The Great Awakening

Posted on by

Ron Unz has gotten back to writing and he has put out a handful of long columns under the American Pravda category. These are posts where he digs into the official narrative on some subject and his experience with discovering the truth. They are packed with lots of well researched information about the topic, often from obscure sources that have been erased from the official narrative. To his credit, he digs into the credibility of his source material, as to why they have been deliberately forgotten. That’s always useful.

I find them a bit too long, but that may be a matter of taste. There is something about reading from a screen that makes long articles less pleasant for me. People have looked into this and found that shorter is better than longer on-line. It’s one reason the long form essay is going away. Most people consume their content on-line, so they prefer short pithy articles. There’s also the fact that most of this stuff is read at work, where you steal a few minutes to read something before lunch or on a break. But, that’s a small quibble.

Anyway, this entry on post-war Europe was really interesting. The post-liberation reprisals in France and Belgium get some mention in the official narrative, but almost exclusively with regards to women who slept with German soldiers. The gang-like warfare between communists and their enemies is never mentioned. Of course, there is never any mention of what happened to many German soldiers in prisoner of war camps. War is an ugly business and ideological war is the ugliest. so the post-war was no picnic.

In regards to the ideological aspects of it, the blind hatred of the Germans by the American elite is never discussed. That’s why no one learns about the Morgenthau Plan in their history classes. It is another example of how ideological enemies cannot see the humanity in one another. The rage-fueled Progressives of America were no different than their moral predecessors, the abolitionists. They came to see the other side as the pure expression of evil and wanted them exterminated. The Morgenthau Plan was about genocide.

The most interesting part of theses posts is that they fit into the “red pill” experience you hear from many who journey to this side of the divide. Not everyone makes the journey, as they were always here, but did not know there was a “here.” Many do have a moment when the light went on and they either began to question their view of the world or simply changed their mind about some important item. Often, it is a book or article that is the triggering event. In that regard, these posts are a good addition to the catalog.

Of course, none of his posts would be possible without modern technology. When the only store of knowledge was controlled by the people running the official narrative, there was no way to “red pill” anyone or be red-pilled yourself. Unless you found a stash of old books that had been proscribed, you had to accept the official narrative at face value. Whatever happens in these troubled times, the fact that the society that produced the technological revolution could be consumed by it suggests nature in the long run, is self-correcting.

Reading the article on post-war Europe, I was reminded of something that often gets forgotten. That is, it is not enough to undermine the moral legitimacy of the prevailing orthodoxy. That phony narrative sold to us is not just propaganda in support of the current order, it gives Americans a reason to feel patriotic. It makes us proud of who we are as currently defined by the people in charge. Learning that it is a lie is like like learning that you were adopted. It leaves a hole and something must fill it. Something will fill it.

While undermining the moral authority of the people in charge is a big part of our project, we also have to work on a replacement. It’s not enough to get people wise to the hypocrisy of the New York Times, for example, with regards to race. They Sarah Jeong fiasco does red-pill  a lot of people, but that only matters if they have something else to embrace. In the movie from which the term “red-pill” originates, the characters had an alternative vision of their future. Without that, they would have had no reason to take the red pill.

This is the lesson of the Great War. The collapse of the monarchical system left a giant void in Europe. That system had been discredited, but there was not a replacement for the people to embrace. Liberal democracy had yet to evolve the secular morality to justify it, so into the void flowed Marxism and Fascism. The twentieth century was the fight between liberal democracy, fascism and communism, with the result being the neo-liberal order we have today. The lesson is that what comes next is not better by default.

The posts on antisemitism will be of some interest, especially to the JQ’ers. Ron is Jewish, so he comes to the subject from a different angle than the anti-Semites, but he is refreshingly frank about the material. It’s  good reminder that Jews are not the monolith JQ people need to believe. There are a lot of alt-Jews out there. It’s not a majority or even close to one, but it is a substantial minority. Their fight within the Jewish community over Jewish identity is a mirror of what is happening within the Occident.

It’s a good reminder that even if you embrace the fact that human diversity requires separation, it does not mean hostility. In fact, diversity requires cooperation in order for peaceful separation to work. Even though one group may have different interests and a radically different sense of identity than another, they can still cooperate with one another where their interests align. For the JQ people who think they have taken the ultimate red-pill, this understanding about cooperation and diversity is the ultimate red-pill.

I’m fond of pointing out that much of what defines the modern age is that everyone forgot the timeless lessons of the human condition and now we have to rediscover them. This great awakening we see on our side of the great divide is, in many respects, a rediscovery of the past. So much has been hidden from view in order to prop up the current regime, it’s shocking to most people. Like that kid who learns his parents had lied to him and he was adopted, what matters next is what we do with this new knowledge.

177 thoughts on “The Great Awakening”

  1. “Unless you found a stash of old books that had been proscribed, you had to accept the official narrative at face value. ”
    Too right. This is addressed in a short story published some years ago,
    ‘Sunrise at Coffin Rock’. It’s currently available at
    http://www.angelfire.com/nv/cceducate/sunrise.html
    and is the sequel to the very dark ‘Sundown at Coffin Rock’.
    The Internet put paid to that information bottleneck, hopefully for good.

  2. Ron points to several interesting books written by fellow travelers after WWII. Unfortunately I don’t have that much time to waste.

  3. Zman, have you any guess as to what Ursula was referring to, when she yesterday *accused* me of taking her “criticisms out of context”?
    Seeing as she has not responded to my above request for clarification, and in light of her simultaneous straw-man charge that we are “not allowed to discuss Jews…”, I suspect that we’re seeing here a sh*t test.
    But I’d be happy to be enlightened, were her beef to have any legit specifics.

  4. “People have looked into this and found that shorter is better than longer on-line. It’s one reason the long form essay is going away. Most people consume their content on-line, so they prefer short pithy articles.”

    Lol. If the target audience is “most people” and the purpose to sell words, then size, topics, and discourse level to get optimal results are easily determined (and without differences between online or offline).
    This is why the long essay (but also punctuation…) are going away: they hinder sales.

    That’s not Unz’s concerns however.

  5. Dagnabbit, people. Too much time yapping about the JQ, not near enough input as to “what matters next.”

    I am way too easily triggered.
    I blame the…!!!

    • OK, Alzaebo, but part of our sorting out “what matters next” is us becoming, and being respected as, DISCIPLINED, e.g. when we assess past records, or future options (e.g. about Jews).
      If we let (esp. the most rabid) JQ-ers bulldoze us, into blowing off Zman’s advice on “understanding about cooperation”, we set our cause up to blunder into unnecessary hornet’s nests, like Hitler got himself into, when his broke his pact with that “Slav-Tartar body with a Jewish head”.
      That big Red blob on the map looked oh so tempting to him, that he just had to dismiss the doubts of major advisors (e.g. Ribbentrop, Guderian).
      His ASSumption that “All we need do is to kick in the front door… ” turned out to be a laughable one, that cost him everything.
      I rather suspect that the conceptual straws he grasped at, were no worse than those grasped by those JQ-ers who would have us blow off Zman’s advice.

      Grasping at straws runs afoul of the advice of Edmund Burke, who held the main human virtue to be PRUDENCE, and of Adam Smith, who most touted SELF-COMMAND, as the virtue that regulated the others.
      (I fear, that some here give the Enlightenment short shrift.)
      If we end up teeing off on Jews, and blow off reasonable prospects of cooperation with them, out of ill-considered paranoia, or rage at current circumstances, we’ll emulate Hitler’s staggering IMprudent sabotage, of what was, by some folks’ lights (e.g. Buchanan), an unprecedented (aside from Napoleon) historic opportunity.

      And, Normies will be well within their rights to doubt our judgement and fairness.
      If our penchant for grasping at straws leads us to jolt the Jews, why shouldn’t the Slavs etc. be next? Wolfsschanze, here we come!

      • Because the slavs aren’t lording it over us in a terrible, destructive way! The overlap we have with Jews is that of our secular, mostly degenerate, materialistic culture. The Jews are lords of money but make terrible lords of people.

        • Well, Ursula, I (and most Normies) find the claim, that THE Jews (more so than, say, wealthy WASPS) are “lording it over us in a terrible, destructive way”, to be closer to wild Speculation, than to being established as fact.
          If such Speculation leads to new pogroms or whatever, Slavs etc. will have much reason to fear that they’ll be next on the menu, that onslaught against them being LIKEWISE justified by new compositions of speculative “evidence” about the “destructive” conduct of these Slavs etc.
          When Slavs etc. learned that Unite the Right was organized etc. by guys like Angelin and Kessler, why shouldn’t these ethnicities expect that such guys could bring off such propaganda campaigns against Slavs etc., after they’ve “settled accounts” (as Hitler used to put it) with the Jews?

          • When I hear of JQ-ers putting *nearly* as much effort into assessing the impact of Rockefellers, Carnegies, etc. (whose impact dates to far before Jews had *any* power in the US), as the JQers put into the JQ, I may begin to take JQ-ers seriously.

