Pitt, 1805

https://www.bartleby.com/73/534.html
“I return you many thanks for the honour you have done me; but Europe is not to be saved by any single man. England has saved herself by her exertions, and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.”

Then there’s the cuck Churchill:
https://www.bartleby.com/73/537.html
“The gift of a common tongue is a priceless inheritance and it may well some day become the foundation of a common citizenship.”

White people erasure

Listen, either it’s a racial group and forensics is real OR stop studying it and wondering why the thing you brainwashed people not to notice (white racial politics) isn’t something they want to notice.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-01-difficulty-white-people.html

Across the three tests, participants who were white and not white experienced the same amount of difficulty in identifying the common ‘rule’ that all three white actors were white.

I don’t know if this is funny.

“Everyone knows Hollywood actors are mostly white and that being white is the norm among film stars,” said Professor Hegarty.

(((white)))

Well, are they ethnic European would be a better question.

UKIP’s Nigel Farage gives a wonderfully sarcastic interview

Despite the heavy-handed editing, it comes through, in full;

JC: Would you go into coalition with Labour?

NF: I’d do a deal with the Devil if he got me what I wanted.

JC: If Miliband said to you, “Look, Nigel, can I have your eight to ten MPs in the coalition and we give you an in-out referendum?” would that be enough?

NF: That would depend when the referendum was, and the terms.

Clever man. Where’s the Devil?

JC: But you’re not ruling it out.

NF: Of course not.

Tactician.

JC: So there could be a Ukip-Labour-Lib Dem rainbow coalition.

NF: Sounds extremely unlikely.

They’re about as popular as Rotherham Social Services.

JC: Or a Ukip-Labour coalition.

NF: Why coalition? There are other ways of doing things.

He’s right. A coalition would drag his party down. They have support for NOT being the Establishment. Playing Kingmaker in the GE is the best strategy, long and short term.

JC: Tell me how. Confidence and supply?

NF: Absolutely.

JC: Would that suit you better?

This leftie’s really trying with the entrapment.

NF: To be honest, the way I look at it now, I can’t see Ukip wilfully going into formal coalition with anybody.

Cards close. Good man.
They haven’t begged hard enough.

JC: But you support Labour on confidence and supply . . .

NF: Confidence motions and primary legislation of certain kinds, yes

JC: . . . you’d be comfortable supporting Labour?

NF: I’d be very comfortable supporting anybody that gave me an opportunity to get my country back.

Taste the sarcasm. (italics mine)

NF: There is no left and right any more. Left and right is irrelevant, it’s irrelevant . . . We need big change. We’ve got to get back control of our country. We’re in deep denial about how we’ve given away control of almost everything, and when you get back control of your country you get proper democracy. You get back proper debate. I mean, who is debating employment legislation at the next election? Nobody. Why? We don’t make the law any more. In the Seventies we scarcely talked about anything else.

True. The nominal l/r have become too centrist to form policy.

JC: David Davis and Andrew Mitchell would say that Ukip is part of the conservative family.

NF: It’s painful to listen to. It just shows you why they’re doing so badly. Look at those blimmin’ figures.

JC: So you’re not part of the “small c” conservative family?

NF: God no!

JC: You call yourself a radical.

NF: Yes. Because I want change.

JC: But not a conservative.

NF: And the word radical in its own proper meaning.

He is radical. You can tell by the way everyone else is terrified of the man.

NF: One gets the feeling that, at about the 30 per cent mark, barring more embarrassments from Brussels or whatever it may be, we are nearing the tribal base of the Conservative vote . . . The Conservatives are down to their middle-class core now, you know, wouldn’t matter who the leader was, they feel Conservative and they feel Conservative because they’ve got some assets and a reasonably good life, and they see that as their tribal means of [identity] . . . that will probably erode as the years go by because the age profile of that dynamic is pretty alarming for the Conservative party.

Did he just refer to thedes or am I reading too much genius in that analysis?

NF: I’m coming after Labour voters . . . old Labour voters and non voters . . . Everybody thought that people’s tribal allegiance to Labour was as strong, if not stronger, than the tribal allegiance to the Conservative party. What we’re actually finding is, they don’t even recognise the tribe. They just don’t. You know, the middle class, the middle class person who doesn’t think about politics very much, but is concerned about where school fees are coming from or whatever it may be, that middle class person still thinks of the political spectrum that the Conservatives are more on their side than the other one. Increasingly what we’re finding is the people that come from the Labour side of the equation don’t think anyone’s on their side.

