Dr. Eugene Valberg on African languages

Posted on August 15, 2010 by jewamongyou

At the 2008 American Renaissance conference, Dr. Eugene Valberg spoke about African languages.  Having spent many years in Africa, and being a particularly bright individual, Dr. Valberg is certainly more qualified than most to speak on this subject.
The main points Dr. Valberg made were as follows:
a)  Native African languages have very limited vocabularies.   He recounted how native Africans expressed wonder that a speaker of English would ever need an English dictionary.   He seemed to be saying that this is, at least in part, a reflection of the simplicity of the African mind.  As I remember, this was strongly implied, if not stated explicitly.
b)  Native African languages lack words for abstract concepts.  Instead, they borrow words for concrete ideas and clumsily use them to approximate abstract concepts that more advanced peoples had introduced into Africa.  One example is the word “obligation”, which one African language attempts to convey through the words “to tie together one’s feet”.
c)  African languages do not include terms of precision.  For example, there is typically no way to say “the fruit is half way up the tree”; either it is up the tree or it is not.  This is a product of the African mind seeing things in absolutes.
While I do not claim to be as knowledgeable about African languages, and African mentality, as Dr. Valberg, I have had my doubts as to the accuracy of his claims.  Firstly, I find it hard to believe that all of the hundreds (if not thousands) of tribal African languages suffer from every one the above deficiencies.  Certainly some of them are more sophisticated.  Lurking in the back of my mind was the suspicion that Dr. Valberg was seeing things in absolute terms, ironic as this would be.
I recently met a gentleman who is from Southern Sudan, near Uganda.  He is a speaker of Kuku so I availed myself of the opportunity to get his perspective on the above questions.  First I asked him how many words, excluding recent foreign loan words, are in Kuku.  He guessed that Kuku has around 1,000 words and that there is no need for a Kuku dictionary for native speakers.  On this count, he was in agreement with Dr. Valberg – though he would probably disagree with his explanation.  As for me,  I do not doubt that traditional African’s are of simple mind compared to more technologically advanced peoples.  However, I think a limited vocabulary necessarily goes hand in hand with non-literal languages.  I would wager that pre-literate European languages were also limited in their vocabulary.  Therefore, I do not see a paucity of vocabulary as clear evidence of racial disparities.  Of course, the fact that they were, until recently, non-literate, does bolster the other evidence we have concerning their mental abilities.
I asked the man about words for abstract concepts such as “responsibility”.  At first, he was not sure how to answer.  In all fairness, he is rather rusty since he has few opportunities to speak his native language these days.  He did tell me that there certainly is a word for “trustworthy” and he gave me an example of a man who has promised to marry somebody.  If he keeps his word, then he is trustworthy.  In other words, he has honored his responsibility.  Every society on Earth has laws against aggression and theft – even in Africa.  What is a criminal if not one who has shirked his social responsibility?  Yes, there is a difference between a good citizen whose motivation is altruistic and linked to a higher goal versus a good citizen who’s motivation is simply fear of punishment.  This distinction merits further study and it is very possible that language differences would throw light on such distinctions – but Dr. Valberg’s presentation is, at best, skeletal in this regard.  So, while I am not saying he is wrong, I am saying that he needs to elaborate much more and flesh out his theories.
I have pointed out to Dr. Valberg that even advanced languages had to borrow mundane terms, early on, to convey abstract concepts.  For example, the word for “forbidden” in Hebrew literally means “tied”.  The word for “obligation” is closely related (and probably derived) from the word for affection/love.  As for “responsibility”, I do not believe there is even a word for it in ancient Hebrew.  Modern Hebrew uses a term that is derived from the word for “end” as in “the buck stops here”.
What about English?  A good place to start would be the word “responsibility”.  It is derived from the word “response”, which simply means “an answer”.  Apparently, its current connotations are very recent.

The word “responsibility” is surprisingly modern. It is also, as Paul Ricoeur has observed, “not really well-established within the philosophical tradition” (2000: 11). This is reflected in the fact that we can locate two rather different philosophical approaches to responsibility.
The original philosophical usage of “responsibility” was political (see McKeon, 1957). This reflected the origin of the word. In all modern European languages, “responsibility” only finds a home toward the end of the eighteenth century. This is within debates about representative government…

What about the word “obligation“?

c.1300, “to bind by oath,” from O.Fr. obligier, from L. obligare, from ob “to” + ligare “to bind,” from PIE base *leig- “to bind” (see ligament). Main modern meaning “to make (someone) indebted by conferring a benefit or kindness” is from 1560s.

So it turns out that it comes from the Latin word “ligare” – to bind.  Indeed, it would appear that Dr. Valberg should have been obligated to look up the etymology of European words before making generalities about African ones.
I asked the man about expressing the concept of a fruit being only three quarters up a tree.  This question took him off guard and his response led me to concede this point to Dr. Valberg.  He explained to me that, in Kuku, one cannot state that a glass is only partly full.  Either it has contents or it does not.  Kuku speakers have no concept of fractions.
In conclusion I’d like to say that arriving at the conclusion that H.B.D. is real and that humans are not all the same is a great milestone in anyone’s life.  That being said, we should not get carried away and assume that every racial difference that could exist actually does exist.  When we find ourselves amongst our own, as in an American Renaissance conference, it is easy to get caught up in the cheerleading mentality.  Once this state is reached, we sometimes find ourselves shouting “Amen” and “Hallelujah”!  Our cause would be better served by stubbornly clinging to our skeptical natures even when in the company of friends.