          • And, let’s talk about the *real* power, rather than the rich tools of power.
            Did J. Edgar have to bite more cranks of Wall St.’s Jews etc., or did they have to bite *him* more?
            Likewise with the Dulles boys.

          • Why are we not allowed to discuss Jews and their important roles in our government, media, institutions, etc. then? And you’re taking my criticisms out of context. Not appreciated.

          • Who said you can’t discuss Jews and their important roles?
            All I’m saying (at this particular point) is, if you harp on Jews more than you discuss other *very* important players, you do injustice to the world’s complexity.
            One German politician called Antisemitism “the Socialism of fools”.
            I’m tempted to also call it “the Nationalism of fools”.

  6. I just came back from visiting the local liberal leaning bookstore. I asked the genderconfused clerk with dreadlocks, a rainbow tattoo on his forehead and a huge nose ring: “I’d like a copy of President Trump’s latest book on immigration.”
    He told me “get the f*ck out of here!” I said “yeah, that’s the name of it!”

  7. Unz is alright but they write the same dozen articles over and over: Russia, Trump, jews/zog, etc. The HBD articles are the only thing worth reading . The other stuff is just fanciful wishful thinking for the civil war/revolt/crisis that will never come. HBD is at least based on empirical and biological reality.

  8. It’s a fair point about the vision thing. From a meme centric prospective some of our sides best youthful one’s tend to take the aesthetic’s of the fantasy series Warhammer 40k as a template. https://imgur.com/gallery/HqvbXvq
    Inspiring optics aside (say what you want about the S.S but the uniforms were class) a grimdark apocalyptic Gotterdamerung isn’t going to do more but troll leftie, which is pretty easy. Going back I seem to recall Eric Hoffer’s opinion of Radical Leftism and other subcultures being a largely an idle rich/dysgenic poor phenomenon as it enables you to avoid the interaction with reality that actual productive work brings irrespective of its social class. Moldbug mentioned something similar in the alliance between the Brahmin intellectual class (The usual suspects, any kind of social/grievance studies swindle) and the Dalit underclass (dindu’s, cholo’s, radical fairies, race hustlers). Rites of passage are a necessary part of any young persons journey. Might have to have a read of Starship Troopers again.

  10. “There are a lot of alt-Jews out there. It’s not a majority or even close to one, but it is a substantial minority.”
    “they can still cooperate with one another where their interests align.”

    May all the gods bless you for these, Zman.

    We can’t kill everyone, nor should we want to. (Nor pry the vote from our ladies’ cold, dead hands. If so many men weren’t such f*cking shitheads, women could depend on ’em.)

    Legitimacy. We’ve earned it before, because that’s who the God made us to be.
    Let us revel in our good, great fortune, and earn it again!

    • Yeah, Alzaebo, we needn’t kill any group. Rather, let’s break the Propaganda machines, and kill the other mal-incentives which warp the culture.
      At https://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com/2012/01/charles-murray-and-white-CLASS-divide.html , you’ll see ways to attack these mal-incentives:

      “On the incentive fronts, blue collar White guys, and White collar White guys, need to have incomes raised…. concrete action can be taken to increase earning power of White GUYS:
      deport illegal aliens (and their kids); increase military spending, particularly ship and plane building; ELIMINATE most legal immigration (and H1-B visas and variants); put import quotas on (increase local factory production);
      increase the ability to file and make money off patents (money to BACKYARD tinkerers). Oil and energy production must be increased, vastly, and spending on various government MAKE-work stuff killed….

      The most important strategic objective, however, is destroying the Hereditary Super Zips….
      To destroy the Super Zips, it is necessary to destroy its ecosystem, the FEMALE driven consumerism. And all that is needed to do that is, frugalism replacing CONSUMERISM. Buying only when needed, and on value and price, not STATUS….
      Network and Cable TV, much of the movies, advertising, marketing, and whole swaths of government, depend on either direct expenditures, or indirect revenues and taxes derived from that….
      Others, particularly Hollywood, would rely on entertaining people, rather than just a profitable SUB-group (see “the Help” the book and movie, and OPRAH’s career)….
      These are all things that are difficult, but achievable. None will happen overnight, but all have the possibility of being enacted.”

      • That’s what grinds my teeth. The Propaganda machines, pushing mal-incentives.

        Information must remain clean, or the software code breaks down, making the hardware useless or dangerous.

  11. Many of you eagerly welcome the Alt-Jews because they are smart, wealthy, and agree with you on some points. You overlook that they are the most ethnocentric people. Most of them will ultimately side with their own, even if they agree with you.

    Here are tests of their assimilability. Will they:
    • Accept that almost none of their people should be allowed to immigrate here, because almost all are far left?
    • Support the repeal of laws that punish questioning the Holocaust?
    • Agree to dismantle the Holocaust studies that traumatize our public school youth?

    • Line, quite an earfull!
      On “almost all are far left”, more so than urban Gentiles? PROVE it, comparing apples to apples, e.g. urban Gentiles vs. Jews.
      Above, I’ve made a case that urban vs. rural, and single female vs. the rest, are the key divides.

      On “repeal of laws that punish…,” and on “dismantle the Holocaust studies”, fair enough, INSOFAR as these Studies only propagandize, and overshadow other comparable, important subjects, e.g. Rwanda’s genocide of Tutus.

      On “will ultimately side with their own”, I quite doubt that the secular ones care much about the Orthodox, more than secular Gentiles care about religious Gentiles.

      This is esp. so, insofar as so many secular ones are marrying Gentiles.
      In a generation or so, the JQ will thus mostly take care of itself.
      The remaining Orthodox will be pimples on the ass of Western culture.

      • Let’s cut to the heart. You argue that conservative values can bind a country more tightly than race, which is civic nationalism. Here, all the standard criticisms apply. It may be sad, but race binds more tightly than values.

        Sure, we have liberal whites. Some are sociopaths while others are universalists. Sociopaths can be handled by harshly punishing anti-white activity. Universalists are our deepest problem. But they are less of a problem than people who see themselves as fundamentally different from us.

        • No, Line, I don’t KNOW that conservative values can bind a country more tightly than race. I see the jury as being still out on that: Race is relevant, but not determinative.
          I’m with Derb, on the key difference being Ice vs. Sun People (esp. blacks and Arabs, e.g. on cousin marriage).
          It seems quite likely, that evolution (of races, as affected by local conditions, esp. climate) has a whole bunch to do with this difference.

          I certainly don’t view Jews (ESP. those from Europe), as seeing themselves as fundamentally different from us. The Arabs sure as hell see these Jews as Western agents.
          Whereas, it’s brutally clear, that most Sun Peoples do see themselves as fundamentally different from us. And, these differences keep getting starker, as the Universalist ideologies get ever-more bastardized, esp. by MadAve’s appeals to STATUS-climbing white (incl. Jewish) women’s lust for rapine, by Sun People alphas.
          .

          • Part of the trouble with thinking about issues of race (vs. conservative values) is that, it’s so easy and common for similar “races” (e.g. Celts, Nordics) to biologically mix with each other, esp. in US cities.
            Out of this, and stimulated by hate from the Establishment and its SJW tools, is growth of a White identity, much stronger than before the SJWs.
            If blacks and other Sun Peoples had been behaving reasonably since JFK’s death, the White identity movement would have a fraction of its current strength, and most whites would have little problem with miscegenation.
            Alas, the ferociousness of Black Power etc. movements serve to spike White consciousness.

          • Jaq: “I certainly don’t view Jews (ESP. those from Europe), as seeing themselves as fundamentally different from us.”

            Obviously Jews feel closer to the white West than they do to the rest of the world. But they do see themselves as different than everyone. There’s no way for them to simultaneously know their history, know about the holocaust, and have seen Schindler’s List et al, and feel close to other peoples.

            Granted there are multiple psychological levels of feeling trust/kinship/affinity with other groups. But all in all Jews definitely feel unique/apart. (Though I’m not sure about young far Left Jewish girls).

          • Frip, I could see this to theoretically be so, but actual evidence quite suggests otherwise.
            US Jews marry outside the faith, rather more than folks born in any other faith.

            I must suggest to you, that most US Jews (esp. post-Boomers) just don’t stew about the Holocaust nearly as much as alt-Gentiles might suppose.
            This is particularly true, for those Jews who grew up in hoods where Jews are a minority, and where they anyway got on well with (white Gentile) neighbors.
            Esp. when their personal experience, esp. with (pushy/ rampaging) blacks, contrasts SO much with their good interactions with whites, they feel UTTERLY WHITE.
            Experience very often trumps the “abstract” history of a prior generation.

          • I know about all the marriage stats and the modern non religious Jews. Just trust me, Jews are Jews and they feel it down deep.

          • Frip: “Jews are Jews and they feel it down deep.”
            No doubt true of some, but overall, a major exaggeration in the US.
            More true of Jews, than of (esp. elite) Eastern WASPS (about being elite WASPS)? I don’t buy it.

