constant surrender on immigration be any different?

Answering a Critic

Tactics.

Read here.

Apparently, my essay on White victimhood was ill-received by some at Counter Currents, although Greg Johnson answered that criticism well.

A few points. [Note: it is unfortunate that the "movement" requires everything to be spelled out in the most minute detail, particularly since these public online forums can be read by everyone, and are. But we well know what the "movement" is, so we cannot be surprised].

First, the "movement" already constantly complains about White victimhood, a topic which probably makes up 50% of "movement" online content, and closer to 90% of what's at Amren and VDARE. So, it is not like I'm telling Mighty Nietzschean Supermen to change their attitudes - more like they take their complaining and do something useful with it: take it into the heart of multiculturalism and use it to heighten the contradictions of a rotten System, expose the hypocrisy, wake up Whites, and try and get a seat at the multicultural table.  Having "activists" whining and moaning to each other about how terrible everything is does not help - doing nothing is what really disparages ourselves and our ancestors. Taking that righteous anger, that indignation, those legitimate complaints, and using them - instrumentally - to achieve concrete objectives, that's what real Mighty folks would do.

Second, it is very possible to issue the complaints from a standpoint of strength, justice, and aggressiveness. Nowhere do I recommend supplication (supplication being the default behavior of Whites who are justifiably aggrieved but who say and do nothing).  "Whining" is not to be taken literally, but instead merely as a description of constant aggressive complaining. Indeed, when one points out the illogical hypocrisy and stupidity of the Left (inclusion that excludes, diversity that does not include those who object to diversity, intolerant tolerance, etc.) one can very well assume an attitude of bemused mastery. How one complains is up to them, and also dependent upon context. Are the Jews and Coloreds who run America in the position of supplicants? Not at all. They've rode their victimology to the pinnacle of power.

Third, as I've stressed, this is a tactic, not a lifestyle.  It is for a purpose.  Victimology>>>mobilize White anger (which can be used for many purposes)>>>demand a seat at the multicultural table>>>expose multiculturalism as an overtly anti-White fraud if refused or undermine the System from within if accepted>>>net gain for White interests.

However, if Mighty Supermen can do differently, and directly lead the Great White Revolt, then that's great.  I don't see that happening though.

Has Anyone Else Noticed, 11/20/14

Coincidences, of course.

Back when (a more secular) Turkey was "Israel's closest ally in the Muslim world" we heard the unending drumbeat of voices demanding that Turkey be let into the EU, that Turks are wonderful, that flooding Europe with Turks will solve all sorts of problems, and it seemed that a cornerstone of American foreign policy was browbeating Europeans into accepting Turkish EU membership.

Today, when (a more Islamist) Turkey has a quite sour relationship with Israel, with real tensions between those two nations, all the "Turkey in the EU" talk has dissipated, "conservative" commentators in Yahoo article comments threads attack Turkey and the Turks, and "concerned" voices question the direction of Turkish society.  All a coincidence, of that we can have no doubt.

I think back to George Bush, Sr. After the first Gulf War, his popularity was sky-high. He and his advisers thought to cash in a bit on that political capital to pressure Israel to make a real peace with the Palestinians, and to cut back on the settlements. I seem to remember some in his government (Baker?) dismissing Jewish concerns with, "they didn't vote for us anyway," or something to that effect. Blasphemy! And then - mysterious it all was! - Bush's popularity started to fade, "experts" started talking about a "coming recession" (a self-fulfilling prophecy, since much of economics is the population's perception of things), all sorts of negative news coming out, and Bush Sr. was portrayed as "out of touch," an "aristocrat" who "doesn't know how to shop at a supermarket," blah. blah, blah. Under constant withering sniping, and with a damaged economy, Bush went from the political pinnacle to being defeated by Slick Willie in 1992. That will show them uppity goyim who's boss!

Immigrants as Baby Substitutes

The ponzi scheme continues.

Read here.

Immigration is a ponzi scheme in many ways. As the linked post indicates, using immigration to keep the nation more "youthful" will requite a constant stream of aliens. As I have written previously, using immigrants for cheap labor ("doing the jobs Americans won't do") is the same, since the offspring of the immigrants won't do those jobs either, and a new crop of cheap labor migrants will be required every generation.

Tactics and Strategy for Democratic Multiculturalism

A time to complain.