Posted in racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 16 Comments

Racist serial killers – by an anonymous guest contributer

Posted on August 14, 2010 by jewamongyou

I emailed JAY a question about Abuelazam and it sounded like he was open to me writing a post on it. So here goes.
This has been a busy couple of weeks as far as mass murderers go. First, we have Omar Thornton in Connecticut and then there were the serial murders allegedly committed by Elias Abuelazam. I say “allegedly” only because he hasn’t been convicted yet. Unless you just fell off a turnip truck you know both stories had a bit of a racial angle to them.
The facts in the Omar Thornton case are simple. Omar was a black delivery driver for a Connecticut beer distributor.  On August 3 he was given a choice of resignation or termination for systematically stealing and reselling beer. There is video of the thefts.  While being escorted from the building he pulled out two handguns, murdered 8 white coworkers, and injured 2 more.  While waiting for the police to arrive he made a 911 call and said his motive was retribution for “racism”.  And then he killed himself.
In the aftermath of the shootings, interviews with his white live-in girlfriend quote her as saying he was a “gentle man” and “would never hurt another creature”.  Thornton’s best friend said he “snapped after years of being subjected to racist taunts by co-workers” and that “No one should have had to endure what that company put him through. Stuff on walls. Racist comments. I saw it with my own eyes.” Which is to say Omar told him so and showed him pictures of the “stuff on walls”.  In response, mainstream newspapers wrote stories that “vengeance” for “racism” had been the motive.
The only problem is that it wasn’t true. There were no racist comments or pictures on the bathroom walls and his co-workers hadn’t taunted him.  He had never even filed a complaint with the company or his union.  If he had then he would have won a lot of money with a discrimination lawsuit.  It was all the creation of a paranoid and mentally disturbed mind.  The only reason his friends and family thought otherwise is because of what he had told them.  But I’m not inclined to take the allegations of a mass murderer at face value.
Now, contrast this with the way the Elias Abuelazam case unfolded.  When police were looking for the suspect, the reports said he was a “white man” who was apparently “targeting blacks”.  Because we all know only “white men” can be serial killers.  And yet when they actually found the guy he was an Israeli.  How do we know this?  The newspapers all said it repeatedly.  So he was an Israeli and Israeli means JEWS!  And no doubt about it, the guy had an Israeli passport.  What’s worse, the media tried to gloss it over by sneaking vague references to him being from the “mixed” Jewish / Arab city of Ramle. They even quoted “unnamed” neighbors from Ramle that he was Christian.  Indeed, numerous comments on blogs crowed about how the “nazis must be disappointed”.  And sounded almost gleeful that it was a “Christian Arab”. That’s two birds with one stone eh?
But I’ve never considered “unnamed” neighbors a reliable source.  So I researched it extensively and still couldn’t come up with a concrete source for these claims.  In fact, the only thing I could come up with was that his mother had given an interview to an Israeli radio station in Arabic.  A smoking gun?  Not when half the Jews in Israel are Mizrahi immigrants from Arabic countries.  I suspect there are plenty of Jewish Israelis who grew up in Iraq or Lebanon and speak Arabic as their first language.  I’m guessing that could account for a last name of Abuelazam as well.  What’s more, I uncovered an interview with his former mother in law.  Apparently, she and her daughter are named HIRTH.  Now, we’re getting to the nitty gritty.  So a Christian Arab immigrates to the United States to marry a Jewish girl, eh?  Not bloody likely.
Oh shades of Columbine!  Does anyone remember the news coverage of the Columbine murders?  For the first couple of days news reports said Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were members of a “skinhead gang” called the Trench Coat Mafia.  And then after the skinhead rumours were firmly planted the newscasters dropped all references to skinheads.  As it turned out, the two teens were actually Jewish.  I haven’t trusted the mainstream media to report honestly on racial issues since.  But who am I kidding?  I never trusted them to start with.
And so I emailed JAY to see if he knew.  I figured he’d know and he’s one of the few people I’d trust to tell the truth.  He answered that he wasn’t exactly sure and didn’t trust the media to get it right, either.  He suggested Elias might actually be mixed.  Maybe.  Who knows? But a couple of more days have passed and I’ve run across another interview with his ex mother law in which she says unequivocally that he was Catholic.  I’ve known several Catholic Arabs so I’m going with Elias being a Christian Arab after all.  Though I suppose it’s possible he could still be mixed.  Like I said, who knows?
But as far as I’m concerned Elias isn’t really the story any more.  The MEDIA is the story now. First they said he was a white racist targeting blacks.  And it turns out the guy wasn’t all that white and he actually stabbed some whites and Hispanics, too.  Then they said the guy was an Israeli which everyone automatically assumes to be Jewish – I know I did!  And it turns out the guy was actually a Catholic Arab.  And this is right after the media tried to portray a black mass murderer as a victim of “racism”.  So can anyone blame me for being skeptical when the newspapers use unnamed sources and vague claims?  They can make their argument that it’s “racist” to want to know and that it shouldn’t matter.  But the truth is that it’s the first thing everyone wanted to know.  And all they did is cause confusion by pussy-footing around with it.  The Lesson is to never take the media at face value on anything even remotely controversial.  They’ve long since proven that they’re just not up to it.

