The Myth of the Rule of Law and the Future of Repression

The Myth of the Rule of Law and the Future of Repression

Richard’s post, “Obama’s Ennabling Act,” raises some interesting questions regarding the significance of the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act, and its probable impact, that I believe merit further discussion. The editorial issued on December 17 by the editors of Taki’s Magazine, “The Government v. Everyone,” represents fairly well the shared consensus of critics of the NDAA whose ranks include conservative constitutionalists and left-wing civil libertarians alike. While I share the opposition to the Act voiced by these critics, I also believe that Richard is correct to point out the questionable presumptions regarding legal and constitutional theory and alarmist rhetoric that have dominated the critics’ arguments.

Wholesale abrogation of core provisions of the U.S. Constitution is hardly rare in American history. The literature of leftist or libertarian historians of American politics is filled with references to the Alien and Sedition Act, Lincoln’s assumption of dictatorial powers during the Civil War, the repression of the labor movement during WWI, the internment of the Japanese during WW2 and so forth. Mainstream liberal critics of these aspects of American history will lament the manner by which America supposedly strays so frequently from her high-minded ideals, whereas more radical leftist critics will insist such episodes illustrate what a rotten society America always was right from the beginning.

Meanwhile, conservatives will lament how the noble, almost god-like efforts of the revered “Founding Fathers” have been perverted and destroyed by subsequent generations of evil or misguided liberals, socialists, atheists, or whomever, thereby plunging the nation into the present dark era of big government and moral decadence. These systems of political mythology not withstanding, a more realist-driven analysis of the history of the actual practice of American statecraft might conclude that such instances of the state stepping outside of its own proclaimed ideals or breaking its own rules transpire because, well, that’s what states do.

Carl Schmitt considered the essence of politics to be the existence of organized collectives with the potential to engage in lethal conflict with one another. Max Weber defined the state as an entity claiming a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. Schmitt’s dictum, “Sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception,” indicates there must be some ultimate rule-making authority that decides what constitutes “legitimacy” and what does not, and that this sovereign entity is consequently not bound by its own rules. This principle is descriptive rather than prescriptive or normative in nature. Schmitt’s conception of the political is simply an analysis of “how things work” as opposed to “what ought to be.”

Like all other political collectives, the United States possesses a body of political mythology whose function is to convey legitimacy upon its own state. For Americans, this mythology takes on the form of what Robert Bellah identified as the “civil religion.” The tenets of this civil religion grant Americans a unique and exceptional place in history as the Promethean purveyors of “freedom,” “democracy,” “equality,” “opportunity,” or some other supposedly noble ideal. According to this mythology, America takes on the role of a providential nation that is in some way particularly favored by either a vague, deist-like divine force (Jefferson’s “nature’s god”) in the mainstream politico-religious culture, or the biblical god in the case of the evangelicals, or the progressive forces of history for left-wing secularists. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are the sacred writings of the American civil religion. It is no coincidence that constitutional fundamentalists and religious fundamentalists are often the same people. Prominent “founding fathers” such as Washington or Madison assume the role of prophets or patriarchs akin to Moses and Abraham.

In American political and legal culture, this civil religion and body of political mythology becomes intertwined with the liberal myth of the “rule of law.” According to this conception, “law” takes on an almost mystical quality and the Constitution becomes a kind of magical artifact (like the genie’s lantern) whose invocation will ostensibly ward off tyrants. This legal mythology is often expressed through slogans such as “We should be a nation of laws and not men” (as though laws are somehow codified by forces or entities other than mere mortal humans) and public officials caught acting outside strict adherence to legal boundaries are sometimes vilified for violation of “the rule of law.” (I recall comical pieties of this type being expressed during the Iran-Contra scandal of the late 1980s.) Ultimately, of course, there is no such thing as “the rule of law.” There is only the rule of the “sovereign.” The law is always subordinate to the sovereign rather than vice versa. Schmitt’s conception of the political indicates that the world is comprised first and foremost of brawling collectives struggling on behalf of each of their existential prerogatives. The practice of politics amounts to street-gang warfare writ large where the overriding principle becomes “protect one’s turf!” rather than “rule of law.”

As an aside, I am sometimes asked how my general adherence to Schmittian political theory can be reconciled with my anarchist beliefs. However, it was my own anarchism that initially attracted me to the thought of Schmitt. His recognition of the essence of the political as organized collectives with the potential to engage in lethal conflict and his understanding of sovereignty as exemption from the rule-making authority of the state have the ironic effect of stripping away and destroying the systems of mythology on which states are built. Schmitt’s analysis of the nature of the state is so penetrating that it gives the game away. Politics is simply about maintaining power. Period.

Another irony is that Schmitt helped to clarify my anarchist beliefs considerably. I adhere to the dictionary definition of anarchism as the goal of replacing the state with a confederation or agglomeration of voluntary communities (while recognizing a certain degree of subjectivity to the question of what is “voluntary” and what is not). Theoretically, anarchist communities could certainly reflect the values of ideological anarchists like Kropotkin, Rothbard, or Dorothy Day. But such communities could also be organized on the model of South Africa’s Orania, or traditionalist communities like the Hasidim or Amish, or fringe cultural elements like UFO true-believers. Paradoxically, such communities could otherwise reflect the “normal” values of Middle America (minus the state).

The concept of fourth generation warfare provides a key insight as to how political anarchism can be reconciled with the political theory of Carl Schmitt. According to fourth generation theory as it has been outlined by Martin Van Creveld and William S. Lind, the state is in the process of receding as the loyalties of populations are being transferred to other entities such as religions, tribes, ideological movements, gangs, cults, paramilitaries, or whatever. Scenarios are emerging with increasing frequency where such non-state actors engage in warfare with states or in the place of states. Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which has essentially replaced the Lebanese state as both the defender of the nation and as the provider of necessary services on which the broader population depends, is a standard model of a fourth generation entity. In other words, Hezbollah has replaced the state as the sovereign entity in Lebanese society.

Another example is Columbia’s FARC, which has likewise dislodged the Colombian state as the sovereign in FARC-controlled territorial regions. The implication of this for political anarchism is that for the anarchist goal of autonomous, voluntary communities to succeed, a non-state entity (or collection of entities) must emerge that is capable of protecting the communities from conquest or subversion and possesses the will to do so. In other words, for anarchism to work there must be in place the equivalent of an anarchist version of Hezbollah  that replaces the state as the sovereign in the wider society, probably in the form of a decentralized militia confederation similar to that organized by the Anarchists of Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War…in case anyone was wondering.


The Future of Repression

Dealing with more immediate questions, the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act raises the issue of to what level repression carried out by the American state in the future will be taken, and of what particular form this repression will assume. I agree with Richard that it is improbable that NDAA represents any significant change of direction or dramatic acceleration in these areas. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that American political dissidents (the readers of AlternativeRight.Com, for instance) will be subject to mass arrests and indefinite detention without trial. Such tactics are likely to be reserved for individuals, primarily foreigners, genuinely involved or believed to be involved in the planning of acts of actual terrorism against American targets. There is at present very little of that within the context of domestic American society.

However, the unwarranted nature of Alex Jones-style alarmism does not mean there is no danger on the horizon. What is needed is a healthy medium between panic and complacency. Richard has argued that our present systems of soft totalitarianism that we find in the contemporary Western world may well give way to hard totalitarianism as Cultural Marxism/Totalitarian Humanism continues to tighten its grip. While this is a concern that I share and a prophecy that I regrettably think has a considerable chance of fulfillment, the question arises of what form “hard” totalitarianism might take in the future of the West.

It is unlikely we will ever develop states in the West that are organized on the classical totalitarian model complete with over the top pageantry and heads of states with strange uniforms and facial hair, given the way in which these are inimical to the universalist ideology, globalist ambitions, commercial interests, and aesthetic values of Western elites. Rather, I suspect the future of Western repression will take on either one of two forms (or perhaps a combination of both).

One of these is a model where repression rarely involves long term imprisonment or state-sponsored lethal action against dissidents. Instead, such repression might take on the form of persistent and arbitrary harassment, or the ongoing escalation of the use of professional and economic sanctions, targeting the families and associates of dissidents, or the petty criminalization of those who speak or act in defiance of establishment ideology. Richard has discussed the recent events involving Emma West and David Duke, and well as his own treatment at the hands of the Canadian authorities, and I suspect it is state action of this type that will largely define Western repression in the foreseeable future.

The state may not murder you or put you in prison for decades without trial, but you may lose your job, have your professional licensees revoked or the social service authorities threaten to remove your children from your home, or be subject to significant but brief harassment by legal authorities. You man find yourself brought up on minor criminal charges (akin to those that might be levied against a shoplifter or a pot smoker) if you utter the wrong words. Likewise, the state will increasingly look the other way as the use of extra-legal violence by leftist and other pro-system thugs is employed against dissenters. Indeed, much of what I have outlined here is already taking place and it can be expected that such incidents will become much more frequent and severe in the years and decades ahead. What I have outlined in this paragraph largely defines the practice of political repression as it currently exists in the West, particularly outside the United States, where traditions upholding free speech do not run quite as deeply.

However, this by no means indicates that Americans are off the hook. An even greater issue of concern, particularly for the United States, involves the convergence of four factors within contemporary American society and statecraft. These are the decline of the American empire in spite of the continuation of America’s massive military-industrial complex, mass immigration and radical demographic transformation, rapid economic deterioration and the disappearance of the conventional American middle class, and the growth of the general apparatus of state repression over the last four decades (the prison-industrial complex frequently criticized by the Left, for instance).

The combination of mass Third World immigration and ongoing economic decline, if continued uninterrupted, will have the effect of replicating the traditional Third World model class system in the U.S. (and perhaps much of the West over time). A class system organized on the basis of an opulent few at the top and impoverished many among the masses (the Brasillian model, for instance) will likely be accompanied by escalating social unrest and political instability. Such trends will be ever more greatly exacerbated by growing social, cultural, and ethnic conflict brought about by demographic change.

The American state has at its disposal an enormous military industrial complex that, frankly, wants to remain in business even as foreign military adventures continue to become less politically and economically viable. Likewise, the ongoing domestic wars waged by the American state against drugs, crime, gangs, guns, et. al. have generated a rather large “police industrial complex” with American borders. Libertarian writers such as William Norman Grigg have diligently documented the ongoing process of the militarization of American law enforcement and the continued blurring of distinctions between the rules of engagement involving soldiers on the battlefield on one hand and policemen dealing with civilians on the other. The literature of libertarian critics is filled with horror stories of, for instance, small town mayors having their household pets blown away by SWAT team members during the course of bungled drug raids.

The point is that as economic and social unrest, along with increasingly intense demographic conflict, continues to arise as it likely will in the foreseeable American future, the state will have at its disposal a significant apparatus for the carrying out of genuinely brutal repression of the kind normally associated with Latin American or Middle Eastern countries. Recall, for example, the “disappeared” of Latin America during the 1970s and 1980s. It is not improbable that we dissidents in the totalitarian humanist states of the postmodern West will face a dangerous brush with such circumstances at some point in the future.

Have We Started a Fire? The Mall of (Black- Run) America Locked-Down Courtesy of Black People

Have We Started a Fire? The Mall of (Black- Run) America Locked-Down Courtesy of Black People



(PK NOTE: I have a surprise planned for the moment Detroit declares bankruptcy and is taken over by the state of Michigan. Life is too short to allow this moment to pass-by without something big to celebrate the occasion of the Black Undertow squandering the resources and infrastructure of what was once one of the world’s great cities and turning into a direct representation — and extension — of the Black phenotype seen all around the world. Detroit’s collapse has nothing to do with ‘liberalism’ or ‘socialism'; it has everything to do with Actual Black-Run America (ABRA). 

Have we started a fire? No… but the fire rises anyways.

The Black Undertow. Nothing is more lethal to the overall health of a county; a city; a business district; or a community then white flight from one of these aforementioned places and bequeathing of the sound infrastructure (abandoned is the right word) to the Black Undertow.

Formerly thriving business districts die immediately. Schools that once produced some of the highest standardized test scores in the nation are replaced with an army of probation officers to keep the peace instead of teaching the Pythagorean Theory.

Malls where commerce once thrived are boarded up. Property values plummet with the rise of the Black Undertow; tax-revenue drops considerably, forcing corrupt government officials (the hallmark of the Black Undertow) to find unorthodox manners in which to raise funds.

We call this Climate Change.

In 2011, across the United States of America, there was no major threat of Muslim terrorist activity (End all threats of Islamic terror by actively seeking to repatriate existing Muslims in America and discontinue all Muslim immigration to the United States).

In 2011, across the United States of America, there were minor terrorist engagements that one man dared expose: Matt Drudge and the heroic Drudge Report shamed every conservative — those clueless non-profits in Washington that steal good people’s money and every web site that still publishes crap about Detroit failing because of ‘liberal policies’ — by showing us the Black Undertow in all its glory.

Who can forget the Memorial Day madness? Who can forget the numerous cities that through up the white flag and passed emergency curfews in response to this persistent threat? Who can forget that freedom failed in New Orleans, where the National Guard could emerge in 2012 as the watchful protector of law-abiding citizens from the savagery of the Black Undertow?

Flash Mobs Mahogany Mobs waged war on white people, each other, and unsuspecting businesses in Philadelphia, Kansas City, Peoria, Cleveland, Columbia (S.C), Washington D.C., Chicago, and many, many other cities. Immediately after the election of Mein Obama, these Mahogany Mobs started in places like Akron, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Milwaukee, and at the Iowa State Fair.

In St. Louis, despite the best efforts of journalists to proclaim that participants in the Knockout King were ‘youth’, it’s well-known that Black people hold a complete monopoly on this barbaric activity. Yes, just as Black people NATIONWIDE engaged in the 2011 Air Jordan Riots, Black people have once again come to dominate the interracial crime statistics this past year.

Only the most Disingenuous White Liberal (DWL) can still hold out hope that a story involving some heinous crime will not be a Black-on-white (or Black-on-insert racial group here) activity. Judging by the comments of any story on the Memphis, Atlanta, Nashville, Chattanooga, Dallas, Los Angeles, well, name-your-city ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX affiliate, your average American knows the score all too well.

A once thriving mall… now dead because of the Black Undertow

People know that the Black Undertow is responsible for the vast majority of crime and do everything possible to avoid living near it… even if that means commuting 10 + hours to and from work a week to ensure the safety of their family in some Whitopia, they’ll do it.

Worse, these criminals now have an Attorney General in Eric “My People” Holder who actively sides with them over the law-abiding masses. His Department of Justice (DoJ) is suing states that dare make people show proper identification; his DoJ is suing police and fire departments that dare make Black people suffer the indignity of showing mental acumen by passing a test that measures their intelligence; his DoJ is… completely refusing to acknowledge nationwide violence courtesy of the Black Undertow.

Then again, haven’t all administrations turned a blind-eye to this threat? Who cares how many cities and counties that were once peaceful places to raise a family and were filled with an abundance of jobs courtesy of productive, law-abiding people have turned into Clayton County? Worse, how many malls have gone the way of Union Station (the former Shannon Mall) in Fulton County — home of Atlanta — Georgia?

Union Station closed because white people stopped frequenting that mall; white people stopped frequenting that mall because the presence of the Black Undertow made shopping there a dangerous proposition; stores closed because of a loss of profits, white people deciding to shop elsewhere because loitering Black people made the experience uncomfortable and unsafe; the myth of Black Purchasing Power was exposed as the Black Undertow couldn’t sustain the mall (security costs outpaced sales).

This exact same scenario has happened to malls across the country. Chris Rock wouldn’t be joking about it if it weren’t true. We call it Mall Envy at SBPDL.

The aptly named Mall of America is headed that same way:

Police arrested nine people at the Mall of America Monday, the day after Christmas, after multiple fights broke out, authorities said.

Mall of America officials released a statement saying that around 4:20 p.m. 50 juveniles caused a large disturbance in the north food court.

Witnesses said the fights started after there were reports that rappers Lil’ Wayne and Drake were visiting the Mall. Police, however, did not comment on these rumors.

Cmdr. Mark Stehlik of Bloomington police said in a press conference that 30 officers responded to the fight and arrested five people (both adults and juveniles) for disorderly conduct.

Mall of America security arrested four other people for disorderly conduct as well, Mall officials said.

Police said as many as 200 were involved the fights. A YouTube video, which contains profanity, shows a fight break out and rage before a police officer interrupts it. The fight occurs at roughly 50 seconds in.

As the fights were popping up, the Mall of America inadvertently called for a lock down. But the lock down was called off minutes later, Mall officials said.
There were no reports of serious injuries, Mall official said.

Although the Mall kept its normal hours, some stores within the Mall closed early.

Some witnesses reported being evacuated from the Mall; but police said that shoppers were escorted toward the east exit to make room for the investigation.

Rumors of rappers led to a massive riot and the lock-down of the Mall of America? This is why Freedom of Association must make a comeback if we are to survive as a nation. Because business can’t discriminate, well, you see what happened to Union Station.

Here’s another story on the Mall of America Black Riot of 2011:

Fists flew and so did a few chairs during a large-scale brawl at the Mall of America Monday.

“Anytime you have a large group of people together things can happen,” said Commander Mark Stehlik with Bloomington Police. “But this is highly unusual.”

