I liked wood vs. termites. I’ve heard Jews compared to locusts. I like that one too.

We are no beyond the point of no return in the USA. Maybe we could have voted our way out of this 20 years ago. It’s too late for that now. We have to establish a power base somewhere. Our best prospects are still in the Deep South: Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, and South Carolina.

Take over a few states. Force a showdown with the federal government. Hope for the best.

This is amusing.

1.) Anti-racists argue that “race doesn’t exist.”

2.) OTOH, anti-racists argue that “racial diversity” is inherently a good thing and should be encouraged. The underlying assumption is that whiteness is inherently pathological.

3.) Anti-racists demand affirmative action programs and diversity initiatives to increase the number of non-Whites in our universities.

So, races are impossible to classify and identify, but we need more non-Whites on college campuses!

You forgot to mention that liberal progressive Democrats are all for globalization and “free trade” while the racist, isolationist, anti-Semitic Buchananites are its most outspoken critics. I haven’t seen ObamaMessiah left a finger yet to change our disastrous trade policies.

No1KState,

A “reversal of fortunes” is an apt description of the fate of Whites in postcolonial Africa.

jwbe,

The overwhelming majority of human history is a chronicle of various groups exterminating each other, struggling for advantage, winning and propagating their genes. This is the primary reason other hominid species failed to survive into the modern era.

I’m the owner of Occidental Dissent. For the record, I don’t run a “white supremacist” website.

1.) I believe in a spectrum of racial differences, not a vertical racial hierarchy.

2.) We’re not trying to restore Jim Crow. I support the creation of a White ethnostate in North America that would exclude all non-Whites.

Millions of Whites give lip service to the PC line on race. In private, they don’t believe any of it. This is why the comment sections of online newspapers and magazines are always filled with “racist” comments.

roro80,

You are either a moron or not at all familar with WW2 history. Adolf Hitler never had any desire to conquer and rule over Europe and North Africa. He didn’t want a war with Britain and France either. It was Britain and France that turned a localized border dispute with Poland into a World War by declaring war on Germany.

Nerd,

I can declare that I have a “right” to a harem of beautiful women. It would still be nothing more than an empty, baseless, arbitrary assertion. “Human rights” are nothing more than social conventions backed up by force.

MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech was mere rhetoric. King himself was a supporter of racial quotas. He was entirely favor in judging others based on the color of their skin.

#658

1.) Re: Founders. In other words, I made an unimpeachable point.

2.)I see no evidence of universal objective moral principles comparable to natural laws.

3.) Abraham Lincoln was a racist who spent years plotting to deport negroes to Africa and Latin American.

4.) White Americans enjoyed full political, civil, and social rights for centuries without extending them to negroes. The existence of rights, which are mere social conventions, does not imply their universality.

Tom,

The Reverend MLK also engaged in serial adultery. This was exposed by his close associate Ralph Abernathy in his book. As for James Bevel, he was a child molestor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bevel

PC,

I’m not from Stormfront. I come here to read Gene Expression.

#595

1.) You have no serious objection to racial consciousness, racial distinctions, race advocacy, racial pride – negroes engage in all of the above, in public with great fanfare, and you applaud them for it. The same is true of Jews, Hispanics, Asians, homosexuals and other minorities. As I said above, it is only when the white majority engages in these things that you complain. Simply put, you are anti-white.

2.) Liberals insist that race is nothing but a “social construct,” but immediately relapse into making racial distinctions in everyday life that corresponds to those of traditional physical anthropology.

3.) Your cherished belief that racism is evil amounts to nothing more than an opinion.

4.) Your points are trivial. The ability of liberals to make racial distinctions undermines their claim that racial categories are too ambiguous and thus purely social conventions.

#593

I think Indian Removal was a great policy. It allowed my ancestors to settle on land which had previously been occupied by the Creek Indians. I still own some of that land today. As a child, one of my favorite hobbies was collecting Indian artifacts like arrowheads, scrapers, and pottery.

#17

Where do “human rights” come from?

#61

The Founders didn’t share your belief in racial equality. They only sought to replace a monarchial order with a republican one.

Jadehawk,

Nice straw man.

