The upcoming American Renaissance conference

Posted on October 16, 2010 by jewamongyou

Those of you who read the American Renaissance monthly magazine should already be aware that we are having another conference this coming February (4th-6th).  This one will be in Charlotte, North Carolina.
It looks like we’ll have some interesting speakers this time around and that is good enough reason to attend.  But there are other reasons to attend as well.  It is important that as many people as possible show up because this is not only a conference.  It is a show of commitment and resolve.  Last February the forces of evil stooped to new lows to keep us from meeting.  We must show them, and all others who are watching, that their despicable tactics will not dim our light or slow our progress.
It was in response to the events of last February that this blog was started.  Some may blame the organizers at American Renaissance for not foreseeing the difficulties or for less than perfect communication.  But now is the time to forgive and to unite behind our common cause.  If enough of us sign up, then sheer profit motive will work in our favor to secure our venue at the hotel.  There is strength in numbers, especially when those numbers carry dollar signs.
Even though I am a Jew, I am not very good with money.  Still, I’ve given serious thought to opening a fund for those who cannot afford the expenses on their own.  I already know of one such person.  He would sorely like to attend but his means do not currently permit.
The various pro-white movements are blessed with many leaders.  Many of those leaders would have preferred something different for this conference.  Some would have preferred that it be closer to the middle of the country.  Others would have preferred a location at a private country estate.  Yet others might object to one or more of the speakers.  But, in order for our movement to be successful, we must all be followers at one time or another.  We must respect the choices that have been made and make the best of them.
I hope there are protesters; they provide entertainment between talks.  It’s always fun to watch leftists stand out in public (preferably in the cold) wearing ridiculous masks, beating drums and making fools of themselves.  For this I have a zoom lens; I wouldn’t want to get too close to them for fear of catching something.

Posted in activism | 15 Comments

More on Muslims, Mexicans and freedom of speech

Posted on October 15, 2010 by jewamongyou

Nobody has taken me to task for the apparent contradiction between my libertarianism on one hand (which presumably supports freedom of speech) and my condemnation of Islam as a menace to our society on the other.  I’m a bit disappointed because I enjoy being challenged and don’t mind being proven wrong.  As it stands, I believe I am right and I shall presently explain.
A person can believe anything he wants and his belief is meaningless to the outside world until he either speaks it or acts upon it.  Therefore, as far as we’re concerned, freedom of religion is the same as freedom of speech.  The writers of the U.S. Constitution clearly saw it this way, as they included both freedom of religion and freedom of speech in one amendment: the first.
Anybody who professes Islam is both exercising his freedom of religion and his freedom of speech.  So, by suggesting that Europe rid itself of its Muslims, am I not suggesting that they curtail freedom of speech?  Yes, I am and, as Curt Doolittle already wrote, “This isn’t a moral question. It’s a practical one.”  But I wanted to expound upon this.  A person could stand on a corner all day long and say “there is no god except Allah and Muhammad is His prophet.”  He might be singing it as a song to entertain or perhaps it is part of a college project (you never know these days), or he might be doing it on a dare.  Or he might be a Muslim.  In the former cases, it is freedom of speech.  In the latter case, it is also freedom of association.
Perhaps here I part ways with the authors of the Constitution but, while a nation should allow an individual to say what he will, at the same time, it must pay close attention to what he is.  It is not what people say that defines a nation; it is what they are.
I can think of two groups of people that it is dangerous to anger and doing so is likely to cost one’s life: Muslims and drug cartels.  If individuals, living in the U.S., profess their membership in a drug cartel, we would do well to remove them from our land.  The government is expected to do so even if the individuals in question have done nothing specifically illegal other than membership in such a group.  Both Muslims and drug cartels threaten freedom of speech in areas that they dominate.  It is likely that the cartels were inspired by Muslims in their use of violence and mutilation to stifle dissent.
Am I being unfair to compare Muslims to drug cartels?  Perhaps.  I have already pointed out that there are good people who call themselves “Muslim” and it is obvious that one cannot lump all Muslims together.  And yet any land that becomes home to large numbers of Muslims is transformed in ways most of us find disagreeable.  Any nation, that allows itself to be inhabited by more than a few Muslims, will find its indigenous population strangers in its own land.
The authors of the Constitution listed freedom of religion and freedom of speech as the “First Amendment” because, without it, all other rights are sure to be lost.  But there is another “First Amendment” that is so primary and so basic that the founding fathers felt no need to even list it: the right to have a nation.  Without a nation, there can be no Constitution and our rights have no home.  They wither away.
The nations of Europe cannot retain their various identities if they are dominated by Muslims.  The U.S. cannot retain its identity if it is dominated by Mexicans.  Europeans and Americans have the right to keep their nations.  Not just a right, but a duty; they owe it to their children.
Things are not so rosy these days in America but, in terms of freedom of speech, we have never had it so good as the last couple of generations.  It was not that long ago that Americans were being arrested for sedition and that antiwar  protesters were routinely thrown in jail.  It is ironic that the same open-mindedness that has given us such liberty has also grown malignant in the minds of fools and convinced them that all people are the same as us.  Thus, in their folly, they have invited the Mexican hordes and, under their wings like so many bedbugs, the cartels find their way here.  I fear that this era of freedom is near its end.  Once the enemy is among us, attending our schools, living in our neighborhoods, attending our churches and caring for our sick and elderly, then more distinctions must be made as far as what can be said and what cannot.  We wouldn’t want to offend them, now would we?  We wouldn’t want to anger them; it could be dangerous you know.  Somebody might get hurt.