            (Yeah, many really care about Israel, but are also REALLY proud to be Americans.
            This is esp. true of those who really care about their children, irrespective of whether their kids married Jews or Gentiles. It helps that they know damn well, how good the US is to Jews.)

            What you say is more true of E. European Jews, than of (bitterly, ironically) their German counterparts, most whom were Germans FIRST.
            No (Trotskyist) Russian Revolution, OR no Versailles Diktat? Then no Holocaust.

          • Indeed, I’m much more suspicious of the (mostly Eastern WASP) old-money families, than I am of all but the wealthiest Jews.
            Did Jews corrupt old-money families, or did old-money families corrupt wealthy Jews?

          • One of Unz’s main points (in the post to which Zman refers above) is “the puzzling contrast between the behavior of Jews in the aggregate, and Jews as individuals”.
            He traces this to the ability of small numbers of energetic folks in key positions to sway masses, esp. via media narratives.

            Thus, a handful of well-placed Jews make so much noise (say vs. Trump), while the mass of Jews vote like their urban Gentile counterparts.

          • Moreover, recall the Dershowitzism “two Jews, three opinions”.
            Jews tend to pride themselves on being analytical and disputational, incl. about human nature.
            So, books like Hannah Arendt’s about Eichmann can really get them going at each other.
            Likewise, when guys like Bernie Goetz do their thing.

          • Insofar as they do see themselves as different than everyone, it’s a matter of intensity.
            They’re a lot like us, except more so.
            The “whitey-haters” really hate whites, and the “blackie-haters” really hate/ fear blacks, perhaps partly because they can so easily see blacks and Muzzies as the most likely groups to take real PLEASURE, in killing of Jews and other whites.

          • One of the difficulties in understanding the Jewish mindset is that they have always been, ultimately, at war with each other.

            Why? Nobody else matters. We are but tools used in the internal conflict between the Tribes. That civil war for supremacy is so important, the True Humans, Adam’s descendents and heirs to the Kingdom, are mapping genetic lines.

          • In a way I am, Line, in that (as I replied to Simba earlier in this thread), I fear that, if we stew about the JQ, to the point of neglecting the UQ, we risk driving away good Jews, and OVERLOOKING practical ideas on how to stem the onslaught of Hollywood, MadAve., RadFems, etc. upon our culture.

            And, I’ll add now, we also risk turning off Normies who much want to give our reasonable fears (e.g. of OBVIOUSLY pushy/ violent blacks) a fair hearing, but also fear that (esp. obsessive) JQ-ers are just VENTing at scapegoats.
            As Zman put it months ago, “anti-Semites taste Jews in their sandwich.”
            If we say to Normies: “one THEORY worth considering is that, it’s *possible* that we’re seeing a NET negative Jewish contribution to (debasing) the culture, perhaps exceeding the net (bad) contribution of urban Gentiles “, many Normies will hear out that sort of pitch.
            But if Normies read us as being hell-bent, to pin almost all of this debasement upon The Joos, almost all Normies will (quite understandably) see this as reeking of the same old AXE-grinding at scapegoats, and they’ll fear that we lack the SOBRIETY of judgement which is sorely needed in these troubling times.
            So, can JQ-ers admit that they’re presenting a somewhat-plausible THEORY, or are they really about their DETERMINATION to “red pill” the world, about their CERTITUDE about the JQ?

          • To Normies, it’s OBVIOUS that PoCs are disproportionately violent, and thus Normies quite understand resentment at SJWs’ McCarthyism at “racists”.
            Whereas, insofar as JQ-ers push their view, as if IT’S truth is as obvious as are the dangers from PoCs, JQ-ers are seen as incapable of telling the Obvious from the Speculative.
            This makes it all the easier for our foes, to plausibly pigeonhole us as unstable louts.

  12. One aspect of my own red pill experience that I struggle with the most is: what is patriotism? To me, for the dissident right to get anywhere they will have to come up with a good answer.

    • To secure the future safety and success of your people. I think that’s not a bad definition. Then ppl can start discussing who ‘their people’ exactly is and isnt

      • To secure the future safety and success of your people. I think that’s not a bad definition.
        Pretty simple and straightforward…Amen Brother…

        • Actually it is so simple as to be ambiguous – for now. It is phony and a cheap throw-way definition that can be defined by any degree you want and whenever you want. But Vox already painted himself in a corner by rejecting Civic Nationalism, so that means “Your people” has to be race-based. So tell me, what is the race of an American who arrived in the US in the mid 1850s and is English, Irish, Portuguese, Austrian, Scottish, Italian, and even Mexican? There you have it. The future of “your people” is a pure BS concept within the United States.
          Anyone in the US with lineage past early 20th Century who is not mixed is likely an inhabitant of isolated sectors and subject to marginal inbreeding.

          • Well arent you a killjoy? If you cant define an American people you dont have an American nation.

            I said the tricky part was defining ‘your people’. Your line of reasoning leads directly to either national dissolution or civic nationalism which is clearly coming apart today.

          • “an American who arrived in the US in the mid 1850s and is English, Irish, Portuguese, Austrian, Scottish, Italian, and even Mexican”

            The Mexican blood would make the above a Latino. Otherwise, they’d be considered simply White.

      • “Their people” cannot be well-defined in America where a majority of people are mixed blood in the sense that there are no pure German, Austrian or Scandinavians. They will not stop at defining “their people” as having white skin. “Their people” will exclude basically anyone they decide, including Poles, Slavs, Irish Celts, the list goes on forever. “Their people” cannot be a concept, it cannot be an idea or any kind of principle as that has already been nullified by people like Vox. It has to be genetic based in their eyes; it cannot be “Western” or physical feature-based. So that means genetic testing would be required to be allowed into their group of people. It is a phony, pure BS idea to rally modern whites together, to win some kind of independence, but will be discarded or evolve in the same way as the Girondins, where whiteness will have to be proved and proved again by degrees, and those left wanting (I hope you don’t have any Portuguese, Italian or Irish blood!) will be ejected from “their people”

        • There’s never been a pure bloodline. Even the Biblical times struggled mightlily with migration and intermarriage, yet the Twelve Tribes still became a People.

          ‘Purity’ is a strawman. Don’t fall for the J-propaganda. Mengele was trying to find a way to make the real Master race ‘pass’, not convert them into Teutons.

          As far as I know, Uncle Dolphie never said “Master Race”, he wanted recognition for the Sudenten and a Danzig corridor, and the Ruhr iron mines back.

          But the propagandists, Heydrich, Himmler, Goering? Wow, look at those low, slungback ears. The genetic tell.

    • The key to understanding what patriotism should and should not be so that it is not a tool used against you is 1) Menchen-“The American people, North and South, went into the War as citizens of their respective states; they came out as subjects of one.” 2) The Pledge, “one nation, indivisible”, propaganda consolidating those progressive gains upon school children in a daily prayer. By WW1 even the southern man was blue pilled in the new patriotism.

    • Unfortunately, nobody knows this anymore and this is the main reason, why we end up with massive war both here in Europe and America. This is called Glossocracy , the power of the word.
      What patriotism means, what Christianity means what free speech means? The last one, do not answer just in case because your answer may be hate speech and you may lose your job.
      Glossocracy is runned by Pathocracy, the power of psychopaths. Are you patriot or traitor? Well, the loudest screaming communist or liberal will decide.

    • The 14 words work for any race or people.
      Everyone should be a patriot in their own place, I respect that.

  13. Z: “It’s good reminder that Jews are not the monolith JQ people need to believe.”

    Ernest van den Haag wrote an casual book on the JQ, “The Jewish Mystique”. Back when NR had real men writing for them. Last time I picked it up I got the impression he was pretty fond of Jews. So it may not be for everyone. But it’s one more perspective.

    Remember the old Haag? Always loved his glasses.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMv4XsL-1lU

    https://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Mystique-Ernest-Van-haag/dp/0440042232/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1533744466&sr=1-1&keywords=the+jewish+mystique

  14. There is always a group of Jew haters on alt-right threads who attempt to co-opt the comments. It is autistic and tiresome to see that for them, every.single.problem. has its roots in (((Da Jooze))). That is not red-pill at all since it doesn’t face reality. It is simple scapegoating, and solves nothing.
    It’s also worth noting that those same people, including Vox Day, consider anyone other than Germanic, Scandinavian, and Anglos as inferior. So to all the Celts and Italians (yes Irish are degenerate in Vox and Heartiste’s eyes), the Portuguese (the great navigators), the Spanish (great Navies), and of course high-IQ Asians, they will throw your ass under the bus.

    • Well, Burner, if those who are “scapegoating, and solve nothing”, came clean with specific ideas as to how to “solve” the JQ, I’d grant that they might not be only scapegoating.
      Meanwhile, the dissing of Jews, Celts, etc., risks us blowing a great opportunity to unite most Whites, in righteous wrath vs. the infantilism of the Sarah Jeongs and the NYT.