There are two basic things we need to do: we need to build a new society based upon a new movement (the theme of my Western Destiny blog), while, at the same time, undermining the System, which includes undermining the “movement” - which is actually part of that System (an inept bogeyman, playing a role similar to that of Emmanuel Goldstein in 1984).  Today, I have a few words about undermining the System as a whole, built as it is on the ideology of multiculturalism.  I would like to talk about “democratic multiculturalism,” a concept endorsed by Salter and Duchesne, and one that I have previously discussed here.

Why do people who believe that “the only thing worse for the majority than a multiculturalism that does not work is a multiculturalism that does work” want to promote so-called “democratic multiculturalism?”  This paradox should become clear with some further explanation.

Whites need to demand a seat at the multicultural table, represented by real advocates of White interests, not groveling patsies.  Given that “Western” multiculturalism is defined by majority passivity and atomization contrasted to collectivist minority mobilization, a more collectivist and mobilized majority will go a long way to undermining the foundations of the System.

How to best begin this process on the group level is something that needs to be determined.  We will need Rightist elites to stand up and follow the lead of Salter and Duchesne. They need not be hypocritical or even deceptive about this, but essentially state: “It is well known that I do not approve of multiculturalism, a destructive ideology bad for my people, my culture, my nation. However, that is the dominant system we currently have and my people and my culture need to be represented within it.”

Most readers here are not, and never will be, part of that elite, but something that can be done at the individual level is to engage in some sociopolitical ju-jitsu against multiculturalism yourself. Think of this as the “bottom-up” component of the strategy, in contrast to the “top-down” approach described above.  When the opportunity arises, one can assert that Whites need to be included and given a legitimate seat at the multicultural table. However, one must present the proper ticket of admission: victimization.  Complain about discrimination whenever you have a legitimate case (in today’s society, you should have no shortage of opportunities).  The complaints should be couched in the language of multiculturalism, but explicitly aimed at targeting discrimination on a racial (anti-White), ethnic (anti-[fill in name of White ethnic group]), gender (anti-male), sexual orientation (anti-heterosexual), religious (anti-Christian, if you are a believer or even if you are not), etc. basis – with those guilty of discriminating being “others” (e.g., coloreds, liberals, feminists, Jews, Muslims, “gay” activists, System apparatchiks, etc.).  

We need to get over the idea that such complaining is “weak, beta, non-White, feminine” blah blah blah.  Not only is this complaining being done for a specific political purpose, but note that in a multicultural milieu, power is in part derived from the role of “victim.”  Yes, it is a “Last Man” attitude, but it is a means to an end, it is the case of Higher Men being able to stomach their sense of disgust (self-mastery, no?) to use the ressentiment of the Last Men against them.  Remember, this is a means to an end, not an end to itself.  It is not mainstreaming, it is not compromise, it is not incremental progress, and it is not reforming the System.  It is instead using the contradictions and weaknesses of the System against itself; it is an approach which forces the System to take its own ideology at face value, or be forced to declare its illegitimacy to the majority of the population.

Certainly, at least in the beginning, these complaints of anti-White, anti-male, anti-heterosexual discrimination will be met with derision, disbelief, snarky ridicule, sarcasm, hysterical responses, heavy breathing about “White Privilege,” and, perhaps, the claim that majority assertions of discrimination are themselves signs that the complainers are the bigots.  This is where the men are separated from the boys, so to speak, where self-mastery comes in: you must ignore these responses, persevere, and push through the barrier. If the System is going to ignore or ridicule your legitimate complaints, you need to push them into a corner in which they have to openly admit that discrimination against straight White men (Sailer's "war against Whites) is acceptable to them, they must be forced to admit that, to them, Whites have no rights, they must be forced to admit that "inclusion" excludes Whites, they need to admit that multiculturalism is for non-Whites only. The System depends on all of this being implicitly understood by Whites without it ever getting to the level of being explicit (although some former government officials have openly stated that "civil rights laws do not apply to [male] Whites"). The System loves the status quo, they want multiculturalism to work smoothly. They want the low-caste subaltern Whites to quietly accept their lowly status without complaint, without forcing the System to crudely reveal its agenda. Don't let them off easy. If they want to exclude Whites, then the exclusion needs to be open and overt, as a slap in the face to the complacent White masses. Therefore, if you have a legitimate complaint, go for it.