Leigh Williams,

1.)Bullshit. Rich does portray Obama’s election as a racial accomplishment. Liberals tell us over and over again with great pride that he is the “first African-American president.” They have no principled objection to racial pride, race consciousness, racial distinctions, or race advocacy. Their real objection is solely to white people who engage in this type of thinking.

2.) Liberals always emphasize two trivial points:

– The various races shade into each other.
– The boundries between races are socially defined.

Note: This has been known since the days of Blumenbach and Linnaeus.

… and announce with glee that “race doesn’t exist.” Ironically, these very same people then relapse into making racial distinctions: he’s “black,” he’s “white,” she’s “Asian,” in everyday life. That’s one reason why I can’t take them seriously.

3.) Andrew Jackson was a great president.

Re: Frank Rich

1.) I’m struck by the way Rich unconsciously portrays Obama’s election as a wonderful example of racial pride and achievement. Whites alone are now forbidden by contemporary racial etiquette to think in such terms.

2.) The same liberals who insist “race doesn’t exist” seem to have little difficulty making racial classifications – how odd.

3.) Obama is merely the latest in a long line of negro leaders – Kwame Nkrumah, Mugabe, Nelson Mandela, Idi Amin, Emperor Bokassa, Mobutu Sese Seko, Jomo Kenyatta, Hastings Banda, etc.

I’m not a paleoconservative.

Leigh Williams,

The term “racism” didn’t enter the English language until 1936. “Racism” wasn’t widely regarded as a social pathology in the West until a few generations ago. This insistence on the morality of non-discrimination is an even more recent innovation.

The major advantage of historical literacy is a heightened awareness of the fashionable trends and prejudices of one’s own times. I see little of this amongst liberals and progressives who regard artifacts of a passing phase of their own culture as a universally valid moral principle rather than mere opinion.

Leftist Bozo,

I haven’t said anywhere that colored people, uhm, or as you would say, “people of color” (this phrase was popularized in the 1980s), are racially inferior.

#531

1.) Yes, I follow American Renaissance, VDARE, Majority Rights, Steve Sailer, etc.

2.) I’m not an ideologue. I believe all religions and secular ideologies (including liberalism and humanism) are ultimately baseless.

3.) I’m familiar with Rushton, Lynn, Harpending, Cochran, Lahn, etc., but not really interested in their work.

Nerd,

I’m somewhat amused by how seriously you people take yourselves. You cling to your moral convictions re: race with all the ferocity of holy rollers. I guess I can’t understand how any historically literate person could do so.

Isn’t it odd how liberals deny the existence of race, but insist on celebrating racial diversity?

#533

I’m not a “radical traditionalist” or a “third positionist.” Also, I never bothered to read Evola or Pound. I have a low opinion of ideologues.

#547

1.) I grew up in an area that is 50% white/50% negro.
2.) My views on race are based on personal experience.
3.) Re: social group. Yes.
4.) I have a blog.
5.) I voted for Ron Paul in the primaries. In the general election, I held my nose and voted for Chuck Baldwin solely because of his position on immigration.

My personal favorite is Emperor Jean-Bédel Bokassa. Meredith has a good profile of him in his book.

#511

Robert Mugabe is another accomplished African leader. If I recall correctly, he has more degrees than Barack Obama.

Colonialism is responsible for the poverty and backwardness of Ethiopia? That’s news to me.

Jadehawk,

Where precisely does one “culture” become another?

jack lecou,

1.) Your values exist within the framework of an ideology (liberalism) that has a long history.

2.) The Anglo-American race hierarchy wasn’t replicated in Latin America which was also enslaved and colonized.

3.) Hollywood aside, I haven’t seen this shattering of racial stereotypes. Sub-Saharan Africa is a basket case. Haiti is a failed state. Negroes are still typically less intelligent than whites and Asians.

Reader5000,

Please name all the distinct cultures that exist within the human species. Oh, thanks in advance.

Jadehawk,

Against the backdrop of human history, the level of “social equality” we see in the United States does not have many historical precedents. The identification of morality with non-discrimination is very fashionable, but also novel. That’s why it strikes me as “weird.”

