2,007 words
Everyone, including self-proclaimed “anti-racists,” is racist. Existing society is deeply racist; Jewish and philo-Semitic, hatred is embedded in its institutions.
“Anti-racists” hypocritically and cynically twist and distort words. “Racist” and “hate” have ordinary English meanings, not just Newspeak meanings.
The fact that racism, hatred, and discrimination are directed against whites, and ideas of chosenness and moral superiority ascribed to Jews and (derivatively, contingently, and temporarily) to Gentile non-whites, does not mystically render them non- or anti-racist.
Again, everyone is racist. Contemporary governments are systematically discriminatory, even genocidal entities. (There is no such thing as “reverse discrimination,” just discrimination.) The vast majority of whites are also racist in the prevailing anti-white sense.
If the latter were Jews, they’d be called self-hating Jews, if blacks, oreos (black on the outside, white on the inside), if Amerinidians, apples (red on the outside, white on the inside), if Mestizos, coconuts, if Asians, bananas.
Consistent with Newspeak principles, no parallel epithet for conventionally racist whites exists.
The casual internalization of and obsessive adherence to anti-white racism by whites causes great bewilderment among the tiny cohort of pro-white advocates.
They conclude that non-whites must possess ethnocentrism that whites mysteriously lack, or that after thousands of years, self-destructive, extremist egalitarian hunter-gatherer atavism or, alternatively, Christian racial “altruism,” suddenly reappeared among whites between 1965 and 1970 everywhere on Earth, or that whites abruptly decided to blow their collective brains out (the “we did it to ourselves” theory).
Pushed to its despairing extreme, such perplexity can lead, if combined with certain Darwinian or Nietzschean tenets, to a normative “whites don’t deserve to live” mentality instead of an objective “If whites don’t ditch hatred of self-kind they won’t live” outlook.
An Alternative Theory
William L. Pierce, the founder of the National Alliance, promulgated a more persuasive theory.
First, he recognized the key role that Jews play in anti-white racism.
Jews are not white and do not think of themselves as white. Pierce had no psychological, emotional, or status hang-ups that prevented him from seeing this. Consequently, he did not worship Jews, defer to them, or regard them as superior to whites or immune from criticism.
He conceptually separated Jews from whites just as Jews themselves do, and objectively analyzed their role in the contemporary racist dynamic.
Pro-white professor Revilo P. Oliver bluntly drove home the same point in reaction to an article by conservative Christian author Otto Scott:
Mr. Scott begins his article by quoting the “darling of the intellectual left,” Susan Sontag: “The white race is the cancer of humanity.” He notes that his god [i.e., the Christian God—Oliver was an atheist] punished the woman by afflicting her with cancer. But he makes the astonishing blunder of supposing that the Sontag woman thought of herself as a Caucasian. She is a Kikess and would no more think of calling herself Caucasian than she would of calling herself a bitch or a sow. She belongs to Yahweh’s Master Race, the race that now openly boasts in its own publications, “WE are the purpose of Creation.” (Revilo Oliver, “Confession of Guilt,” Liberty Bell, July 1989)
Sontag, according to Christopher Hitchens, later “retracted” her statement by sneering that her remark had slandered cancer patients.
What follows naturally from such hatred, especially when stoked with “Holocaust” fanaticism, which provides the ruling class, the mass murderers of millions of Europeans under Communism and world war, with a warrant for genocide?
What do people do with those they deem to be “the cancer of humanity”?
Exactly what Jews and governments are doing—they eradicate them.
My opinion is that the anti-white racism of the Jews is of an entirely different order than the racism of other non-whites. The racism of the latter is fundamentally taught or learned or culturally-acquired racism.
The hatred of the Jews, on the other hand, is virulent, implacable, eternal, and homicidal. It burns within, and will never leave them.
Whites Are Neither Good Nor Evil
William Pierce also taught that the vast majority of whites are neither good nor evil; they will think and behave in whatever manner the powers that be direct them to. Most people that is, will conform and obey, no matter what. (Pierce called them “lemmings.”)
Only a tiny handful, he said, are truly good or evil—he estimated 1 to 3 percent in either direction. For some reason he believed the number of “good” people, though exceedingly small, was roughly double the number of intrinsically bad people.
My own inclination is perhaps closer to the Christian belief that humans are afflicted with original sin, and can only be saved (become good) through a process of change and redemption.
What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good.
Nevertheless, people’s beliefs and behaviors can change radically. Change (for the worse) during my lifetime has been massive. Of course, it is easier to destroy than to build.
Unfortunately, if Pierce’s assumptions are correct—and, apart from his optimistic overestimation of the number of good to evil people, they appear to be—then it is comparatively easy with modern technology and dedicated ruthlessness for a small, domineering elite to continuously identify and destroy the tiny handful of good people on the margin, as they did under Communism and have continued to do in the post-WWII era.