After all – and this is crucially important – our complaints of discrimination, as opposed to those of the Others, have the added power of actually being true (note my caveat above: make sure your complaints are based on some sort of legitimate issue). This is an “the emperor has no clothes” situation – some Whites do know what the score is, but each alone is afraid of saying anything.  In a multicultural regime, complaining about discrimination is a socially acceptable means of protest.  In theory, socially acceptable for everyone; in practice, not acceptable for White men.  But, following the implicit/explicit argument I made above - it is "not acceptable" only in an implicit sense.  Implicit attitudes are the downfall of a White race unable to articulate or defend its racial interests.  Implicit Whiteness.  The acceptance of an implicit lower-caste status for Whites. An implicit understanding that White men are "not allowed" to complain about race/sex/ethnic animus directed toward them. This implicit bluff needs to be called. If multiculturalism makes whining victimology socially acceptable, then the real victims of multiculturalism have to force the issue. If a few Whites so complain, that might embolden others to follow suit.  With sufficient White complaints that seat on the multicultural table just might open up, as the System strives to placate Whites by assimilating them into multiculturalism.  At first, they may try and get System agents to pose as White representatives, to defuse the pressure: this must be opposed and such individuals replaced by real advocates.

First steps first.  Discriminated against?  Complain. Persevere.  Use the multiculturalists’ own language of “inclusion” and “fairness” against them.  If “White Privilege” comes up, make arguments against it – one can find plenty online.  One can slip in subtle “movement” memes at this point; the idea that a people being demographically displaced as a result of official policy are “privileged” is ludicrous, as one example. Keep on pushing, but within the System framework. Use common sense; become familiar with the vernacular of victimology. Play the game well. The System is based upon a house of cards and they know it. You should know it too.

Success here is predicated on the assumption that “breaking the ice” will embolden other Whites to speak up as well.  Of course, this assumption may be wrong, given the pitiful passivity of the subaltern White race.  But one never knows, one must try. If you wait for the “beer and football crowd" to be the first ones to voice their simmering complaints and resentment you will be waiting forever. 

One concern at this point would be that this essay, along with the statements of Salter and Duchesne, will lead the Others to conclude that the demand for a seat at the multicultural table is for the purpose of undermining their multicultural project, leading to a refusal of that demand.  After all, you can argue that these folks can simply point to essays such as this one that openly state what the strategy is.  That is true. But it is irrelevant.  One should not deny the obvious.  One can say: “It’s true. I don’t like multiculturalism. I want to see it end.  I have an overt pro-White agenda. Others who are demanding a “seat at the table” share these views. But that is not relevant. The multicultural system exists, it is YOUR system, and any system that disenfranchises that majority of the population will be viewed as illegitimate by that majority.  This being YOUR system, it is up to YOU to find a way to include Whites and LEGITIMATE White interests (defined by us, not by you) in multiculturalism. If you believe multiculturalism can work, it is up to YOU to show it can work for everyone. Inclusion cannot be exclusive, as much as you would like it to be, as much as you have practiced it as such for decades. Whites are no longer going to be passive while others are mobilized.”  

This of course, once again, depends upon other Whites doing their part – Rightist elites applying pressure from above, and a fraction of the White masses applying pressure from below. Obviously, if they fail to do so, there will be no incentive to the System to compromise (note: they compromise, not us) in the manner described here.  The “top” and “bottom” pressure must exist, it must be consistent, and it must weaken the legitimacy of the multiculturalist regime. The System may realize that including Whites in that regime may have the same long-term result that “glasnost” had for the USSR – but, like Gorbachev, they must feel like that have no choice but to take the chance on reform.

Another concern is that the System will attempt to co-opt White multiculturalist involvement by promoting compliant anti-White White traitors to positions of representing Whites.  We must absolutely refuse to let the System dictate the terms of our own participation. Only those who represent the interests of Whites, defined by those Whites who have historically been defending and prompting White interests in an explicitly racial manner, will be acceptable. Puppets will be rejected.

This is a long, hard road, and there will be additional objections, problems, and criticisms, but here at least is a broad statement in favor of “democratic multiculturalism” and an outline of sorts of what should be done.

Start complaining!  Do your best imitation of an aggrieved member of the Tribe, or some whining colored activist.  It may be hard at first, and out of character, but remember, it’s for a good cause. Disruption, chaos, heightening the contradictions. Probe the System to expose the anti-White animus of multiculturalism. It's win-win. If they refuse that seat at the table, use that refusal to expose the animus and the hypocrisy; if they allow the seat, then undermine the very essence of multiculturalism by forcing majority interests to be accepted as a legitimate topic of discussion and policy objective.  Above all else, shake up the status quo.  Chaos, chaos, and more chaos.