Indigenous? They’re correct. Poor people aren’t stupid. Street smarts are self-preservation.
He’s getting them. I’m hearing of second-generation immigrants and mixed race who’ll be voting UKIP, from not voting to voting Labour. It’s called the drawbridge effect, even they’ve had enough.

NF: The people who get up earliest in the morning have the highest propensity to vote Ukip. I’m being absolutely serious about that. A lot of these people are in jobs where they’re driving, or working on building sites, or running a small carpentry business, or whatever they’re doing, they tend to be people whose political backgrounds from their parents and grandparents would be red and blue. There’d be bits of both. A lot of them haven’t voted for anybody since the early-to-mid Nineties. For some Major was the last vote, for some Blair was the last vote. So that’s the other aspect of our vote, and that’s the one thing we have in common with Salmond, that we’re beginning to bring people back into politics. And that’s very interesting.

Yes, that’s the word.

I would say from Birmingham northwards, from Birmingham to Hadrian’s Wall, if you vote Tory, you’ll get Labour. If you vote for the challenger party, you might just get a few Ukips elected.

JC: Whom do you admire from Labour?

I wish he’d said the ex-BNP one. There’s more than one.

NF: [Coughs] Can’t name most of them. Don’t know who they are. I mean, they’re just so bland it’s not true.

JC: Alan Johnson?

NF: Yeah, but he’s out now, isn’t he? Whenever I’ve met him, I’ve liked him. Jon Cruddas is somebody who I think gets it; I think he understands what the Labour Party ought to be . . . Again, if I meet someone like [Douglas] Alexander, I mean, he almost can’t bear being in the room [with me], I’m so lower-order compared to him. But people like Jon Cruddas, they want to talk to you; they can see politics is changing. And Kate Hoey is wonderful, obviously.

Spot the Marxist.

JC: Who’s your favourite Tory? Is there anyone you admire in the cabinet?

NF: If you’d asked me six months ago, I’d have said Douglas Carswell. [Laughs] Well, I have to be slightly fond of Philip Hollobone, because he and I were in the same year at school together . . . I have admiration for Iain Duncan Smith, someone who was almost crushed publicly by politics, went away, studied a subject, and came back with real passion and conviction, and I respect that and admire that. Socially, I enjoy David Davis’ company. [laughs] Share a glass with him, and it’s quite fun.

NF: I’ve always admired Michael Gove, who did me a big favour once that he didn’t need to. I’ve always thought he was profoundly decent.

JC: What did he do?

NF: Oh, he was at the Times, and I got myself into a bit of a legal tangle, and he mediated and, at a time when I didn’t quite know what I was doing, I thought he was a profoundly decent person. And I like Michael Gove for this reason. If you sit down with the people really running the show these days, and you were over dinner to throw an opinion at them that was a bit out of left-field for them, they’ll just swat it away like a bluebottle. People like Gove, when you do that, say “OK, why do you think that?” He’s open-minded.

You’re going places, Mr Farage.
Last stop, #10.

Guardian, 1999: “repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/feb/28/lawrence.ukcrime4

…….

What then can be done? (Apart, of course, from widespread and vigorous miscegenation, which is the best answer, but perhaps tricky to arrange as public policy.) First, we need to raise still more taxes to help regenerate inner-city ghettos and to employ more young people, white and black. Tony Blair spoke very well on Wednesday, and Jack Straw has driven this process through with grim vigour. But this is a Gordon Brown issue too.

The next answer was given by Doreen Lawrence, welcoming the report’s emphasis on education: ‘I truly believe in education our history, our background, is what separates us.’ But, though teachers are the most effective anti-racist campaigners in the country, this means more than education in other religions it means a form of political education. Only people who understand the economic forces changing their world, threatening them but also creating new opportunities, have a chance of being immune to the old tribal chants.

the EU is goooooooood zombies
globalisation saaaaaafe

And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress. It may be my Presbyterian background, but I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good. Stamp hard on certain ‘natural’ beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off. The police are first in line to be burdened further, but a new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too.

So it should – but not merely on the police, or the boys with spray-paint cans. Perhaps the big difference between working-class racism and middle-class racism is not that the former is more violent, but that the latter is more effective. The middle classes have sacrificed almost nothing to multi-racial pieties – often no more than smiling at the shopkeeper, inviting a black colleague for a drink or being pleased when your child knows as much about Diwali as Easter. That’s the beam in our eyes -hypocritical abuse of the poor by people unwilling to pay higher taxes or review their own organisations and lives. We need a rethink in all big British institutions – venerable, liberal, conservative, commercial, public and educational – as they seriously ask themselves how eagerly porous they are to black people. Yes: employment quotas, publicly published numbers of ethnic-minority employees in annual reports. All that. They do it in America and South Africa. Until we start doing it here, why should anyone on the streets listen to a word, a single word, that the comfortable people have to say?