As a result, whites opposed to genocide or totalitarianism have failed to gain any traction.
The Case of Germany
Most whites believe in Holocaust dogma. Germans who stewed blissfully in the depraved Jewish cauldron of Weimar did a volte-face and began shoveling Jews into “ovens” at the behest of the Great Satan. Today, Germans once again complacently serve a decadent, genocidal anti-white state.
It doesn’t matter who is metaphorically shoveled into the ovens—Jews or, today, whites—as long as the perceived authorities order it. Brutal East German Communism is as acceptable as West German freedom as far as Germans are concerned. Whoever calls the shots is fervently obeyed.
This is strong proof to me that human beings really are, as my former college roommate was fond of saying, “malleable.” It is safe to assume that today’s anti-white whites, under appropriate conditions, can be influenced and persuaded, shaped and bent into pro-white anti-Semites. Jews believe this, since they’ve performed the same alchemy in reverse.
In other words, Jews can be treated the same way they treat whites—which is food for thought. There is hazard in lighting the path to Darkness, but Jews were eager to take the gamble.
The Mass Media as Agents of Change
The mass media and state-controlled education have displaced the family in the formation and transmission of attitudes, beliefs, behavior, and culture. In addition, the mass media winnows candidates for public office at every level, thereby exerting effective control over the (formerly) democratic political process.
“One-to-many” transmission spreads radical innovations and causes rapid cultural change. The media are a powerful source of one-to-many communication.
Powerful conformity is induced also by “many-to-one” transmission. This consists of many persons or institutions all transmitting the same idea or message to every individual.
Social scientists Peter Richerson and Robert Boyd note that “TV’s constant availability, low cost, and curiously addictive hold on our attention apparently allow it to crowd out more highly rated activities.” (Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution, 2004, p. 238)
There are many unexplored reasons why TV, movies, video games, pop music, and other forms of media exercise such tremendous influence over our ideas and behavior. A “simple” one, I believe, is the (literal) hypnotic effect they have on us. Hypnosis is associated with heightened suggestibility.
The Jews, as William Pierce recognized, control the mass media of news and entertainment (which he invariably denominated the “controlled media”).
There is perhaps no other truism of modern life that he emphasized so repeatedly. It is somewhat surprising, therefore, that he never developed, or at least never publicly articulated, a theory of media control, or analyzed the nexus between media messages and human psychology and behavior.
Instead, he stated his case axiomatically:
By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by parents, schools, or any other influence. . . .
To permit the Jews, with their 3000-year history of nation-wrecking, from ancient Egypt to Russia, to hold such power over us is tantamount to race suicide. Indeed, the fact that so many White Americans today are so filled with a sense of racial guilt and self-hatred that they actively seek the death of their own race is a deliberate consequence of Jewish media control.
White Resistance to Thinking Realistically About Jews
Whites (actually, all Gentiles) exhibit an astonishing degree of resistance to thinking objectively about Jews. Most seem incapable of exercising even the most basic rationality where Jews are concerned. It really is remarkable.
This is true even of many white racialists and nationalists.
An important point to emphasize is that not all racialists have the same objectives. Danger lurks in the fallacy of the shared assumption—the incorrect belief that people are all on the same page when in reality they are not.
For example, my primary objectives are for the white race to (a) survive, (b) expand demographically, (c) win complete emancipation and independence from other races, including Jews, and (d) resume the path of progress.
But other “racialists” may have radically different objectives. To cite one example, I am sure the primary objective of some whites is the advancement of Jewish interests. And some “racialists” are not racialists at all. There are many other possibilities.
In reading the Nation of Islam’s The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, vol. 2: How Jews Gained Control of the Black American Economy (2010), I was forcefully struck by the historical coexistence of anti-black racism and extreme philo-Semitism among whites in the Deep South over a very long period of time—a phenomenon characteristic of the former nations of southern Africa as well.
The widespread myth of shared black-Jewish suffering in the racist South (or, by extension, southernAfrica) is a gigantic Jewish imposture. It is a lie. There is no equivalence whatsoever between the black and Jewish experiences in either case. The Nation of Islam’s researchers leave no room for doubt on that score.
This new insight, combined with my longtime awareness of unshakeable philo-Semitism among many white racialists, finally caused it to dawn on me that there is a deep psychological fissure within white racialism that cannot be bridged.
Flawed Racism
As English-born John Derbyshire, who is on the opposite side of this divide from me—the “Southern” side, for want of a better term—expressed it:
I bond effortlessly with East Asians & I think always have. I’m more at ease in a room full of Chinese people than I would be in a room full of black American rap artists. And my personal predilections aside [emphasis added], I think the big division in our society is always black-nonblack. The other stuff—Hispanics, Asians—is a bagatelle [unimportant, a trifle] by comparison. (“‘I May Give Up Writing and Work as a Butler’: Interview with John Derbyshire,” Gawker, April 9, 2012)
Derbyshire, who is married to a Chinese woman and has hybrid children, is also a self-described “philosemite,” “anti-anti-semite,” and “Zionist.” Philo-Semitism is central to his value system, as it is for many racialists.