Who Rules America, 11/18/14

Oligarchic America.

Read here.

Taking a Dive

Get ready for more GOP betrayal.

Read here.

If treason occurs, will the White lemmings still flock to the polls in 2016, to vote for the guys with the "R" next to their names?

Nuclear Inferiority

The continued decline of "diverse" America.

Read here.

That's entirely believable.  We can't even launch a rocket anymore, what else is new?  Of the nuclear triad, we have ICBMs developed in the 1960s, SLBMs developed in the 70s and 80s, and, while the B-2 bomber is still cutting edge, one wonders if 1950s era B-52s are still planned for nuclear use. Even if not, the other two, more important, components of the triad are woefully out-dated. We no longer test the warheads and rely instead on "computer simulations" - one wonders if any Asian cogelites conduct such "simulations."  Sir Purple Lips, our mulatto dictator, is dedicated to the absurdity of a nuclear-free world.  

A future White ethnostate or Imperium will require a modernized and large nuclear force.  Using missiles older than the fellows who would fire them is not appropriate. That's banana republic stuff - and that's what America has become: spending money on handouts to chimps and apes, using Americans as cannon fodder for the Tribe in the Middle East, while our nuclear weaponry is an antiquated joke.

Yahoo Commentator on Amnesty

Repeating insanity.

Free Speech

WHAT IS INSANITY?

 

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

 

Congress has passed 7 amnesties for illegal aliens, starting in 1986.

 

1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens

2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens

3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994

4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America

5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti

6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens

7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens.

Darwin Shrugged

Ayn Rand would be proud.

See here.

A Hapa married to a Negress. Supporting genocidal replacement immigration, but getting the votes of White men. One story that ties together so many threads of White decline, White degeneracy, White worthlessness.

The Beta Race

Some analogies.

I'm not the biggest fan of the whole "dark enlightenment" "game" crowd, but I admit they are correct when it comes to sexual dynamics, female behavior, etc. (my basic problem with them is one of prescription, not description).  Some useful analogies can extend to the race situation.

According to the gamesters, women love alpha males and absolutely despise beta males, for whom they have contempt and who they mercilessly exploit (when they're not ignoring them). Alpha males are cocky and confident, know what they want and take it, don't care what others think of them, and have borderline sociopathic traits. Beta males are "try-hard" nice-guys. comfortable providers, the doormats of society.

It is clear that the once-alpha White race is now hardcore beta: weak, wishy-washy, starry-eyed nice guys, doormat supplicants, a subaltern race, groveling toward aggressive coloreds (and the sexual consequences of this are not hard to discern).  Whites are held in contempt by coloreds, who exploit the pitifully beta White race.

Another "game" concept is the "shit test" - obnoxious female behavior aimed at evaluating and probing the relative alpha-beta characteristics of the targeted male.  Woe betide the beta male who fails the test!  Isn't much world-wide colored behavior a series of massive "shit tests" towards Whites? Illegal immigration? Race-targeted crime? Racial preferences? Double standards? Accusations of "White Privilege" while it is clearly the coloreds who are privileged? What is the upcoming executive amnesty but a large, in-your-face "shit test" aimed at White America, White voters, and the "old White men" of the GOP? And, truth be told, Whites fail these "shit tests" each and every time.

Another analogy is that of schoolyard bullying - where the low character bully targets a victim based on the knowledge that the victim won't fight back.  The victim runs away (White flight), appeases the bully, allows himself to be beaten and humiliated, etc.  This would end only when the victim stands up to the bully, when the victim defends himself.

The racial analogy is apparent. Whites worldwide have been bullied for decades, Whites absolutely refuse to stand up for themselves, refuse to fight back, and so invite more bullying.

Indeed, the proper image of the White race is that of a cowering beta male, shit-tested and exploited by brassy sluts, and bullied by dull-witted lumbering oafs. 

What advice would you give such a man?

That advice is what the White race as a whole needs to do.

Dark Brown Privilege

More evidence of the complete worthlessness of the White race.

One news story that summarizes everything that's wrong with America, especially White America. If White folks had any worth whatsoever, the White population in Dallas would take to the streets in protest. But, no. There's football on TV, cold beer in the fridge, and all is right with the world.

America Is Finished

An economic analysis.