Shortly after 4 p.m., authorities confirm more than 20 individuals started fighting in the north food court. Cellphone video uploaded to YouTube shows dozens of young people watching while some push, punch, and even throw chairs. At that same time, police say several other fights flared up in other places of the mall.

“There were drinks thrown on the floor and chairs being thrown everywhere,” said Tess Dessalgne who witnessed the brawl. “Everyone started running towards the fight.”

No, Commander Stehlik, anytime you have large groups of Black people together, without a massive police response that resembles martial law — just ask the good folks at the Indiana Black Expo — then anything can happen. Perhaps this is why the people of Miami no longer want Black people to celebrate Memorial Day in their city?

OD showed some unsurprising statistics when it comes to entitlement abuse from the Black Undertow in Minneapolis (undoubtedly, many of the youths Black people involved in Mall of America Brawl for All subsist on redistributed tax-dollars):

Note: In 2009, 47 percent of African-Americans in Hennepin County, Minnesota were EBT card users. The number is undoubtedly much higher almost three years later. See also Looting in Minneapolis after Tornado? Who looted?

The Beat Whitey Night II event at the Wisconsin State Fair was the moment that I realized the end of Black-Run America (BRA) was an absolutely certainty: Just like in the waning days of the Soviet Union, people no longer believe in this insanity. No national figure has started to articulate a cogent argument against BRA yet, but that doesn’t matter.

Have we started a fire? No, but the fire rises anyways.

We didn’t start the fire. Nor will anyone know how to put it out.

DWLs know this too.

Baltimore, Washington D.C., Richmond, Philadelphia, Birmingham, Charlotte, Minneapolis, Houston, Tulsa (Oklahoma), Seattle, Hartford, Providence, Augusta, Mobile, Orlando, Tampa, Oakland… all of these cities are dangerous because of the Black Undertow. Entire shopping complexes are abandoned when the costs of doing business (and securing that business) is overwhelmed by the Black Undertow.

In Birmingham, the city has basically been rebuilt in the suburbs; white people giving up hope of ever saving downtown Birmingham and leaving its citizens as perpetual stars and cast members of The First 48 tv show.

Atlanta’s suburbs that jettison as far as the Alabama, South Carolina, and Tennessee state lines are directly related to white people fleeing one city/county that the Black Undertow overwhelms and rebuilding it again in the futile hopes of escaping.

Just like any mall that the Black Undertow takes over; just like any city that the Black Undertow inherits the existing infrastructure of upon the inevitable white flight; just like any county that goes majority Black Undertow, the end result is always the same as that which befell Union Station.

The aptly named Mall of America is not immune from this iron law of the visible Black Undertow hand. Just look at Detroit, Birmingham, and Clayton County for the proof of what happens when Black people inherit the existing infrastructure of a formerly world-class city or county… it isn’t pretty.

Have we started a fire?


But the fire rises anyway.

Like it or not, 2012 is gonna be a hell of a year.

Even More Debt And Even More Store Closings

The Obama Nation: Even More Debt And Even More Store Closings

Well, it is time to raise the debt ceiling again.  Right now we are about to hit the current limit of $15.194 trillion and the Obama administration is going to ask that it be raised by another 1.2 trillion dollars.  Unfortunately, Congress has already promised not to stand in the way, and so soon the debt limit will be raised to a staggering $16.394 trillion.  Considering how much debt we have already placed on the backs of future generations, what is another 1.2 trillion dollars?  After all, if we are going to sell our children and our grandchildren into debt slavery, we might as well go all the way, right?  Such is the thinking in “the Obama Nation”.  During “the Obama Nation”, the federal government has already accumulated more debt than it did from the time that George Washington took office to the time that Bill Clinton took office.  Of course the Bush administration was nearly as bad at piling up government debt.  Between Bush and Obama (with a big helping hand from the Federal Reserve), they have done a pretty good job of wiping out the financial future of the United States.  If there are future generations of Americans, they will look back and curse those that did this to them.  It is absolutely immoral to steal trillions of dollars from future generations.  Unfortunately, there are very, very few members of Congress that are even objecting to this madness.

Today, more debt just seems to be the answer to everything.  The truth is that debt is not just a government problem.  We are a nation that is addicted to debt.

As of October, total consumer credit in the United States had increased for 12 of the past 13 months.  We simply have not learned the lessons of the past and we are making the same mistakes all over again.

We are living in the greatest debt bubble in the history of the world, and this false prosperity that we are enjoying is simply not sustainable.

But even in the midst of this false prosperity we are seeing a huge number of store closings.

For example, it was just announced that Sears has decided to close between 100 and 120 Sears and Kmart stores.

Once upon a time, Sears was the dominant force in the retail industry, but those days are long gone.  Sears stock has declined more than 45 percent so far this year, and many are wondering how long the company is going to be able to survive.

And there have been other high profile store closings announced during this holiday season as well.  A while back it was announced that all Syms stores and all Filene’s Basement stores will be closing.

Will we all eventually be relegated to shopping only at Wal-Mart?

In the middle of this “economic recovery” that Obama keeps talking about a staggering number of retail stores are closing up shop.  The following is a list of store closings in 2011 that I recently found.  The first number represents the total number of stores being closed for each chain….

405 Blockbuster

633 Borders

200 GameStop

189 Gap

160 f.y.e.

117 Anchor Blue

117 Foot Locker

100 Talbot’s

71 A.J. Wright

69 Metropark

63 Friendly’s

60 Rite Aid

52 Destination Maternity

50 Abercrombie & Fitch

50 Hot Topic

45 Big Lots

45 Family Dollar

43 Select Comfort

43 Sonic Drive-In

35 Denny’s

32 Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc. (SuperFresh, Pathmark Super Market)

30 Ultimate Electronics

28 Dominos

25 Superfresh (Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company)

20 Lowe’s

Sadly, it looks like things are going to get even worse next year.  One consulting firm is projecting that there will be more than 5,000 store closings in 2012.

The United States is piling up unprecedented amounts of new debt at a time when our economy is dying and our ability to produce wealth is diminishing.

All over America right now, poverty is absolutely exploding.  Millions of people that never dreamed that they would have to reach out for help now find that they have no other options.  The following comes from a recent article in the Fiscal Times….

For years, the food pantry in Crystal Lake, Ill., a bedroom community 50 miles west of Chicago, has catered to the suburban areas’ poor, homeless and unemployed. But Cate Williams, the head of the pantry, has noticed a striking change in the makeup of the needy in the past year or two. Some families that once pulled down six-figure incomes and drove flashy cars are now turning to the pantry for help. A few of them donated food and money to the pantry before their luck soured, according to Williams.

“People will shyly say to me, ‘You know, I used to give money and food to you guys. Now I need your help,’” Williams told The Fiscal Times last week. “Most of the folks we see now are people who never took a handout before. They were comfortable, able to feed themselves, to keep gas in the car, and keep a nice roof over their head.”

But not everyone will ask for help nicely.  As the economic numbers continue to get worse, desperate Americans will lash out in wild and unpredictable ways.

The following is from a local NBC station down in Texas.  In the days to come, this type of report will become quite common….

A 19-year-old Houston-area man says he was beaten and a friend was slashed in the face as a group of men robbed him of his new pair of expensive Air Jordan shoes.

We will also see more mass protests and more mass riots as the months and years roll along.  This country is going to become increasingly unstable.

Check out this video of a massive brawl that erupted inside Mall of America the other day.  Soon scenes such as this will become so common that they will not even be newsworthy anymore.

In response, many Americans will get sick and tired of waiting for the police to protect them and will take matters into their own hands.

In fact, we are already starting to see this.  For example, just the other day a store clerk down in North Carolina knocked a would-be robber out cold and then forced him to clean up his own blood after he woke up.

There are millions of Americans out there that are not going to put up with a whole lot of nonsense.  When desperate criminals try to rob from their homes or businesses it might not end well for the criminals.

Of course it would be much nicer if the federal government would do some things to actually fix the economy and avoid some the problems that are looming on the horizon.

Ah, but that would interrupt their vacations.  Right now, the U.S. House of Representatives is on vacation until mid-January.

If you can believe it, Congress does not work for most of the year.  Normally they are scheduled to be in session for about a third of all the days on the calendar.

And Obama is certainly taking it easy.  He is enjoying yet another vacation.  As I wrote about yesterday, it has been estimated that the Obama Hawaiian vacation this year will cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 million dollars.

Yes, it is tough being the head of the Obama Nation.

Sadly, a lot of Americans still have faith in these jokers.

According to a Gallup poll that was just released, Barack Obama is the most admired man in America by far and Hillary Clinton is the most admired woman in America by far.  If you can believe it, Barack Obama has held the top spot for men for four years in a row, and Hillary Clinton has held the top spot for women for ten years in a row.

When are we going to learn?

Someone once said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Well, the American people keep sending corrupt politicians such as Bush and Obama to the White House and they keep expecting things to get better.

It just isn’t going to happen.

If we stay on the current path that we are on, there will be a lot more store closings, the economy will continue to crumble and government debt will continue to skyrocket.

Minor changes are not going to cut it.  We need massive changes on a fundamental level.

Unfortunately, neither political party is offering massive changes.  The Republicans and the Democrats just keep offering the same tired solutions and they keep promising that they can “fix things” if we will just send more of them to Washington.

Hopefully the American people will wake up and see through these lies because time is running out.

Napoleonic Ammunition Conservation

Napoleonic Ammunition Conservation

Nominee for Quote of the Decade, over at WRSA:

If the absolute best that the so-called intelligentsia of the freedom movement can come up with is “Wait behind your door, trembling, until you are confronted with an overwhelmingly superior force who has come to kill you”, we are indeed completely screwed.
Or those folks pushing that position are completely full of….

One or the other.

Holiday talk at an American fast-food restaurant

This is not the situation of Team Freedom- 


This is not the enemy faced by liberty in our nation-
This is the situation, and the enemy we face.

This is how the enemy approaches citizens now, in their homes.  This is “whites of their eyes” in practice-

So is this-

And this-

And, sadly, this-

It’s not too hard to understand, really.

Contemporary America has absolutely NOTHING to do with Bunker Hill, or an admonition based on Napoleonic tactics, smoothbore musket best practices, maximum effective ranges, and attempts to conserve ammunition.  Given the initiative and modern firearms, the “whites of their eyes” admonition would never had been uttered.  

In reality, had the defenders had sufficient ammunition, it never would have been uttered.

How foolish is it to choose to die with a full cartridge box.

The enemies of liberty are all around, and close.  You can see them on TV and on the internet.  They are “whites of their eyes” close to us every day.

This is not Bunker Hill.  Patriots are not nearly out of ammunition.  Smoothbore muskets are for enthusiasts, re-enactors, and museums.  The initiative is still there for the taking. 

Jose Guerena saw the whites of their eyes.  So did Solzhenitsyn, and millions of Russians.

Wait, if you wish, for many reason.  Just don’t wait until it is too late.  Do not decide now to give the enemy the initiative in all cases.

Do not be the lone crossbowman holding his fire until he sees the whites of the armored knight’s eyes behind his visor.  Shoot that horse down as far away as you can.  Then run, and do it again when you must.

You can see “the whites of their eyes” quite well while strapped to a torture chair.  Likewise from your cell.  You can see the whites of their eyes while standing against the wall.  There’s plenty of time for that, later.

What am I saying here, what do I mean?

I am saying that when citizens’ hands are forced, they should not limit themselves based on Napoleonic era smoothbore ammunition conservation techniques. Neither should they base their decisions on a movie.  Any movie, even Lord of the Rings.  They should base their decisions based on METT-T, the current reality, and risks vs. rewards.  Nothing else.  Cold.  Calculated. 

I am saying citizens should have already by now have made their decisions and drawn their lines.

I am saying that when “that time” comes…



Tea Party Terrorists

BREAKING…Tea Party Terrorists Kill UN Peacekeepers During Winter Holiday Festival

Tea Party Terrorist kill United Nations Peacekeepers During Winter Holiday Festival

“…United Nations Peacekeepers stationed in Trenton, New Jersey were slaughtered in an attack by Tea Party terrorists who apparently crossed the Delaware river by night.  Early reports indicate 22 of the Peacekeepers were killed and 98 wounded.  The brave Colonel Johann Rall may have been wounded in the attack. It is said that the terrorist group was led by George Washington who calls himself a “General.”

(h/t to a reader for the link)

Please go read this humorous, yet sobering piece, and consider again the single, solitary factor that constitutes the only real difference between a “terrorist” and a “legitimate”, legal “soldier”.


This concept, taken further and refined, gives us another difference: perspective.

Ask yourself, from the perspective of the fictitious writer, which side had the “moral high ground”.

“General” Washington?  British clergy?

What about colonial clergy?  Well, that’s a bit more complicated.  They were split, even within denominations.

The colonists were insurgent criminals until winning the fight legitimized them.  Washington had no more or less more “legal” claim to the title “General” than do any of the various militia leaders around our nation today. 

Their legitimacy, their futures, and their very lives depended on winning.  It was, in my opinion, a fight worth fighting.  Defeat, for any reason, was unacceptable.  Many means were used to secure the final victory, and any more than a cursory study of the war will reveal the often vicious and “becoming your enemy” tactics used by both sides during the fight.  The events in the Hackensack Valley illustrate this well as do many of those in the South.

Let us not forget the men who risked their lives during the First Revolution to steal land from the British Empire, and bring thousands of loyal British subjects -against their will- under the rule of a new government.  Let us not forget the men who left wives and children to shoot, bayonet, club, and dismember their countrymen, as well as various agents of their lawful government, in order to be able to live as they pleased.

I cannot help but mention that I do not think that “Lord of the Rings” analogies and advice are always applicable to real-life ugliness.

It is dishonest and foolish to romanticize, idealize, or demonize any one side in a war, even the one that led to the founding of the united States’ nation.

Let us not delude ourselves any longer.  The fight that is coming will be no different, no less ugly, no less confused, no less conflicted and no less divisive when it comes.  If you are not on the “right” side, you will be demonized.  If you are on the “right” side, you will be demonized.  If your side loses, you will be the bad guy.  This might matter to you if you live through it.

Even so-


You are free

You have been free since the moment of your first breath.

You have the highest claim on your life, your labor, and your property.

You are the one who decides how deep your honor goes, and what actions are required to wipe away the tarnish.

You are free.  I am free.

If we choose to be.


And that’s the real kicker. We can posture, we can make the treats, verbal and unspoken.  Shake our guns in the tyrants face, as it were.
We can say “here is my line in the sand.”
This far, and no farther.

We can say we will exercise our natural rights in the face NDAA.

But the thing is, we have to do it.
Can you bear it? Can you follow through.
I ask myself these questions, and I’m confronted by AP’s poem:

      “And to the last pulse in my veins,
        I shall resist.

And it calls me hypocrite. It calls me weak. It calls me vain, arrogant, pampered, weak, and fake.

These are the charges I must face in my own heart of hearts.  I just hope I can sort them in time.

Time to face our daemons is now, while we have that luxury.  Spend some time with yourself.  Find out who you are, what you are for.  Make peace with it and yourself.  Because our time is running short.

- Cato, the American.

Hollywood gives history another racial make-over.

Hollywood gives history another racial make-over.

Thomas Bruso became an internet hero due to a video of him humiliating an attacker on a public bus. He is white and the attacker is black. Two black females scream anti-white racial slurs and egg the attacker on in the video. Hollywood transformed him into a Mexican who is attacked by two white “skinheads.”

A new movie called “Bad Ass” is inspired by the famous “Epic Beard Man” video that became an internet sensation. The video shows an older white man being harassed by a younger black thug. Two black women yell racial slurs and egg the man on. The white victim moves to the front of the bus and the black thug follows him and attacks. The attack ends with the thug getting beat up by his intended victim.

Notice how Hollywood twists the real event. In their version, a Mexican man is harassed and attacked by two white “skinheads” on a bus.

Anti-white Hollywood movie.

The movie’s creator admit to basing the opening of the movie on Thomas Bruso who thwarted a racially motivated attack on a public bus.

Apparent racially motivated torture/murder in South Carolina.

Apparent racially motivated torture/murder in South Carolina.

Beverly Hope Melton

A 23 year old black man has been arrested for the abduction, rape, torture, and murder of Beverly Hope Melton.


Kershaw County deputies say a man followed a 30-year-old woman who was shopping, kidnapped her, sexually assaulted her, killed her and left her body in a field on Monday.

According to investigators, Beverly Hope Melton called her grandmother on Monday afternoon and said that a man was following her near a Jefferson store and she was afraid.

Kershaw County Sheriff Jim Matthews said that Chesterfield County deputies responded to the reported abduction and found Melton’s car in a ditch on Angelus Road near Jefferson. The car was in reverse, still running, and Melton’s pocketbook was still inside, deputies said.

Deputies went to the convenience store where Melton had been earlier in the day. Investigators said surveillance video from the store showed 23-year-old Nickolas Miller harassing Melton. They said the video also showed Miller’s vehicle.



Anarcho-Fascist or Unassimilable Jew?

This Friday (December 16), Warner Bros. will release the first seven minutes of The Dark Knight Rises (2012), the completion of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy. It might be the most anticipated film of all time. (It has, at least, already generated hundreds of millions of tweets, blog posts, and social-networking links.)