I am convinced that this represents, like the historical racism of the South and southern Africa, a totally different psychology from mine, or William Pierce’s, despite the fact that a hostile society classifies both as a single monolithic form of “white racism.”
In fact, they could not be more different. This truth is crucial to grasp if Jews are indeed the primary impediment to white survival, and the main catalysts of genocide.
42 Comments
Good article.
This understanding of what some call the vulgum pecus problem makes the difference between good politicians and bad politicians.
Good politicians know that the masses are cattle, and build on this idea. They don’t speak to them from equal to equal, but through vulgarization, oversimplifying, repetition propaganda, power displays, and subtle psychological manipulation. Getting the son of the dethroned Kaiser to support him publicly and speak at rallies is a good example of how Hitler used one form of subtle psychological manipulation, namely, using authority figures. After power is in their hands, good politicians don’t argue, but use brute force and State influence to keep the people in check.
Bad politicians keep trying to make the masses fit the idealized idea they have of them, and don’t understand why their clever demonstrations and scientific arguments never succeed, but always meet the crassest and most depressing responses. I am very sorry to say that, but Merlin Miller or David Duke might be good examples.
Too many people in our circles continue to have, even when they use the overused term “sheeple”, this idealization of the vulgum pecus.
But this idealization is not the only reason we fail to draw popular support. Don’t put these words in my mouth. There are of course many reasons pro-white politics got nowhere since 1945, and few of them had something to do with correctable flaws in pro-white politicians. Most had to do with increased governmental persecution of far-right groups, rapid social changes and increasing importance in public life of media it was impossible for them to get a foothold in. Anybody could start a newspaper in the 20s and distribute it, nobody could start a TV channel or a Hollywood studio in the 80s except insiders.
I think it would be great for serious white advocates to stop idealizing the masses, but I don’t think at all it would be a miracle solution to all our ailments. Once you’ve stopped idealizing, you need to begin the psy manipulation… and we don’t have anymore the means to do that.
So maybe we should altogether forget about gaining popular support. Hence the idea of economic and cultural, and then physical, secession.
Excellent article, Andrew, but the fact that Whites have collectively in in EVERY White country surrendered their power to the Jews since the nineteen sixties indicates that there may be an inherent weakness in the psyche of Whites, (especially Northern European Whites) that makes them open to the deceptions of the Jews. If this is in fact, a genetic weakness, only a strong, authoritarian White government would have enough power to override this mechanism and establish a healthy, Jew free society.
I think there is a natural dominance hierarchy among races.
Physical anthropologist Carleton Coon stated that this was the case, which is where I got the notion.
In my view, whites are dominant over every other race on earth, except Jews, or at least Ashkenazi Jews.
Ashkenazi Jews are naturally dominant over whites and therefore—it follows inescapably!—over every other race on earth.
In dealing effectively with the Jews, who are murdering our people (for the process is fundamentally one of genocide, not suicide), we face the same tough task Amerindians or blacks faced in trying to cope with our (that is, whites’) natural dominance over them.
So the problem is not some unique white flaw, genetic, evolutionary, or otherwise, other than our position in the dominance hierarchy.
Germany briefly demonstrated that successful opposition to Jews by whites might be possible.
The other key factor besides dominance is demographics. If white numbers versus Amerindians and blacks are too small, for example, then whites cannot assert, or realize, their natural dominance.
Similarly, when Jewish populations are too small, they cannot effectively assert their natural dominance over their hosts. That is to say, they cannot subjugate or erase (murder) them.
The weird, non-territorial nature of the Jewish ecological niche seems to cause sharp population fluctuations over time, rising to peaks and then crashing, before flat-lining at a modest equilibrium for a long time before eventually exploding again.
Don’t you think it’s more due to the tribal nature of the jew to dominate us whites, who are not as tribal – as we’re more individualistic.
Since jews operate tribally, all it takes is a few number of them to dominate a much larger number of individualistic whites.
You bring up an important point about Jewish population explosions. Prof. Albert Lindemann zeroed in on this fact in his worthy tome “Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews.” He argued that the explosion in the Ashkenazi population of Eastern Europe/Russia fed all that followed. I observed very carefully how his book was received and conclude that many in the Jewish community were quite nervous about it. It took much reassurance from Jews who knew Lindemann to calm their fears, though “Commentary” ran a virulent attack on the book (and Lindemann).