    • With respect to Vox Day he’s never been of the opinion that American identities have always been more defined regionally than as a sort of Nordiscist Madison Grant idea. Thats far more a Brett Stevens type position at Amerika.org. What Vox has said is that America’s main source of culture has been mainly British and predominantly English, and that the migrants from Central and Northern Europe eg, Scando’s, Germans, Austrians never really understood or embraced the concept of The Rights of Englishmen. Thats a point Z’s made before in a post i think, but I could be wrong. Regarding the Irish, Italians and other Southern, Eastern Europeans he’s of the opinion they never grasped the concept either. Which is pretty fair. The Micks he believes were a great source of cannon fodder and man power during the Civil War. I’m not a fan boy but when he’s not talking about things that don’t directly affect him he can be pretty insightful and not as dogmatic.

    • I try not to co-opt, but end up foaming at the mouth. Somewhat embarrassed by it.

      When Saxons own the Federal Reserve, Italians own Hollywood, and Portuguese determine immigration policy, I’ll relax.
      The Irish- well, we’ll think of something.

  15. Ron Unz’s American Pravda series is great.

    I’ve been using his “Was Rambo Right” ( http://www.unz.com/runz/was-rambo-right/ ) post for a number of years now , to send to “conservatives” I know who still practice either government worship or John McCain worship (or both). Just bringing up that column and what Unz put in it – sending it to them and telling them to read it ….. usually shuts them right the hell up.

    It’s nice red pill suppository stuffed right up their bung.

    The best part about it is – to dispute the McCain and government malfeasance claims, you have to basically start throwing vets under the bus.

    Major cognitive dissonance.

    Let it do the job for you.

  16. “This great awakening we see on our side of the great divide is, in many respects, a rediscovery of the past.”

    Agree!!! To pluck but one item, forget ‘counter-insurgency’ when dealing w muzzie f*cks. Stick their ‘hearts AND minds’ up their a$$es. If anything Genghis Khan was too soft on islam. He was the last one who could realistically have killed this the ultimate satan worship. Soft sentimental bastard he was, he failed to finish the job. Muzzies wanna see ‘holy war’?? Let’s give em one!

    • Ok, I admit, that felt good to write. But, I dont believe in being ‘nice’ to fanatics anymore. Islam or leftie, they take it as weakness. And I wanna f*cking survive and win, free of grade A a$$holes who wanna kill me. Ive had enough of that nonsense. It’s time to make evil men scared men again. Very scared men. Coz they share the planet w US. And we are slowly learning to like killing them again.

      To all good men and women out there, have a great day. And buy some more ammo.

      • First thing any serviceman learns in the Middle East – never show them weakness. Always act the alpha in their presence or they’ll go for your throat.

  17. Zman’s points about Jews and JQ-ers are crucial.
    “Their fight within the Jewish community over Jewish identity is a MIRROR of what is happening within the Occident…. Jews are not the monolith JQ people need to believe.”
    Seeing as this “substantial minority” of (URBAN) alt-Jews is probably of comparable proportion to the “substantial minority” of (URBAN) alt-Gentiles, maybe we’d be better off if JQ-ers (and alt-Jews) would become Urban-Q-ers, or UQ-ers.

    Until JQ-ers get specific about how they aim to solve the JQ, I’m more interested in the UQ-ers. They’ve gotten quite specific, about how the UQ could be handled (e.g. by addressing cultural mal-incentives), so they may have much to teach key lessons to both Jews and Occidentals (and, I’ll add, other Ice Peoples, e.g. Orientals), e.g. about single female CONSUMERISM’s impact upon an electronic-media driven political culture.
    For some UQ-er specifics on mal-incentives, e.g. in Hollywood, see https://whiskeysplace.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/the-avengers-joss-whedon-and-HOLLYWOODs-crisis/ :

    “… TV and movies mine old stuff constantly, because everyone knows today’s creators are handcuffed by PC and Diversity demands, to the degree that they cannot create anything interesting that people will want to see.
    That in a nutshell signifies Hollywood: Cultural Collapse.
    The collapse has come, because INCENTIVES, Hollywood’s NEPOTISM, and PC/Diversity handcuffs and fear of thought-crime, has made Hollywood incapable of doing much of anything, but RECYCLE old stuff. This is roughly the case for Classical Music in the West, save a few John Williams soundtracks, and to an extent, Jazz. Certainly rock and roll has reached this stage.

    The implications for this are profound. Hollywood, like it or not, shapes perception of reality by the masses. It has largely replaced Christianity and the churches, as the basis for morality, thought, and pretty much everything else. Hollywood is the glue, sadly, that holds America and the larger West together. [Itself a stunning statement on the decline of the West’s internal strength.]

    Hollywood now DEPENDS on sitcoms and a few dramas, appealing to older White WOMEN, and recycling old Comic book heroes into commercials for toys, rides, and the like….”

    • I agree. Im not into ‘lets hate all Jews’. But, we can discuss the JQ, and the extent to which it is or is not, a problem like adults. Leftie does not get to decide what is and what is not ‘within limits’.

      • Of course, Leftie shouldn’t decide Jack. But if we stew about the JQ, to the point of neglecting the UQ, we risk driving away good Jews, and OVERLOOKING practical ideas on how to stem the onslaught of Hollywood, MadAve., RadFems, etc. upon our culture.

          • Simba, above I say that:
            “Seeing as this “substantial minority” of (URBAN) alt-Jews is probably of comparable proportion to the “substantial minority” of (URBAN) alt-Gentiles, maybe we’d be better off if JQ-ers (and alt-Jews) would become URBAN-Q-ers, or UQ-ers.”

            My view is that, the (URBAN) Gentiles are as problematic as the (urban) Jews, seeing as both groups are corrupted by status-driven consumerism (esp. of single females), this driving the Media to target these women’s subconscious whims (e.g. fantasies of being raped by alpha PoCs). The Media propaganda appeals to these women by glorifying PoCs (Derb’s Sun People), at the expense of “boring” white (and Oriental) betas.

          • Well done. Some like me are focused on past instincts, outraged that we swallowed so much falsified history. I could drive a bus through the obvious holes.

            (One reason atheists are hopping mad. We know we’re being lied to. No reason to be obnoxious sh*ts about it, though.)

            You suggest we pay more attention to the instincts grown large in our new environment. Kudos.

      • Ursula, this sounds right, but we could allow restrictive covenants, wherein LOCALS can decide what level of risk they can afford to take, as to how much multiculturalism they’ll tolerate.
        JFK’s idea of a Federally-mandated “colorblind” society was, in its way, worth a try, but we must now admit that it’s becoming a nightmare, all the more so since it was followed by other hyper-expansions of Federal power, such that now we all have major reason to fear a slew of Wacos, Ferguson Effects, FIU-style bridge collapses, and prospects of a hugely-devastation Civil War.

          • My emphasis on URBAN devolution is meant to contrast with *relative* rural cultural stability, so that rural Gentiles are less likely to be corrupted by “modern” culture, and thus went for Trump far more than did their urban counterparts.

            See the relevant thoughts about the cultural impact of mass urbanization (and other factors) at https://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com/2008/09/modern-romance.html , e.g. :
            “Under the Western System, men and women are mostly free to choose their own partners. But institutions, such as local Church, or benevolent society, or group/block civic organization dances, fairs, exist to mediate that choice. Guide the choices, control them, and ensure optimal outcomes….
            … Critically, the MEDIATING institutions allow “test drives” without sexual commitment….
            … These rules form the bedrock of Western romance. They serve to form life-long partnerships based on love, and for the most part have worked for about a THOUSAND years….
            … the radical shift in romantic choices, brought about by the Pill, the Condom, rising female wealth, and URBAN anonymity. Which is why Modern Romance … is dead.”

            My sense of things is that, rural folks are more likely to get “culture” from local mediating interactions, and thus are less likely to be warped by MSM “culture”.

            In certain circles, urbanites who eat up the MSM are called “Bugmen”, see https://hackernoon.com/on-the-infestation-of-small-souled-BUGMEN-6561ae922e07 .

          • Wow. Kudos to Whiskey as well. Romance and it’s exaltation was a fine thing. Nice things simply work better.

      • That doesn’t work. Behavior is mostly but not entirely gene driven

        The number of people like Candace Owens or Thomas Sowell who are basically an allied tribe among the Blacks will always be slight

        Latin America is like it is because that is how Latinos are and so on,

        I know its unpleasant but any plausible future will involve repatriation and very possibly ethnic cleansing. Land can productively belong to a single tribe and try as you might to stop it when society begins a collapse , people will revert to what works, tribe

        In the end the future we want is going to be “Deplorables” and almost everyone else can GTFO

        That truth be known is not even that stable a mix and will even have some ethnic admixture in places but its within achievable goals

        Behavior as a model is not.