Posted in freedom of speech issues, immigration/ Hispanics, libertarian thought | 11 Comments

The Holocaust Industry by Norman Finkelstein

Posted on October 13, 2010 by jewamongyou

I just finished reading “The Holocaust Industry” by Norman Finkelstein, sent to me by my friend Gaurav Ahuja a while back.
Both of Finkelstein’s parents had survived the Warsaw ghetto and both of his parents were the only ones, of their families, who had survived the war.  In spite of this, or perhaps because of this, his perspectives are refreshingly different from what we have come to expect from the leftist elite.
The first part of the book, which I did not find especially interesting, explains the evolving relationship between American Jewry, Israeli Jewry and the Nazi Holocaust.  I am certain that many other readers would find it quite interesting.  As for me, politics make my eyes glaze over.
Toward the middle of the book, Finkelstein shows us how powerful Jewish elites harnessed the tragedy of the Holocaust for their own monetary and political gain.  He shows us how shady and powerful Jewish organizations extorted millions of dollars from governments and banks – and then used the money for their own pet projects (and for their own personal wealth) rather than transferring it to actual survivors.  He cites several examples of dubious Holocaust history and scholarship and how, once those works were exposed as fraudulent, the Holocaust industry continued to lend them credence anyway.
Finkelstein names many names in his book, and slaughters a lot of sacred cow – so it is no wonder that he lost his job, as assistant professor at DePaul University, and is the target of threats and intimidation.  Finkelstein is a leftist and he annoyingly reminds us of this periodically in his book.  I wonder if this has given him any additional armor against his critics.  Somehow I doubt it; the Left is not known for being gracious or merciful.
For me, one of the most interesting paragraphs in the book was the following (pg. 127):

As the Holocaust industry plays with the numbers to boost its compensation claims, anti-Semites gleefully mock the “Jew liars” who even “huckster” their dead.  In juggling these numbers the Holocaust industry, however unintentionally, whitewashes Nazism.  Raul Hilberg, the leading authority on the Nazi holocaust, puts the figure for Jews murdered at 5.1 million.  Yet, if 135,000 former Jewish slave laborers are still alive today, some 600,000 must have survived the war.  That’s at least a half-million more than standard estimates.  One would then have to deduct this half-million from the 5.1 million figure of those killed.  Not only does the “6 Million” figure become more untenable but the numbers o fthe Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers.  Consider that Nazi leader Heinrich Himmler put the total camp population in January 1945 at a little over 700,000 and that, according to Friedlander, about one-third this number was killed off by May.  Yet if Jews constituted only 20 percent of the surviving camp population and, as the Holocaust industry implies, 600,000 Jewish inmates survived the war, then fully 3 million inmates in total must have survived.  By the Holocaust industry’s reckoning, concentration camp conditions couldn’t have been harsh at all; in fact, one must suppose a remarkably high fertility and remarkably low mortality rate.

In their zeal to inflate the numbers and suffering of Jewish victims, the Holocaust industry has sought to belittle the suffering of other ethnic groups.  Finkelstein relates how the Holocaust industry used its political clout to disparage victims of the Armenian holocaust and the mass murder of Gypsies by the Nazis.  More famously, Finkelstein opines that the Holocaust has been used as a tool for the oppression of Palestinians in Israel.
I think it all boils down to greed and the attempt to enforce a hierarchy of suffering – as in the saying of Plato, quoted by Finkelstein at the end of his introduction, “You can’t compare any two miserable people and say that one is happier than the other.”