Incidentally, while reading the book when it first came out, I was undergoing a real awakening on the J. Problem and was throwing off the belief in accepting conventional wisdom, wisdom handed down by our scholars, govt, etc. I realized that Lindemann’s title actually meant: “Jews rise” (both in numbers but particularly in power–think Communism), they torment Gentiles (“Esau”), who then cry. As a REACTION to this torment, Gentiles attempt to defend themselves, which, of course, is defined by the Master Race as “anti-Semitism.”
This was all before I had ever heard of KMac’s work. (Actually, it was Lindemann himself who pressed MacDonald’s work on me. Even with free copies of his books, I was initially uninterested. How fortunate I am to have changed my mind!)
I think the ecological niche inhabited by Jews is not quite so weird. The Terrible Williams’s and Traveling Irish in America, plus Gypsies in the old world do something similar to what Jews do.
All four groups use group cohesion and guile to fleece the majority population. The Jews are just more subtle and scientific about it. Their cons also operate on a longer time scale.
That being said I think there are good, assimilated Jews, but they are few and will never be able to reform the predator nature of the over all Jewish culture, not while Jews live dispersed among other peoples at least.
The Williams’s likely chose that family name because it is the most common in America and helps give them anonymity. They ride into a community, sell shoddy roofing jobs and other labor to susceptible locals. I believe their tactics are to hang around one community for at most 48 hours and then be two states away by the end of the week.
I think it is the Hindus from India who do a similar more long-term ethnic scam like the Jews.
You may remember they were kicked out of East African about five years back. The overseas Chinese are another example of an ethnic group that does this.
The unique thing about the Jews I feel is the extent to which they terraform nations to their own specifications. Since WWII they have gone so far as to try to destroy the genetic identity of their host.
Whites, moreso than other races, have a need to feel like they’re “good people,” and since good and evil are defined by jews, Whites are naturally subservient to jewish interests.
You resumed really well.
I think, respectfully, that it is overly simplistic.
The masses do not really care about morality, about what is just and good, or what is honorable and dignified. These concerns are more for what I would call the priest class, or in more analytical terms, people of a slightly above-average intelligence (~ between 105 and 115 of IQ).
In fact, the average human is probably less moral and far more selfish than you. I can redirect you, as I always do in that kind of arguments, to the works of French social scientist Gustave Le Bon. Further recommendations would be to study closely the lives and achievements of Edward Bernays, Joseph Goebbels (who was a big fan of the former), Adolf Hitler, and a compatriot, Louis-Ferdinand Céline, who notably declared, in his cynical old age, that “Proletarians are just bourgeois who failed in life… there is no proletarian nobility”.
The masses are moved by fear and envy, not by a drive toward justness.
What the Jews did was not tell them that Hitler = evil and Holocaust = evil. This line of moral appeals only works with old women, and does not work at all with the youth. It was, more accurately, tell them that “Far right extremists = losers”, “Racists = ugly skinheads who can’t get laid”, and “If you want to succeed in life and bang lots of girls, don’t be a far-right extremist”. And also, of course, “There’s nothing to be gained by stepping out of the politically correct line, and everything to lose”.
The same old tactics used against dissidents in the USSR territories. Why change a winning recipe?
I am curious why you associate morality with a priest class within a specific IQ range slightly above average. Where does that concept come from? Is there some evidence to support it, or is it more in the nature of a personal hypothesis or observation?
I have long thought that contemporary high IQ people (above the range you mention) are generally immoral and anti-moral. A good example is the academic class, whose members Arthur Jensen persuasively argued have high IQs. I think most academics, that is, the socially, politically, and ideologically engaged ones, are evil.
Willis Carto or Revilo Oliver, I can’t remember which, called such people “mattoids” for a time.
I believe that Revilo P. Oliver and Willis Carto both referred to mattoids. Oliver certainly did so in his article “History and Biology,” and Carto apparently did so in his book Profiles in Populism, judging from a reference to it that I recall reading in James Coates’ book Armed and Dangerous.
Mr. Hamilton, another fine article. As a certified hypnotist myself – by training, but not by occupation – I can confirm that you are exactly correct when you suggest that “There are many unexplored reasons why TV, movies, video games, pop music, and other forms of media exercise such tremendous influence over our ideas and behavior. A “simple” one, I believe, is the (literal) hypnotic effect they have on us. Hypnosis is associated with heightened suggestibility.”
Hypnosis is a very real phenomenon, I have hypnotized dozens of people, and as can any individual with decent skills, am able to induce a trance in most people. In a trance state, people can be easily be induced to forget their own name, be unable to move a limb, experience positive hallucinations (there is a monkey on their shoulder singing oldies) or negative hallucinations (they can’t see their own shoe). Be assured that these are very real to the person experiencing them, as real as a vivid dream. This is the fun stuff that stage hypnotists entertain audiences with, that usually lasts just for the period of the trance.