        • The idea is to codify the white Christian way of doing things here and make them the laws of the land to stop the exploitation and damage done to white Christians. Those who don’t like our laws will leave so they can practice their crappy ways on people in a different country. That’s the idea. To make illegal the lousy things they like to do to us. Jews and gentiles alike.

  18. Germany was actually partitioned into four zones after WW2, Soviet, French, British, and American. I am interested in how different the postwar treatment of German civilian survivors might have been across the zones. My mother’s relatives were in Bremen, in the American zone. As their house was on the edge of town, it survived the war bombings intact. American soldiers evicted them, and turned the house into a barracks, stripping the interior and remodeling it to suit their needs. When the house was returned to them, years later, the Americans made the effort to return the home to its former status, as much as possible, and took the trouble to remodel it one more time. My relatives were not anyone special, as my mother’s uncle had been a foot soldier in the German army. The effort to maintain the house and return it intact made a huge impression on the family.

    I suppose war stories (and post-war stories) are always small pieces of a much bigger mosaic. I have heard stories of the post-war struggle to survive there all my life. It is an extraordinary thing to me, that a people who suffered so greatly in rebuilding something out of their devastated country, would so easily roll over a few decades later, under the dictates of the EU, led by the same people who made them suffer so. Perhaps that is one reason for the comprehensive cover-up.

  19. One thing what must be understand to defeat communism or like you say, liberalism. It is not politics, is is religion. And in the religion, facts does not matter.
    God burned down Sodom and Gomorrah, caused flood to kill all living things and Christians are fine with that. God is still good and Devil is bad despite average christian cant say what evil Devil did.

    That is why holocaust denial also does not work. Until Jew is holy, then instead of mourning and gloating sixmilliongassed, just they keep gloating 300 000differentreason.

    Until Nazis remain ultimate evil, everything done against them remain normal, after WW II and most important, today. Because, despite we like democracy, human rights and so on, we can not let things to gas chambers again and because of that, we have to take off silk gloves sometimes. And even when comes out that there were no gas chambers, well Nazis were ultimate evil anyway so it is absolutely irrelevant, what crimes they committed or did they commit any crimes at all.

    • “we can not let things to gas chambers again and because of that, we have to take off silk gloves sometimes. And even when comes out that there were no gas chambers, well Nazis were ultimate evil anyway”

      Beautiful stuff, Juri, I could not have said it better. The World Wars’ glory showed our mettle, and ruined us at the same time.

  20. Unz is already paying the price and might as well keep it long form. The web filter at work now blocks unz.com for “intolerance.” No more reading a paragraph or two here & there for me.

  21. Good stuff boss. “Everyone forgot the timeless lessons”.
    How many clay tablets, chunks of granite and re-tellings of Kings and Judges (shit was so important and painful they wrote it down twice) have to created?
    Nothing new.
    As far as replacements go, mushrooms pop up out of nowhere after the rains. Trick is in not eating the amatias.

  22. In terms of punitive attitude towards the conquered German population, the order of ranking seems to be, from most to least; Soviets, French, Americans, and British.

    Interestingly, it was usually Allied military leaders who were more conciliatory, with civilian leaders taking a more punitive attitude. Generals like Patton, Mark Clark, and Montgomery tended to see the defeated Germans as potential allies against the Reds, while the civilians in London and DC took the hardest line. You saw the same thing in the Pacific, with men like MacArthur and Admiral Nimitz expressing serious doubts about the “Unconditional Surrender” formula. It was often those who were closest to the fighting who were the least interested in retribution.

    The one exception to this was in the case of ordinary soldiers fighting against Japan. I never me or heard of anyone who fought against them, American, British, Australian, Chinese, or Pinoy, who didn’t hate their guts. Of course, it’s not hard to see why…

      • Because, by and large, the Germans and other western elements of the Axis practiced the chivalrous and professional respect of their military foes, while the Japanese were notorious for not doing so. For example, ritual execution of captured military POWs. There is a famous photo of a captive and tied up Australian soldier being beheaded under the sword. Whether or not the photo represents an outlier behavior, the idea was taken to heart.

        • Fair point, Niall Ferguson’s World of the World maybe neoliberal softcore porn, but he does discuss the differences of treatment of pow’s between enemies who had similarities with a lot of examples. The Wehrmacht treated Slavs brutally, but restrained themselves with White British Empire troops and Americans. The Japanese treated Allied troops brutally as they were viewed as a Racial enemy.

          • They were just as bad to the Chinese. They were a cruel race at one time. Unfortunately it seems that high iq is linked with cruelty.

          • Troll King, cruelty seems to be hard wired into being human. Point out to me a society or culture, just one, which didn’t witness some widespread form of it, be it organized or spontaneous.

          • Disagree a little bit. East Asians are astonishing in their cruelty. Their religions reflect it as well. Even commoners do things to animals and each other that makes one wonder how they can think of themselves as still human.

    • To me, a middle-aged German, your ranking of punitive attitude in the victorious powers sounds about right, according to what I heard from the older folks who had lived through it over the years and decades. Perhaps sporadically the Americans outdid the French, which was easy, as the French only occupied a minuscule portion of Germany, and had very limitid resources themselves.

      • As to the Russians, in Nobel laureate Svetlana Alexievch’s “Second-hand Time” (2013) I recently testimonials by Russian soldiers who admitted to her that after WWII they basically raped every German woman between 8 and 80 they could get a hold of, semi-proudly claiming that pretty much every German born in East Germany in 1946 must in fact have been half Russian.

        German women of that generation used to speak about this Russian behavior themselves, for sure, but only in hushed tones, out of shame but also because the German powers that be always signaled that such tales were politically highly unwelcome. First, the Russians might not like them, and second, domestically they would complicate the “all guilty, at all times, to the full extent” official narrative.

        Now, before anybody gets me wrong, Adolf H. and his ilk certainly were some of the major assholes of all times. Still, what the Russians did at the time is an abomination and a lasting stain on them too.

        • The Russian army behaved no differently than the Wehrmacht did when invading Russia. What goes around comes around.

          • That’s just so much BS. Wehrmacht misbehavior and crimes in Russia were of a totally different nature when and where they occurred (reprisal killings, burning down of villages, such things), but without sexual predation on a large scale, let alone one condoned or even egged on by commanders. Again I can recommend Alexievich’s book for Russian accounts of Wehrmacht behavior in the East.

            But likely you’re not much interested in historical accuracy anyway, but just want to indulge your anti-German animus, facts be damned.

          • Totally agree with Herzog, here.

            I call and raise you one- the human sacrifice demanded by prophecy was fulfilled- but it was six million Germans who burned.

        • I see Svatlana Alexievich is a darling of the West (i.e., anti-Russia, anti-Putin), with no less than the Council on Foreign Relations giving her some BS award for the book you mention. And I hate to say it, but at least since the Clinton administation and forward, Nobel awards are given to Western globalist puppets. In other words, the nice book you read may have been massaged quite a bit so I’d take it with a grain of salt if I were you. If you Google her name, you see outlets like The Guardian and The New Yorker fawning over her — all the red flags I need to see to know she’s ‘one of them.’ There are plenty like that around; for being pets of the elite, they are rewarded with lucrative book deals, nice institutional appointments and prominent public platforms from which to spew their globalist-sanctioned garbage, which always somehow come out against the evil Russia and nary a peep ever uttered against Israel or Saudi Arabia. And awards, of course. I bet the BBC loves her!

          • Didn’t know about some of the (leftist) circles cheering Ms. Alexievich, but that must be for very different reasons than the ones that concern me here.

            When Ms. Alexievich (or rather the testimonies she collected) show the Wehrmacht in Russia in a rather friendly light, and expose the Red Army’s post-war behavior in Germany as often rather degraded, that in no way serves to confirm the lefty narrative of Hitler / Germans / fascists always bad — communists always good; rather, it undermines it.

            So, even if Ms. Alexievich has some of the wrong friends (but how much can you influence who has a crush on you anyway, and often for the wrong reasons?), that doesn’t undermine the credibility of the specific material from her that I refer to.

          • You’re not reacting to my argument with a counter-argument, but with assertion and condescension (in the guise of generosity, in time-honored female manner).

            You’re free to cultivate that attitude at your own risk. God bless.

          • And your counter lacked just as much substance, dear sir, talking about her friends and such. And I wasn’t intending to be condescending when I wished you God bless. I do enjoy your comments. You’re right, it may be less risky to accept unquestioningly the product generated by the pets of the elite. So I suppose my attitude is riskier in that sense.

          • The elite are very good with managing intellectual product. They know how to present mostly the truth but then include just enough of what they want you to believe but is not true among all the truths so that it’s accepted. On top of that, trusting, smart people like you go on to actually spend their hard-earned money on their Right-Think products. The mistake is in giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are as decent as you are. They’re not! Don’t give them your money and only give them enough of your mind so that you keep up with what they are doing. We are on the same side, brother. They care not for you or me. You probably think I’m some kind of kook, but that’s OK. Just keep these little things in your back pocket, so to speak, and maybe some day they’ll be of use to you.