Multiculturalism, immigration, free trade, Jewish influence - have all destroyed America. A hollowed out economy is just a symptom of the disease, as is the traitorous and feckless White Gentile political class that allowed all of this to happen.

A diverse America is an America in terminal decline.  The world is handed over to Asian robots, the human photocopiers.

What a waste.

Stupidity of the American Voter

Our transparent overlords.

Read here.

Book On the White Vote

Taking Whitey for granted.

Over at VDARE, Sailer mentions this book. You can read the Introduction at Amazon, and I notice that some of the points made by the author overlap with recent themes at this blog, particularly:

1. The the White vote is routinely ignored by the media pundits and taken for granted by the GOP, and

2. Attempts by the GOP to increase their share of the "Other" vote (likely doomed to failure) will most probably anger their White voter demographic base, and, ultimately, do more harm than good.

It's true that, in the long run, the GOP is in a difficult position. Winning national elections will become increasingly difficult as their base decreases as a percentage of the electorate; at the same time, approaches to enhance their share of that growing colored demographic will lose them the support of their White base.  But, whose fault is that?  The GOP have supported the demographic changes in America, they have collaborated in the slow genocide of their own supporters, and, if they face an uncertain political future, a look in the mirror can affix the responsibility for that situation.

Ethnic Hollywood

Some contrasts.

A focused essay demonstrating the extreme hostility of Jews toward founding stock Americans ("WASPs"), which can be contrasted to my RLS blog piece here.

Truth is that Jews hate "WASPs" - in fact hate all Germanic Nordic types. Jews tolerate Asians to the extent that Asians can be used to dilute White demographic, social, economic, academic/technical, and political power. Asians look out for themselves and hate Whites as well. The HBD pipe dream of a Jewish-led Jeurasian alliance of Jews-Asians-Nordics is just that: a pipe dream.

Of course, Jews hate White ethnics as well, albeit a slightly different form of hatred than towards the old stocks/Nordics.  Jews hate the latter because of competition for leadership roles in America, because of the Jewish aversion to the traditional America built by old stock Americans, because of alleged "exclusion" of Jews, because of envy towards Nordic phenotypes and restrained "WASP" behaviors, and, simply put, the two groups are so different in every way that a sense of aversion is instinctual.

In contrast, Jews hate White ethnics because the ethnics are viewed as uncouth racist savages, pitchfork-wielding pogromers, inherently reactionary or fascist, "traitors" who helped form the "Reagan coalition" and today make up conservative elements in, e.g., New York state. The ethnics are not as easily manipulated by "White guilt" and pathological altruism as are the old stocks, and the Jews are frustrated that the ethnics have joined with the more conservative and healthy portion of the old stocks to form the greatest remaining resistance to the American multiculturalist project.  

And then we have this comment:

buckle

November 9, 2014 - 12:21 pm 

How on earth did Joe Dante get away with “Gremlins” ? It discreetly upheld small town America and even included an homage to Dante’s fellow Italian Capra. The latter had, of course, provided the definitive fictionalised model of small town America, “Bedford Falls”. In truth, Italians have been the greatest victims of WASP exclusion (and yes it is real) and not Jews. The exclusion of Italians has been to the detriment of the American project as they might have proved useful allies in the 1930’s when the USA started to lose its way and began to make bad decisions.

Mr. Buckle is correct, but he's wasting his time there.  These ethnic elements can be natural allies against the Tribe's perfidy, but there are folks who still look at reality as if it was 1914, instead of 2014.

A Great Speech

Good points.

This is one great speech; that is really speaking truth to power. And the moronic comments by the communist at the end were helpful as well, demonstrating quite clearly the memetic link between Christianity and Marxism.

Too bad we didn't get to see the full reply to the leftist idiocy. One answer would be to ask what about the "love and tolerance" for the native populations - the Swedes and the indigenous Saami minority?  

Christianity, Marxism: same difference.  A sickness. Masochistic slave morality.

Update: It has come to my attention that Ekeroth is Jewish; according to Wikipedia he has a Jewish mother and considers himself an atheist Jew. If this is correct, then this is a rare case of a member of the tribe who actually shows concern for majority interests and for that he should be commended.

Pushing "Citizenism" Yet Again

Breezy Steve's inconsistency.

Read here.

Putting aside the issue of someone named "Posner" contributing to an open borders essay (will wonders never cease?), we get Steve Sailer once again shilling for his constitutional patriotic idea of "citizenism."  