Jadehawk,

I don’t believe that values or ultimate ends are derived from reason or natural science.

Jadehawk,

My point is this weird belief in “equality” is a tradition; to be exact, a republican one. I’m assuming you were raised in this tradition.

Brownian,

Re: blood groups. IMO we could definitely do that one to. We can imagine a society that discriminated along those lines. That would be a fun scenario.

“what’s your point exactly?”

I like to study the past and imagine other possibilities. I’m not impelled to demonize cultures other than my own.

Jadehawk,

You’re attacking a straw man. I said nowhere that something is “good,” in the objective sense, because it is traditional or customary. I simply noted that your reverence for “equality” struck me as a custom which I compared to animal sacrifice in some cultures.

Brownian,

If your values don’t come from natural science, where do they come from?

Travis,

We could easily pick something else. For example, we could judge people on the basis of the color of their skin plus other characteristics such as facial and skelatal morphology and hair texture.

Jadehawk,

Human history is a chronicle of violent tribalism. I don’t see in-group altruism as evidence of any universal moral principle of non-discrimination.

Jadehawk,

I’m neither a theist or a creationist. I haven’t seen any evidence that God exists. Similarly, I don’t see any evidence that leads me to believe that we should treat all races equally. This strikes me as a liberal superstition. It evolved out of the earlier Christian belief that humans are equal in the sight of God. The Quakers were amongst its first practicioners.

Jadehawk,

Natural science has nothing to tell us about ethics. Skin color is a commonly cited morphological racial difference. Why shouldn’t we judge people based on the color their skin? It was once customary to do so.

The Founding Fathers were well acquainted with the theory that racial differences are environmental. Unlike Darwinism, it has an ancient pedigree. The abolitionists frequently made use of it in their propaganda during the 1790s.

Jadehawk,

We’re discussing moral beliefs here, not physiological differences.

Sorry, my error there.

Leftist Bozo,

I’m not following your reasoning. I don’t see how equal treatment is derived from the condition of being a Homo sapien. It sounds more like a custom to me. Animal sacrifice would be another example.

Brownian,

What is the basis of this moral belief in equality? Why should someone believe in equality as opposed to inequality?

Badger3k,

Do you acknowledge that the United States was founded by men whom you would call “racists”?

Leftist Bozo,

Your belief in “equality” is as arbitrary and baseless as the most deranged evangelical who believes dinosaurs were on Noah’s Ark.

Ignorant of what?

Just an observation: the liberals here cling to their substitute god (equality) even more tenaciously than even the most deluded followers of Ken Ham and Kent Hovind.

Sure.

Prejudice – Where to start? How about the accusation that ‘race realists’ are scum, hillbillies, white trash, rednecks, Kluxers, Neo-Nazis, etc.

Bigotry – A bigot is someone who is “intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own.” The incivility of the commentators above speaks for itself.

Stereotypes – You’re Nazis, trailer trash, rednecks and so on.

I read through the first 100+ comments on this thread. What struck me immediately was the sheer volume of bigotry and prejudice, epithets, closemindedness, insults, and stereotypes of the liberal commentators.

Nerd,

I can declare that I have a “right” to a harem of beautiful women. It would still be nothing more than an empty, baseless, arbitrary assertion. “Human rights” are nothing more than social conventions backed up by force.

MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech was mere rhetoric. King himself was a supporter of racial quotas. He was entirely favor in judging others based on the color of their skin.

#658

1.) Re: Founders. In other words, I made an unimpeachable point.

2.)I see no evidence of universal objective moral principles comparable to natural laws.

3.) Abraham Lincoln was a racist who spent years plotting to deport negroes to Africa and Latin American.

4.) White Americans enjoyed full political, civil, and social rights for centuries without extending them to negroes. The existence of rights, which are mere social conventions, does not imply their universality.

Tom,

The Reverend MLK also engaged in serial adultery. This was exposed by his close associate Ralph Abernathy in his book. As for James Bevel, he was a child molestor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bevel

PC,

I’m not from Stormfront. I come here to read Gene Expression.