      • Herzog;

        FWIW, I agree with your general comments about relative post war behaviors of the various victorious allies after WW II. IMHO the primary reason behind this ranking is that atrocity was open State Policy for the USSR, as it had been for Germany before their surrender. As evidence, they both maintained specialized paramilitary units for just this purpose (see below)

        BTW, the vitriolic controversy in the Unz posting (particularly in the mostly unbelievable comments) is whether it became State Policy (official or unofficial) for the US or the UK, particularly post-war re POWs.*

        Re Soviet atrocity, I’m old enough to have discussed post-WW II events with refugees from Germany as a youth. They vividly confirmed the vicious ethnic cleansing of anyone with any German connections (name, language, culture, whatever; conduct didn’t matter) from the East, some who had been local inhabitants for over 300 years (e.g. Volga Germans). When the restraints were off, the various Slavic locals actually behaved no better than they accused the Germans of doing. Later they became ashamed and sought to suppress this information, particularly including their facilitating roles in the opening days of The Holocaust.

        Re conduct of the German military: The (entirely real) dirty work was largely done by selected units of the SA/SS (created for this purpose) and not by the ordinary Wehrmacht.** The practical reason is that atrocity degrades soldiers, ruining discipline and unit cohesion. Knowing this and holding themselves to a high standard (particularly the old aristocrats who formed the only organized opposition late in the war), the regular German officers (as a whole) wanted nothing to do with atrocity and punished it rigorously, where possible.***

        Knowing all the above, and being practical monsters, the NSDAP bigwigs introduced functional specialization for their planned atrocity, designating those missions for those specialized units. In this they were following the Communist example from the USSR where, until the last months of the war, the Red Army was theoretically held distinct from the NKVD/KGB (whose designated role was atrocity/terror) for the same reasons.

        When Red Army discipline was no longer seen as essential, it all broke down into mass rape and looting. The progressive break-down of Red Army discipline played no small role in the enormous casualties (> 5:1) that it suffered until the last hours of the war.

        As contrary evidence re US POW policy, my supervisor in my campus job had been a guard at a German POW camp nearby. It seems that great numbers of German POWs were sent back to CONUS (the continental US). Many of them were employed as agricultural workers in place of the locals who were serving overseas and they were not mistreated in the least. By their own accounts, some POWs were mistreated as slave laborers by the English and French after being shipped back to Europe.

        See: https://www.amazon.com/Stalag-Wisconsin-Inside-Prisoner-Camps/dp/187856983X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533832609&sr=8-1&keywords=Stalag+Wisconsin
        ___________________________
        * Depends on whether bombing enemy cities (where enemy industry lives) vice bombing enemy industry is an atrocity. The latter was State Policy of all belligerents: Post war goalpost moving not acceptable. As a practical matter, accuracy was so poor that it was often a distinction without a difference.

        **There were SS units (The Waffen SS) whose main role (unlike their other units) was combat not atrocity. They were formed later in the war. AFIK, there were no Wehrmacht units whose role was atrocity, not combat. The Waffen SS units were formed as a deterrent and counterpoise to the regular Wehrmacht getting any ideas about regime change. This proved critical in Operation Valkyrie where regular commanders were deterred from supporting the coup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Valkyrie

        ***A regular German officer had no disciplinary authority over any SS trooper of whatever rank. Likewise in the Red Army re NKVD units.

        • Al,

          thank you very much for all this additional info and analysis. You’re much more well-read and informed on these issues than I am, who, as a German living his life in Germany but mainly busy with other, more pressing concerns, just happened to accumulate anecdotal pieces evidence over the years, and tried to make sense of them. So, thanks again for your input.

  23. Great post great post!

    I had so much to say at every point, but I’ll limit. I read the unz article on the jfk assasination. He draws together many good points, but I still doubt lbj was the true mover, but rather you-know-who. Lbj called back the planes during the Liberty attack simply because he was afraid of what happened to Kennedy. When I read about Ruby’s shooting of Oswald, I said aloud: “he had cancer!” I instinctively understood he was a fall guy who they already knew was about to die! Sure enough, several years later, during an appeal, he died of lung cancer! I’d bet any money they already knew he had cancer when he shot Oswald! Does anyone know whether any other source has speculated about this?

    A good book that I read a while back when I first got into this stuff was John beaty’s Iron Curtain Over America. He has the same tone that you imply in unz about American cruelty to Germans during and after the war. He has a very anti Semitic bent that may off put some, and I think he wastes ink on that bizarre khazarian hypothesis, but politically he had a common sense approach which made a lot of things obvious to me.

    • Few know that LBJ, as well as Hillary, had Jews as grandparents. I suspect LBJ’s extensive Mob payors, as well as Clinton’s Dixie Mafia allies, probably descended from Lucky Luciano and Meyer Lansky’s move to Hot Springs AR and Florida/Baton Rouge in the 1940s.

      Hillary’s father was head of the Jewish Mafia in Chicago for a reason. One Jewish family gang, the Krinskys, made a fortune during Prohibition, and bought the near bankrupt Grumann weapons company after WWII.

      I think networking explains the corrupt Model Cities real estate Projects and Vietnam weapons/equiptment shipments by LBJ, as well as Hillary’s protected dealings at State.
      (Of course I include the Bush Family, Air America, neocons and neoliberals, etc.)

      I see our Government as a mafia network, extending their gains into corporate boardrooms, agency directorships, and town councils. A nephew on the board.
      Their loyalties are to the Families, not to us, not to any border.

      • What’s your source for this? Are you really alluding that someone else has a Jewish grandparent? It would be one grandparent, correct?

        • Mixed sets, not all the grandparents were Jewish. Done from memory, I see it as a clue that ethnic ties can open doors and explain loyalties.

      • About the Khazar thing: it’s a way of saying “they’re not real Jews! The state was declared Jewish by the king’s edict!”

        I suspect their semitism was revealed, not declared. Quite possibly a side branch in hiding, like the ones that failed in Turkey and Yemen, or the Donmeh branch that prevailed in Arabia, intoduced Wahhabi rule, and later allied with the British Rothschilds (and currently with Israel). The squabble between the Sultan and the Caliph was a perfect replica of the fight between Judah and the Israelites.

        The Semitics- Jews, Arabs, Turkics- are slippery, dangerous, facile, and batshit crazy. They operate by different rules.
        We can’t treat them as if they were White.

        (Faisal, the Emir of Mecca, was best friends with Weisl and encouaraged Jewish emigration. The Jews fled Christian Europe to Islam’s protection for a thousand years, administering their tax farms and slave trade.

        Islam began as two vassal mercenary armies created by the tax farmers to attack their former patrons, weakened by the wars that enriched their (((advisors))). Of course said advisors muddied and revised Islam’s mythic history, as they did in their own Book, and do continuously today. It is what is in them.

        Salmeen Quraysh- the Mohammed- was from a Jewish-Arab family, guardians of the Ramadan market at the crossroads by the old Roman copper mines. He attacked his uncles then fled for the Medina, the Jewish ‘Old Quarter’, later prevailing against his own family. His family, illiterate, remembered enough of the old stories for him to tell tall tales attracting customers to Khadima’s stall. In the Medina he asked for sanction from Jewish elders, who refused him. He was a local brigand much later elevated to signifigance and authorhood, unmentioned in Islam for it’s first century as Jews plagiarized Nestorian tracts by Syrian bishops rebelling against Nicean Trinity doctrine to organize their Bedouin cousins with the ‘marraige of the moon goddess and the high god’ (think Catholic saints).

        The smartest people on earth keep creating golems in a self-sustaining prophecy of victimhood and seperation. Inbreeding for millenia has made paranoia with aggression an inheritable trait, verified by genetics as the MAOA combination.

        I list all semitics under the same demographic umbrella. Why? Because they succeed by Darwinian rules, like Africans or feminists. Rote Nature’s ‘balance’ is surges and dieoffs. Not enmity; scorpions will do what scorpions do, as he told the frog.)

        • Sorry ’bout the diversion into a pocket history of the Mohammed. The question was, “why would a Bedouin pagan demand that Jewish elders declare him a prophet?”

  24. “it is not enough to undermine the moral legitimacy of the prevailing orthodoxy” This reminds me of the terrible damage that atheists do when they attack the entirety of Christian belief because some parts, such as evolution, are “not true” or because certain priests or pastors have engaged in reprehensible behavior.

    What is supposed to replace Christianity? If one chooses not to believe in a supreme being who created this world, why haven’t atheists put forward a simple, commonly accepted moral code to replace the Ten Commandments: respect (not “love”) your parents, do not steal (also applies to abstract things such as badmouthing people = STEALING another person’s good name), do not murder, do not covet etc.