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links, Jewish stuff and Israel | 9 Comments

JAY gets banned from change.org

Posted on October 12, 2010 by jewamongyou

I was wondering what took them so long, at change.org, to ban me.  After all, even though I was careful to refrain from abusive language and personal attacks, I told the truth about race – and this is a huge sin in the eyes of the left.
This is the reason I was given for being banned:

Change.org is not a space to be promoting debunked “science” nor a space to be denigrating other ethnic groups. There are plenty of spaces on the internet for you, Change.org is not one of them. All the best. Justin – Community Manager

…and this is the post that was, apparently, the last straw:

Every one of your statements only illustrates the fact that the power structure is anti-white.
You ask why you can’t find John Baker’s book “anywhere” (I assume you mean at your campus bookstore etc.).  The reason is that his views are contrary to the official stance on race.  It’s the same reason you wouldn’t find Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses” in Iranian bookstores.
You point out that American Renaissance is considered a “racist” organization by the powers that be.  But of course.  Rather than debating the issues themselves, it’s much easier to simply call your opponent a “racist”.
You ask me for evidence of racial differences in violence – but demand that I exclude any “racist” authors.  Do you not see how your argument is circular?  This would be like me demanding from you that you cite evidence of the superiority of the Democratic Party but exclude any Democrats as sources.  You are being lazy Gabrielle – because you are taking the easy way out and using name-calling instead of examining the evidence itself.
No, there is no single “violence gene” that is found in minorities.  Especially when we consider that “minority” is not a race.  But there are genes for agression – and those genes are more frequently found among certain races/ethnic groups.  The science behind this is not being pursued in America because it is practically forbidden to do so here.  There is some progress being made in China however.
You sound very young and you give the impression that you are trapped inside the dogma with which you have been raised.  This is a difference between you and I.  I am willing to read your books and articles – but you are not willing to read mine.  I see no such thing as “heresy” and so I am open to new ideas.  To me, there is no such thing as an “evil” theory.  A theory can only be right or wrong but not “evil”.  It cannot be heretical.  You find the theory of racial differences to be offensive.  This is why you react so strongly against it.  I do not consider your theories to be offensive; I only consider them wrong – after having carefully considered them, and having been raised with them as you have.

I think this is the first time I’ve been banned from a leftist website – and I was beginning to doubt my own bona fides as a racial activist.

Posted in shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 14 Comments

Felony voting bans

Posted on October 11, 2010 by jewamongyou

Anna Hirsch is disturbed by the fact that felons are not allowed to vote in many states.  The reason she objects to this ban is that she considers the racial disparity in felony convictions to be the result of white racism.  Apparently, she is oblivious to the facts on the ground: that blacks and Hispanics really do commit more crime than whites and North Asians.

On a certain level, I also disapprove of felony voting bans.   There are far too many laws in America and it is far too easy to become a “felon”.  If the powers that be do not like you, one goon tells another, “find something to charge him with”.  As long as you’re breathing, they will find something.  But this injustice does not matter to those on the left; it only matters if the victims are “people of color”.

Should anybody be voting?  There is a strong case to be made that most acts of voting constitute aggression.  This happens to be my opinion as well.  Nobody has the right to appoint another person to rule over me or to use violence against me.  It does not matter what race, gender or age the voter is.  He still has no such rights.  Therefore I see no reason to protest a law that prevents certain people from voting if nobody should be voting.  I would make the same case against woman suffrage.

What Hirsch is in fact saying, though not in all cases, is that non-whites who have committed crimes against other people should be allowed to commit yet more crimes against more people.  Leftists, like Hirsch, have a tendency to promote policies that encourage violence.

During the reign of President Bush, many leftists protested against his wars.  I wonder if Hirsch was among them.  Many have asked why those protesters are staying home now that Obama is waging the same wars and committing the same abuses.  The answer, of course, is that the Left does not oppose violence.  It only opposes violence that it does not approve of.  Obama is a “person of color”.  Therefore, they approve of his violence – at least enough to refrain from massive protesting.  They approve of the violence committed by black/Hispanic felons – at least enough to encourage those same felons to rule over us via their votes and to excuse their crimes (insofar as real crimes were committed) as artifacts of white racism.