Christopher Nolan is an exceptional filmmaker; within the Hollywood establishment, he is a kind of miracle. And as I argued in this essay, originally published at Taki’s Magazine in 2008, Nolan’s Batman Begins and The Dark Knight aren’t just action flicks. The implications of the films are quite radical in nature, and the themes Nolan is willing to explore are challenging to the prevailing Zeitgeist to say the least.

The most enduring superheroes—Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Captain America among them—were all born in the Lower East Side between 1938-1944. Their creators were almost entirely first-generation Jews. The current explanation for this phenomenon goes something like this: The artist’s “double identity” as a Jew in America + adolescent power fantasy = superhero who wears a mask. In the words of one historian, “Superman was the ultimate assimilationist fantasy.” The Man of Steel, after all, arrived in the Heartland from the Hebraic-sounding “Kal-El”—sent to earth by his parents much like Moses in a basket—adopted an Anglo name, and became beloved by Americans, if never quite one of them.

There’s certainly something to this. And it’s also worth noting that the birth of the superhero in the years just before the Second World War announced the birth of America as a superpower. In 1940, Superman flew to Europe to battle the Nazis. In one amazing scene from Look Magazine, the Man of Steel held up Hitler by the throat, growling, “I’d like to land a strictly non-Aryan sock on your jaw.”

Whatever Lower East Side anxieties might be present in this image, what’s most remarkable is that Superman has becomes a symbol of U.S. dominance—“Truth, Justice, and the American Way” being not a bad summation of the rhetoric of Washington’s Cold War foreign policy. In No. 170 from 1963, Superman swooped into the oval office to take orders from Kennedy—“You wanted to see me, Mr. President?”.

But not all superheroes were created equal. If Superman is a Cold War liberal, then Batman is a right-wing populist. Like McCarthy, the Dark Knight’s enemies are domestic. If Superman is about “Truth, Justice, American Way,” then Batman is a scourge of an angry god. There’s even a sense that when the rich playboy Bruce Wayne donns his cape and mask, he becomes a criminal himself. I doubt Bob Kane, Batman’s creator, set out purposely to create an outright subversive figure, but then Batman seems pretty far away from any “assimilationist fantasy.”

Perhaps the best elaboration of the tensions inherent in the Batman character can be found in Frank Miller’s masterful graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns (1986). The conceit here is that after spending a decade in unpleasant retirement, a fifty-something Bruce Wayne is driven to once again go kick ass on the streets of Gotham. But when the Dark Knight returns, he encounters none of the brightly dressed mafiosos of the original comic but instead a gang of teenage punk rock sadists, “the Mutants”—’60s counter culture with a gun.

Ruling the city is an effete liberal elite that offers the few remaining good people of Gotham barely a semblance of order. Among them is Dr. Bartholemew Wolper, a psychologist who’s been “rehabilitating” and subsequently releasing the Dark Knight’s archenemies, who, of course, quickly return to murder and mayhem. On television, Dr. Wolper refers to Batman as a “social fascist,” then as a “social disease.” Comissioner Gordon—Batman’s only real ally in law enforcment—goes into mandatory retirement and is replaced by the post-feminist Ellen Yindel, whose first act on the job is to issues a warrant for Batman’s arrest.

There is some hope in Gotham. Carrie Kelly, a young girl who eventually becomes Batman’s new “Robin,” decides to join the Dark Knight after listening to her baby-boomer parents prattle on about the caped “fascist” who’s “never heard of civil rights”—“America’s conscience died with the Kennedys.”

The ultimate villain in The Dark Knight Returns is in fact Superman—whom America’s folksy, patriotic president sends off to fight the commies, deflect a nuclear weapon, and finally bring down the ungovernable Dark Knight. At the close of the novel, Batman is so alienated from civil society that his only recourse is to, in fact, “go underground,” where he plans to train an army that might one day “bring sense to a world plagued by worse than thieves and murderers” [emphasis in the original]. The Joker being dead, one senses that Batman’s referring to the Wolpers, Yindels, and the rest of the Establishment.

Along with Art Spiegel’s MausThe Dark Knight Returns established the “graphic novel” as a genre. It also had much to do with revival of the Batman film series in 1989, although it’s notable that these films completely dispensed with Miller’s social critique. In Tim Burton’s rendition, Batman is a brooding, Romantic hero, and Gotham looks much like something out of the 1930s, with the joker as a charismatic mobster accompanied by some goons fit for “Guys and Dolls.” When Joel Schumacher took over, the series became a bad joke, little more than a vehicle for stars to make a one-off as a colorful villain.

With Batman Begins and its sequel The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan has succeeded in laying out a new ground zero for the saga. Moreover, Nolan—along with his writing partners David S. Goyer and brother Jonathan—was given some leeway by the boys upstairs to make, in a sense, “graphic novels,” that is, serious reflections on the implications of the Batman character in light of the present. Both films were influenced by Miller’s Dark Knight in more ways than just the name.

In Nolan’s reinvention, Batman Begins as the young Bruce Wayne abandons Gotham. Disgusted with the slippery city government that has released the murder of his parents in order to strike a deal, Wayne declares  that the “system is broken,” “drops out,” and goes on a seven-year rampage around world—beating to a pulp every criminal in sight and becoming one himself.

In the wild, Wayne meets the mysterious Henri Ducard, who offers him admittance into a secret society that, Ducard insists, represents something much greater than the crude vigilante justice Wayne has been pursuing. Ducard is a leader of the League of Shadows, a collective in which “hatred of evil” is made an “ideal,” and which would teach Wayne to strike against criminals as something more than a man. Wayne joins, and it is with the League that he, in a sense, learns to be a Superhero, studying Ninjitsu as well as the “theatrical” means of stoking terror in the hearts of one’s opponent.

The turning point in Bruce’s training comes when Ducard demands that Wayne actually kill one of the low-lifes the League had picked up. Wayne demurs, “This man should be tried.” Ducard’s response: “By whom? Corrupt bureaucrats?” Wayne thus learns that the League’s purpose is not simply to execute criminals but whole societies that have grown decadent and are “beyond saving.” The League has, through the centuries, served this purpose, bringing down “Constantinople and Rome before it.” Gotham’s time has come, and Wayne is being trained to be its hangman.

Wayne rejects the League, fights his way out of its compound, and battles against it throughout the rest of the film. Much like Abraham looking onto Sodom and Gomorrah, he believes there are enough good people left in Gotham to warrant its rescue. But then what’s most important is that in Nolan’s reinvention, Batman’s origins lie not in some distant planet or ideal of Truth and Justice but in the nihilist, “anarcho-fascist” League of Shadows—Batman against Gotham.

What further separates Wayne from the League is that he actually hopes for a kind of reawakening among Gotham’s ruling elite. In The Dark Knight, Nolan personifies Wayne’s dream in the figure of Harvey Dent, Gotham’s crusading (and sometimes sanctimonious) new DA who goes after the criminal underworld with equal vehemence as does Batman. Wayne even learns that Dent approves of Batman and praises him for doing the job law enforcement should. Dent even puts his career in jeopardy to conceal Batman’s identity. In turn, Wayne begins to see Dent as Gotham’s “white knight,” a Batman who need not wear a mask and who would emerge from the political class—“I believe in Harvey Dent.”

Harvey Dent

As with Batman Begins, the ultimate villain in The Dark Knight is an active nihilist—the Joker, played manically by the late Heath Leger. Seeking neither money nor even notoriety exactly, the Joker’s objective to prove that, in their hearts, the people of Gotham are just as monstrous as he is. He starts by turning the criminal underworld against itself (not too difficult), then moves to destroy Gotham’s new hero, Harvey Dent, and finally enacts a series of “social experiments” in which he tries to bring out the utter depravity of the average Gothamite.

The Joker loses this gambit, and to the extent that The Dark Knight offers a happy ending it is this. The Joker does succeed, however, in destroying Harvey Dent, horribly disfigured his face and murdering his beloved Rachel Dawes. The Joker’s final coup is to release Dent from the hospital and inspire him to go on a revenge killing spree against everyone involved with Dawes’s murder, as well as those who failed to protect her. Wayne had hoped that Dent might become Batman without a mask, instead he becomes a kind Batman gone berserk, a Batman without ideals—pure revenge without justice. The real Batman is forced to bring him down.

The Dark Knight could have ended with death of Gotham’s DA—a story of the flawed hero who went bad. But then, Nolan has something much more complicated in mind. In the final stunning scene, Batman and Commissioner Gordon decide that a kind of legend of Harvey Dent should live on. Batman will be framed for Dent’s murders, Batman will take the blame, Batman will become the object of hatred of society and be hunted by the police. Harvey Dent will remain an immaculate “white knight.”

If Nolan isn’t willing to go as far as Frank Miller in broad cultural critique, he does, however, offer a view of the place of the hero in society that is no less tragic. Much like the character of Tom Doniphon in John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962), Batman recognizes the necessity of the Big Lie—“I Believe in Harvey Dent,” “Print the Legend”—that gives the people something to believe in. Also like the “good outlaw” Doniphon, Batman understands himself as a hero beyond the law, as an exception that must eventually be replaced by politically legitimate leadership—a new Dent for Batman, Senator Ransom Stoddard for Doniphon. No “Superman”—no guided missile of the establishment—could occupying such an ambiguous position.

Hollywood is, of course, quite good at producing “Supermen”—the Jack Bauers and James Bonds who take orders from the Establishment. Christopher Nolan, however, has managed to create a character caught in the intersection between law, vigilante justice, and anarchy. It’s quite an achievement. And after all, not every hero has to be an “assimilationist fantasy.”

Freedom Failed: And the Thunder Rolls into ABRA Detroit

Freedom Failed: And the Thunder Rolls into ABRA Detroit
Actual Black-Run America (ABRA) Detroit’s demise is near

You can’t see the lightning strikes. Not yet. You can see the horizon, far in the distance, starting to light up with increasing brilliance. There’s rumblings, signifying approaching thunder. But its still far-off, right?

Some are aware of the impending storm; most are afraid to admit it exists, preferring to ban all talk of unsavory topics on a so-called “Free” Republic; others have decided all that matters is lowering taxes for millionaires and billionaires, pursuing any and all avenues for reaching this objective; others -we call them Disingenuous White Liberals (DWLs) – have decided that the approaching calamity is a time to go all in on the “right vs. left” rhetoric.

State of Michigan may step in to run Detroit
Detroit Mayor Dave Bing speaks at a news conference

None of this will matter once the storm hits, for, like Hurricane Katrina, all that will be left in its wake is the unvarnished truth that those on both the politically-acceptable left and right work feverishly to hide: Detroit’s collapse through financial mismanagement, depleted tax-base, shuttered businesses and completely broken local economy is due 100 percent to being the crown jewel of Actual Black-Run America (ABRA).

BRA doesn’t mean that America is run by Black people; it means America – at every level of society – is run for the benefit of Black people, to  the detriment of everyone else.

ABRA means, literally, that Black people control all levels of society in a given geographic area (be it city or county).

In BRA, freedom is denied to, well, everyone who isn’t Black. In ABRA, most white people have completely fled the city or county, leaving behind Black people to tend to running the government, courts, schools, city services, and sustaining an economy.

Examples of ABRA would be Clayton County in Georgia, Prince George’s County in Maryland, Baltimore, Birmingham, Memphis, Newark, and, who can forget, Detroit.

And it is Detroit – on the heels of Jefferson County (home to 72 percent Black Birmingham) declaring the largest municipal bankruptcy in American history – that WILL soon run out of money and declare the same.

People always like to say that the hope rests in the children, but with the sons and daughters of Detroit’s leaders producing the worst 2011 NAEP scores in both reading and math of any big city in America, the future so bleak in that city you’d literally have to possess the atomic energy of the sun to see grounds for optimism.

Any ABRA city or county shows that freedom failed, with property value plummeting amid the exodus of citizens looking for “good schools” and a safe place to raise a family. Businesses immediately fold, with a large part of the remaining citizenry subsisting on government entitlements (EBT, TANF/Welfare, Section 8 Housing) and having no discretionary income to spend on luxury items. Or even ‘needs’ most of the time.

ABRA Detroit’s collapse has DWLs worried, most notably those at MSNBC:

The potential takeover of the city of Detroit by an “emergency manager” under a controversial Michigan law was the topic of the night on MSNBC Thursday, with the Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz shows tackling the topic.

In Pontiac, emergency manager Louis Schimmel responded to a WJR radio host’s question of whether he is a tyrant, by saying “I guess I’m the tyrant in Pontiac, then.”
According to an analysis by Chris Savage, a Democratic activist who runs the blog Ecectablog, when you count the cities and towns that have already been taken over by emergency managers, and cities like Detroit that are under review, 50.7 percent of blacks in Michigan are “on the verge of having no meaningful local democracy,” Maddow said.

Maddow said the story of Michigan’s emergency manager law “could be the most important and most under-covered story of the year,” a belief Maddow said she shares with Schultz.

During his show, Schultz talked to Rev. Alexander Bullock of Rainbow Push Detroit, who called the emergency manager law “the end of democracy.”

Pointing to what he called racial implications of the law, Schultz highlighted one Detroit city council member’s description of the emergency manager as a “master…someone to control the plantation.” And he noted that Michigan congressman John Conyers is calling on the Justice Department to investigate the law, which Conyers said could perpetuate discrimination.

Bullock referred to the emergency managers authorized by the law as “emergency dictators.”

“We thought the end of democracy is in Michigan,” Bullock said. “The end of democracy is in Michigan. Michigan is the new Mississippi.”

50.7 percent of Blacks in Detroit are on the verge of having no “Democracy,” because the concept of freedom has failed. White people were forced to leave Detroit in the late 1960s after brutal Black rioting made raising a family there an impossibility. One can only hope that the end of democracy in Michigan is at hand, for Detroit is an example of what ABRA will eventually do to any other city in America that goes that direction.

Thus the slow ceding of Detroit into ABRA began, culminating in the city becoming synonymous with corruption, crime, decadence, dereliction, and America’s irreversible decline. But that decline is immutably tied to both the universal, dogmatic enforcement of BRA and the hundreds of cities and counties where actual ABRA exists.

Black people had the opportunity to take Detroit to new heights once white people left; Black people had the opportunity to sustain Detroit once white people left; instead, Black people once again reminded the rest of America what happens when a town goes ABRA… it fails.

Democracy isn’t ending, no. Something more powerful is at play. Just as in the waning of the Soviet Union, most within the Iron Curtain no longer believed the lies of the state, a growing number of those held captive – and without Democracy in America – by BRA know that Detroit’s collapse is 100 percent racial.

Those on holding positions of power on both the “right and the left” will refuse to admit this, knowing their seat at the 21st Century Nobility Table — reserved only for traitors to Real America — would be at jeopardy if they reneged on the promise for publicly joining the ranks of Those Who Can See.

One Detroit council member had the audacity to say the state takeover of ABRA Detroit would turn it into a “plantation,” but Walter Russell Mead’s blog on The American Interest states:

“Plantation”? “Plantation” is a colloquialism for a prosperous place where white people live good and make money from the back-breaking labor of black people.

Detroit is a place where the predominantly black population doesn’t work but receives handouts from white middle and upper-middle class taxpayers in the form of food stamps, welfare, health benefits, etc. Rather than being prosperous, the whole thing is collapsing. “Plantation”? OK, you can start calling me a racist now. Just remember, I wasn’t the one who made this a racial issue.”

Rachel Maddow would still find a way to spin this truth into blaming white people for the fall of Detroit because not enough money was spent on Black people.

Pontiac, Michigan (51 percent Black) is one of those towns that has been taken over by the state of Michigan. Home to the built for millions upon millions, but sold for half-a-million dollars Pontiac Silverdome, the city is another reminder that freedom failed:

If you don’t feel like sugar-coating it, the emergency manager—Pontiac is one of three Michigan cities currently run by one—is an admission that democracy occasionally doesn’t work. Michigan introduced an emergency “financial” manager law in 1990, as a way to straitjacket cities that were failing.

That the experiment of ABRA in Detroit ends so… so much like what happens when colonialism ends in Africa will not be addressed by the managerial elite who work to keep BRA moving forward.

But to Those Who Can See, the impending financial takeover of ABRA Detroit by the state of Michigan will be another reminder that freedom failed. And you’d be shocked at the number of Those Who Can See.

You can hear the rumbling. For those who ready, ABRA Detroit is about to be struck with a lightning bolt of truth that no sob story from MSNBC can help overcome.

Freedom Failed.

Might Is Right

Or the Survival of the Fittest

by Ragnar Redbeard


“Must we then speak of this subject also; and shall we write
concerning things that are not to be told, and shall we publish
things not to be divulged, and secrets not to be spoken aloud?”
…….Julian the Emperor

“The law immutable, indestructible, eternal; not like those of
to-day and yesterday, but made ere time began.”


The natural world is a world of war; the natural man is a
warrior; the natural law is tooth and claw.

All else is error.

A condition of combat everywhere exists. We are
born into a perpetual conflict. It is our inheritance, even
as it was the heritage of previous generations. This
“condition of combat” may be disguised with the holy
phrases of St. Francis, or the soft deceitful doctrines of a
Kropotkin or Tolstoi, but it cannot be eventually evaded
by any human being or any tribe of human beings. It is
there and it stays there, and each man (whether he will or
not) has to reckon with it. It rules all things; it governs
all things; it reigns over all things and it decides all who
imagine policemanized populations, internationally
regulated transquillity, and State organized industrialism
so joyful, blessed and divine.