Posted in examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 11 Comments

The American Pit Bull Terrier Pt 1

Posted on August 12, 2010 by jewamongyou

The United Kennel Club was founded in 1898 by Chauncy Z. Bennett.  The main reason was to have an official registry for his favorite breed: the American Pit Bull Terrier.  The American Kennel Club had refused to recognize the breed; officials there referred to them as “pit fighting mongrels.” By forming his own registry,  Bennett and the APBT represented the sort of rebellion against uptight aristocratic a-holes that made America great.  So it is sad to visit the UKC website and witness the glossing over of the ABPT as the seminal breed in the forming of the UKC.

The United Kennel Club was the first registry to recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier. UKC founder C. Z. Bennett assigned UKC registration number 1 to his own APBT, Bennett’s Ring, in 1898.



This entry is only found by searching for the history of the APBT, and is not even included in the general history of the UKC section.  The reason behind this must be an attempt at legitimizing the UKC in the eyes of the general public and, oh the horror, in the eyes of uptight aristocratic a-holes.
So then there is the AKC Registered American Staffordshire Terrier, whose owners will swear up and down this is a separate breed entirely – certainly not to be confused with that “pit fighting mongrel.”  The only problem:  Every Amstaff registered in the AKC is a direct descendant of a UKC registered APBT.  You see, in 1935, the AKC opened up their registry to a small number of APBTs and named them the much friendlier sounding name “The American Staffordshire Terrier”.  So although the Amstaff has been bred strictly for conformation in the AKC for 75 years, while the UKC APBT has been bred for both conformation and working ability, they are quite closely related.  It becomes even more interesting considering the fact that the AKC opened up their books again in the 1970’s to increase the gene pool of their Amstaff.  There are even some dual registered dogs, such as the APBT in the UKC and the Amstaff in the AKC – which are actually the same breed.
People not wanting their dog to be the wrong breed is understandable however, considering what is commonly referred to as “Breed specific legislation.”  According to the Animal Legal And Historical Center:

In 1984, a New Mexico town completely banned pit bulls and allowed county officers to confiscate and euthanize the dogs.

Also that year, Cincinnati, Ohio enacted a regulation that “defined vicious dogs to include all pit bull terriers,” and put special restrictions on the confinement, sale, and control of those dogs which were not applicable to other breeds. In each of these situations, one breed of dog has been singled out as “inherently dangerous to society,” regardless of the individual dogs’ present or past behavior.


Much can be said about these draconian measures enacted in the name of public safety.  Just imagine little Timmy playing in the front yard with his beloved family dog, when up comes the police officer to take him away and euthanize him.
I would like to take into consideration all the political, genetic/scientific, legal, racial and libertarian points of view.  Therefore, this topic will require another posting.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The precious heritage of Yemeni Jews