Posted in libertarian thought, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 12 Comments

Racist code words

Posted on October 10, 2010 by jewamongyou

The left loves to accuse the rest of us of hiding our racism through “code words”.  Their list of code words might include “states’ rights”, “urban”, “high-crime area”, “youth” etc.
Typical of such leftists is Steve Rawley who  writes:

Racism exists in many forms. Perhaps the most hurtful form is the unconscious kind, expressed inadvertently by people who consider themselves to be well-meaning. I don’t think anybody who contributes to the discussions at PPS Equity is a racist, but there have been times when non-white readers have contacted me in exasperation about some of the things they’ve read here.
Just for kicks, see how many code words you can spot in the following passage. This is a real comment on a different blog.

We live in our neighborhood b/c it’s what we can afford, but the schools here are scoring so low and are socially very rough. We go to a charter school (thankfully k-8) about 4mi away, and have been developing a great community there. Most of the kids in our neighborhood go to various other schools too. Ironically, they are the more balanced, healthy kids that I prefer my kids befriend anyway. The ones from our neighborhood school are often yelling cusswords, lying, flipping each other off, and don’t seem to be supervised.

The type of “racism” Mr. Rawley complains about is, in fact, parents looking out for their own children.  Leftists (and most of those in power) view freedom of association and parental instincts as evils that must be crushed.
While leftists moan and groan about whites voting with their feet, picking their own friends and protecting their children, we do not see them complaining about anti-white racism at all.
Kaiser Permanente is offering scholarships for students interested in pursuing careers in health care.  Here is a snapshot of their application:
It is hard to be more transparent than this; Kaiser is plainly stating that Hispanics and blacks have preference over whites.  Examples, such as the one above, are extremely easy to find.  In fact, they are the norm.  Apparently, people like Rawley do not consider such policies “hurtful”.  Either that or he does not consider whites important enough to worry about.   By the way, “underrepresented” is a code word for racism.

Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites | 31 Comments

More blatant racism from The Oregonian

Posted on October 8, 2010 by jewamongyou

I am not sure what is more amazing.  The sheer volume of anti-white propaganda we are exposed to or the extent that the masses are blind to it.
The Oregonian ran a large article, in their “Opinion” section (Sunday, October 3, 2010) called “It’s time for Oregon to get smart on crime”.  The article dealt with various mandatory sentencing laws, Oregon’s prison population, crime levels and the budget.  On the first page of the add is a blurry illustration depicting an anonymous inmate’s face superimposed on the state of Oregon behind bars.  The inmate appears to be Caucasian.  On the second page of the add, two photos are featured.  The top one shows two productive, benign inmates clearly trying to better themselves.  One is black and the other Hispanic.  We can see how well they get along – and what could be more innocent than getting/giving a haircut?:

Toward the bottom of the page is the second photo.  Here we see a gang of shirtless toughs, one of them sporting a large swastika on his chest.  They appear menacing.  They are faceless, nameless and – they are all white:

Whatever message the Oregonian appears to be sending, they are clearly piggy-backing their underlying creed onto it: “people of color” = good.  Whites = bad.  But, since this is not the topic of their opinion piece, the impression is that this message is not an opinion at all, but rather a fact.  I hope none of this blog’s readers actually support The Oregonian monetarily, for this is a cowardly and dangerous form of propaganda.
(Note that the above photos were taken two years apart.  Somebody sifted through a lot of photos to find what they were looking for in order to obtain the desired effect).

Posted in examples of propaganda | 5 Comments

Quran-burning Pastor interview

Posted on October 7, 2010 by jewamongyou

Patrick, who often comments on this blog, was kind enough to send me an interesting link.  Here we can hear a naive and foolish BBC reporter interviewing the breathtakingly ignorant pastor Terry Jones – who recently planned to burn 20 Qurans.
It is frustrating when a cause, which should be praiseworthy, is taken up by a man who comes across as a clueless dufus.  It is not enough that pastor Jones had never even read the Quran, but he is caught flat-footed even on simple questions about the Bible.  If there are people like him among race-realists, let us hope that they do us all a favor and keep their mouths shut.

Posted in freedom of speech issues | 4 Comments

The legacy of serfdom

Posted on October 5, 2010 by jewamongyou

The vast majority of whites are descended from people who suffered as serfs for several hundred years.  In our time of abundance, we often forget how short and brutal life used to be.  Christopher Martin, in his book “Louis XIV”, describes it thus:

… The peasantry still formed the bulk of the population.  Dressed in course cloth, with wooden clogs, living in thatched hovels, they lived simply at the best of times, on a meatless diet of bread and dripping, and porridge.  As much as half the value of their crops might go to the landlord in rent; or if, as was common in Southern France, they owned their own smallholding, it was often too tiny to keep them above the level of starvation.  The periodic scourges were famine, plague and war.  Not surprisingly the peasant’s expectation of life at birth was only twenty-five years.