Virtue is rewarded in this world, remember. Natural law
makes no false judgments. Its decisions are true and just,
even when dreadful. The victor gets the gold and the land
every time. He, also, gets the fairest maidens, the glory
tributes. And – why should it be otherwise?


Why should the delights of life go to failures and cowards?


Why should the spoils of battle belong to the unwarlike?


That would be insanity, utterly unnatural and immoral.


How is it that “men of light and leading” hardly ever
call in question the manufactured “moral codes”, under which
our once vigorous Northern race is slowly and surely eating out
its heart in peaceful inaction and laborious dry-rot?
Standard “moral principles” are arbitrarily assumed
by their orthodox apologist to be a fixed and unalterable
quantity, and that to doubt the divine-rightness of these
“principles” is treason and sacrilege. When the greatest
thinkers of a race are incapable, or afraid to perform their
manifest and logical function, it is scarcely to be wondered that
average citizens are, also, somewhat unwilling to “risk life,
fortune and sacred honor” for the overthrow of popularized
“right and wrong” concepts, that they know from bitter

personal experience, are unworkable falsities. Although the
average man feels in his heart that nearly all political and
religious conventionalisms are dynamic deceits, yet how
cautiously he avoids any open display of antagonism thereto?
He has not the courage of his opinions. He is afraid to say
openly what he thinks secretly. In other words he is living in a
state of subjectiveness; of vassalage. He allows his brain to be
dominated and held in bondage by the brain of another. From
his infancy he has been deliberately subjected to a continuous
external pressure, especially designed to coerce his
understanding into strict accord with pre-arranged views of
moral, political or religious “duty”. He has not been permitted
one moment of real mental liberty. He imbibed fraudulent conventionalisms
with his mother’s milk. He listens to the most
hideous lies being glorified in his presence as sublime truths.
He hears falsehoods sung in swelling chorus. He hears them
sounded on bugles of silver and brass. He hears them intoned
by congregations of the faithful amid peals of sacred music,
and the solemn roll of chanted prayer. Thus his mind is
sterilized by authority before it has had a chance to mature.
Thus youth is mentally castrated, that its natural vitality may be
afterwards used up in the yoke of custom–which is the yoke of
slavery. In the nursery, at school and at college, plastic brain –
pulp is deliberately forced into the pre-arranged mold.
Everything that a corrupt civilization can do, is done to
compress the growing intellect into unnatural channels. Thus
the great mass of men who inhabit the world of to-day have no
initiative, no originality or independence of thought, but are
mere subjective individualities, who have never had the
slightest voice in fashioning the ideals that they formally
Although the average man has taken no part in
manufacturing moral codes and statute laws, yet how he obeys
them with dog-like submissiveness. He is trained to obedience,
like oxen are broken to the yoke of their masters. He is a born
thrall habituated from childhood to be governed by others.
Chinese civilization deliberately distorts its children’s

feet, by swathing them in bandages of silk and hoop-iron.
Christian civilization crushes and cramps the minds of its youth
by means of false philosophies, artificial moral codes and
ironclad political creeds. Deleterious sub-theories of good and
evil are systematically injected into our natural literatures, and
gradually (without serious obstruction) they crystallize
themselves into cast iron formulas, infallible constitutions,
will-o-the-wisp evangels and other deadly epidemics.
Modern “leaders of thought” are almost wholly
wanting in originality and courage. Their wisdom is
foolishness, their remedies poison. They idiotically claim that
they guide the destinies of nations, whereas, in reality, they are
but the flotsam and scum-froth that glides smoothly down the
dark stream of decadence.
“Thus all the people of the earth are helpless, seeing
those that lead are blind.”
Mankind is aweary, aweary of its sham prophets, its
demagogues and its statesmen. It crieth out for kings and
heroes. It demands a nobility – a nobility that cannot be hired
with money, like slaves or beasts of burden. The world awaits
the coming of mighty men of valor, great destroyers; destroyers
of all that is vile, angels of death. We are sick unto nausea of
the “good Lord Jesus”, terror-stricken under the executive of
priest, mob and proconsul. We are tired to death of “Equality”.
Gods are at a discount, devils are in demand. He who would
rule the coming age must be hard, cruel and deliberately
intrepid, for softness assails not successfully the idols of the
multitude. Those idols must be smashed into fragments, burnt
into ashes, and that cannot be done by the gospel of love.
The living forces of evil are to be found in the living
ideals of to-day.
The commandments and laws and moral codes that we
are called upon to reverence and obey are themselves the
insidious enginery of decadence. It is moral principles that
manufacture beggars. It is golden rules that glorify meekness.
It is statute laws that make spaniels of men.
A man may keep every one of the Ten Commandments and yet remain a fool all the days of his life.
He may obey every written law of the land, and yet be a caitiff
and a slave. He may “love Jesus”, delight in the golden rule
and yet continue to the hour of his death, a failure and
dependent. Truly the way to hell is by fulfilling the
commandments of God. If the all-conquering race to which we
belong, is not to irretrievably dwindle into multitudinous
nothingness (like the inferior herds it has outdistanced or
enslaved), then it is essential that the Semitic spider webs (so
astutely woven for ages into the brains of our chiefs) be
remorselessly torn out by the very roots, even though the
tearing out process be both painful and bloody.
If we would retain and defend our inherited manhood,
we must not permit ourselves to be forever rocked to repose
with the sweet lullabies of eastern idealisms. Too long we have
been hypnotized by the occult charm of Hebrew Utopianism. If
we continue to obey the insidious spell that has been laid upon
us, we will wake up some dread morning with the gates of hell
– “of hell upon earth” yawning wide open, to close again upon
us forever.
The idea of hell is in some respects a truthful
conception, suggestive of actual fact. If we terrestialize the
location, there is nothing inharmonious about it. Many a race,
many a tribe and many a mighty empire has gone down into a
grimly realistic Sheol. Is it not right and just that the vile, the
base and the degenerate (that is to say, the slave nations of the
earth) should be punished pitilessly for their creeping
cowardice? Is it not right that they should be, as it were, fried
and toasted – should swim in pools of boiling blood, or dance
sweltering satanic glees, with blistered feet and straining eyeballs
on red-hot Saharas of grave and sand?
In actual operation Nature is cruel and merciless to
men, as to all other beings. Let a tribe of human animals live a
rational life, Nature will smile upon them and their posterity;
but let them attempt to organize an unnatural mode of existence
an equality elysium, and they will be punished even to the point
of extermination.

All ethics, politics and philosophies are pure
assumptions, built upon assumptions. They rest on no sure
basis. They are but shadowy castles-in-the-air erected by daydreamers
or by rogues, upon nursery fables. It is time they
were firmly planted upon an enduring foundation. This can
never be accomplished until the racial mind has first been
thoroughly cleansed and drastically disinfected of its depraved,
alien and demoralizing concepts of right and wrong. In no
human brain can sufficient space be found for the relentless
logic of hard fact, until all pre-existent delusions have been
finally annihilated. Half measures are of no avail, we must go
down to the very roots and tear them out, even to the last fiber.
We must be, like Nature, hard, cruel, relentless.
Too long the dead hand has been permitted to sterilize
living thought – too long, right and wrong, good and evil have
been inverted by false prophets. In the days that are at hand,
neither creed nor code must be accepted upon authority,
human, superhuman or ‘divine’. (Morality and
conventionalism are for subordinates.) Religions and
constitutions and all arbitrary principles, every mortal theorem,
must be deliberately put to the question. No moral dogma must
be taken for granted – no standard of measurement deified.
There is nothing inherently sacred about moral codes. Like the
wooden idols of long ago, they are all the work of human
hands, and what man has made man can destroy.
He who is slow to believe anything and everything is
of great understanding, for belief in one false principle is the
beginning of all unwisdom. The chief duty of every new age is
to up-raise new men to determine its liberties, to lead it towards
material success – to rend (as it were) the rusty padlocks and
chains of dead custom that always prevent healthy expansion.
Theories and ideals and constitutions, that may have meant life
and hope and freedom for our ancestors, may now mean
destruction, slavery and dishonor to us. As environments

change no human ideal standeth sure.
Wherever, therefore, a lie has built unto itself a throne,
let it be assailed without pity and without regret, for under the
domination of a falsehood no nation can permanently prosper.
Let established sophisms be dethroned, rooted out, burnt and
destroyed, for they are a standing menace to all true nobility of
thought and action. Whatever alleged “truth” is proven by
results, to be but an empty fiction, let it be unceremoniously
flung into the outer darkness among the dead gods, dead
empires, dead philosophies and other useless lumber and
The most dangerous of all enthroned lies is the holy,
the sanctified, the privileged lie – the lie that “everybody”
believes to be a model truth. It is the fruitful mother of all other
popular errors and delusions. It is hydra-headed. It has a
thousand roots. It is a social cancer. The lie that is known to
be a lie is half eradicated, but the lie that even intelligent
persons regard as a sacred fact – the lie that has been inculcated
around a mother’s knee – is more dangerous to contend against
than a creeping pestilence. Popular lies have ever been the
most potent enemies of personal liberty. There is only one way
to deal with them. Cut them out, to the very core, just as
cancers are. Exterminate them root and branch, or they will
surely eat us all up. We must annihilate them, or they will us.
Half and half remedies are of no avail.
However, when a lie has gone too far – when it has
taken up its abode in the very tissues, bones and brains of a
people, then all remedies are useless. Even the lancet is of no
avail. Repentance of past misdeeds cannot “save” decadence
from extermination. The fatal bolt is shot; and into the fiery
furnace of wholesale slavery and oblivion they must go, to be
there righteously consumed. From their ashes something new,
something nobler may possibly evolve, but even that is the
merest optimistic supposition.
In Nature the wages of sin is always death. Nature
does not love the wrong-doer, but endeavors in every possible
way to destroy him. Her curse is on the brow of the “meek and

lowly”. Her blessing is on the very hearts’ blood of the strong
and the brave. Only Jews and Christs and other degenerates
think that rejuvenation can ever come through law and prayer.
“All the tears of all the martyrs” might just as well have never
been shed.
Whatsoever a people believeth shall make it free,
enslave it or corrode its very marrow in strict accordance with
natural order. Consequently, if a people place implicit faith in
what philosophers teach them, they are liable to be duped. If
many nations are so duped, their deception is a menace to the
liberty of the world.
Freemen should never regulate their conduct by the
suggestions or dicta of others, for when they do so, they are no
longer free. No man ought to obey any contract, written or
implied, except he himself has given his personal and formal
adherence thereto, when in a state of mental maturity and
unrestrained liberty. It is only slaves that are born into
contracts, signed and sealed by their progenitors. The freeman
is born free, lives free and dies free. He is (even though living
in an artificial civilization) above all laws, all constitutions, all
theories of right and wrong. He supports and defends them of
course, as long as they suit his own end, but if they don’t, then
he annihilates them by the easiest and most direct method.
There is no obligation upon any man to passive
obedience, when his life, his liberty and his property are
threatened by footpad, assassin or statesman.
One of Columbus’s lieutenants in the West Indies,
captured a Carib chief by means of a subtle stratagem. The
chief was invited to a feast and when there, persuaded with
honeyed words to don (on horseback) a set of brightly polished
steel manacles; it being cunningly represented to him, that the
irons were the regalia of sovereignty. He foolishly believed his
astute flatterer, and when the chains were firmly clasped
around his limbs, he was led away, to die of vermin, turning a

mill in a Spanish dungeon. What those glittering manacles
were to the Indian chieftain, constitutions, laws, moral codes
and Hebrew dominated civilizations are to the nations of the
earth. Indeed, under the name of Progress and Social
Evolution, mankind has been lured into fetid dungeons, where
it labors unceasingly and for naught, in darkness, despair and
shame. Like that Spanish lieutenant the masters of the earth
first flatter their dupes in order to more easily enchain them.
Who talks nowadays of the “sovereign people” without a laugh
of derision? And yet it was once thought to be a term full of
significance. Their ‘sovereignty’ is now acknowledged sham,
and their freedom a dream. The sovereign people be. –
It is clear, therefore, that the man or nation that would
retain liberty or be really safe must accept no formula as final
– must trust in nothing written or unwritten, living or dead –
must believe neither in special Jehovahs, nor weeping Saviors
– neither in raging devils, nor in devilish philosophies – neither
in ghosts, nor in idols, nor in laws – nor in woman, nor in man.
“O threats of hell, and hopes of paradise,
One thing at least is certain – this life flies;
One thing is certain and all the rest is – lies,
The flower that once has bloomed forever dies.”

He who saith unto himself, “I must believe, I must not
question” is not a man but a mere pusillanimous mental
gelding. He who believes “because it has been handed down”
is a menial in his heart; and he who believes “because it has
been written” is a fool in his folly. Sagacious spirits doubt all
things, and hold fast only to that which is demonstrably true.
The rules of life are not to be found in Korans, Bibles,
Decalogues and Constitutions, but rather the rules of decadence
and death. The “law of laws” is not written in Hebrew
consonants or upon tables of brass and stone, but in every
man’s own heart. He who obeys any standard of right and
wrong, but the one set up by his own conscience, betrays

himself into the hands of his enemies, who are ever laying in
wait to bind him to their millstones. And generally a man’s
most dangerous enemies are his neighbors.
Masterful men laugh with contempt at spiritual
thunders, and have no occasion to dread the decisions of any
human tribunal. They are above and beyond all that. Laws and
regulations are only for conquered vassals. The free man does
not require them. He may manufacture and post up Decalogue
regulations, to bind and control dependents with, but he does
not himself bow down before those inventions of his own
hands, except as a lure.
Statute books and golden rules were made to fetter
slaves and fools. Very useful are they for controlling the herds
of sentenced convicts who fill the factories and cultivate the
fields. All moral principles, therefore, are the servitors, not the
masters of the strong. Power made moral codes, and Power
abrogates them.
A man is under no obligation to obey anything or
anybody. It is only serving-men: – must obey, because they are
caitiffs by birth, breeding and condition. Morals are only
required in an immoral community, that is to say, a community
held in a state of conquest.
Fear God, bridle the spirit and obey the law is advice
most excellent, as from a philosopher to a yokel, but when
directed in all earnestness at a man of inherent might, he smiles
to himself in silent scorn. Full well he knows that in actual life
the path to victory and renown does not lie through
Gethsemanies, but over fallen enemies, the ruins of rival
combines, through Aceldamas. “Meekness of spirit” is
regarded by him as a convenient superstition, very useful for
regulating the lives of his servants, his women and his children,
but otherwise inoperative.
“I rest my hopes on nothing.” proclaimed Goethe, and
masterful minds in all ages have never done otherwise. This
unspoken thought gives to all truly great men their manifest
superiority over the brainless, vociferating herd. The “common

people” have always had to be befooled with some written or
wooden or golden Idol – some constitution, declaration or
gospel. Consequently, the majority of them have ever been
mental thralls, living and dying in an atmosphere of strong
illusion. They are befooled and hypnotized even to this hour,
and a large proportion of them must remain so, until time is no
more. Indeed the masses of mankind are but the sediment from
which all the more valuable elements have been long ago
distilled. They are totally incapable of real freedom, and if it
were granted to them, they would straightaway vote themselves
a master, or a thousand masters within twenty-four hours.
Mastership is right – Mastership is natural – Mastership is
eternal, but only for those who cannot overthrow it and trample
it beneath their hoofs. Is it not a fact that in actual life the
ballot-box votes of ten million subjective personalities are as
thistle down in the balance, when weighed against the far
seeing thought and material prowess of, say, ten strong silent
It is notorious, universally so, that the blackest
falsehoods are ever decked out in the most brilliant and
gorgeous regalia. Clearly, therefore it is the brave man’s duty
to regard all sacred things, all legal things, all constitutional
things, all holy things with more than usual suspicion. “I deny
and I affirm,” is the countersign of material freedom. “I believe
and I obey” is the shibboleth of serfage. Belief is a flunky , a
feminine – Doubt is a creator, a master. He who denies
fundamentals is in triple armor clad. Indeed, he is invulnerable.
On the other hand, it has been said that every belief, every
philosophy has some truth in it, but so, we might add, has every
Strong men are not deterred from pursuing their aim
by anything. They go straight to the goal, and that goal is
Beauty, Wealth and Material Power. The mission of Power is
to control and exploit the powerless, for to be powerless is to

be criminal. The world would indeed be a house of horrors, if
all men were “good” and all women padlocked.
As far as human searchlights have yet penetrated into
the darkness that enshrouds the origin of nations, we see the
subduers and the subdued, the plebeians and the patricians, the
chiefs who governed, and the vassals who obeyed. And there
is nothing in the most modern social developments (of these
deedless days) to warrant any belief that this ancient and
natural division of human animals, into castes of superiors and
inferiors, sovereigns and serfs, can ever be dispensed with. The
slave-owner’s whip cracked from the beginning, and it will
crack till the day of doom. In every kingdom, republic and
empire on earth we have (in one disguise or another) the master
and the slave – the ruler and the ruled. In the course of
centuries names alone have changed, essentials have remained
the same. Forms of royalty may alter, but kings can never die.
There was mastership at the beginning, and there will be
mastership to the end. We build, but as our fathers built.
Change is not progress, nor numbers advance.
Every one who would be free must show his power.
Unalterable remains the basis of all earthly greatness. He who
exalteth himself shall be exalted, and he who humbleth himself
shall be righteously trodden beneath the hoofs of the herd.
“The humble” are only fit for dog’s meat. Bravery includes
every virtue, humility, every crime. He who is afraid to risk his
life must never be permitted to win anything.
Human rights and wrongs are not determined by
Justice, but by Might. Disguise it as you may, the naked sword
is still king-maker and king-breaker, as of yore. All other
theories are lies and lures.
Therefore! If you would conquer wealth and honor,
power and fame you must be practical, grim, cool and
merciless. You must ride to success (by preference) over the
necks of your foemen. Their defeat is your strength. Their
downfall is your uplifting. Only the powerful can be free, and
Power is non-moral. Life is real, life is earnest, and neither
heaven nor hell its final goal. And love, and joy, and birth, and