#595

1.) You have no serious objection to racial consciousness, racial distinctions, race advocacy, racial pride – negroes engage in all of the above, in public with great fanfare, and you applaud them for it. The same is true of Jews, Hispanics, Asians, homosexuals and other minorities. As I said above, it is only when the white majority engages in these things that you complain. Simply put, you are anti-white.

2.) Liberals insist that race is nothing but a “social construct,” but immediately relapse into making racial distinctions in everyday life that corresponds to those of traditional physical anthropology.

3.) Your cherished belief that racism is evil amounts to nothing more than an opinion.

4.) Your points are trivial. The ability of liberals to make racial distinctions undermines their claim that racial categories are too ambiguous and thus purely social conventions.

#593

I think Indian Removal was a great policy. It allowed my ancestors to settle on land which had previously been occupied by the Creek Indians. I still own some of that land today. As a child, one of my favorite hobbies was collecting Indian artifacts like arrowheads, scrapers, and pottery.

#17

Where do “human rights” come from?

#61

The Founders didn’t share your belief in racial equality. They only sought to replace a monarchial order with a republican one.

Jadehawk,

Nice straw man.

Leigh Williams,

1.)Bullshit. Rich does portray Obama’s election as a racial accomplishment. Liberals tell us over and over again with great pride that he is the “first African-American president.” They have no principled objection to racial pride, race consciousness, racial distinctions, or race advocacy. Their real objection is solely to white people who engage in this type of thinking.

2.) Liberals always emphasize two trivial points:

– The various races shade into each other.
– The boundries between races are socially defined.

Note: This has been known since the days of Blumenbach and Linnaeus.

… and announce with glee that “race doesn’t exist.” Ironically, these very same people then relapse into making racial distinctions: he’s “black,” he’s “white,” she’s “Asian,” in everyday life. That’s one reason why I can’t take them seriously.

3.) Andrew Jackson was a great president.

Re: Frank Rich

1.) I’m struck by the way Rich unconsciously portrays Obama’s election as a wonderful example of racial pride and achievement. Whites alone are now forbidden by contemporary racial etiquette to think in such terms.

2.) The same liberals who insist “race doesn’t exist” seem to have little difficulty making racial classifications – how odd.

3.) Obama is merely the latest in a long line of negro leaders – Kwame Nkrumah, Mugabe, Nelson Mandela, Idi Amin, Emperor Bokassa, Mobutu Sese Seko, Jomo Kenyatta, Hastings Banda, etc.

I’m not a paleoconservative.

Leigh Williams,

The term “racism” didn’t enter the English language until 1936. “Racism” wasn’t widely regarded as a social pathology in the West until a few generations ago. This insistence on the morality of non-discrimination is an even more recent innovation.

The major advantage of historical literacy is a heightened awareness of the fashionable trends and prejudices of one’s own times. I see little of this amongst liberals and progressives who regard artifacts of a passing phase of their own culture as a universally valid moral principle rather than mere opinion.

Leftist Bozo,

I haven’t said anywhere that colored people, uhm, or as you would say, “people of color” (this phrase was popularized in the 1980s), are racially inferior.

#531

1.) Yes, I follow American Renaissance, VDARE, Majority Rights, Steve Sailer, etc.

2.) I’m not an ideologue. I believe all religions and secular ideologies (including liberalism and humanism) are ultimately baseless.

3.) I’m familiar with Rushton, Lynn, Harpending, Cochran, Lahn, etc., but not really interested in their work.

Nerd,

I’m somewhat amused by how seriously you people take yourselves. You cling to your moral convictions re: race with all the ferocity of holy rollers. I guess I can’t understand how any historically literate person could do so.

Isn’t it odd how liberals deny the existence of race, but insist on celebrating racial diversity?

#533

I’m not a “radical traditionalist” or a “third positionist.” Also, I never bothered to read Evola or Pound. I have a low opinion of ideologues.

#547

1.) I grew up in an area that is 50% white/50% negro.
2.) My views on race are based on personal experience.
3.) Re: social group. Yes.
4.) I have a blog.
5.) I voted for Ron Paul in the primaries. In the general election, I held my nose and voted for Chuck Baldwin solely because of his position on immigration.