During the Middle Ages, some 90% of Europeans were serfs.  These “Middle Ages” persisted, in some places, until the 19th century.  Once born a serf, it was almost impossible to escape to a higher station in life;  one’s status was determined by lineage.  Education was rudimentary at best and was typically limited to religious instruction.  Illiteracy was the norm.
Peasants were viewed as an inferior breed of human, relegated by divine providence to serve the noble class:

Certain wild creatures, male and female, are to be seen about the countryside, grimy, livid, burnt black by the sun, as though tethered to the soil which they dig and till with unconquerable tenacity… When they stand upright, they show a human face; they are, in fact, men.  At night they creep back into dens, where they live on black bread, water and roots; they spare other men the trouble of sowing, ploughing, and reaping in order to live, and they deserve not to go short of that bread which they have sown…” (La Bruye’re on the peasants, in “Characters”).  Also from “Louis XIV”.

While most white people today are descendants of those “wild creatures”, it is certainly working class/blue collar whites who are their true heirs.  What long-term cultural and genetic legacies did those centuries of slavery inflict upon the the descendants of serfs?
Among large-scale movements, the rise of Marxism in Eastern Europe was clearly built upon class resentment – though it ended up destroying the very downtrodden it was supposed to rescue.
I would argue that the prevalence of alcoholism in certain European countries is an outgrowth of serfdom.  After all, in a life of abysmal misery, it is only natural that people availed themselves of the temporary escape from reality that alcohol provided.  Who can blame them?
In a feudal society, peasants lacked freedom.  They needed their lord’s permission to marry or even to leave his property.  Over generations, people would have grown accustomed to their rulers making important decisions for them.  Today, their descendants are accustomed to government making decisions for them.  There was a smooth continuity of subservience – the lord gave way to other, more modern, forms of subjugation.  The serf has always had “authorities” to answer to even to this day.
Despite all the above, I do not believe that any white society pities itself and lives in the shadow of any historical persecution.  As Guywhite eloquently put it, in his open letter to Eric Holder and Michelle Obama:

What proof is there that black people still suffer from slavery 150 years ago besides your claims? Do Russians still suffer from the legacy of serfdom? If so, why did Russia get rapidly wealthier after the fall of the Soviet Union and the people of Moscow are now wealthier than most Americans? If blacks still suffer from the legacy of segregation into the black ghetto, does that mean that Jews must still suffer from the legacy of the Jewish ghetto? If so, then why are Jews the wealthiest people in the United States and every other country? Why do they score the highest on academic and IQ tests?

In the Western world, what is it that distinguishes successful people from failures?  Failures are enslaved by their legacies.  Successful people rise above their legacies.

Posted in government/corporate discrimination against whites, Uncategorized | 10 Comments

Jared Taylor versus Ora Garway

Posted on October 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

We like to think of the internet as being a free forum of ideas, a place where unpopular truth can defeat establishment dogma in a level playing field.  This is what we like to think – until we remember that even where freedom of speech prevails, it is money that determines which speech people are most likely to hear.  It is money that determines who speaks the loudest.
Hence we have Ora Garway, a newspaper editor in Monrovia, Liberia getting far more publicity than Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance. Garway’s newspaper, “Punch”, has a circulation of only 500 people per issue and does not appear to deal with particularly controversial issues.  I do not know how many readers American Renaissance has but I’m fairly certain it is more than 500.  Furthermore, AR is truly revolutionary.  It discusses issues than no mainstream publication is willing to seriously discuss.  The same cannot be said of “Punch”.
If we do a Google search for “Jared Taylor +American Renaissance”, we get 21,200 hits.  For “Ora Garway +Punch” we get 303,000 hits.  Garway’s visit to Mango Town is international news, even though very little happened there.
I have nothing against Garway.  She seems like a dedicated and brave woman.  But the above Google searches show us who is truly in charge versus who the real underdogs are.
Taylor and Garway do have something in common.  Just as most Liberians are illiterate, so too are most Americans racially illiterate.  Just as Garway faces an uphill struggle to get her message across, so too do people like Taylor.  The difference is that Garway has the support of powerful international forces behind her.

Posted in examples of propaganda, government/corporate discrimination against whites | 5 Comments