death, and fate, and strife shall be forever.
This earth is a vast whirl of warring atoms – a
veritable revolving cock-pit. Each molecule, each animal
fights for its life. You must fight for yours, or surrender. Look
well to it, therefore, that your beaks and spurs, your fangs and
claws are as sharp as steel, and as effective as science can make
Though, the survival of the strongest is the logic of
events, yet personal cowardice is the great vice of our
demoralized age. Cowardice is corroding the brain and blood
of our race, but men have learnt to disguise this terrible
infirmity behind the canting whine of “humanity” and
“goodness”. Words flow instead of blood, and terrible insults
are exchanged instead of terrible blows.
How rich this degenerate world is in small, pettysouled,
good-for-nothings, who are forever excusing their
infantile ineptitude behind some plausible phrase – some
conventional make-believe?
Courage, I say! Courage, not goodness, is the great
desideratum–courage, that requires neither tin horns, nor
calcium lights, nor brass bands, nor shouting multitudes to call
it into effective action.
But courage that goes its way alone, as undauntedly as
when it marches to ‘victory or death’ amid the menacing stride
of armed and bannered legions.
Courage, that delights in danger – Courage, that
knows not despair! Courage, that proudly, defiantly, smiles on
Courage, that regards with equal loathing the
multitudes mad howls of hate, its stupid hee-haws and its
stridulating ‘tremendous applause’.
Courage, that asks no quarter, even with the knife at
its throat – courage that is stiff-necked, unyielding, sullen,
Courage, that never falters – never retreats!
Courage, that looks down with supreme disdain upon

all slave regulations, upon all rights and wrongs, upon all good
and evil!
Courage, that has made up its mind to conquer or –
That is the kind of courage this world lacks. That is
the kind of courage that aids by active co-operation the survival
of the Fittest – the survival of the Best.
That is the kind of courage that has never turned a
master’s mill.
That is the kind of courage that never will turn it.
That is the kind of courage that will die, rather than
turn it.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
“When Svipdag came to the enclosure, the gate of the burg was
shut, (for it was customary to ask leave to come in and see, or
take part in the war games). Svipdag did not take that trouble,
but broke open the gate and rode into the yard.” *
Queen Yisa said – “This man will be welcome here.”
*Ancient norse saga

As far as Sociology is concerned, we must either
abandon our reason or abandon Christ.
He is pre-eminently, the prophet of unreason – the
preacher of rabble-rabies. All that is enervating and destructive
of manhood, he glorifies – all that is self-reliant and heroic, he
denounces. Lazarus, the filthy and diseased vagrant, is his hero
of heroes; and Dives the sane, energetic citizen and his ‘awful’
example of baseness and criminality. He praises “the humble”
and he curses the proud. He blesses the failures and damns the
successful. All that is noble he perverts – all that is atrocious
he upholds. He inverts all the natural instincts of mankind and
u rges us to live artificial lives. He commands the
DEMONIZATION of virtues that aggrandize a people, and
advises his admirers to submit in quietness to every insult,
contumely, indignity; to be slaves, de-facto. Indeed, there is
scarce one thought in the whole of his Dicta that is practically
O, Christ! O, Christ! Thou artful fiend! Thou Great
Subverter! – What an amazing Eblis glamour thou has cast over
the world? Thou mean, insignificant-minded Jew!
Why is it that our modern philosophers are so mortally
afraid to boldly challenge the ‘inspired’ utopianism of this
poor, self-deluded, Gallilean mountaineer – this preacher of all
eunuch-virtues – of self-abasement, of passive suffering?
The sickly humanitarian ethics, so eloquently rayed
forth by Jesus Christ and his superstitious successors in ancient
Judea and throughout the moribund Roman empire, are
generally accepted in Anglo-Saxondom as the very elixir of
immortal wisdom, the purest, wisest, grandest, most incontrovertible
of all ‘divine revelations’, or occult thaumauturgies.
And yet when closely examined, they are found to be neither

divine, occult, reasonable, nor even honest; but
composed, almost exclusively of the stuff that nightmares are
made of, together with a strong dash of oriental legerdemain.
Through a thousand different channels current
politico-economic belief is dominated by the base communistic
caballa of the ‘man of many sorrows’; yet as a practical
theorem, it is hardly ever critically examined. Why is it that the
suggested social solutions promulgated by Jesus, Peter, Paul,
James and other Asiatic cataleptics are accepted so meekly by
us, upon trust? If these men were anything, they were crude
socialist reformers with mis-shapen souls, preachers of ‘a new
heaven and a new earth’, that is to say, demagogues –
politician-of-the-slums; and out of the slums, nothing that is
noble can ever be born.
As agitators, Jesus and his modern continuators shall
be exclusively considered in these pages. However, it must be
distinctly understood, that the spiritual and temporal in all
cosmogonies are so intricately interwoven that it is almost
impossible to completely divorce them. Like the Siamese
twins, Gods and Governments are inextricably bound together;
so much so indeed, that if you kill one, the other cannot live,
Hence the open or secret alliance that has always existed
between the politician and the priest.
Whatever their primitive purity (or impurity), all
operative creedal philosophies are essentially civil and military
codes, police regulations. ‘Religion is a power, a political
engine, and if there was no God, I would have to invent one’,
said the great Napoleon. In letter and in spirit, Christianity is
above all things a political theory, and a theory that often takes
the form of raging hysterics.
Religions are the matrix in which public institutions
are generally molded. This has ever been well understood by
the dominant leaders of mankind, from Numa to Brigham
Young, from Solon to Loyola, from Constantine to the lowest
Levite hireling, who gets paid in dimes and cents for his
unctuous mock – ditthyrambs.

‘All ye are brethren.’
Are all men really brethren? – Negro and Indian,
Blackfellow, Kalmuck and Coolie – the well-born and the basebred,*
– beer-soaked loafer and hero-hearted, patriot-belted
chieftain and ignoble mechanic-slave, – pot of iron and pot of
What proof is there that the brotherhood-of-man
hypothesis is in accordance with nature? On what trustworthy
biologic, historic or other evidence does it rest? If it is natural,
then rivalry, competition and strife are unnatural. (And it is
proposed to prove in this book, that strife, competition, rivalry
and the wholesale destruction of feeble types of men is not only
natural, but highly necessary.) Has ‘brotherhood’ ever been
tried upon earth? Where, when and with what final result? Is
not self-assertion nobler, grander, and more truly heroic than
self-denial? Is not self-abasement but another term for
voluntary vassalage, voluntary burden-bearing?
Christ might well and truthfully have said unto his
followers, ‘Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden
and I will bind you in unbreakable bonds, and load you down
like an ass between two burdens.’
The ‘poor and ignorant’ were his first followers – the
vagrants, the disinherited shiftless classes; and to this very day,
the poorer and more ignorant men and women are, the more
eager are they to follow his religious ideals, or the political
millenialisms that are distilled out of his delusions.
‘If we only lived as Christ lived, what a beautiful
world this would be,’ saith all thoughtless ones. If we lived as
Christ lived, there would be none of us left to live. He begat no
children; he labored not for his bread; he possessed neither
house nor home; he merely talked. Consequently he must have
existed on charity or have stolen bread.
* These terms are used in the strictest Darwinian sense.

‘If we all lived like Christ’, would there have been anyone left
to labor, to be begged from, to be stolen from? ‘If we all lived
like Christ’ is, thus, a self-evident absurdity.
No wonder that it is recorded: ‘Not many wise after
the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called; but God
chose the foolish things of the world, and God chose the weak
things of the world, and the things that are despised.’ Nothing
else would have anything to do with him. Christ was indeed,
the prophet of the credulous rabble during three years of active
agitation, and it abandoned him in his hour of need (what
always happens under similar circumstances,) for the rabble is
ever cowardly, ungenerous, suspicious, unfathomable base. It
has never yet had a leader of commanding ability (either in
peace or in war), that it did not ultimately desert or betray, i.e.
if he did not take the precaution to make himself its master.
After permitting Christ to be butchered, the mob
thereupon set him up as their Divinity and erected altars to his
renown. Slaves, women, madmen, lepers, magdalenes were the
earliest Christians, and to this hour, women, children, slaves
and lunatics are the raw material of the Christian Church.
Primitive Christianity cunningly appealed to the
imagination of a world of superstitious slaves (eager for some
mode of escape that meant not the giving and receiving of
battle-strokes). It organized them for the overthrow of Heroic
Principles; and substituted for a genuine nobility based on
battle-selection, a crafty theocracy founded upon priest-craft,
hell-craft, alms-giving, politicalisms and all that is impure and
subterranean. It is a doctrine at the disgraceful in its
antecedents, its teachers and in itself. Truly has it been called
‘the fatal dower of Constantine’, for it has suffocated or is
suffocating the seeds of Heroism.
Both ancient and modern Christianism and all that has
its root therein is the negation of everything grand, noble,
generous, heroic, and the glorification of everything feeble,
atrocious, dishonorable, dastardly. The cross is now, and ever
has been, an escutcheon of shame. It represent a gallows and a
Semite slave swinging thereon. For two thousand years it has

absolutely overturned human reason, overthrown common
sense, infected the world with madness, submissiveness,
Truly, there is a way which seemeth right unto a
people, but the ends thereof are the ways of death.
Sound the loud timbrel,
O’er lands and o’er waves;
The Israelite triumphs!
The nations are – graves

Is the Golden Rule a rational rule? – Is it not rather a
menial rule – a coward rule – a best-policy rule? Why is it
‘right’ for one man to do unto others as he would have others
do to him and, what is right? If ‘others’ are unable to injure him
or ‘do good’ to him, why should he consider them at all? Why
should he take any more notice of them than of so many
worms? If they are endeavoring to injure him and able to do it,
why should he refrain from returning the compliment? Should
he not combat them, does not that give them carte-blanche to
injure and destroy him? May it not be ‘doing good’ to others,
to war against them, to annihilate them? May it not, also, be
‘good’ for them to war against others? (Again, what is ‘good’?)
Is it reasonable to ask preying animals to do unto
others as they would be done by? If they acted accordingly,
would they, could they survive? If some only accepted the
Golden Rule as their guiding moral maxim, would they not
become a prey to those who refused to abide thereby?
Upon what reasonable and abiding sanction does this
‘Rule’ rest? – Has it ever been in actual operation among men?
– Can it ever be successfully practiced on earth – or anywhere
else? – Did Jesus Christ practice it himself upon all occasions?
– Did his apostles, his ‘sons of thunder’ practice it? – Did Peter
the boaster do so when he ‘denied Him’ for fear of arrest at the
camp-fire? Did Judas the financier when he sold him for net

cash? Also, how many of his modern lip servants actually
practice it in their daily business intercourse with each other.
How many?
These questions require no formal answering.
They answer themselves in the asking. And here it must be
remembered that the best test of a witness is cross-examination.
‘Do unto others as you would have others do to you.’ No baser
precept ever fell from the lips of a feeble Jew.
It is from alleged moralisms of this sort and fabulous
‘principles’ that our mob orators, our communards, revivalists,
anarchists, red republicans, democrats and other mobworshippers
in general derive the infernal inspiration that they
are perpetually hissing forth. Even the subversive pyrotechnic
watchword of their mephisto-millennium are to be found in the
‘holy gospels’. Is it not written, ‘and God sendeth angels to
destroy the people’? – Behold! These men are the ‘angels’ that
He sends: politicians and reformers!

‘Love one another’ you say is the supreme law, but
what power made it so? Upon what rational authority does the
Gospel of Love rest? Is it even possible of practice, and what
would result from its universal application to active affairs?
Why should I not hate mine enemies, and hunt them down like
the wild beasts that they are? Again I ask, why? If I ‘love’
them does that not place me at their mercy? Is it natural for
enemies to ‘do good’ unto each other, and what is ‘good’? Can
the torn and bloody victim ‘love’ the blood-splashed jaws that
rend it limb from limb? Are we not all predatory animals by
instinct? If humans ceased wholly from preying upon each
other, could they continue to exist?
‘Love your enemies and do good to them that hate you
and despitefully use you’ is the despicable philosophy of the
spaniel that rolls upon its back when kicked. Obey it, O!
Reader and you and all your posterity to the tenth generation
shall be irretrievably and literally damned. They shall be

hewers of wood and carriers of water, degenerates, Gibeonites.
But hate your enemies with a whole heart, and if a man smite
you on one cheek, smash him down; smite him hip and thigh,
for self-preservation is the highest law.
He who turns the ‘other cheek’ is a cowardly dog–a Christian dog.
Give blow for blow, scorn for scorn, doom for doom,
with compound interest liberally added thereunto. Eye for eye,
tooth for tooth, aye four-fold, a hundred-fold. Make yourself a
Terror to. your adversary, and when he goeth his way, he will
possess much additional wisdom to ruminate over. Thus shall
you make yourself respected in all the walks of life, and your
spirit – your immortal spirit – shall live, not in an intangible
paradise, but in the brains and thews of your aggressive and
unconquerable sons. After all, the true proof of manhood is a
splendid progeny; and it is a scientific axiom that the timid
animal transmits timidity to its descendants.
If men lived ‘like brothers’ and had no powerful
enemies (neighbors) to contend with and surpass, they would
rapidly lose all their best qualities; like certain oceanic birds
that lose the use of their wings, because they do not have to fly
from pursuing beasts of prey.
If all men had treated each other with brotherly love
since the beginning, what would have been the result now? If
there had been no wars, no rivalry, no competition, no kingship,
no slavery, no survival of the Toughest, no racial
extermination, truly what a festering ‘hell fenced in’ this old
globe would be?

Reverend Ferdinand M. Sprague of Chicago, (who
may be taken as a common specimen of the priest-politician),
in a little pamphlet lately published, entitled ‘The Laws of
Social Evolution’, writes thus: –


“The sheet anchor of Socialism according to its ablest exponents, is the Holy Christian religion. Its motto founded on the precept ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’ is –‘each for all, and all for each.’