My personal favorite is Emperor Jean-Bédel Bokassa. Meredith has a good profile of him in his book.

#511

Robert Mugabe is another accomplished African leader. If I recall correctly, he has more degrees than Barack Obama.

Colonialism is responsible for the poverty and backwardness of Ethiopia? That’s news to me.

Jadehawk,

Where precisely does one “culture” become another?

jack lecou,

1.) Your values exist within the framework of an ideology (liberalism) that has a long history.

2.) The Anglo-American race hierarchy wasn’t replicated in Latin America which was also enslaved and colonized.

3.) Hollywood aside, I haven’t seen this shattering of racial stereotypes. Sub-Saharan Africa is a basket case. Haiti is a failed state. Negroes are still typically less intelligent than whites and Asians.

Reader5000,

Please name all the distinct cultures that exist within the human species. Oh, thanks in advance.

Jadehawk,

Against the backdrop of human history, the level of “social equality” we see in the United States does not have many historical precedents. The identification of morality with non-discrimination is very fashionable, but also novel. That’s why it strikes me as “weird.”

Jadehawk,

I don’t believe that values or ultimate ends are derived from reason or natural science.

Jadehawk,

My point is this weird belief in “equality” is a tradition; to be exact, a republican one. I’m assuming you were raised in this tradition.

Brownian,

Re: blood groups. IMO we could definitely do that one to. We can imagine a society that discriminated along those lines. That would be a fun scenario.

“what’s your point exactly?”

I like to study the past and imagine other possibilities. I’m not impelled to demonize cultures other than my own.

Jadehawk,

You’re attacking a straw man. I said nowhere that something is “good,” in the objective sense, because it is traditional or customary. I simply noted that your reverence for “equality” struck me as a custom which I compared to animal sacrifice in some cultures.

Brownian,

If your values don’t come from natural science, where do they come from?

Travis,

We could easily pick something else. For example, we could judge people on the basis of the color of their skin plus other characteristics such as facial and skelatal morphology and hair texture.

Jadehawk,

Human history is a chronicle of violent tribalism. I don’t see in-group altruism as evidence of any universal moral principle of non-discrimination.

Jadehawk,

I’m neither a theist or a creationist. I haven’t seen any evidence that God exists. Similarly, I don’t see any evidence that leads me to believe that we should treat all races equally. This strikes me as a liberal superstition. It evolved out of the earlier Christian belief that humans are equal in the sight of God. The Quakers were amongst its first practicioners.

Jadehawk,

Natural science has nothing to tell us about ethics. Skin color is a commonly cited morphological racial difference. Why shouldn’t we judge people based on the color their skin? It was once customary to do so.

The Founding Fathers were well acquainted with the theory that racial differences are environmental. Unlike Darwinism, it has an ancient pedigree. The abolitionists frequently made use of it in their propaganda during the 1790s.

Jadehawk,

We’re discussing moral beliefs here, not physiological differences.

Sorry, my error there.

Leftist Bozo,

I’m not following your reasoning. I don’t see how equal treatment is derived from the condition of being a Homo sapien. It sounds more like a custom to me. Animal sacrifice would be another example.

Brownian,

What is the basis of this moral belief in equality? Why should someone believe in equality as opposed to inequality?

Badger3k,

Do you acknowledge that the United States was founded by men whom you would call “racists”?

Leftist Bozo,

Your belief in “equality” is as arbitrary and baseless as the most deranged evangelical who believes dinosaurs were on Noah’s Ark.

Ignorant of what?

Just an observation: the liberals here cling to their substitute god (equality) even more tenaciously than even the most deluded followers of Ken Ham and Kent Hovind.

Sure.

Prejudice – Where to start? How about the accusation that ‘race realists’ are scum, hillbillies, white trash, rednecks, Kluxers, Neo-Nazis, etc.

Bigotry – A bigot is someone who is “intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own.” The incivility of the commentators above speaks for itself.

Stereotypes – You’re Nazis, trailer trash, rednecks and so on.

I read through the first 100+ comments on this thread. What struck me immediately was the sheer volume of bigotry and prejudice, epithets, closemindedness, insults, and stereotypes of the liberal commentators.