However, a trance state also has the potential to instill post-hypnotic suggestions. Trance states are very common, we humans enter into them frequently throughout the day, describing them as “daydreaming”, “highway hypnosis” and so forth. During this time, our unconscious mind (or “subconscious” if you prefer) takes control as our conscious mind goes somewhere else (we do this all the time when driving or working on a repetitive task). When in a trance state, we become very suggestible, as the “critical factor” that acts as the gatekeeper preventing us from accepting new ideas is lulled to sleep. Be very clear that media professionals understand this expertly, and design commercials and “programming” around this, continually inserting suggestions to be adopted by willing trance subjects. If you are one of the TV watchers, notice that when you stare at the tube, especially at night, you lose track of time, being in the moment, where your unconscious mind reigns. Media programs viewers through implanting suggestions and continually reinforcing them through repetition (Africans are exceedingly wise, kind and good people is one common theme, for example). Females are particularly susceptible to this.
This is not myth, it is pretty well established scientifically at this point. A good hypnotist will attain about a 40% rate of smoking cessation, for example, through post-hypnotic suggestion, which is higher than any other smoking cessation method. Some intriguing studies have been done examining how powerful hypnosis can be. A harvard study showed that people receiving suggestions for healing healed about 40% faster from broken ankles, and accelerated wound healing rates for other injuries.
If you wish to understand how ideas and opinions are formed, understanding the unconscious mind is essential. Humans are indeed “malleable” to a great degree. What we see around us, what we are taught, what we experience, programs us starting from the moment we exit the birth canal, and perhaps even before that. As children, we are constantly watching, observing and learning, and all this is programming our unconscious minds. This is a critical survival mechanism, and that programming profoundly affects us to our very core throughout our lives.
I love your–totally unexpected–response! I certainly had no idea a certified hypnotist would read it. Thanks.
I essentially agree with you about this. Of course, hypnosis is not really understood, so many readers will not grasp the hypothesis. But it seems almost self-evident to me.
Books about hypnosis rarely if ever suggest anything remotely like this about the media. The closest they come is the example of someone being absorbed in a good novel.
But it is obvious that TV, movies, pop music, video games, etc., all induce more powerful altered states of consciousness.
Recall when you have actually cried during a movie, or laughed very hard, or been totally absorbed in the story.
Yes, I think it’s safe to say all of that is hypnosis.
The frontal lobes, which are the siege of abstract reasoning and logical thinking, consume enormous amounts of energy relative to the others parts of the human body, in the sole form of glucose. [When blood glucose levels are too low, glucose must be synthesized artificially from lipids, a process known as gluconeogenesis.] This is, by the way, one of our big flaws, us developed races… we actually need more food than Africans to survive, because our big brain just sucks up so much kilojoules. This is also, by the way, why high intelligence in humans tends to be associated with puny corpulence — something very observable in children, less so after. The process of energy consumption also engenders strain on the metabolism, namely fatigue.
I suspect that when humans are tired, exhausted, or ill, their frontal lobes “shut down” — or rather more accurately enter a state of hibernation — to stop drawing too much energy and causing further fatigue, with their limbic system taking over. It is my expectation that at this point humans become vulnerable to suggestions, illogical thinking, conscious dreaming (or “directed dreaming”) and hallucinations.
I highly doubt, though, that it is possible to induce such effects by mere talk, in plain day, on a fully aware and strong-willed subject. Hypnotism is not totally cranky, but still a bit in my book. As to the effects of television, yes, I think there’s indeed this kind of “trance” going on in people who watch the tube, this glaze on the eyes that you have all seen once in your mother or sister when they were watching their favorite program. The fact that Jews understood so early the power of this device does make them look like alien superpredators, but I rather think they were just very lucky.
When you look at Jewish history, you see verbal intelligence and determination, yes, but you also see a lot, lot of blind luck. For example, if Napoleon had won at Waterloo, the European banking system would have ended up being nationalized by an Aryan autocrat. Instead, Napoleon’s downfall happened and granted our “chosen friends” all power to continue taking control of the economy and the media under a very liberal legal system.
Deviance,
If you have no experience with hypnosis, then it may seem to be hokum from the late night B-movie channel. It is true that you cannot force a subject to accept suggestions against their will when in trance. But you can induce a subject to want to do something. For example, a modest woman would naturally refuse to remove her clothing in front of an audience even when in the deepest trance. But give her the suggestion she is alone in her bathroom and about to take a shower, and off go the panties. If someone does not wish to go into trance, then he can generally prevent himself from doing so, although there are quite a lot of tricks to bypass this reluctance, many pioneered by the late great Milton Erickson.