Its working principle for the present is altruism.” *
Nearly all the canonized ‘Fathers’ of the early Roman
propaganda (most of whom, by the way, were slaves, freedmen
or – eunuchs) advocated similar Ideals. Even now, the anointed
and sanctified head of the Catholic Church resurrects the same
hoary old utopianism, in a Jesuitic encyclical addressed to his
flock. (How suggestive of being shorn and skinned, is that
word ‘flock’.)
Again, the Epistle of James who is known to have
been Christ’s full brother killed by a special policeman’s club
in a street riot, has been reprinted and widely circulated by
Socialists in order to so broadcast their illogical theories of a
universal brotherhood, founded upon enforced labor,
regimentation of the herd and majority votes.
Many modern cities are, also, infested with plausible
epileptoid priestlings of unreason, like Dr. McGlynn, Professor
Bemis, Hugh Price Hughes, W. T. Stead, Myron Reed and
Professor Herron of California. All these men are unrivalled
masters in the art of persuasive declamation. They accept the
New Testament as their text book and preach therefrom to
morbid multitudes the actrocious and shallow gospel of equal
rights, equal liberty, equal brotherhood, as the veritable omnific
word, the newly discovered emancipating protocol of the
Crucified (yet all-mighty) Don Quixote, the Saviour, God of
Asia Minor, he who was born in a cattle-shed and died on a

A God begging his bread from door to door! – A God
without a place to lay his head! – A God spiked to two pieces
of crossed scantling! – A God stabbed to death by a hired
officer! – A God executed by order of a stipendary magistrate!
* The ethics of socialism are identical with teachings of Christianity. -Encyclopedia

What an insane idea. Is it an idea or rather a wasting cranial
disease? Talk about ‘the heathen in his blindness’ and
superstitious madness in past ages! Why it is as childplay to
the hysteric Idolatry of today, the deification of a Jew. The
‘Divine Democrat’ was executed upon a government gibbet,
because the Rulers of Imperial Rome were more powerful men
than he was. His strength and that of his followers was not
equal to theirs.
He died an abysmal failure, – a Redeemer who did not
redeem, – a Saviour who did not save, – a Messiah whipped
like a calf, – a slave agitator deservedly destroyed for preaching
a Falsehood, the monstrous gospel of Love, Brotherhood,
Even from the spiritual point of view, there is nothing
whatever in his life or its after effects to show that ‘The pale
man upon the cross,’ when he moaned and wept so bitterly,
‘beheld any further down the Void than those who gathered
round to see him die.’
Of what use was that ‘pale dreamer’ to the iron
conditions that existed in the conquered and garrisoned
Fortress of Jerusalem? For once the city mob were on the right
trail, when they petitioned for the release of Bar Abbas, rather
than the supple singer of a ‘Sweet bye and bye.’ Bar Abbas is
described in the ‘Scriptures’ as a petty thief. He was really an
armed insurgent leader, the slayer of Roman tax-gatherers, a
guerrilla chief (like Rob Roy, Robin Hood, William Wallace,
William Tell) who levied toll upon opulent Hebrews for
patriotic purposes.
Had I been there that day, I, also, would have joined in
the demand: – ‘Release Bar Abbas unto us.’ – Better one Bar
Abbas than a thousand Christs.
Alas! Alas! O Gallilean! Thou art neither the Way,
the Truth nor the Light!
Reverting, however, to Chicago’s reverend Utopia

constructor, thus waileth he with cajoling crudity: “The laws
of social evolution, far from being the blind, barbarous and
brutal struggle for organic existence, consists in the physical,
intellectual and moral well-being of ALL the members of
society, so constituted that the politico-ethical principles of
Liberty, Equality and Fraternity shall have the largest possible
realization throughout the social organism. The main features
of the condition of progress are christian churches, christian
schools, christian governments, christian ethics and
Another secuctive but most malignant State Socialist
(Henry George) roundly proclaims that “The salvation of
society, the hope of the free and full development of Humanity
is in the gospel of brotherhood, the gospel of Christ!” and there
upon he proposes to make politicians the national rent-tax
collectors, Administrators of everything in general and allround
Distributors of State Pensions to ‘the poor and needy’.
Has not mankind had sufficient experience of what politicians
are? Those black-hearted, creeping thieves and frauds. Their
sting is deadlier than the bite of a cobra, and in the breath of
their mouth there is – Death. Curses be upon ye, O ye
Politicians! And upon all who advocate increasing your
Presidential candidates, from Jefferson, to Lincoln,
(also, their apish imitators) have generally indulged in equally
shallow rhodomontade, because it means votes, and for votes,
office-seekers would dress up in glowing language and ray
forth any devilish deception.
For two thousand years these effeminate superlatives
have been trumpeted to the remotest corner of every Christian
land, and yet (while enervating the morale of people), they
have dismally failed to inaugurate the much foretold Earthly
Paradise. They were preached by bare-foot monks at the
inauguration of the Dark Ages, in order that those saintly lovers
of the common people might creep into the administration of
cooperative wealth and power. Now, the same general ideas
are revived and dressed up (this time in politico-economic

garb) by the eloquent agitator, in order that he may rule and
plunder in the future, through the agency of the State; just as
the priest once ruled and plundered through the equally
rapacious agency of the Church.
When the Church triumphed the Dark Ages began,
and when it is finally rooted out (together with all its social
antennae) the Heroic Age dawns once more. True heroes shall
be born again as of old, for our women may yet be something
more than rickety perambulating dolls and drug-stores in
The ‘Church’ is the idol of the priestly parasite. The
‘State’ is the idol of the political parasite. Beware, O, America!
that in escaping from the holy trickery of the monk, you fall not
an easy prey to ‘the loving kindness’ of the politician. Even if
the ‘reformer’ succeeds in re-establishing upon majority-votes,
the dark tyranny of the ‘greatest number’, we have this
consolation to fall back upon, such organization must
ultimately tumble down of its own weight, and then re-divide
up into warring fragments. Nothing that is unnatural can last for
The Universal Church is no more; all we see of it now
is jealous remnants. And the Universal State, the Social
Democracy, the Economic Republic, the Brotherhood of Man,
should they take practical form, are pre-ordained to similar
failure. All they could do, would be to postpone the operation
of the survival of the fittest – drugging nations in temporary
No matter how eagerly madmen may try to do it, there
is no known process whereby they can jump out of their own
skins. Christian or socialist churches, paternlisms, schools,
governments, administrations, ethics and moralisms (even if
genuinely Christian and Fraternal) would be wholly impotent
to change the natural course of things and, therefore, powerless
to command the survival of mental and physical cripples, even
although those cripples were as canonized saints for
‘goodness’, and as the sands of the seashore for number.
Shrieking sentimentalism is indeed a feeble lever wherewith to

overturn the immutable order of the Universe. It cannot do it.
No! Not if it were whooped till the crack of doom! Not even
if it had a Lamb of God in every city, ready to be butchered
each Friday afternoon in order to make a Christian Holiday.

‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’, those three great lights
of Modern Democracies are three colossal Falsehoods, –
ignoble slave-shibboleths; impossible of actualization, even if
proclaimed by some superhuman Satan, followed by armed
hosts of un-killable demons, all armed to the teeth with flaming
swords, Greek-fire and dynamite cannon.
You may trace Equality in letters of silver on tablets of
burnished gold, but without engineering a perpetual miracle,
you can not make it – true.
You may write Fraternity in blazing diamonds on
walls of enduring granite, but without reversing the mechanism
of the Universe, you cannot make it a fact.
And, though you enscroll Freedom on countless
sheepskins and rivet Statues of Liberty on every harbor-rock,
yet with ‘all the king’s horses and all the king’s men’ one being
born to be a hireling and a subordinate, No Power can free.
Can you build up a marble palace with mud and slime,
O! Ye drivelling bedlamites? Can you raise up a conqueror
from the dunghill, or make the stupid great? Can you
manufacture heros out of hogs, O! Ye snuffling ‘Educated’
“We can! We can! We Can!” shrieketh the raging
rhetoricians of the market place and the editorial mill. “We can!
We can!” bellows the herd, as it stupidly pours through the sliprails
to the pithing pen. “Yes, O! Yes! With the love of Jesus
and our collection plate,” whines the soft-skinned preacher as
he turns over the sybiline leaves of his Black-Art. “Of a
certainty, we can,” hisseth the plastic politician, the rattlesnake!
The hungry basilisk! Whose lawmaking is more blighting than
the breath of a simoom.
Thereupon, toward you, O! America! They, one and
all, point the finger of pride! Towards you!
America! Where the politicians rage and the people
imagine vain things! And the dogs in the alleys are baying at
the moon!
Then, turn I away! Sadly! Sadly! Sadly! And I brush
against a slave in copper-rivetted overalls, hurrying to his mill,
and against another in gold chain and silken hat, hasting to his
money-changing– and a lean woman in sordid rags, with a pile
o lumber balanced upon her crown; and a splendid harlot in
diamonds and brilliant plumage, rideth slowly by.
And the cattle in the slaughter yard are lowing for
their hay; and a draught mare, with a galled shoulder, lieth
swollen and dead on the frozen paving blocks. How nauseous
it all is?
Loathsome! Loathsome! O, how loathsome?

Man is part and parcel of the animal kingdom and
(notwithstanding Jefferson, Franklin and Lincoln – Karl Marx,
LaSalle, and Liebknecht – Christ, Robespierre and Rousseau –
Hyndman, Tennyson and Mazzini – Dr. Adler, Bebel, George
and Isaiah – Bellamy, Gronlund and W. T. Stead) he cannot
escape from the draconic ordinances that despotically govern
that kingdom and environ his being like an atmosphere on
every side.
Altruism, meek and lowly self-abnegation, upon any
extended scale is among predatory organisms (and all
organisms are predatory) impossible of practice on pain of
wholesale felo-de-se.
Every man is under an obligation to fight and bear his
own burden. If he cannot do so, others cannot do his fighting
or his burden-bearing and their own at the same time with
reasonable safety to themselves. He, therefore, who finds it
impossible to carry his own burden, had better sink down and
die in his tracks than impose an additional load upon the
shoulders of his kind-hearted fellow strugglers. For then, they

would be overloaded and consequently unable to fight
successfully; so ALL might perish together.
Practical fraternal sympathy (upon any universal
scale) has always had in the end a most destructive effect upon
the internal structure of communities. Men will always love
and cherish those that are near and dear to them; but when it is
proposed to extend the circle of their ‘near and dear ones’ to all
mankind, that is going rather too far. Indeed, all must perish
ignominiously if that foolish idea prevails. ‘ALL’ are, even
now, enervating themselves, undermining their strength, by
futile overexertion in that very direction. They are straining
themselves to death by endeavoring to carry an impossible
load. The majority of men are born far too weak constitutionally
for their conditions; and the few who do possess the
necessary stamina and grit will have quite enough to do in
proving by deeds their fitness to survive, propagate and
possess. Many are projected – few are selected.
Yet altruism, wholesale self-renunciation – wholesale
burden-bearing, for the sake of ‘Outraged and Suffering
Humanity, is the maddening basis upon which ‘our good Lord
Jesus’, and his demented imitators have erected their sporadic
sociology – their Magnificent Satanism.
Does not simple business acumen whisper to us that
every man’s chief occupation upon earth is to sustain himself.
‘I mean subsist at any cost; you shall want ere I shall, business
is business.’ If men had sufficient personal initiative to think
along these stern lines, there would be little use on earth for the
theologian and ‘the reformer’; whose twin Mephistos who find
their renown and grandeur in the abasement of mankind. The
battle of life would then be so grim, terrible and realistic; (so
Trojan in fact) that those holy dissimulators and crafty
deceivers would rapidly die off or be eaten off; for in the clash
of naked interests, the Best and Bravest only cold possibly
survive; and no one would ever dream of including them
among the Best or Bravest.

Count Leo Tolstoi, undoubtably the ablest modern
expounder of primitive Christliness, in a much translated
volume, entitled: “Work While Ye Have Light”, writes this;
“Our Faith tells us hat bliss is to be found, not in resistance, but
in submission; not in riches, but in giving everything away;…
we have not quite succeeded in casting off every habit of
violence and property.”
To the most inept understanding, could any
proposition be placed in a clearer light? Is it not as simple as
‘rolling off a log’, that the individual who even attempts to
become a true and honest Christian must become like unto a
tame sheep? What a sublime ideal? How heroic?
The bliss of a sheep! How superlatively delightful?
How divinely glorious? And a Jew as the Good Shepherd, who
leadeth his lambs “to green pastures, and quiet resting places,
the pleasant waters by”. For two thousand years or so, his
fleecy flocks have been fattening themselves up with
commendable diligence for the shearing-shed and the butchersblock.
Let any nation throw away all ‘habits of violence’, and
before long it must cease to exist as a nation. It will be laid
under tribute; it will become a province, a satrapy. It will be
taxed and looted in a thousand different ways.
Let any man abandon all property, also, all overt
resistance to aggression and behold, the first sun will scarcely
have sunk down in the west before he is a bondservant, a
tributary, a beggar – or a corpse.
Property is necessary to the complete and free
development of personality and, therefore, human animals
should somehow obtain a full and fair proportion thereof at any
cost – or perish in the attempt; for he who cannot possess
himself of property is much better buried out of sight. Our
cities are literally honeycombed with treasure caverns, heaped
up with gold, title-deeds, silver and instruments of credit; our
valleys and our mountains are actually bubbly with wealth
untold; and yet, poor miserable ‘servants of Christ’ pass idly
by. Men, they call themselves! I call them castrates.

If Tolstoi’s obsequious principles are derived from the
Sermon on the Mount, then who can deny but that the sermon
on the Mount is a sermon unto decay and slavery? If they are
derived from the Golden Rule and if the Golden Rule is the
word of God, then can it be doubted that the word of God is the
word of Fraud? There is far too much of this ghastly ‘goodness’
in the nation, far and away too much. It is time men who can
think began to emancipate themselves and consider the fact
that: –Morals, laws and decalogues were made by liars, thieves
and rogues.
All good citizens, however, are hereby warned and
solemnly advised, not to smash-up the Ten Commandments –
not to burn up the Golden Rule – not to break up the Moral Law
– for that would be terribly wicked! Terribly! On the other
hand they must obey all Law implicitly (no matter how it
originated) and be sure (above everything) to order themselves
lowly and reverently before executive officers of the Law even
if in doing so, they are deprived of their Property and their
Liberty forever. Obedience, you see, is of God ‘who so loveth
the world’, but Disobedience is horrible and of the Devil, and
the Devil is a frightful rascal, who has not the slightest respect
for anybody or anything; not event the American Constitution.
Let us curse the Devil then and obey – the Law.
Liberty is honestly definable, as a state of complete
bodily and mental self-mastership (which includeth the
possession of property; also defensive weapons) and thoroughgoing
Independence from all official coercion or restraint.
Liberty in the conventional sense is a miserable Lie.
To be independent is synonymous with proprietorship.
To be property-less and unarmed is the condition of actual
dependence and servitude. Unarmed citizens are always
enslaved citizens, always. Liberty without Property is a myth,
a nursery tale, believable only by babbling babies and ‘foolsof-
the-forest’ – fools the city, also. “Liberty Regulated by
Law” is, in practice, tyranny of the darkest and foulest
description, because, so impersonal. There are numerous
worthy, reasonable and practical methods whereby individual

tyrants may be removed; but a tyranny ‘regulated by Law’ is
only removable by one method – the sword in the hands of men
who are not afraid to use it, or to have it used against them.
That is to say – the Sword in the hands of the Strongest.
During the whole course of human history, there is not
upon record, one authentic instance wherein a subjugated
people has ever regained property-holding Liberty, without first
butchering its tyrants (or its tyrants armed slaves in battle),
thereafter confiscating to its own use the lands and realized
property that previously had been in the possession of its
defeated foes and masters. This statement is made with cool
deliberation and aforethought. Let it be disproved by any one
creditable example to the contrary, and the Author is prepared
to forfeit 50,000 ounces of pure gold and enough ‘dimes and
dollars’ to erect in Chicago a bronze statue of ‘Our Blessed
Redeemer’ (crown of thorns and all) 100 cubits higher than the
Masonic Temple. This offer is strictly bona-fide and shall
remain open till 1906, so that philosophers, editors, statesmen,
divines (and other accomplished liars) may have enough time to
blind themselves, wading through National Archives and the
putrid rubbish heaps that men call Public Libraries. Should
some or all of said Mutual Admiration Society maniac-geniuses
go blind, also deaf, dumb and silly: this wicked old world may
probably whoop with delight – should it happen to hear of the

During the three years of Christ Jesus’ peripatetic
trappings, he never said anything that had not been better said
a thousand times before, by Dervishes, Spellbinders and
Mahatmas. Neither did he do anything that had not previously
been better done, by the jugglers and wonder-workers of Egypt,
India and Assyria. Not a few of his ‘miracles’ are to this day,
part of the ordinary stock-in-trade of fortune telling gypsies,
third-class strolling players, and charlatans in general.
The very phrase that ‘He’ uses to sum-up and

memorize ‘His’ patent Cure-all, was undoubtedly stolen
(directly or indirectly) from Plato, the Rig Veda or Confucius.
The Golden Rule is not only a snare and a tangle, but it, also,
is a literary piracy.
‘He raised the dead,’ you indignantly protest. And
even supposing that he did, wherein is the positive advantage?
What is gained by restoring vitality to the decomposing corpse
of an animal that may be so easily duplicated – an animal that
is a positive nuisance, numerically. What is the ‘good’ of
breathing the ‘breath of life’ into an odorous winding-sheet-full
of maggots and mouldy bones? Are there not plenty of
animalculae on earth, without dragging them out of tombs?
(Especially are there not plenty of leprous Asiatics?) Death and
destruction are necessary to the health of this world and,
therefore, as natural and lovable as birth and life. Only priests
and born cowards moan and weep over dying. Brave men face
it with approving nonchalance.
“Come lovely and soothing Death, undulate around
the world. Serenely Arriving! Arriving! In the day, in the
night; to all, to each. Sooner or later, delicate Death.” *
He fed the hungry – but to what end, I say? Why
should a famishing multitude be fed by a god? And that too, in
a land said to be flowing with milk and honey! Would not such
a mob be far better dead? Would not Napoleon with his cosmic
‘whiff of grape-shot’ be just the right man for such an
occasion? From the harmonious nature of things, it is clear that
men were intended to feed themselves by their own personal
exertions or perish like dogs. He therefore, who ‘feeds the
hungry’, is really encouraging poltroonry (which includeth all
other crimes) for men who quietly starve within reach of
abounding plenty are – all poltroons.
‘He clothed the naked,’ you shriek; and why, it may be
asked, should ‘the naked’ be clothed – they being able bodied?
What right have they to broadcloth and fine linen? If men
possess not enough sense to clothe themselves -
(in a literal Weaving Mill of inexhaustible looms),
* Walt Whitman’s “ Ode to Death”

why should a ‘God’ – the son of a ghost, come down from
Cloudland (via a Jewess maiden’s womb) to robe such
groveling, miserable hounds in swaddling clothes made of
cotton or wool? ‘Clothing the naked’ is purely a business
Here, it may be suggested en-passant – is the wearing
of garments, in itself, a natural and necessary condition of adult
existence? It certainly does not render the ‘human form
divine’, more healthy or more beautiful to gaze upon (although,
it may prevent Tenderlings from perishing of cold). Was it
really intended that the man-animal ONLY, should wrap itself
up from birth to death in layer over layer of disease-breeding
rags? Was there not a secret vital strength in the wind and rain
and storms that whirled round our forefathers giant limbs and
shaggy brows? All ethnic legends tell us that our first parents
were most elegantly attired in glorious sunshine and gaudy
fresh air. Who ever saw a Cherub painted in pointed shoes,
pantaloons, cuffs, collars and overcoat; or a smirking angel in
bloomers, steel-ribbed corsets and a delicate little ‘O! Dear me!
How awfully awful!’ style? Clothing serves most effectively to
hide the abominable physical deformity of modern men and
women, just as superficial educationalisms serve to hide their
dwarfed minds. If they were so perambulate around in the
nude, even the street cars would bark at them out of sheer
terror. Indeed, they would be more hideous to the eye than the
stuffed scarecrow that adorns a relative’s harrowed field and at
which our old dog, “Danger”, generally barks himself into
hysterics over, whenever he gets off the chain.
What a horrible sight a crowd of free and independent
electors would be, all sitting in solemn conclave, sucking their
thumbs, absorbing political opiates and divine euthanasia? Just
think of it! (Even Carlyle the dyspeptic would faint at the
sight.) The very conception of such a saddening horror makes
one ill. It would be as if they all had just emerged from a tomb,
a tomb of wool and cotton and leather.
Physical distortion and mental malformation are the
direct result of two thousand years of bad-breeding; that is to

say, of Mongrelize, of Democracy, of Equality, of Moody and
Sankeyism. Christians, originating in the despairful and
fallacious philosophy of a Crucified Wanderer (suffering from
acute Morbus Sacer), is now developed into an organized and
world-wide conspiracy of Clerical, Political and Decedents
directed en-masse, with Jesuitic cunning against all the
primitive and Heroic Virtues.
Our clean-skinned ‘heathenish’ ancestors with all their
vital forces unimpaired were really the nobler type of animal.
We on the other hand, with our corrupt, irresolute, civilized
hearts, our trembling nerves, our fragile anemic constitutions
are actually the lower, the viler type –notwithstanding the
baseless optimism that courtly rhymers drivel into their “Heirs
of all the ages”, etc., etc.
No people can long retain hardihood and
independence, whose minds become submissive to a False