    I have found that truly religious Christians constantly express love for others and gratitude for the simple blessings of having healthy children, food on the table and a roof over their heads. Grateful people are happy people. Do atheists want us to feel grateful to the government instead? Are atheists much happier than religious people? Why do they feel obligated to destroy the peace and harmony in the lives of religious people?

    • @MAA
      Brother I think you could spend the rest of your life trying to answer those questions and still not have a definite answer…I would try instead to focus on being a better person in whatever you believe…I’m a Christian so I try to be more like Jesus Christ although I fail miserably most of the time…Keep your chin up…

      • Yes, instead of trying to improve other people, “focus on being a better person”. Such a simple, yet profound idea!

        “Intellectuals” keep on failing to improve society, but they remain convinced that they have all the correct answers.

    • What is supposed to replace Christianity?
      Progressivism. In case you hadn’t noticed, they mostly adopted your moral code while removing key parts of it, but also augmenting it with some of their own. (This is not surprising since Progressivism is hyper-evolved Christianity.) Of course they have dynamited the foundation of it, which is God. But this hasn’t slowed them down much.

        • Ya. Progressivism is devolved Christianity, it’s acts separated from it’s motivations, the loop of feedback snuffed out. The man who donates to charity is not the charitable man.

        • Yes it is, a mutated version of the the “God is Good” ignore the Old Testament as its unpleasant strain common to America, the Jefferson Bible on crack if you like.

          It also not going to work as its current form intersectionalism puts inferior people on top of the social ladder which even Communism was smart enough to try and avoid.

          That said people got along fine with folk religions for centuries and were morally, thought granted not a moral set we fully share, educated well enough/

          My guess is that if modernity continues and that’s not a given, we’ll get more folk practices and cribbed together teachings which will work out fine

          Well alright the big centralizers (State, Church) won’t like it but most polities are far too large anyway . Its far better to have someone with a strong connection to the land on which you live that a foreigner or worse a rootless carpet bagger ruling you

          • I read it. Point well made. But Ursula is right in her own way. None of that blather is Christian. It is Marxism wrapped up in Christianity. Those same National Council of Churches, and World Council of Churches pulled the same crap up until recently. The highly liberal denominations, such as the United Methodists and Episcopalians got away with telling a complicit American press that they represented Protestantism in America, meanwhile they were shrinking away to nothing while non-denominational churches grew like wildfire. I’d bet only 10% of American Protestants would be represented by those two denominations today. People left because those churches were no longer practicing Christianity as their religion, but political progressivism.

            Now the libs are moving to take over the Southern Baptist Convention. And folks will end up moving on away from there, too.

          • Progressivism has noting to do with Christianity because Christ accepted that temporal inequality – the human condition – is an immutable fact. Progressivism is utopianism that merely opportunistically borrows bits from Christian doctrine, from Marxism, from Fabian socialism, from all sorts of sources to suit Progressivism’s constant moving of the goalposts and thus its constantly shifting list of enemies based on whatever the Progressive utopians deem to be the evil de jour to suit their lust for totalitarian “we have all the answers” power.

          • Sorry, I had to leave the blog yesterday and didn’t get back to it till now. I read the article. I couldn’t have said it any better than teapartydoc’s excellent comment, though he added quite a bit more erudite substance that I could’ve. And Auntie Analogue put it well, too, I thought. I guess I would only add that the Time article from 1942 reflected an American people involved in the second world war after coming out of the first world war and then a great depression, with no Social Security (until 1935) or other safety nets. It was the voice of organized (politicized) religion, not Christian scripture. And seeing the involvement of “Chairman Foster Dulles” made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I think they were making lots of progressive talk like that back then in an attempt to soothe the angry poor masses so they wouldn’t rise up and bring on Communism. Thanks for the interesting item from the past!

      • “They have dynamited the foundation, which is God.” That’s my point. Stalin, Hitler, Mao and other “great” leaders were failed “gods”, but atheists keep hoping they will find replacements for the one that is not supposed to exist. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind.

      • This. In the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Constitution the French revolutionaries stated that care of the poor was a “sacred” obligation, and then proceeded to desacralize everything, and secularize that which had been declared sacred. Then, without the infrastructure of the church (they drove out or killed over half of the priests and abolished the orders of nuns which would have been there) the people starved, while the government officials in charge somehow ended up with better houses.

    • why haven’t atheists put forward a simple, commonly accepted moral code

      It’s simply not possible. Both Kant and Stefan Molyneux made gallant tries, but both rest on certain a priori assumptions and if you can’t get people to agree to those assumptions, or people realize, correctly, that they can gain advantage by ignoring those assumptions, then their philosophies have no force. Philosophies rely on reason and throughout history there have been an awful lot of reasonable people who ended up with unreasonable peoples’ swords sticking out if them.

      Without recourse to a divine mandate, human philosophies lack power. No one ever has marched to their death under the banners of the categorical imperative or universally preferable behavior, or ever will.

        • The categorical imperative and Kantian philosophy are an attempt to define moral truths a priori via pure practical reason such that they stood on their own without the requirement for a divine mandate. It is irrelevant whether Kant himself was an atheist.

  25. “I’m fond of pointing out that much of what defines the modern age is that everyone forgot the timeless lessons of the human condition and now we have to rediscover them.”

    Kipling wrote about this in “The Gods of the Copybook Headings” just after WWI.

    • Everything going on in Western Europe today is due to forgetting (purposefully) their history. A country that spent 770 years wrestling control back from invading Muslims now invites them back in instead of shooting them on the beach?

      • @Drake
        It’s that old normalcy bias raising it’s ugly head again…They had never experienced the savagery and horror of Moslem dominance so they invite them in and spread their legs…I wonder if their children will hate them or the Moslems more… Problem is we aren’t that far behind them on the path we are going because we don’t read, understand history or maybe just can’t relate to it enough to say hell no you aren’t living here…Bracken has some pretty good post on this issue…

    • If you are going to mention Kipling how about The Wrath of the Awakened Saxon. The civil war may get hot and this poem alludes to how it happens.

  26. “There is something about reading from a screen that makes long articles less pleasant for me.”

    That’s because you are left side dominant. Marshall McLuhan used to talk about “light on” print, as opposed to “light through” screen. He claimed that light on was processed in the logic side of the brain, the linear side: one. letter. at. a. time. Light through requires the brain to fill in more of the gap subjectively, the right side. The moonbat side. In a very general sense, he claimed that wide scale dissemination of print raised our culture, brought about the Enlightenment whereas the advent of screens brought about the Dumbening and the seeds of demise.

    • Cute idea, but I don’t think there is any compelling evidence for it. A lot of that right brain/left brain stuff is about as scientific as horoscopes.

      • So you believe the part of the brain that governs reason is the same as the part that governs emotion? Kind of like the transmission of a car is the same as the engine? Hmmmmm…

        • The human brain is not an automobile engine and the pop culture left-brain/right-brain dichotomy is a ridiculously reductive description of something that is poorly understood by science.

      • It’s shorthand. Works well enough.

        I await your delighted sneer- because palmistry proves you incorrect.
        Yes, palmistry!

        The lines of the hands are not merely creases, but also a map of the major circuitry.

        Right brain “Heart”
        Left Brain “Mind”
        Spinal cord “Life”
        Corpus Callosum “Fate” (Conscience is a better descriptor)

        The Women’s line, base of the palm to the little finger, or Gut Instinct. Yes, they read people and think with their c*nts.

        The Negro line, a Conscience line canted offset, illustrative of their sure certainty, self-centeredness, and love of the limelight. Too determinedly individualistic to ever unify.

        Plus much more- cancer (an asterisk) or heart problems (canted or connected lines) in the fleshy part of the hand, even tubal ligations.

        The lines- a redundant wiring diagram- reflect flows and interrupts in the electrical wiring, the nervous system.

        Freud began his theories of Id, Ego, Superego as a brain surgeon- if the brain had structure, should not the mind?

        The ancients saw repetive patterns correlating to personality types, but had no knowledge of electricity or neurology, so they tried with astrology as a matching system. No, palmistry isn’t chiromancia, fortunetelling, except that one’s tendencies may lead to certain probable outcomes.

        Humans show the seperation of hemispheric function with two lines.
        Apes and monkeys do not, they have only one solid crease, no higher level function.

        Thus, sir, you are refuted.

        Now, your next question pertains to what we call religion- why the seperate functions, what are the hemispheres for?

        PS- horoscopes, Tarot, oracular divination- all are attempts to put a language to the nonverbal, hologrammatic information processing of the right brain. Try to put a dream, packed with information, into words.
        Hard to do, eh?

        The right brain perceives the immaterial world, the ecology of ‘energy’ (electromagnetic spectra)- the spirit world.

        The left brain perceives the material world.
        The different environs demand different processing. We are meant to talk to ‘God’.
        Not all science is Western science.