Remember, if they could, these people would line you up and shoot you for disagreeing with them. That’s fascism.

Who Needs Nationalism?

Good point on the EU: “Frustrated idealists of today look at the bureaucratic monster that oppresses the European people and fail to remember the high-mindedness that motivated the birthing of the beast in Belgium.” Economic free market trade between the strongest players.

European history alone shows that Europe has a mixture of positive and negative-overall divisions i.e. Italian > Romanian culture.

Italy is a great example of how the concept of nationhood beyond hard borders (English Channel) are created by conditions of war. (If you can’t defend it, at your borders, it isn’t yours.) Odds are, Italy will splinter again as its people splinter and any effort to unite *a* nation as it stands would stave off this tendency to ethnic entropy.

Henry Dampier

Attilla and His Hordes Destroy Italy and The Arts - Eugene Delacroix Attilla and His Hordes Destroy Italy and The Arts – Eugene Delacroix

Nationalism is the most controversial sector of the neoreactionary trichotomy. The most ardent nationalists tend to be suspicious and hostile towards neoreaction, but not always. This essay will survey the modern situation, perform a brief historical review, and then move on to practical considerations of political strategy as it relates to the ethno-nationalist tendency. It closes with a recommendation.

The recent historical background

Since World War II, all the great powers have repudiated previous-held doctrines of rights to ethno-religious self-determination that became popular after the European upheavals of 1848. The victorious Allies supplanted European nationalism with an internationalist set of Universal Human Rights which repudiates the idea of ethnic and religious exclusivity that nationalism requires.

The obvious reason why this happened is because the USSR was an internationalist Marxist dictatorship. The US is and was a universalist democratic world-Empire with an…

View original post 2,612 more words

“Multiculturalism has utterly failed” Merkel


h/t mindweapon

“We on the left wing, …must ask how we enabled what is going on. We shouldn’t get too fascinated by these details. This is only part of a general shift. The whole political mapping is changing in a horrible way, now more and more in Europe another polarity is emerging, a big liberal capitalist party, and the only serious opposition is the anti-immigrant nationalists. They are establishing themselves as the only authentic voice of protest [because they have real jobs]. Behind every fascism is a failed revolution [multicult], this should worry us, not this arrogant negative class connotation, where people attack common people as racists and it’s always like we upper middle class dismissing ordinary people, we should start asking ourselves, what we did wrong. The works were almost the same [centrist leftward drift over decades] this is the tragedy at its purest. The time of left radical mobilization has passed. …Campaign to turn us into experts. We need experts to tell us [everything]. Universities should not serve as experts to those in power who define the problems, we should redefine and question the problems themselves [that requires intellectual honesty]. Is this really the problem? You should start asking more general questions. Why are we living like this? This is the problem. I say this ironically as a leftist. Anti-capitalism in a moralistic sense… No no, the problem is more fundamental. It’s about how the system works to make the companies do this. This excess is a false excess. We are approaching slowly a zero point. To make our conscience clear, we are blackmailed in our everyday. We have to act if not I don’t want to live in society which will be here, in say, twenty years.”

Why? Because different people don’t get along. It’s that simple.

National pride in Europe isn’t new, it’s been in hiding from the liberal crazies.

It is exacerbated by rich white people hating on poor white people for expressing their valid opinion, that is why every prole-based revolution from these bourgeois maniacs has failed. It’s fine for everyone else to celebrate their culture, except white people? In their own country? The proles believe in many cases the exact opposite of the left wing middle class, especially on a broad topic like immigration, which affects the NHS, unemployment, wages, and above all, culture. Have you noticed the lowest class of a society are always really into their home grown culture? With us, pubs, football, food. When that is all you live for, anyone threatening to change that culture becomes Public Enemy #1.

To quote another post;

“I’m going to make this very simple: if you take away pride (the poor man’s dignity), you take away money, you take away space and foreign people who further impose on those things are going to get the brunt of it.

Since space and money aren’t going to change parameter, national pride needs to be reinstalled and emboldened.

This won’t happen. It will get worse until it boils over because the politicians refuse to make amends.”