This is the same Steve Sailer who continuously writes critical posts about "the war against straight White men."  Hey, Steve - who is conducting that war against these men?  Why, it's their "fellow American citizens!"  Indeed, White men are a minority of the US population, and if you promote "what's good for the majority of Americans" then maybe the White Feminist-Jewish-Colored Alliance, representing the majority of the American population, feel that the "war" is in their interest. You can't make tribalism, real (Jews, coloreds) or imagined (feminists), disappear by wishful thinking, Steve.  All these "fellow Americans" perceive themselves to have different interests, and will all argue about "what's good for America."

And Sailer, who apparently perceives himself as a "White mam" (putative Jewish ancestry notwithstanding), bemoans the "war" against his identity group. That's not very "citizenist" of you, Steve. You need to get together with your "fellow American citizens" like Sharpton, Caplan, Posner, all the Ferguson protesters, Latino amnesty advocates,  and lesbian school deans and decide what's best for all these "fellow Americans."

The "Movement" and Following Through on Premises

The biological determinism premise.

Read here.

The "movement" - particularly its HBD faction - promotes the idea that behavior is biologically determined. Certainly, culture and environment count for little according to this meme.  I am more in agreement than disagreement with this viewpoint: biology is predominant, but perhaps not exclusive.

But, if biology trumps culture according to "movement" memes, then this woman's destructive ethics can't be laid at the feet of her Jewish conversion.

Never fear though.  The "movement" is never at a loss. Obviously, this behavior is good - disinterested moral universalism from a hunter-gatherer origin! - simply exploited and perverted by nefarious others. This woman - who can reasonably be seen as prompting the "peaceful" world-wide genocide of Europeans - is merely a victim.  Indeed, a certain Liberal Latino will argue that the hardware is great, it is only a software problem.  The "movement" has answers for everything.

Unfortunately, reality moves inexorably forward, disregarding "movement" dogma.

Once Again: Taken for Granted

More of the same.

Read here.

Sure, there's some token comments about Republicans owing their election to anti-amnesty sentiment and that the majority of GOP voters oppose amnesty.  But the overall theme is the same: the GOP must pander to Hispanics to be successful in 2016, with the implicit idea that White votes can be taken for granted.

This is a theme previously discussed here, and one I assume will take on greater importance over the next two years, as the GOP forgets 2014 and looks toward 2016.  We can all imagine the propaganda. "Stop Hillary!"  "We can't have a 'liberal Democrat' in the White House again!"  "We must be pragmatic!"  Yes, you see, there is some mysterious law of the universe which compels Whites to go to the polls and vote for the person with the "R" next to their name, regardless of who that person is, what they say and do, and what they stand for.

Given this universal law, this automatic assumption, this smug and dismissive "they have no where else to go" attitude, why, sure, White voters can be ignored with sneering contempt.

If White voters had any sense, any solidarity whatsoever, they should look at the recently completed elections and understand their power.  The GOP can win ONLY with a significant majority of the White vote.  Losing any reasonable fraction of that vote dooms the GOP to failure, to non-electability. That realization should be the starting point for any discussion of American political realities.

And why can't the narrative be flipped?  Instead of talking about the GOP needing to pander to minorities, what about the Democrats needing to pander to Whites?

Well, we know we can't have that!  It's only one small step from that to some guy with a toothbrush moustache committing genocide.  Oy vey!

Desi Republican Loses White Vote

Asiatic failure.

Read here.

For a Republican candidate to lose the White vote, in an election where the GOP rode to victory on the backs of their White core, is remarkable. That's certainly a repudiation of liberal Republicanism. It may be a repudiation of the idea that White folks are "race blind" when it comes to smug NECs. Much gnashing of the teeth among the cogelites, I imagine.

Intelligence, Religion, and Fertility

Various correlations.

With respect to my arguments here, I cite the following:

Religion and fertility positively correlated.

More on that correlation.

Religion and intelligence negatively correlated.

More on that correlation.

And, of course, the well known negative correlation between intelligence and fertility.

Critics can claim that these findings are cherry picked and/or that correlation does not imply causation. With respect to cherry picking, all I can say at this point is that virtually every study of which I am aware agrees that religion is positively correlated with fertility and negatively correlated with intelligence, and that fertility and intelligence are also negatively correlated.  I am unaware of any studies that assert the opposite. Arguments about correlation and causation can also be used against the alleged benefits of religiosity; at this point, in the absence of definitive psychometric (and other) data demonstrating causation, all we have is correlation.