Your theory about brain fatigue is creative, but incorrect as an explanation for hypnotic phenomena. As I mentioned previously, trance is a completely normal state, which everyone, you included, enter into numerous times each day. Your brain is designed and structured to do this. In fact, studies indicate that if you don’t go into trance frequently, then you end up starting to go batty. Hypnosis is simply taking advantage of this to induce trance and implant suggestions. There are numerous youtube videos of stage hypnotists inducing trance and eliciting bizarre behavior, which might be educational, as well as videos of dentists using hypnosis for pain control instead of chemical anesthesia.
There are several videos about how TV employs hypnosis as well. It is to be expected that electronics manufacturers, media corporations and ad companies use every means of getting users to watch the tube and program them when untold billions of dollars are at stake. For TV, its not as simple as hidden messages creating a zombie-like state, but rather constant suggestion repeated over and over through a human’s life during periods where their suggestibility is very high.
By the way, the experience of going into trance is very pleasurable, completely relaxing and restful. Women in particular absolutely love it. Hypnosis can be a powerful therapeutic tool for change, eliminating bad habits, phobias, addictions and unproductive behavior, as well as helping to build healthy relationships. More intelligent people generally have a greater capacity for going into trance. There are 3 main types of people that are usually not able to; the mentally retarded, those with brain disorders such as schizophrenia and overly analytical people that cannot help but analyze everything the operator is doing and saying rather than following his instructions. It is estimated that perhaps 85% of people are capable of going into a state of hypnosis, although skilled hypnotists rarely encounter someone that cannot go into trance (some take more effort than others).
As Greg would identify him, “a political activist even smarter than Saul Alinksy”wrote three generations ago that people are more susceptable to persuasion when they are tired or sleepy.
Thanks for reminding me of this. I’ll try to shift my posting on main stream chat rooms to after supper time.
This sound like very good and usefull information.
Would people be more receptive of printed material and more likely to remain in a trance like state when reading? In other words if they are in an actual conversation with someone who is selling and idea, is the social interaction likely to make them come more awake, as opposed to being face to face in a conversation?
A political activist smarter than Saul Alinsky once wrote that public speakers are much more persuasive than newspaper columnist. I’m still wondering about the pros and cons of this.
I’m glad you consistently point to Jewish behavior when discussing our current plight. I’m further gladdened by the fact that you explicitly point out that Jews are not White. This should be a rock-solid part of the definition of “White.”
Incidentally, just after I read your piece, I read the C-C essay “Waking Up from the American Dream: A White Nationalist Memo to White Male Republicans” by Gregory Hood. His was excellent, too, though he doesn’t begin to touch the root of the problem — while your piece does.
I wonder if I’ll be able to share Hood’s essay with friends and relatives. Sadly, I can’t think of any who would at this point like to take it one step further and read your essay. If anything, Whites are more afraid of that topic now than ever. Some people say more and more Whites around them are waking up to the Jews, but I have my doubts. What do you think?
PS: Is Gregory Hood primarily a C-C writer?
I’ve been falling down on the job lately. I need to remember to focus more on the Main Topic, which most WNs evade.
Main Topic, that is, from the point of view of the objectives I enumerated. I think most WNs have different agendas, in which opposition to genocide and white racial survival are simply not major factors.
What Main Topic??
me:
THE Main Topic is the ongoing practice and process of the Genocide, as defined by the United Nations, of the White race.
Today, they are winning, and we can Do Something about that; can, and should.
If we believe in natural selection of psychological traits including the trait of conformity, then we have to wonder how evolved psychological tendencies could exist that would allow a whole people to commit racial suicide.
William Pierce was wondering about that about the same time I was.
I had come to the conclusion that conformity was necessary for a people to be united, and thus strong.
They had even to be susceptible to the approval of the rest of the tribe to the point that they would die rather than be social outcast. A couple of months later I read Pierce were he had come to the same conclusion.
The coward dies a thousand deaths.
Something has to drive individual members of a baboon troop to face death in combat over a drying water hole.
The problem arises when your racial enemies gain control of modern artificial consensus forming tools of
Mass media. The Jew Edward Bernays stated basically this truth on the first page of his 1929 book, “Propaganda.”
With enough control over a group’s access to information and power to form their consensus you can literally talk hundreds of people into mass immediate personal physical suicide. The race mixer Jim Jones proved this for all time at Jones Town Guyana in 1978.
How much easier must if be to manipulate any population into a slow moving racial suicide?
And whites are not the only ones susceptible. Half the victims at Jones Town were blacks.
Kevin wrote:
but rather only a cohort of influential Jews who are really hostile to whites and downright traitorous towards western civilization
In other words, “organized jewry”.
The problem is a lot bigger than organized Jewry. Effectively, it’s all Jews. The exceptions, which do of course exist, are too inconsequential to matter.
Also, remember that Jews hate whites. They don’t bother making distinctions, except for purposes of manipulation. They are destroying our entire race, even though most whites worship and adore them.