Posted on August 9, 2010 by jewamongyou


Without divulging too much about my personal history, suffice it to say that Yemeni Jewry holds a very special place in my heart.  Their traditions, when kept faithfully, have always provided me with great pleasure.  The sound of Yemeni children chanting as their forefathers have taught them is the most wonderful music to my ears.  Even their appearance, at least as it is most commonly found among them, represents the ultimate harmony of features.  Because of their beauty and character, Yemeni women have often been sought as wives by Ashkenazi men.  More recently, even Yemeni men have been sought as husbands by Ashkenazic women.  As far as I could tell, Yemeni men make good husbands and rarely abuse their wives (obviously I am speaking of Jews here).
Aside from the aesthetic aspects of Yemeni Jewry, it is a fact that their set of traditions is the most faithful to our ancient roots.  During the period of massive Jewish exodus from Spain, prior to and during the inquisition, Spanish Jews culturally dominated Oriental Jews wherever they settled.  These Sephardic Jews were white, educated, haughty and very literate.  They typically became the elite in Middle Eastern nations where they settled.  This did not happen in Yemen.  In Yemen, those Sephardic Jews who arrived assimilated to Yemeni culture and their children, aside from having European racial features, became Yemeni in every sense.  Literary traditions were so strong in Yemen that even the Sephardic juggernaut was stopped in its tracks there.  In later centuries, however, many Yemeni Jews did adopt Sephardic liturgy for their prayers.  Spanish cultural pressure was not the only obstacle however.  Yemeni Jewry was subject to various famines, persecutions and exiles as well.  These sometimes entailed wholesale destruction of holy books and widespread death.  Through it all, the ancient traditions held fast.
I will spare my readers the details of religious practice that set Yemeni Jews apart.  To do so would only alienate most readers as an intimate familiarity with Jewish traditions would be necessary to understand them.  Still, I shall gladly elaborate if anybody wishes me to do so.  In general terms, however, some of the highlights are as follows:
1)  Yemeni Hebrew is, along with some Iraqi dialects, the most conservative of all forms of Hebrew.  The finest grammatical distinctions, long forgotten in other communities, are zealously guarded in Yemeni congregations.  In modern Israel, unfortunately, there is degradation among the youth.
2) The parchment, upon which the Torah scrolls (and other holy scripts) are written, is tanned according to authentic ancient tradition.  This in not the case with most other communities.  Unfortunately, this tradition is only kept by a handful of congregations currently – as will be later elaborated upon.
3) Generally speaking, Yemeni Judaism places less emphasis on rabbinical authority insofar as qualifications for certain duties and functions.  Any man was considered fit to bake his own unleavened bread for Passover.  Each man would read the Torah scroll for himself in synagogue and (if memory serves me correctly) many people would slaughter their own animals for their meat.
4) Certain dubious traditions, which spread throughout the rest of Jewry, never caught on in Yemen.  One example is the superstitious ritual of “kapparoth”, where a live chicken is waved over a person’s head before Yom Kippur in the voodoo-like belief that the chicken would absorb the person’s sins (or something to that effect).
5) There are actually textual differences between the Yemeni Torah and the Torah of other communities.  To be sure, these differences are minor but we should bear in mind that, according to Jewish law, even a difference of one letter is enough to disqualify a Torah scroll.  My guess would be that the Yemeni version is more accurate.
6) Until fairly recently, Yemeni Jewry used the “Babylonian” system of vocalization, where the vowels were placed above the letters (“niqud ‘elyon”) as opposed the the “Tiberian” system, used by all other Jews, where the vowels were placed (usually) beneath the letters.  Note: there are no vowel letters in Semitic languages but special signs (“vocalizations”) were sometimes added to aid children and for religious liturgy.  Even though it is unclear which system is older (in ancient times it is likely neither one was used), I wanted to list this distinction here to emphasis the uniqueness of Yemeni tradition.

A page from tiklal (prayer book) “Mashta” (a famous manuscript, here in facsimile) illustrating this alternative vowel system

Yemeni Jewry, as found in Yemen, could be divided into three major sects: Shami, Baladi and Darda’i.
“Shami” literally means “of the vicinity of Syria, including the land of Israel.”  Syria is, in Arabic, called “Sham”.  This sect had adopted the Sephardic liturgy in prayer and many of their customs but, to a large extent, still remained Yemeni in character.  They retained many Yemeni customs and did not follow the Sephardic liturgy 100%.  They tended to follow the “Code of Jewish Law” (Shulhan ‘Arukh), which was written by R. Yosef Karo (a Sephardic Jew) – but according to Yemeni interpretation.
Baladi means, in Arabic, “local” or “regional” to be more exact.  This sect was more traditional and, though they adopted certain outside practices, remained by and large untainted.  They did, however, accept the “Kabbalah” and they did have deference to outside rabbinical authorities.  The most notable outside authority, and the most influential among them, was the Rambam (Maimonedes).
Darda’i is reportedly derived from a scriptural reference and started out as a derogatory term.  Another interpretation is that it is a compound word: “Dor” + “Dea'” = generation of knowledge.  Either way, this sect began in the early part of the 20th century under the leadership of a certain fearless man by the name of Mori Yihyeh al-Gafih .  “Mori” is the Yemeni term, roughly speaking, for “rabbi”.  Mori Yihyeh wrote a book exposing the Kabbalah, and its primary source, the Zohar, as both fraudulent and contrary to traditional Judaism.  It is difficult for modern Westerners to appreciate the courage necessary to do such a thing but let it suffice to say that his audacity was on par with that of Galileo or Copernicus.  His followers more or less follow the teachings of Maimonedes and they are, by far, the strictest adherents to the ancient traditions.  In Israel today, they are forced to congregate secretly and to remain an underground movement.  They number only a handful.  Of this handful, only very few conscientiously keep the finer aspects of their tradition – including the ancient formula for tanning the leather to be used for Torah scrolls.

Mori Yihyeh al-Gafih

In Yemen, Arabic was considered a quasi-holy language and Yemeni Jews continued to write in Arabic (in Hebrew characters) until fairly recently.

A writ of mourning dated 1942.  The last part is mostly in Arabic

There was a Yemeni Jewish presence in India and, from the 1880’s in the Land of Israel as well.  Remnants of their presence bear their distinctive signature.