Revenge of the GOP Establishment Coming Soon

Wasted votes.

Read here.

As much as I like to see White men as a voting bloc (by the way, what is "White," Steve?), 64% is still too low.  With what's going on, 94% would make more sense. Worse, is the fact that these votes are wasted. Yes, indeed, the GOP will eagerly grab these votes, and then turn around and pander to minorities and feminists in anticipation of 2016. Your votes are taken for granted, White man, just like you are. Taken for granted, and your interests ignored. Sure, the GOP may oppose "executive action" on immigration, simply because they don't like seeing their power and prerogatives diluted. But they'll have their own ideas on immigration, not only amnesty for illegals, but flooding America with more "legal immigrants" to please Big Business interests. White male voters?  Step back, shut up, and know your place.  At the bottom, as usual. Welcome to the New America. Now go back to watching Negro behemoths run across the football field.

Putin's "Nationalism"

The Russian Steve Sailer.

"Citizenism" masquerading as nationalism.

Excerpts, emphasis added as follows.  My own comments at the end.

On October 24, Putin touched on the topic in his speech to Russia experts of the Valdai Club in Sochi. "I am the biggest nationalist in Russia," he said. "However, the greatest and most appropriate kind of nationalism is when you act and conduct policies that will benefit the people. However, if nationalism means intolerance of other people, chauvinism -- this would destroy this country, which was created as a multiethnic and multiconfessional state."

With this statement, Putin was "trying to define the acceptable parameters of nationalism," says Mark Galeotti, a professor at New York University and author of the blog "In Moscow's Shadows." 

"He's trying to redefine or define the acceptable level of nationalism as being not about racism, not about intercommunal violence or intercommunal tensions, not about essentially a radical social agenda," he says. "But instead being about patriotism. I think that's the key thing. When he says 'nationalism,' he really means patriotism -- in other words, loyalty to the status quo." 

"Putin is no nationalist -- he's just a spectator," Yegor Prosvirnin, the editor of the popular nationalist website Sputnik & Pogrom, said in a recent interview. "He was put there by the ruling corporation to manage the political process, while the noble members of the secret police buy villas and mansions in Cote d'Azur." 

Galeotti argues there are four key pillars of the Russian nationalist movement -- imperialism, social conservatism (support for the Russian Orthodox Church and antipathy toward homosexuality), ethnic chauvinism, and an economic radicalism of redistribution based on ethnic criteria. 

On the first two points, Galeotti argues, Putin has done just about as much as he can to meet nationalist expectations. And the last two are too dangerous and anti-Kremlin to even be touched. 

"[The Kremlin's] opportunities for traction on the nationalist movement are diminished and the risks within nationalism are increasing," he says. "So I think that's why they are probably trying to nip it in bud prophylactically now." 

Kevin Rothrock, editor of RuNet Echo at Global Voices, notes that Prosvirnin and other nationalist leaders have been predicting that the worsening economic climate in Russia will bring ethnic tensions inside the country to the fore. This is potentially dangerous for Putin, although Rothrock does not expect the issue to take center stage at this year's Russian March. 

"If they get at all a little bit antigovernment, it might have to do more with immigration services -- don't give visas to people from Central Asia and so on," he says. "They are even officially marching under some of those slogans. Granted, those are not overtly anti-Putin causes, but I think immigration and the kind of slippery slope into ethnic issues or racism -- that can very quickly become anti-Kremlin and then anti-Putin."

Well, of course, real Russian nationalist opposition to immigration is "anti-Kremlin" and "anti-Putin" since the current regime's endgame to create a "strong Russia" depends upon demographic race replacement and the Asianization of European Russia.

The real issue here though is not what's going on in Russia (although that's a serious concern), but what it says about the pathetic circus freak show known as "the movement," particularly its American version.  I have in mind all the pitiful, weak, effeminate blushing schoolgirls who get all weak in the knees when they see their hero riding horseback bare-chested in some Siberian wilderness, "movement activists" engaging in sweaty onanistic fantasies that a committed multiracialist and anti-racialist is somehow "pro-White" and a harbinger of racial nationalism.  Such people are idiots, imbeciles, brain-addled morons, a tragicomic embarrassment. They forfeit any potential claim they may make for any sort of leadership position or influence in a reborn and rational racial nationalism that may come into being.