According to the Narrative, Americans, Britons, Russians, and others pulled the Jews’ bacon out of the fire in WWII. But the Jews do not love them for it. Instead, they blame their saviors, those who died on their behalf, for the Holocaust just as much as they do the Germans.
I would not waste time looking for “good Jews.”
I don’t feel that way about blacks, Mestizos, Amerindians, Muslims, East Asians, or anybody else. Only Jews.
They are a different breed of cat, and must be treated as such.
Andrew also wrote:
Also, remember that Jews hate whites. They don’t bother making distinctions, except for purposes of manipulation. They are destroying our entire race, even though most whites worship and adore them.
I wish to call to your attention to this item straight from the horse’s mouth. (Thanks to our mutual friend for the link http://fedupusa.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/a-real-case-against-the-jews-and-the-jew-commissary-to-the-gentiles-by-marcus-eli-ravage/ ) The rest is very good reading. I didn’t want to re-post a bigger chunk here – just a small paragraph – enough to whet your appetite and go to the link to read the rest of it:
You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are disturbers. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom not merely of the latest great war but of nearly all your wars, not only of the Russian but of every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long we shall go on doing it.
I found it comforting that far-left professor James Petras was also adamant about holding ALL Jews responsible for general Jewish behavior. In his books, time and again he’d indict “the dentist, accountant, filmmaker,” all of whom were tacitly or directly supporting the J. program. His discussion on “sayanim” is especially good.
See my essay on Petras here: http://www.toqonline.com/archives/v7n4/746Connelly.pdf
Andrew Hamilton wrote:
I have long thought that contemporary high IQ people (above the range you mention) are generally immoral and anti-moral. A good example is the academic class, whose members Arthur Jensen persuasively argued have high IQs. I think most academics, that is, the socially, politically, and ideologically engaged ones, are evil.
Willis Carto or Revilo Oliver, I can’t remember which, called such people “mattoids” for a time.
Lately, that term is called “psychopaths”. Doctors Martha Stout and Robert Hare talked about them in their work. They say about 4% of the general population are psychopaths.
Willis Carto frequently called such men (& women) ‘plutocrats’. So we have Plutocracy ruling over us. I prefer to use the term Psychopathocracy . Yep, we have a Psychopathocracy ruling the globe.
According to Kohlberg’s theory of moral stages, most people are not creative in morality or able to make real moral judgements. Rather they are conformist, naturally accepting what is given to them and seeking to live up to that. Thus the Academics may not be evil but rather just mundane instruments of evil, just dancing for their dinner while another calls the tune. And he who pays the piper calls the tune.
I’d say that power corrupts firstly. And also Ponerology adds to this truism by saying the Pyschopaths are often of high IQ and realize they are different early in life. And incredibly, they can recognize each other and cooperate. Thus over time they tend to gain more and more power as Civilizations progress – along with the natural centralization of power in a class and the corruption that follows from that.
All of this helps explain why the West fell like a rotten fruit to the Jewish assault. And of course they added their unique talents such as preaching Universality while not practicing it.
nice guy wrote:
Since jews operate tribally, all it takes is a few number of them to dominate a much larger number of individualistic whites.
In that case, no wonder jews call us whites “goy”/”goyim” – cattle (or animals) – we are so easily like cattle and all it takes is one cattle herder (i.e. a jew) to herd hundreds if not thousands of cattle (i.e. whites) into doing things that benefit the cattle herder.
It is really amazing (or rather, dissapointing) to see how many people are misled to believe that whites are “individualistic” by nature. There is very little evidence for such claims of “inherent individualism,” and in fact there is an abundance of evidence in European history to argue that Europeans are actually “collectivist.” I say that, of course, with the fact in mind that hardly any people can be described as either totally collectivist or individualist. In reality, individualism is a perversion of the original nature of European peoples. Anyone who seriously believes claims about a pre-determined collectivism would do well to have a good look at the works of many prominent philosophers that hold an opposing view, and who, in my opinion, successfully refute that claim; such as, to give a few examples, Othmar Spann, Edgar Julius Jung, Werner Sombart, Hans Freyer, Carl Schmitt, and Julius Evola.
Just a note, I made an error in my typing where I wrote that “Anyone who seriously believes claims about a pre-determined collectivism…” That was meant to be “pre-determined individualism.”
Great article but think that academics may be evil because of their over emphasis on logic and critical thinking and the tight little world they live in. Over time, cocooned in their ivory tower intellectual humility, integrity and empathy can be lost. Jewish influence is also to blame as the Jew often confuses intellectual skills with intelligence. I’ve found low IQ people more often to be petty and cruel. Emphasis on reason at the expense of reflection may be more to blame than high IQ.
I do not see this issue at all the way the author does. The great majority of whites ascribe a sense of reverence, for lack of a better word, toward Jews for religious reasons. It is the Jewish role in Christianity that shapes the perceptions of many white white people. The Jew is seen from a religio/historical perspective. The actions of Jews are seen in this context.