The hand-crafted binding of a book, printed by the ‘Iraqi family (actually of Yemeni origin) in Calcutta, India dated 1851


The same book showing the seal of the ‘Iraqi family, which is of the priestly caste.  On the right, we can see that the book was bound using old Yemeni manuscripts (most of which have been removed)

In the early days of the State of Israel, the vast majority of Yemeni Jews were airlifted to Israel, where they were forcibly stripped of their outward traditions.  For all practical purposes, they were no longer allowed to dress traditionally and their children were educated in European “Hebrew”.  Their traditional ear locks were shaven off – ostensibly to rid them of lice and their valuables were often stolen from them.  Through all this, of all Oriental Jewish groups in Israel, the Yemenis have made the greatest effort to preserve their identity and to educate their children in the ways of their forefathers.  Sentiments vary among Yemenis in Israel.  Many became completely estranged from their roots as a result of military service (where overwhelming peer pressure was exerted to turn religious young people into hedonistic slaves of the Zionist state).  Others, while retaining some vestiges of their heritage, loath the concept of Yemeni Jews trying to maintain a “people within a people”. They buy into the idea that Israel is a place where all Jews must shed the identities of exile and unify themselves into one people with one culture.  Some value their continuity but take a fatalistic attitude.  They seem to be at peace with the idea that they are the last guardians of their traditions, their children marrying outsiders and forgetting the old ways.

The long term prospects of Yemeni Jews in Israel are not promising.  Too many forces are aligned against them.  It will be a sad day when the only remnants of their rich traditions are to be found in museums.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 27 Comments

A visitor's questions answered

Posted on August 8, 2010 by jewamongyou

Somebody contacted me with some questions about this blog and, even though I’ve dealt with some of these issues before, I’ve decided to clarify them again and here I’ll quote some of his words.

I frankly find it impossible that you would feel a true wellspring of sympathy for the cause of white racial preservation given the fact that a significant number of white nationalists have expressed sympathy for the nazi movement. Frankly I find the way you respond to people expressing such sympathies to be mind boggling because you seem so calm and jewish people are never calm when it comes to people saying nazi-ish things. And so I am a bit confused by you.

In other words, if many/most supporters of a particular cause also affiliate themselves with another cause that has a sordid history, this should be a reason for me to reject that particular cause altogether.  From a logical point of view, this makes no sense.  If most people, who are careful to turn off their lights before leaving their homes, are obsessive compulsive, does this mean the rest of us should not worry about turning off the lights?  The preservation of the white race stands on its own merit regardless of how many crazies choose to attach themselves to it.
As for my soft stance regarding neo-Nazis, I think some distinctions need to be made.
Firstly,  the government/media/education complex has been persecuting whites for at least 50 years – longer than most of us have been alive.  Most whites have been second-class citizens their entire lives.  Most whites, due to constant propaganda, are oblivious to this fact but a few have their eyes opened and then they become very angry.  The government/media/education complex goes to great pains in order to present only two choices to whites: a) normal or b) racist.  Out of anger and frustration, some of those angry whites pick option “b” in its purist form (according to what they’d been taught) and this would be “Nazism”.  Their young and undeveloped minds fail to recognize more reasonable paths.  These angry skin-heads and neo-Nazis are victims of the anti-white establishment just as much as the young white women who are pressured into dating black men.  Both mentalities are perversions that would rarely occur in a healthy society.  As has been pointed out many times, all too often we find Jewish names behind anti-white activity and so the young skin-heads and neo-Nazis find it easy to believe that “the Jews” are the enemy.  Hence I have a soft spot for these unfortunate misled youth.  Yes, they hate me for being a Jew – but I blame the leftists for this and I hope that those youth will grow out of it at some point.
Secondly, not all neo-Nazis are the same.  A person might call himself a “Nazi” and have no violent inclinations at all.  Most likely, he denies that the Nazi holocaust ever happened.  Within the context of labeling himself a “Nazi”, this would be a good thing because he might never call himself that if he believed that Nazis were responsible for the murder of several million innocent people.  Such a person might be mistaken about historical facts and he might differ from me politically but this does not necessarily mean he advocates murder, torture or concentration camps.  I am willing to look past the label and debate the issues on their own merits.
There are some neo-Nazis who are dangerous, deranged individuals.  Given the chance, they would kill me and my loved ones.  I have no soft spot for them.  I consider them to be not only dangerous to Jews but they are dangerous to everybody around them.  If they cannot be fixed then they should be removed from society.
The visitor asks how I can be calm when people say Nazi-ish things.  Would he prefer that I react by becoming hysterical?  We already have Jews whose job it is to become hysterical: they call themselves the A.D.L.  Let them be hysterical.  As for me, I prefer a calm and reasoned debate.

I am a white non-jewish person who is not a white nationalist. I do believe that if I were to breed with someone I would prefer someone of my own race but I am comfortable living in a multiracial nation. I have lots of experience with the different races and do believe their is differences but as far as I am concerned all humans suck to some degree and so I am not gonna say blacks are worse than whites. I have some friends who are black. Most of my friends are white, some are jewish, a few are black, and one is hispanic. I have no asian friends at the moment. I do not mind that these people are of different races.