Blessed are the Strong for they shall possess the earth
Cursed are the Weak for they shall inherit the yoke. Blessed are
the Powerful for they shall be reverenced among men – Cursed
are the feeble for they shall be blotted out.
Blessed are the Bold for they shall be masters of the
world – Cursed are the Humble for they shall be trodden under
hoofs. Blessed are the Victorious for victory is the basis of
Right – Cursed are the Vanquished for they shall be vassals for
Blessed are the battle-blooded, Beauty shall smile
upon them – Cursed are the Poor-in-Spirit, they shall be spat
upon. Blessed are the Audacious for they have imbibed true
wisdom – Cursed are the Obedient for they shall breed
Blessed are the iron handed, the unfit shall flee before
them – Cursed are the haters of battle, subjugation is their
portion. Blessed are the Death defiant, their days shall be long

in the land – Cursed are the feeble brained, for they shall perish
amidst plenty.
Blessed are destroyers of false hope, they are true
Messiahs – Cursed are the God-adorers, they shall be as shorn
sheep. Blessed are the Valiant, for they shall obtain great
treasure – Cursed are the believers in Good and Evil, for they
are frightened by shadows.
Blessed are they who believe in Nothing – never shall
it terrorize their minds – Cursed are the ‘lambs of God’, they
shall be bled ‘whiter than snow’. Blessed is the man who hath
powerful enemies, they shall make him a hero – Cursed is he
who “doeth good” unto others, he shall be despised.
Blessed the man whose foot is swift to serve a friend,
he is a friend indeed – Cursed are the organizers of Charities,
they are propagators of plagues. Blessed are the Wise and
Brave, for in the Struggle they shall win – Cursed are the unfit
for they shall be righteously exterminated.
Blessed are the sires of Noble Maidens, they are the
salt of the earth – Cursed the mothers of strumous Tenderlings,
for they shall be shamed. Blessed are the mighty-minded for
they shall ride the whirl-winds – Cursed are they who teach
Lies for Truth, and Truth for Lies, for they are abomination.
Blessed are the unmerciful, their posterity shall own
the world – Cursed are the pitiful for they shall receive no pity.
Blessed are the destroyers of idols, for they shall be feared by
tyrants – Cursed are the famous Wiselings, their seed shall
perish off the earth. Thrice cursed are the Vile for they shall
serve and suffer.
Contrast this with an orthodox Sermonette, one that is
repeated every seventh day in thousands of sacred sanctuaries
by consecrated black-robed clericals, who have been specially
trained from boyhood to weepfully, unctiously rehearse the
same with upturned eyes and skillful snuffle or in classic
diction, sounding, sonorous, nay! Sublime – as suits the

Dearly Beloved Brethren!!!
Gawd answers all who kneel and pray, is a Trewth
accepted day by day. Behold! their bright and joyful lot,
who’ve faith in what Christ Jesus taught!
If you’ve empty pockets and tables bare, demand ye
not your natural share; that would be wrong; but, creep and sigh
and ‘you’ll go to heaven when you die’.
For the meek and humble who obey, there’s a happy
and far, far away; but a fearsome, fiery, brimstone pit, shall
melt their marrow, who won’t – submit.
If foemen smite you on one cheek, turn round the
other, tearful, meek; if perjured knaves your votes betray:
come ‘wicked sinners’, kneel and –pray.
If Hebrews fleece and flay your hide, heaven’s gates
for you, shall open wide; Christ your Shepherd, won’t lead
astray, O! Lambs of God! come bleat and pray.
If bruised and beaten, shorn and sold, you’re sure of
stalls in your Father’s fold; but – robbers rob, or rulers slay!
Hell roast your souls for ever and aye.
If elected persons invade your wealth, with bribes and
lies or deadly stealth, and threat your bones with a bannered
host: Christ is your refuge and the Holy Ghost.
You’ll triumph thus ‘in the dawning years’ hope on!
Toil on! In this vale of tears sing, “Rock of Ages cleft for me,
O! let me hide myself in thee.”
Jewish books are for the Jews,
And Jew Messiahs too.
But if you’re not of Jewish blood,
How can they be for you?
To make an Idol of a book,
Is poison for the brain;
A dying God upon a cross
Is reason gone insane.
Beware of all the Holy books
And all the creeds and schools,
And every law that man has made
And all the golden rules.
“Laws” and “Rules” imposed on you
From days of old renown,
Are not intended for your “good”
But for your crushing down.
Then dare to rend the chains that bind
And to yourself be true.
Dare to liberate your mind,
From all things, old and new.
Always think your own thought,
All other thoughts reject;
Learn to use your own brain
And boldly stand erect.

Of Men and Mockingbirds

Of Men and Mockingbirds

By Robert Ardrey

A territory is an area of space, whether of water or earth or air, which an animal or group of animals defends as an exclusive preserve. The word is also used to describe the inward compulsion in animate beings to possess and defend such a space. A territorial species of animals, therefore, is one in which all males, and sometimes females too, bear an inherent drive to gain and defend an exclusive property.
In most but not all territorial species, defense is directed only against fellow members of the kind. A squirrel does not regard a mouse as a trespasser. In most but not all territorial species — not in chameleons, for example — the female is sexually unresponsive to an unpropertied male. As a general pattern of behavior, in territorial species the competition between males which we formerly believed was one for the possession of females is in truth for possession of property.
We may also say that in all territorial species, without exception, possession of a territory lends enhanced energy to the proprietor. Students of animal behavior cannot agree as to why this should be, but the challenger is almost invariably defeated, the intruder expelled. In part, there, seems some mysterious flow of energy and resolve which invests a proprietor on his home grounds. But likewise, so marked is the inhibition lying on the intruder, so evident his sense of trespass, we may be permitted to wonder if in all territorial species there does not exist, more profound than simple learning, some universal recognition of territorial rights.
The concept of territory as a genetically determined form of behavior in many species is today accepted beyond question in the biological sciences. But so recently have our observations been made and our conclusions formed that we have yet to explore the implications of territory in [4] our estimates of man. Is Homo sapiens a territorial species? Do we stake out property, chase off trespassers, defend our countries because we are sapient, or because we are animals? Because we choose, or because we must? Do certain laws of territorial behavior apply as rigorously in the affairs of men as in the affairs of chipmunks? That is the principal concern of this inquiry, and it is a matter of considerable concern, I believe, to any valid understanding of our nature. But it is a problem to be weighed in terms of present knowledge, not past.
How recently our information about animal territory has come to us is very well illustrated by reflections recorded only thirty years ago by the anthropologist Julian H. Steward, now of the University of Illinois. “Why are human beings the only animals having land-owning groups?” he wondered. And he brought together observations “of twenty-four different hunting peoples so primitive that their ways differ little, in all probability, from the ways of paleolithic man. Their homes were isolated and far-spread — in Philippine and Congo forests, in Tasmania and Tierra del Fuego, in Canada’s Mackenzie basin, in the Indian Ocean’s Andaman Islands, in southwestern Africa’s Kalahari Desert. So remote were they from each other that there seemed small likelihood that any one could have learned its ways from others. Yet all formed social bands occupying exclusive, permanent domains.
How could it be that such a number of peoples in such varying environments so remote from each other should all form similar social groups based on what would seem to be a human
invention, the ownership of land? Steward came to a variety of conclusions, but one line of speculation was denied him. Even in 1936 he could not know that his assumption was false, since many animals form land-owning groups. Lions, eagles, wolves, great-horned owls are all hunters, and all guard exclusive hunting territories. The lions and wolves, besides, hunt in cooperative prides and packs differing little from the bands of primitive man. Ownership of land is scarcely a human invention, as our territorial propensity is something less than a human distinction.
Man, I shall attempt to demonstrate in this inquiry, is as much a territorial animal as is a mockingbird singing in the clear California night. We act as we do for reasons of our [5] evolutionary past, not our cultural present, and our behavior is as much a mark of our species as is the shape of a human thigh bone or the configuration of nerves in a corner of the human brain. If we defend the title to our land or the sovereignty of our country, we do it for reasons no different, no less innate, no less ineradicable, than do lower animals. The dog barking at you from behind his master’s fence acts for a motive indistinguishable from that of his master when the fence was built.
Neither are men and dogs and mockingbirds uncommon creatures in the natural world. Ring-tailed lemurs and great-crested grebes, prairie dogs, robins, tigers, muskrats, meadow warblers and Atlantic salmon, fence lizards, flat lizards, three-spined sticklebacks, nightingales and Norway rats, herring gulls and callicebus monkeys — all of us will give everything we are for a place of our own. Territory, in the evolving world of animals, is a force perhaps older than sex.
The survival value that territory brings to a species varies as widely as do the opportunities of species themselves. In some it offers security from the predator, in others security of food supply. In some its chief value seems the selection of worthy males for reproduction, in some the welding together of a group, and in many, like sea birds, the prime value seems simply the excitement and stimulation of border quarrels. And there are many species, of course, for which the territorial tie would be a handicap to survival. Grazing animals for the most part must move with the season’s grass. Elephant herds acknowledge no territorial bond, but move like fleets of old gray galleons across the measureless African space. The gorilla, too, is a wanderer within a limited range who every night must build a new nest wherever his search for food may take him.
In those countless species, however, which through long evolutionary trial and error have come to incorporate a territorial pattern into their whole behavior complex, we shall find a remarkable uniformity. Widely unrelated though the species may be, a few distinct patterns are endlessly repeated. In the next chapter, for example, we shall examine arena behavior, in which solitary males defend mating stations to which females come solely for copulation. It makes little difference whether the species be antelope or sage grouse, the pattern will be almost the same. And in the [6] chapter after that we shall consider the pair territory, that portion of space occupied and defended by a breeding couple, as in robins and beavers and men. So we shall move along, surveying the territorial experience in the world of the animal as it has been observed by science in our generation.
It is information, all of it, which failed to enter your education and mine because it had not yet come to light. It is information, all of it, which yet fails to enter our children’s textbooks or the
processes of our own thought, through nothing but neglect. To me, this neglect seems a luxury which we cannot afford. Were we in a position to regard our knowledge of man as adequate in our negotiations with the human circumstance, and to look with satisfaction on our successful treatment of such human maladies as crime and war, racial antagonisms and social loneliness, then we might embrace the world of the animal simply to enjoy its intrinsic fascinations. But I find no evidence to support such self-satisfaction. And so this wealth of information concerning animal ways, placed before us by the new biology, must be regarded as a windfall in a time of human need.
If, as I believe, man’s innumerable territorial expressions are human responses to an imperative lying with equal force on mockingbirds and men, then human self-estimate is due for radical revision. We acknowledge a few such almighty forces, but very few: the will to survive, the sexual impulse, the tie, perhaps, between mother and infant. It has been our inadequate knowledge of the natural world, I suggest, that has led us to look no further. And it may come to us as the strangest of thoughts that the bond between a man and the soil he walks on should be more powerful than his bond with the woman he sleeps with. Even so, in a rough, preliminary way we may test the supposition with a single question: How many men have you known of, in your lifetime, who died for their country? And how many for a woman?
Any force which may command us to act in opposition to the will to survive is a force to be inspected, at such a moment of history as ours, with the benefit of other than obsolete information. That I believe this force to be a portion of our evolutionary nature, a behavior pattern of [7] such survival value to the emerging human being that it became fixed in our genetic endowment, just as the shape of our feet and the musculature of our buttocks became fixed, is the premise of this inquiry. Even as that behavior pattern called sex evolved in many organisms is nature’s most effective answer to the problem of reproduction, so that behavior pattern called territory evolved in many organisms as a kind of defense mechanism, as nature’s most effective answer to a variety of problems of survival. I regard the territorial imperative as no less essential to the existence of contemporary man than it was to those bands of small-brained proto-men on the high African savannah millions of years ago. I see it as a force shaping our lives in countless unexpected ways, threatening our existence only to the degree that we fail to understand it.

From: The Territorial Imperative

A Personal Inquiry into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations
By Robert Ardrey

Freedom Failed: The New Orleans Black Crime Wave

Freedom Failed: The New Orleans Black Crime Wave

PK note: There will be two posts today. I’m in a vendetta kind-of-mood. Next week you’ll get The Walking Dead/Atlanta piece and a big article on why The Hunger Games is a vital book for understanding the world we live in now. I’d argue that the world of Black-Run America (BRA) is far worse than the one Katniss Everdeen encounters in District 12. Thanks to each of you for helping make this week a big one at SBPDL. The comments have been excellent. Again, this site continues to grow because of you, the reader.  I say it repeatedly, but this site started as a joke… it’s important to laugh, but for me the joke is over (The Walking Dead piece will prove that point with an exclamation mark). 

Next week the cover for SBPDL Episode II will be unveiled. No more talk of next week: let’s roll.

We already know that the United States Military utilizes Baltimore and Cincinnati for training trauma response teams, emergency personnel, and doctors who are about to be deployed to war zones across the world. The bellicose nature of The Black Undertow (mind you,the Black crime rate was just as bad in 1921 as it is now) provides these trauma units with an experience that the “real” war zones can’t replicate. Understand that the lethal combination of Black-Run America (BRA) – which makes it impossible to hold Black people accountable for their actions, because they point to the “legacy of slavery” as the source of all their problems – and a desire in the Black community to protect Black criminals in their midst through no snitching campaigns will doom any hope of ever turning dying cities into a Green City.

Why wasn’t this movie released in theaters?

It was Hurricane Katrina that ripped apart every lie promulgated by Disingenuous White Liberals (DWLs) and Crusading White Pedagogues (CWP) regarding racial matters. It is a testament to the power of DWLs and CWPs that the reality of what transpired in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina has been brushed neatly under the rug. But it’s important to understand that that rug is already bursting with other Hate Facts that have a tendency to come bursting out when they are least desired.

New Orleans of 2011 is a war zone. It’s a war zone because the citizens of the Black Undertow in a city with the mantra “Laissez les bons temps roule” have been granted unlimited freedom, because people are fearful of the consequences that would accompany pointing out the obvious: New Orleans doesn’t have a crime problem; New Orleans has a Black problem.

 Across the nation, affluent Black people are escaping migrating away from citizens of The Black Undertow, just as white people have been doing for years. Regardless of the city, what is left behind is a facsimile of New Orleans.

If you’ve noticed, Freedom Failed has become a new theme here. You didn’t have to be inside the Super Dome in New Orleans back in September of 2005 to realize the truth of this statement. Every citizen of New Orleans had the freedom to leave the city before the hurricane hit; it was those who failed in exercising that freedom who turned New Orleans into an even more lawless version of its self.

Black crime has always been bad in New Orleans, but the recent outbreak of violence has shocked the editors at The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. For anyone who views WorldStarHipHop, you know this outbreak of violence is celebrated in the Black community, videotaped, and uploaded for the world to see.

So what’s happening in New Orleans that has fine folks at The New York Times shocked?:

Of all the challenges facing the city of New Orleans, none is as urgent or as relentlessly grim as the city’s homicide rate. It was measured at 10 times the national average in 2010, long before shootings on Halloween night in the crowded French Quarter revealed to a larger public what was going on in poor neighborhoods around the city every week. There were 51 homicides per 100,000 residents here last year, compared with less than 7 per 100,000 in New York or 23 in similar-size Oakland, Calif. 

“From September of last year to February of this year,” said Mayor Mitch Landrieu in a recent speech, after reciting a litany of killings from one city high school, “a student attending John McDonogh was more likely to be killed than a soldier in Afghanistan.” 