As usual I am probably coming late into this exchange, but cannot help disagreeing with Hamilton’s claim that “Ashkenazi Jews are naturally dominant over whites and therefore—it follows inescapably!—over every other race on earth.”
History does not support this claim at all. It is a claim based solely on the Jewish experience after about 1850, and on IQ results. The fact that Ashkenazi Jews have a slightly higher average IQ than Whites is not enough to say they are superior. In terms of historical achievement, they are, in may respects, a complete failure as a people in never having the capacity to create their own territorial states. A list of the greatest Europeans in the Arts and Sciences would show that the overwhelming majority are White. There is a point at which a higher IQ adversely affects other human attributes. Caesar, Alexander the Great, Napoleon were much more than intelligent men. Jews are terrible in all sports and physical endeavors. Why do you think Jews envy the Romans so much? Think of the greatest thinkers in history — none of them are Jewish.
I mostly agree with your second paragraph, if the first two sentences are omitted.
I said Jews were “dominant,” not “superior.” It means that, when present in sufficient numbers, they’ll usually end up on top, successfully elbowing others aside. On the other side of the equation, non-Jews of every race will defer to them, give way to them, treat them with especial respect, and bend to their will.
Also, I don’t agree that Jews are terrible at all sports and physical endeavors. There have been a number of successful Jewish athletes and coaches. As a group, they differ greatly from whites in not being particularly interested in participating in athletic activities, however.
Although you do not mention it, I would add, due to a persistent stereotype, that Jews are also NOT weak or cowardly. They’re almost the opposite.
That’s about right. I’d guestiamte that 80% of Jews will support Jewish nationalism in Israel then turn around and support diversity in the West.
However I’m not certain that they are most of them on board with the destruction of whites by assimilation.
That being said 99% of Jews will rally together if they feel attacked in the West.
Also I don’t think any Jew can help but reproduce Jewish culture when they have children.
There are many Jews who are basically fully assimilated and may even oppose American wars for Israel.
But when they raise their children as part of a Jewish community in the West they are essentially raising the next generation of a nation within a nation. The grandchildren will have average Jewish views and average Jewish behavior in any white nation they inhabit. That means on average they will be little covert operatives for the extended Jewish community .Your average Jew puts a CIA field operative to shame.
The only way to reform the Jewish culture of cultural aggression is to have them living separately from everyone else. As long as they (or any other ethnic group) can live semi-covertly among other peoples nations the temptations and rewards will be too great for acting covertly together in their group interest.
Jewish residence in gentile lands will always end in Bernie Madoff and AIPAC.
The hatred of the Jews, on the other hand, is virulent, implacable, eternal, and homicidal. It burns within, and will never leave them.
It does, and it can’t be said often enough. I was surfing around Majority Rights and ran across this comment by James Bowery regarding the Jewish response to the American baby boom.
Andrew Hamilton wrote:
I don’t agree that Jews are terrible at all sports and physical endeavors. There have been a number of successful Jewish athletes and coaches.
Yep. For example, there’s Mark Spitz, an American jew who won 7 gold medals in swimming in 1972.
I once had a beehive inside my house, the bees would come out 2 or 3 at time, I would kill the bees and a little while later they would send out a few more, this kept happening until eventually I had killed all the bees. What most people can not accept is the idea that there are no “good bees and bad bees” there are only bees. The fact that the Jews have been kicked out of 100 countries over the years means people are simply unable to grasp this concept, it in order to prevent this from happening again you have to kill the whole beehive.
Great article! Have you ever thought of compiling, and publishing your best works? I’d certainly buy it.
I like what you say….they hate us…not only that but through the media, they also teach other races to hate us- with catastrophic results…what else is the point of Roots, Django Unchained, The Duke False Rape debacle, The Help, Trayvon, every freaking episode of Law and Order….. etc etc etc. Not only do they hate us, they want everyone to hate us….to convince the world about what they are already convinced about. We are the scourge of the Earth. Good or bad, that is irrelevant. Shouldn’t we feel the same way?
I liked Deviance’s remark about the priest class with an IQ of 105 to 115. If you take the average high school teacher -and quite a lot of university teachers-, the average employee in the MSM, and, yes, the entire protestant and catholic clergy up to the bishops, and the activists who dominate the political parties and decide who will be the next presidential candidate, you move exactly in that intelligence range.
@Deviance:
Thanks for the insights. I’m not sure of all of it but certainly cc people are here becasue we care about something bigger than ourselves. So the average person is probably less “moral.”
As to the “skinhead =ugly can’t get laid” I’ve heard the left use that tactic against pro-lifers.
I assume you are right in that they use it against pro-white dissidents too.
I read Bernays and Adolf and a little bit of Goebbels. If I get time I will check out the French writers, if they have been translated.