In other words, “all humans suck”, there are racial differences but there is nothing wrong with a multi-racial society.  Of course, entire books have been written on these subjects and I highly recommend that the visitor read Amren every day for a while.  But, in a nutshell, my response is that those racial differences manifest themselves, on a societal level, in such ways that make multi-racial societies untenable in the long term.  When government refuses to acknowledge those racial differences, it ends up wasting untold billions of dollars in misguided projects.  Racial average I.Q. disparities mean that blacks (as a group) will never perform as well as other groups in schools and many professions.  A government that is blind to racial differences will assume that this inferior performance is due to white “racism” and act accordingly.  Blacks’ propensity for violence means that other groups will always be in danger from them unless, and until, separation is implemented.

Why is my view not represented? Why is it that it’s an either or scenario… either antiracist or white nationalist? What about the in between people who are mildly racist but not to the point of wanting to politically exclude people of certain races? The way I see it is if I ever have kids I would like the mother of my children to be white… and as far as grandkids go I would recognize that would be up to my kids(if I had them and they decide to breed) to decide….
What about us moderates? Where is our voice? Why is it that when someone realizes that on average blacks arent that bright they have to go and idolize hitler… its so freaken insane… OF COURSE BLACKS ARENT THAT BRIGHT but that doesnt mean we have to do all sorts of crazy hitler stuff about that.
Visitor, your view is not represented in this blog because it is not well thought out.  To state that racial differences are real but that we should sit back and do nothing about it is like saying somebody has been diagnosed with cancer – but it has not yet spread to his lungs so there is no need to worry about it.  Western society has cancer and, instead of seeking treatment, government is actively making it worse.
Surely you can see the consequences of the course we are on.  Massive non-white immigration and differential birth rates will obviously lead to the eventual extinction of whites.  If you disagree, then please explain the flaw in our reasoning.  If the eventual extinction of the white race does not disturb you, then how can you describe yourself as pro-white?  As for “crazy Hitler stuff”, I’m not sure what you mean by that.  Nowhere, in this blog, have I suggested a “final solution”.    What you describe as “moderate” seems to be a sit-back-and-let-the-forces-of -evil-destroy-us attitude.  Are you familiar with the plight of whites in South Africa?  What do you propose be done about it?  Have you been reading the news from U.K. and France?  If so, do you not see a problem?  I am curious how a “moderate” would tackle these issues effectively.
Posted in Uncategorized | 17 Comments

Difficulties with skulls

Posted on August 5, 2010 by jewamongyou

On page 196 of “Race” by John Baker, we are presented with the following representations of an Eskimo skull versus a Lapp skull:
While I have no reason to suspect that the Eskimo is not typical of his race, I have my doubts about the Lapp.  It is difficult for me to imagine what such a person might have looked like, at least as an adult.  An 1884 expedition by Prince Roland Bonaparte involved photographing quite a few Lapps.  Browsing through the photos, the Lapps do appear to be mixed – to the point where I don’t see how any one of them could be described as “typical Lapp”.
But back to the Eskimo skull, he resembles somebody we all know: Kennewick Man.
I cannot take full credit for this; a poster at Mathilda’s Anthropology blog, who calls himself Salsassin,  brought up the similarity though he did not include any illustrations.  So all the hoopla over Kennewick Man being European might have been for naught.  How could all the scientists who studied Kennewick’s remains have missed this?  Either Salsassin and myself are missing something or those scientists are not familiar with Eskimo skulls.

Posted in racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 5 Comments

L.A. Times policy re: race of murder victims

Posted on August 4, 2010 by jewamongyou

Amren recently had a story on murder victims in the L.A. area categorized by race, age, gender and location.  With a few clicks, I found an interesting explanation why the L.A. Times includes the race of murder victims:

Why does the Homicide Report give the race of victims and suspects?
The Homicide Report includes information on race or ethnicity of each homicide victim, as well as the name, gender and age and the time, place and manner of death. A number of readers have asked why race is included. Some have criticized the practice.
Racial information was once routinely included in news stories about crimes, but in recent decades, newspapers and other media outlets stopped mentioning suspects’ or victims’ race or ethnicity because of public criticism. Newspapers came to embrace the idea that such information is irrelevant to the reporting of crimes and may unfairly stigmatize racial groups.
The Homicide Report departs from this rule in the interest of presenting the most complete and accurate demographic picture of who is dying in homicides in Los Angeles County.
Race and ethnicity, like age and gender, are stark predictors of homicide risk. Blacks are much more likely to die from homicide than whites, and Latinos somewhat more likely. Black men, in particular, are extraordinarily vulnerable: They are less than 9% of the county’s population, but they represented nearly a third of homicide victims over the three years of data in the Homicide Report. That means one in a 1,000 blacks became homicide victims over those three years, more than 10 times the rate for whites and nearly four times the rate for Latinos.
The Homicide Report recognizes the peril of turning victims into statistics by reducing their lives and deaths to a few facts — particularly racial designations that provide only the roughest markers of ancestry and history. But given the magnitude of difference in homicide risk along racial and ethnic lines – -and the suffering homicide inflicts on subsets of the population — we opt to present the racial and ethnic contours of the problem so conspicuous in the coroner’s data.
In making racial and ethnic distinctions, The Times relies largely on the coroner’s designation. Occasionally, additional reporting from law enforcement officials or the victim’s family may lead us to make changes.