New Orleans has long been a violent town; in 1994, there were 421 killings here, one of which was a hit ordered by a police officer. With federal intervention, the homicide rate dropped precipitously but began rising again around 2000 and has been fluctuating since Hurricane Katrina. The killers and their victims are overwhelmingly young black men, according to an analysis of homicide cases by outside experts last March, and sponsored by the federal Bureau of Justice Assistance. As police officials frequently point out to the anger of some families, most victims and offenders had prior contacts with the police, often for violent crimes. Less than a quarter were listed as having a steady job. 

The narrower causes are less clear. There are no large organized gangs in town, nor are there major drug wars, though some killings are turf disputes over the drug market, made worse by the drastic reshuffling of the urban poor after Hurricane Katrina and the demolition of public housing projects. 

Many killings in New Orleans are a result of conflicts and vendettas among small, loosely organized groups, the analysis concluded, but in nearly half the cases, the experts listed the primary motive as uncertain or unknown. Only about half the homicide cases are cleared. 

City officials have been pushing what they call a public health approach, a “paradigm shift,” they say, in a city that has been known for soaring arrest and incarceration rates.

Back in 1921, the Black homicide rate in New Orleans was 46.7 per 100,000. Not much changes, does it? What would a paradigm shift look like? Have the New Orleans Saints play a game every day (during the run to the Super Bowl title in 2010, there were no murders during their games!)?

So even during the evil days of Jim Crow, Black people made the streets of New Orleans unsafe. Almost 100 years later, not much has changed.

Douglas McCollam of The Wall Street Journal shares with us this information:

The violence left New Orleans Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas strapped to the hot seat. Appointed by Mayor Mitch Landrieu in May of 2010, Mr. Serpas—the former police chief of Nashville, Tenn.—came into office vowing to stem a tide of violent crime and reform what he called “one of the most dysfunctional police departments in American history.” In Mr. Serpas’s first 18 months more than 60 officers have been fired or have resigned under investigation, including members of the department’s top brass. Overall, nearly 200 officers have left for a variety of reasons. (PK NOTE: Nashville has a horrible Black crime problem, which Serpas worked to cover up)

Over the same period, the city’s murder rate has risen. As of this week, 164 homicides have been committed in New Orleans in 2011, on pace to eclipse last year’s total of 172. To put that number in perspective, New York City, with more than 20 times the population of New Orleans, had 536 murders last year. If New York had New Orleans’s homicide rate, more than 4,000 people would have been murdered there last year, about 11 every day.

In response to public outcry over the bloodshed, Mr. Serpas has offered a plethora of reform ideas. His public statements are peppered with references to his 65-point plan to remake the department, the adoption of crime-interdiction strategies such as Project Safe Neighborhoods, and enhanced community policing efforts to help repair the police department’s tattered image. 

In March, the Justice Department (which is negotiating a consent decree regarding court supervision of the New Orleans Police Department) released an analysis of the city’s crime problem that did contain some insights. Contrary to popular perception, it found that New Orleans’ overall crime rate—including its rate of violent crime—is lower than that of other cities of comparable size. It’s even lower than the crime rate in such family-friendly destinations as Orlando, Fla. (PK NOTE: what a coincidence, the Black Undertow in Orlando is more criminal than New Orleans)

But that news comes with a giant caveat: The Big Easy’s homicide rate (52 homicides per 100,000 residents) is 10 times higher than the national average and almost five times that of other cities of its size. 

Why is the city such a murder outlier? In many jurisdictions, the Justice Department notes, gangs and drugs are principal drivers of the murder rate. Not so in New Orleans, which has comparatively little gang activity or organized violence related to the drug trade. Nor do the killings tend to happen in back alleys or vacant buildings as they often do in other places. More often they occur in residential neighborhoods in close proximity to witnesses. And more often the motivation is not random robbery, but revenge or argument. 

In short, the killing in New Orleans is personal. “What appear to be different about homicides in New Orleans are the circumstances of the events,” Justice Department investigators noted. “In reading the narratives of the offenses, one is struck by their ordinariness—arguments and disputes that escalate into homicide.”

Wait, isn’t New Orleans the same city that a Department of Justice study found that too many Black people are being arrested? Why yes it is. The DoJ has made a consent decree with the city in an effort to bring about massive reforms, such as these:

The U.S. Department of Justice issued a 115-page report last March outlining what it sees as systemic problems within the NOPD. The findings will be the basis of the federal consent decree that city officials will soon begin negotiating. The report concluded New Orleans police:

  • Use too much force against civilians, often don’t report it and, when it is reported, too often fail to investigate the incidents thoroughly.
  • Stop, search and arrest civilians without sufficient cause.
  • Disproportionately arrest African-Americans compared with white residents.
  • Fail to sufficiently engage and police the city’s Latino and Vietnamese communities.
  • Discriminate against women by failing to properly investigate sexual assaults and domestic violence.
  • Have subpar recruitment and training programs.
  • Use a paid detail system that is a potentially corrupting influence.
  • Inconsistently discipline officers, while conducting inadequate internal investigations.
  • Fail to sufficiently embrace community-policing strategies.

Why won’t white people commit crime in New Orleans? Can’t some of the criminality found in The Big Easy be redistributed – like tax dollars are – from the Black community to the white community?

Steve Sailer also noted that the Obama Administration issued a report that noted the unpleasant nature that all 27 instances of police using deadly force in New Orleans in the past few years was on Black people:

The [Department of Justice Civil Rights Division's] report found from 2009 to 2010 all 27 incidents of NOPD deadly force were against African Americans, and in 2009 the department arrested 500 black and 8 white males under age of 17, which diverges “severely” from national data.

Disparate impact, I tell you!

In 2000 (the most recent data I can find), the NOPD was 51% black. I can’t find anything in the Obama Administration’s report on the racial identity of these NOPD police officers they are criticizing. That seems like a bit of an omission for a Civil Rights Division report, no? How often does that division forget to mention the racial makeup of an organization they are criticizing?

Back in 2009, McCollam was high on the prospects of turning New Orleans into the Portland of the South for Stuff White People Like (SWPL) white people:

The Saints’ arrival in a refurbished Superdome in the fall of 2006 marked a symbolic resurrection for the team and the city. Since then an unmistakable halo of optimism has hovered over both. The city’s population has rebounded to about three-fourths of its pre-storm level. And after decades of losing its best and brightest to the wider world, the city’s brain drain has become a brain gain. Dedicated 20 and 30-somethings from around the country are showing up in force, in part to aid with the still ongoing rebuilding effort, but drawn also because New Orleans, in its post-Katrina incarnation, has become something of a testing lab for new ideas. 

In the battered Ninth Ward, hot young architects work with groups such as Brad Pitt’s Make It Right Foundation to build ecofriendly housing. Teach For America and other organizations have taken over large swaths of the derelict school system, helping push it to the forefront of America’s charter-school movement. Tax incentives and an arts-friendly environment have turned the city into a Hollywood hub, with more than 40 films shot in New Orleans in the past two years. Recently, TV auteur David Simon began filming his upcoming HBO series “Treme” around town, a show focusing on the lives of New Orleans musicians after Katrina.

Why is America dying? Why are our major cities in need of Jack Kemp approved enterprise zones? Because people are afraid to shop there, which means businesses are uninterested in investing capital for building new stores in places like New Orleans. All of this is due to Black Undertow.

Worse, the Department of Justice is going after cities where too many Black people are being arrested (though FBI stats for 2010 show that 53 percent of known murders were committed by Black people, who represent only 13 percent of the population).

City Journal published this about New Orleans, which underscores why so many consumers are now using online shopping outlets — because they don’t want to drive into shopping centers, outdoor malls, etc., that are also frequented by the Black Undertow:

Day in and day out, Katrina or no Katrina, New Orleans is America’s most dangerous city. But the numbers don’t tell the whole story. White and black residents, rich and poor, of good neighborhoods and bad, are afraid to go out at night beyond the clear boundaries of well-patrolled areas like the heart of the French Quarter—and night means 6:00 pm, not 2:00 am. Everyone in New Orleans knows someone who has been violently mugged—and everyone knows someone who knows someone who has been violently killed.

The violence is often random but never surprising: a young mother and her seven-year-old daughter shot to death in their home. A 90-year-old former school principal, the widow of the former chancellor of Southern University, and her adult daughter shot and stabbed to death in their home. A Vietnamese immigrant murdered in her grocery store. A middle-aged craftsman shot to death and burned in his home. A young, mentally impaired man shot as target practice in a housing project. A tourist bludgeoned to death near his business-district hotel.

Freedom failed.

There’s a movie I’ve been dying to see called Sinners and Saints about a white cop and his struggles during Hurricane Katrina. It’s my belief the producers of the film can’t find a studio to release it because the movie depicts some of the truth that DWLs and CWPs like swept under the rug.

Worse, our Department of Justice is actively trying to place more yes-men into police departments across the nation who will work to make a more BRA-friendly organization, undermining the safety of civilians in the process.

The United States of America will have another “Katrina” moment (it is my belief it will be based around EBT Cards/Food Stamps). This time, it won’t be an act of nature that shows us the truth; it will be an act that could have been avoided but one that BRA made inevitable

Democrats declare race war

Democrats declare race war

The left likes to pretend that everything is fine with race relations, and that the topic only comes up when some right-wing bigot mentions it.

Yet it’s the left who has waged race war against America for the last six decades. Starting with a post-WWII boom in racial equity legislation, the left — fresh on the heels of America’s victory over fascism — committed itself to initiatives to displace and then replace the white majority, culminating in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.

Now the left has made it official: they are the party of the holier-than-thou “intellectuals,” and the non-whites.

Everyone else can go take a hike. Especially white intellectuals who don’t agree with them.

If the races were reversed, we’d call it genocide. As it is, such talk is not permitted, Comrade Citizen. That is to say, the left is very committed to making this strategy work. At this point, they’re desperate. Every leftist initiative since WWII has failed, leaving behind a trail of social problems. The left needs to seize power soon or the great anti-leftist wake-up call may occur.

As a result, they’re taking it to the mat:

For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters. But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.

All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.

…In the United States, Teixeira noted, “the Republican Party has become the party of the white working class,” while in Europe, many working-class voters who had been the core of Social Democratic parties have moved over to far right parties, especially those with anti-immigration platforms.- The New York Times

The left and their lackeys in the media want to spin this as poor whites versus the smart people. While the media is not pro-leftist per se, it panders to any group that considers themselves to be victims, as such people consume more media out of a lack of any other purpose in life. Think lonely people with drab functionary jobs and no families, alone at home eating cookie dough and watching maudlin movies.

Nevermind that (a) a college education is no longer worth much because it’s High School II, a denatured certification program that with a few exceptions emphasizes memorization over the ability to think and (b) that many of the un-educated in our country are not stupid, but opted to avoid four more years of pointless education that’s little more than propaganda and memorizing steps to be another cog in the machine.

In the meantime, what they are endorsing is genocide — the replacement of one ethnic-racial group with another. Few dare speak up about this because to speak up is to invite someone else to call you un-educated or hateful, which in turn reduces your prospects in life. But it’s genocide the same.

As the heavy-browed species ventured farther and farther to cope with climate change, they increasingly mated with our own species, giving rise to mixed-species humans, researchers suggest.

Over generations of genetic mixing, the Neanderthal genome would have dissolved, absorbed into the Homo sapiens population, which was much larger.

“If you increase the mobility of the groups in the places where they live, you end up increasing the gene flow between the two different populations, until eventually one population disappears as a clearly defined group,” said study co-author C. Michael Barton, an archaeologist at Arizona State University’s School of Human Evolution and Social Change. – National Geographic

Why is this acceptable, and why do Democrats do it? By any other means, it’s a psychotic race war declared on America’s European-descended peoples. In practical analysis, it doesn’t create anything better, other than another mixed-race state where soon we will have lots of people of a uniform grey with no particular cultural characteristics.

The left declared race war on white America because white America, on the whole, does not buy into the leftist charade. The left wants power; it doesn’t care how it gets it. It doesn’t care if it helps the people it claims to help. It wants a mindless, soulless, mechanistic revolution so it can take power from those in charge. (Not unlike the common cold, a cancer or even ringworm.)

By separating out one group of white people, telling them that they are “educated,” and pitting them against the rest of their ethnic group, the Democrats hope to achieve approval for their open-minded policy of importing people who are guaranteed not to vote Republican.

Finally, the Republicans have responded:

In the wake of the 2008 election, conservative Republican strategists like Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and William Kristol warned that their party faced even worse defeats if it continued in its anti-immigrant posturing.

“An anti-Hispanic attitude is suicidal,” Rove wrote. The decision to “demagogue” the immigration issue was a “totally self-inflicted wound by House Republicans,” Kristol declared. “Beating up on immigrants,” Grover Norquist said, “loses you votes.”

Their advice was rejected. Republicans running for the House and the Senate defiantly calculated that they could win in 2010 with a surge of white voters, affirming the Republican role as the default party of white America. Initially, this approach appeared quixotic. A demographic tidal wave of African-American and Hispanic voters threatened to wash the Republicans out to sea.

But many Republican candidates — incumbents and challengers — did not budge. They not only held firm in their adamant opposition to immigration reform (despite its crucial importance to many Hispanic voters), but they also became even more hard-nosed. Former apostates on the issue, like Senator John McCain of Arizona, who had proudly backed immigration reform in 2004 and 2005, saw the light — in other words, read poll data on Republican voters — and moved to the right. – The New York Times

Both parties are coming down to the line here. If Democrats do not get power soon, they will be forced to confront the disaster created by liberalism. If Republicans do not gain control soon and change our immigration rules, they will soon be permanently demographically outvoted by the Democrats.

In the meantime, another disaster brews: the primary support for our welfare state is the white voter. They’re getting squeezed, because the ratio of non-whites to whites is increasing, according to this article, and it means possible ethnic conflict ahead.

Ethnic minorities are expected to be a majority of the U.S. population by 2042, and that big demographic change will eventually affect Social Security as well — if a bit further down the road. By around 2070 or so, Social Security itself will reflect the new “minority majority” population, predicts Maya Rockeymoore, president and CEO of Global Policy Solutions, which put together a new report on the issue with a coalition of left-leaning policy and minority advocacy groups. The report points out that minority Americans tend to rely more heavily on Social Security than white Americans, given the disparities in wealth and income. – The Washington Post

The pundits told us that it was suicidal for Republicans to not endorse the Hispanic and Black vote and aggressively pursue it. As it turns out, those pundits were wrong.

Pundits also tell us that there is no peaceful means of ethnic separation, and that if we do not support the minority vote, they may riot and murder us in our beds. As it turns out, that isn’t true either — when the subsidies go away, everyone leaves:

Unemployment rates have fallen in Alabama amid new legal pressure on companies to comply with a popular immigration reform law.

September was the first full month that the reform was in force, and the unemployment rate fell from 9.8 percent in September to 9.3 percent in October, according to a Nov. 18 report from the state government. – Daily Caller

Think about this practically: Mexican people come here to feed their families. When it’s easier to earn a living in Mexico, they stop coming and the ones that are here go away.

I have a suggestion for our response to the Democrats’ declared race war on white America: repeal all anti-discrimination legislation. Let people hire, rent to, sell to and socialize with whoever they want.

Then, replace our welfare state with a workfare program like we had in the 1930s under FDR. They’re not perfect, but they’re better than welfare, which smashes families.

Finally, let’s talk reparations for slavery — with repatriation. No ethnic group is happy without self-rule. It’s time for us to end the ongoing racial drama in which Democrats use race as a weapon, and Republicans are afraid to react, and everyone loses as a result.

Still, she argued that even though America has “gotten to a place [where] race is not the limiting factor that it once was,” she said that “we’re never going to erase race as a factor in American life.”

“It is a birth defect with which this country was born out of slavery; we’re never really going to be race blind,” she said.

She pointed to the confluence of race and poverty as a particularly troubling constraint for overcoming inequality, and wondered if that problem isn’t becoming even more exacerbated in recent years. – The Root

Rice makes a good point: race will never go away. Someone will always be the victim, and someone else the giver, and they’ll resent each other as they do now. Weren’t we promised that racial problems would go away in the 1960s, if we just passed some liberal reforms? (Note: also in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.)

Even if we breed ourselves into a uniform grey color, some baby will be born that is lighter than others. Some geographic area will be seen as more privileged. And so it goes, on and on, south of Heaven.

Before the Democrats unleash another round of ethnic warfare upon America, let’s make up our mind about the peaceful and yet effective solution to this problem. End the race warfare; end multiculturalism.


The Minority Strategy

The Minority Strategy

The central irony of “The Majority Strategy” (what VDARE calls “The Sailer Strategy” and what could be called “The Francis Strategy“) is that the GOP has been winning elections by means of it for years, while denouncing it and even consciously trying to undermine it. In other words, the GOP is the White People’s Party, whether it likes it or not.  And it will win in its current form so long as America’s historic Majority believes (corectly or not) that the Party stands for its interests.

The Democrats also have a winning forumla; it’s called “The Minority Strategy.” Quite unlike the Republicans, the Democrats are willing to talk about their Strategy.

The Future of the Obama Coalition

New York Times
By Thomas B. Edsel
November 27, 2011

For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters. But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.

All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.

The implication of an explicit Minority Strategy and implicit, unspeakable Majority Strategy is that no White ruling coalition will  be allowed to exist in these United States.