  27. I disagree with Ron Unz on a lot of things, but one thing I’ll say – he doesn’t lack guts.

  28. I like the idea that separation does not mean hostility. I’ve mentioned before that I actually like POC. I just don’t see why we have to be crammed together in unnatural ways. The Rhodesians tried a combination of voluntary integration with peaceful separation. School was segregated at the primary and secondary levels and integrated at the college level. Africans who had proven themselves economically and culturally could live in white neighborhoods and vote, others were allowed to work in towns and have homes in tribal trust lands, where there wives and kids resided, unless they had the resources to bring them into town. This experiment got squashed by the globalists back then, however the philosophical foundations that facilitated that squashing appear to be falling apart now. Something along those lines might serve as an example or template for future application.

    • @tpd
      I like people as long as I’m not subsidizing them to the detriment of my family, my tribe, my culture…I will give you the shirt off my back if you are truly in need…I don’t like being forced too by the end of a gun though and will do everything in my power to stop it…

  29. ” There are a lot of alt-Jews out there. It’s not a majority or even close… ”

    Yes kind of but not close. Few Jews outside of Israel seek the truth without first asking “is this good for the Jews.” (While most Israelis do not follow the truth, if a Jew dies, he is usually Israeli Jew).

    Unz is an exception for a Western Jew and one of the more honorable men of the modern age. Reading him is entertaining and enlightening, both for what you can learn and for a rare opportunity to observe an intelligent person, who is driven to find the truth, trying to figure out what is true. The reader gets to sit there and watch him stumble and struggle then finally have an “Ah ha!” moment. Great stuff and I await the next installment of American Pravda.

  30. This is where the “all HBD, all the time” people lose me. The question for our purposes boils down to: When “representative government” fails — as we all agree it already has — what will give the State (whatever that ends up being) legitimacy? That’s purely the realm of culture. No one will be loyal to a government that says “only those with this specific gene sequence may apply” — not even people who have it. A divinely-sanctioned moral order is the only way to go; our version of Dear Leader will start as a prophet of some kind.

      • It will. An Indian medicine man called one’s ancestors and relatives an “oversoul”, the EM (‘spirit’) equivalent of a genetic demographic.

        Our gods are culture built on the mythic stories of those ancestors, true, but they are something more- embedded and reflected in both flesh and spirit.

        Time will crush, simplify, and streamline our stories into portable, weatherproof nuggets. DNA, whether material or immaterial, is itself a collection of experience- our ongoing Stories, molded into ourselves.

      • No. But as Z Man himself often points out, humans are hard-wired to believe in the transcendent. Trying to build a political philosophy around “Resolved: The American Nation consists of those with gene sequence XXX” is a fool’s errand. You need to find some kind of mythical “Essence of ___” to make it work. This has been done before, e.g. “kokutai no hongi.” It didn’t work so well, but were the bad parts bugs or features? (It’s an academic question, as far as I’m concerned, because I’ve been saying for years now that we’re going to find out, one way or the other. But it’s an interesting question for all that).

        • In what exact way did it not work so well? You think that attacking Pearl Harbor was inherent in Kokutai? With all due respect Severian, that’s absurd.

          • 1,000 years in Manchuria was most definitely part of kokutai. That didn’t work out so well. (The US was only involved in a very small part of WWII in Asia).

        • The Transcendent can best be found in the lines of blood, and spirit. We seek the transcendent because we sense it, but can only see it’s fleshly half.

      • The Romano-Christian Jesus doesn’t need to be tied to the Semitic ba’al / Elohim /Hub-Al-i-lah. (Jehovah and Allah, in short)

        That was an attempt at scientific legitimacy, in accord with the science of the the time.

        A primitive version of HBD moral philosophy, come to think of it.

        Good King Jesus would make a splendid god of our forefathers, he’s the best model out there. The oogily-boogily can stay in the bar and the nursery.

    • I see no reason a state could not be run by those with a gene-sequence. Of course, no responsible state would do that, because it excludes too much talent. But, for example, our government is highly meritocratic. The fact that stupid people have very little power does not affect the legitimacy of the state much. The state’s legitimacy among the proles and NAMs is pretty much irrelevant.

      The thing you’re missing is that we are moving (or have moved) from a technological situation where the average man had substantial military power, to one where he does not. As such, the opinions of the masses are increasingly unimportant. Democracy as a system is a response to the military power of mobs. If mobs have no power, there’s no need for it.

      Every state must have morale and cohesion among its ruling class, or it cannot persist. You may have noticed our rulers have plenty of unity. Also note that they have replaced God with “the will of the people” (as expressed through them), and they seem quite happy with it.

      • “The state’s legitimacy among the proles and NAMs is pretty much irrelevant.” Really? Who staffs the armies? The police forces? ” the average man had substantial military power, to one where he does not.” Again, really? The guy who shot up a Republican Party softball practice begs to differ. I know, I know, the Media doesn’t cover it, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, and it certainly doesn’t mean it lacks lessons for the rest of us. A state that’s legitimate in the eyes of “proles and NAMs” is generally free of political violence.

    • The word you’re looking for is “a People”.
      The divine example, the standard to strive for, is an archetype. A King above kings, but for us only. The Face of the People, to earth and to heaven.

      Their forefathers followed other gods, because they are different Peoples. They aren’t us, nor should we expect to make them so. Let them keep their ancestor’s spirits, and we shall keep ours. Now we understand each other.

      I’m agreeing with you, by the way.

    • First of all good luck waiting. The falcon cannot hear the falconer and Jim Jones ran out of purple drank.

  31. It’s also possible to get out of print books from all over the world. I got a little out of print book habit that started when I gave up reading living authors. And generally I read non-fiction so everything has an index and that’s where I go to find the new one. It doesn’t mean I’m reading about politics or economics or philosophy all the time either. I’m finishing up a book written in 1911 on the Australian aboriginals right now. Fascinating. Reading all the older books also shows me how poorly educated I am. Not just the fact I don’t know Latin, Greek, German and French but that I have to read with a dictionary. It’s also a reminder that there are things in this culture worth defending. It’s all so degraded now it’s hard to see

  32. We haven’t so much discovered that we were adopted as that our “parents” are degenerate child-eating monsters from Mars.

    But yes, we aren’t going to go anywhere with separatism unless we can present it as a beneficial or essential move to the other interest groups in our polity. On the other hand, given the somewhat parasitic nature of some of those groups, the degree to which separatism actually will be beneficial to them in the short run is debatable.

    I doubt that the break-up of the U.S. is going to do all that much for, say, welfare mothers, if it happens.

  33. Giles MacDonogh’s “After the Reich” is a solid treatise of the immediate postwar refugee and POW problems and the massive dislocations of populations. The American antipathy towards the Germans in general is amply discussed. Overall, the immediate post war periods, both WWI and WWII and the degree to which old scores were being settled and the new “isms” were battling for adherents is hugely under-examined. At the same time I’d also recommend George Friedman’s book “Flashpoints”— another good treatise on the irrepressible legacy of Balkan grudges. Something to think about when we are handing out defense and nuclear umbrellla guaranties to every batch of Miscellaneous Slavs who ended up with their own country.

    • George Friedman — another Jewish neocon warmonger, founder of Stratfor. His worldviews remind me of that jerk Zbigniew Brzezinski (may he rest in peace). Delusional arrogance written for the military industrial complex and (((other interests))). He had another book that was to be released in Jan 2018, but since his warmonger Hillary didn’t get elected and Trump is shaking things up, the book’s release has been twice delayed for re-writing, now scheduled to release summer 2019.

      • Make sure you check under your bed for Ted Herzl and Max Nordau before you go to bed every night….you never know.

        • Ha! I don’t blame you for thinking I’m JQ-obsessed with the way I vent on Z Man’s blog. I’m not such a hater, it’s just a relief to be able to vent all these things that cannot be said in our current society. We really need to be able to talk about the inordinate amount of Jewish influence in our government, schools, courts, finance, foreign policy as well as about the history of Jews and their expulsions — what caused them and our subsequent history together. You think I exaggerate Jewish involvement in our governance and active demise? Well, look at the people in charge of anything that matters, so many Jews. It’s not like I wanted it to be so, I read up and looked around and that’s what I see. I used to be hugely sympathetic to the Jews, even studying Holocaust literature in college. I drank the Kool-Aid! But then as I worked over the decades, I studied reality, which turns out to be very different from what I was taught and what is reinforced to us every day by media and our government. I don’t believe in persecuting Jews, I believe in outlawing certain behaviors that *some* Jews and their non-Jewish cohorts like to impose on us average working gentiles. I also reject the “Judeo-Christian” notion, a recent creative development. Jews and Christians are very different and we parted ways back with Jesus. Judaism has more in common with the other side of the semitic coin, Islam. I mean, have you read any of the Talmud? Creepy, hateful stuff. Nothing like Christianity. Sorry, rambling, and I already blabbed so much yesterday.

          • Same here. Once you see the tendrils, you can’t stop seeing them.

            This cannot be conscious conspiracy, the recurring pattern is millenia old. Only genetic history explains such persistence, such length.

Comments are closed.