While it is wonderful that the L.A. Times is not covering up the racial aspects of murder, it is still amazing that presumably sane people can make statements such as “Black men, in particular, are extraordinarily vulnerable” with a straight face.  Just who then, do they think is killing those black men?  When discussing pit bulls, trained to fight each other to the death, we do not usually describe them as “vulnerable”.  Instead, they are described as “dangerous” and put to sleep.  Obviously, not every black male victim was dangerous or deserving of death – but as a group, these are the most dangerous humans on the face of the planet.
Tragic as it is that some innocent black men are murdered by other black men, whites should be concerned first and foremost with their own well-being.  Segregation is the best answer.

Posted in examples of propaganda, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 6 Comments

More on race versus color

Posted on August 3, 2010 by jewamongyou

I’m reading “Race” by John Baker and I just came across this (pg. 159):

Nevertheless, people do commonly make remarks about those non-white races that are in fact very different in morphological characters, to the effect that ‘the only thing that distinguishes them is the colour of their skin’.  It scarcely seems possible to believe that anyone who has seen an Australian aborigine, a Melanesian, a Bushman, or a Negro could accept such words as true.  They are directly contrary not only to the established facts of physical anthropology, but also to ordinary observation.
An albino Melanesid (Melanesian) or Negrid, who is fairer than any non-albino European, appears even more unlike a European than a normal Melanesid or Negrid.  This fact was pointed out (with reference to Negrids) by the French mathematician Maupertuis more than two centuries ago.  The association of a pale face and straw-coloured hair with the features of a non-Europid race brings out strongly the great differences that in fact exist.  This is perhaps partly because darkness of the skin interferes with clear vision of the face.  Indeed, if the skin were actually black (which it never is), it would be impossible to see any features, apart from the lips, gums, teeth, and whites of the eyes, except in profile.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about all those white women and girls I see walking with black men (some of them very ugly black men) and it has occurred to me that people are trained to detect beauty or ugliness more within their own race than outside of their own race.  This is why we often hear (sometimes in jest) that “all Asians look alike” for example.  Perhaps these foolish girls overlook the ugliness of their black boyfriends because they cannot see it.  In their eyes, “blackness” is an attractive attribute in its own right and if those same black males woke up one morning with light skin, those girls might be revolted by what they see.
(added a few hours later):
I came across another worthy quote from Baker that I just couldn’t resist adding:

The question arises, why so many people say or imply that the races differ only in skin-colour, when this is obviously untrue.  Those who minimize racial differences, by speaking as though the only distinction between a European and (for instance) a Chinese or a Negro were one of skin-colour, appear unwittingly to admit that recognition of the more fundamental differences that actually exist might affect people’s views on the ethnic problem; for it might be regarded as unlikely that such differences could coexist with exact similarity in the parts of the body concerned with thought and feeling.

This merits reading over several times because it is so profoundly true.

Posted in miscegenation, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 12 Comments

The line of King David

Posted on August 2, 2010 by jewamongyou

Over the years I’ve known, and known of, several people who claimed to be descended from King David.  Not that they could trace their ancestry back to him directly.  Rather, they claimed to be descended from one or another famous rabbinical personality who, in turn, was reputed to have been descended from an earlier one who was claimed to be of the Davidic line.
One such individual, according to his followers, was the late Lubavitcher Rebbe.  Though I cannot claim to have known him, I did meet him a few times and saw him speak on many occasions (in Yiddish, which I did not understand).  By claiming their rebbe was descended from King David, his followers bolstered their claim that he was to be the messiah.  I also knew others, humble Jews of lowly stations in life, who claimed descent from King David.  No matter how lowly they were, their alleged royal ancestry would give them a sense of importance.
If I had to venture a guess, I would say that many more people are descended from King David than actually believe this to be the case.  After all, his son, King Solomon, sired many children.  By now, they are probably spread throughout the globe.  Perhaps, given the prolific love lives of royalty, being descended from a king is not so special after all; it might be that an individual who is not descended from a king is the exception.
One of the longest lasting institutions, within Jewry, was based upon direct descent from King David: the “exilarch“, called “Resh Galutha” in Aramaic or “Rosh Galuth” in Hebrew.  According to tradition, the first exilarch was Yehoyachin, the last monarch of Judah.  From him, the title passed, father to son, through the rest of the Biblical era and more, having survived the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman and the Sassanid empires.  It lasted through the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods on through the age of those who immediately followed: the Savuraim.  The line was almost extinguished at the end of the Sassanid empire and this is the tale of Bustenai.
The above manuscript is from my collection and tells the story of Bustenai.  Following is an excerpt:

In the days of the kingdom of Persia, arose one stupid king.  He took it upon himself to extinguish the royal seed.  So he sought every Davidic household within his kingdom and killed them.  He imprisoned the members of their households, their in-laws and their friends and he tortured them… and he had the pregnant women split open.   But, in God’s mercy on the seed of the House of David, one bride remained after all the young men were killed – and she was pregnant…
And that king had a dream and they showed him standing in the garden of Betan and within it were trees beautiful to behold and for their fruit.  And he knew that this garden was not his own so he threw its fruits to the ground in anger and jealousy and he went back to check if there were any roots so that he could dig them up so that it could never sprout again.  After a while he found one root and from it was sprouting something like a branch from the Earth.  So he raised his axe in order to destroy it and behold an old man stood before him and he was of ruddy complexion with beautiful eyes and a fine appearance.  And (the old man) rebuked him a great rebuking and he cried a great and bitter cry and he snatched the axe from his hand and stuck it in (the king’s) forehead so that his blood flowed onto his face and onto his beard and his soul was close to death and he fell on his face to the ground and wept and pleaded with him.  He said, “please, my master, let my pleadings fall before you so that you do not destroy me for what have I done to you and what is my sin and transgression that you tried to kill me?”  So the old man answered and said, “this is very little considering the evil you have done for you have come to my garden…

To make a long story short, the old man was King David and he convinced the king to allow his line to continue through the pregnant woman who had been spared.
The office of the Exilarch flourished during Arab rule and began to wane by the 12th century.  I remember reading, a while back, that the institution of the Exilarch was finally destroyed by Tamarlane in 1401 but now I’m having trouble finding a source for this.
One prominent family, that claims descent from King David, is the Meyuhas family.  In fact, the very name “Meyuhas” means “pedigreed” in Hebrew.  More certain is that they were among the Spanish Jews exiled by the inquisition.  Below is one of several signatures from Moshe Mordechai Yosef Bechor Meyuhas (from the margins of one of my books):
The large symbol on the bottom is “S.T.” which stands for either “sofo tov (his end is good)” or “Sefaradi tahor” (pure Spanish).
As uncertain as their claims may be, I envy those whose family tradition includes descent from the kings of Israel.  As satisfying as it is to be of Jewish heritage – not half Jewish and not a quarter Jewish – it would still be nice to know more specifics.  To know which tribe I belong to.  Looking at the story told by the Torah, I wonder if this sense of tribal identity is an underlying reason why the People of Israel was divided into twelve tribes, each with its own territory.  That way, when a member of the tribe of Menashe traveled to the territory of Naftali, he would be conscious of his own distinctiveness and he would be recognizable as such through his cloths, his speech and his mannerisms.  With this in mind, he would take care to be on his best behavior so as not to reflect badly upon his brethren back home.  If all Israel were just one big mishmash, an individual would be accountable only to himself and his immediate family (who would usually remain anonymous).  So, in a nutshell, with affiliation comes accountability.  With accountability comes good behavior.  We live in a world where the most potent type of affiliation, blood affiliation, is being eroded at alarming levels.  Therefore, it should be no wonder that accountability is also eroding.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 10 Comments

The Sherrod charade

Posted on July 31, 2010 by jewamongyou

For the past two generations, anti-white racism has been the norm rather than the exception.  Very rarely does the MSM report it as such because to do so would make their pet ethnicities look bad and caste doubt on their entire Weltanschauung.  This pattern is extremely consistent.  Rarely is an exception made – and yet the Sherrod affair is being openly discussed in even the most leftist of publications.  Or is it?
In the July 30th edition of The Columbian (a Washington state publication), we find (on page A2):

Sherrod was forced to resign after a conservative website posted an edited video of her speaking about race.  Sherrod said the video took her remarks out of context.

According to this, she said nothing wrong.  She simply “spoke about race” and this was enough to force her to resign.  Curious indeed.  Even more curious when we consider that the headline of said article reads “Obama talks race… on ‘The View'”.  Is Obama being forced to resign?
A frequent commenter on this blog, Portland Realist, told me his theory on the Sherrod incident: the accusations, of anti-white racism, against her are so flimsy that leftists have seized upon it in order to use it as a straw man.  In other words, their plan is to use this incident to convince people that just like the accusations against her are baseless, so too are most other charges of  racism against non-whites.
I am convinced that Portland Realist is right.  This publicity truly does fit in very nicely with the leftist agenda.  Within the same issue of “The Columbian, we find an editorial by black columnist Eugene Robinson.  Robinson reveals himself to be a shallow non-thinker when he writes:

A cynical right-wing propaganda machine is peddling the poisonous fiction that when African-Americans or other minorities reach positions of power, they seek some kind of revenge against whites…
With the Obama presidency, though, has come a flurry of charges – from the likes of Breitbart but also from more substantial conservative figures – about alleged incidents of racial discrimination against whites by blacks and other minorities…
These allegations of anti-white racism are being deliberately hyped and exaggerated because they are designed to make whites fearful…

As a matter of fact, whites really do have reason to be fearful when ruled over by blacks.  Just ask the whites of South Africa or Detroit.  I personally have known several whites who have suffered under black tyranny.  The internet is full of such stories.  Robinson is not only an idiot, he must have spent most of his life in a cave.

Posted in examples of propaganda, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 5 Comments