Diagramming a White America
By john – Posted on 24 January 2010
We can easily extrapolate from EAU’s basic positions and moderate tone what a nation under the authority of a white advocacy government might actually look like. Clearly, ending the integration and destruction of the founding race would have to be a top priority since our declining numbers are now a matter of public record. Following an undetermined period of cultural change implemented by an influential minority of race-conscious advocates; corruption of established law by those whose aims deviate from that law would result in public abhorrence and subsequent degradation to the offender.
Except for the discovery of an imminent threat to our safety as a people, invading a sovereign nation would be a last resort. Foreign wars would be pointless since a white nationalist government’s primary concern would be domestic in nature.
While the pursuit of wealth would be encouraged; those whose actions are to the detriment of everyone else will have to be effectively neutralized by evenhanded law & the proper re- introduction of ethics; an ethics plan based not on class or creed, but instead on moral character and personal achievement.
And finally, the traditional family unit would be the cornerstone upon which all else was derived.
Immigration: Because a white nationalist government supports the self-determination and preservation of all races and peoples, one of the first things the government would do is hermetically seal its borders. Since the preservation of genes and land is undoubtedly a priority, the border between the United States, Mexico and Canada would be fortified with manpower and technology to prevent further incursions. While turning away the oncoming interlopers, inwardly the administration would empty the jails and prisons of non-white criminals, and humanely deport them.
To supplement this action a public campaign would be implemented, encouraging the rest to return to their homelands, to make the necessary improvements they want therein. A WN USA would also make it as uncomfortable as possible in terms of employment and public assistance for them to continue to remain. (Without question however there would be exceptions based on individual merit, not necessarily applied exclusively to Latinos, especially with regard to long established ties and history.)
Nevertheless once all humane removal was accomplished the administration would then endeavor to collect by whatever means necessary– from the government of Mexico and the southern hemisphere — all of the billions of dollars the European American taxpayer lost by subsidizing the public assistance, health care and education during their people’s stay.
Finally, we would negotiate among ourselves a return to pre-1965 immigration laws when nearly all immigration was from Europe.
This is not to say, however, that foreigners would never be allowed to temporarily enter and work in the United States. But –they would only be admitted according to their potential of contributing to the host nation’s general progress. Immigration officials would first guarantee that immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their provisions and for their dependents. Foreigners WILL be barred from the country if their presence upsets the stability of the national demographics, or when they are considered negative to economic or national interests, when they do not act like good citizens in their own country, or when they have broken American laws, and when they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.
In fact a WN USA will have the option of suspending or outright prohibiting the admission of foreigners when it determines it to be in the national interest. Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, will most definitely be imprisoned.
Economy: Since our nation was founded on values coupling personal endeavor with joint co-operation, European Americans have demonstrated over the years that we all are better off when we adhere to fundamental standards of social justice and free enterprise. This is to say the federal government would adhere to the Tenth Amendment as originally intended by allowing each state’s citizens to create and maintain the kind of economy only the best and brightest can create, including international cordial trade policies with all other nations.
The implication of course is those that facilitated NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, the Federal Reserve and the IRS would have much to answer for. Consequently those organizations, which do not have our people’s best economic interests at heart, would be gone overnight.
The best tax system to replace the punishing graduated tax code European Americans are now forced to endure through “voluntary compliance” would be the Fair Tax, or something akin to it, ensuring people keep all of what they earn while funding the government on the retail side. “Dog-eat-dog” global economics that has resulted in off shoring, outsourcing, the destruction of unions, and the gutting of the US economy would be outlawed. Incentives such as tax breaks for corporations to participate would be generous.
A WN USA would therefore promote economic nationalism, which places the economy at the service of the nation; believing that the welfare of our people should supplant all other things, including the capacity of multinational corporations to abuse or disregard our people for uninhibited profit margins. Again as far as international trade is concerned, the United States would trade freely with anyone who wishes to do business, provided it doesn’t minimize or harm our own manufacturing base.
Environment: Corporate interests more often than not damage the natural environment. This egregious practice would come to an immediate halt and remain stringently enforced. An over-reliance on foreign oil, which has harmed our foreign policy, would be replaced with environmentally “friendly” drilling and the exploration of our own oil, natural gas and the appropriation of technology that further minimizes the byproducts of using coal. A WN USA would work to emulate France, which has more nuclear reactors than any other nation on earth, building as many of its own safe and reliable nuclear reactors as possible to power the economy; thus keeping the charge of use affordable.
A white nationalist government would do what was possible to stabilize man’s relationship with the natural world. For example, mass public relations programs encouraging more telecommuting to keep as many vehicles as possible off the roads; the development of better mass transit by the private sector, the healthy utilization of unused (reclaimed) “brown fields” such as for orchards and root crops; allowing people to plant and raise what they wished to not only feed their families but financially support themselves and their local economies.
Heavier penalties than we see today would be imposed upon those whose careless ambivalence about the natural environment has claimed untold injury to the land, air and water; though regulations would be simplified so anyone would understand them. Likewise, a white nationalist government, which values the diversity of all races, would consequently lobby strenuously for the ethical treatment of domestic and wild animals; the preservation of scarce and vulnerable species, and the conservation of their diversity.
Freedom: Having examined the greatest successes of European peoples; we believe that our greatest growth and achievements (Greece, Rome and the U.S. up until the 1930’s) have always been under Republican rather than Socialist forms of government. So instead of turning to dictatorship, a white nationalist government turns to Thomas Jefferson. In essence, Jefferson conceived of a purely European-derived nation in which individuals (bound to the community’s wellbeing through morality) had wide latitude of action; while government could not be misused to benefit some people at the expense of others because its sphere of action was limited. (Obviously, the vision of Jefferson, Washington, Madison and Jay was perverted; almost from the very start, by a radical known as Alexander Hamilton.)
Furthermore, like any government structure, Republics must have limitations of scale, and may only achieve their desired outcomes with a majority European population as it was intended.
Clearly, some fine-tuning of this concept is required to make it workable. That fine-tuning in the ongoing work of the European New Right will be critically considered. However an American white nationalist political philosophy lies in a perfection of the U.S. Constitution which facilitates the defense and improvement of our folk. Additionally an honest re-assessment of the original Bill of Rights would include a zealous public undertaking at all stages of education and public discourse.
A white nationalist government would in essence be religion neutral and people would be free to worship, or not worship, as they wished.
In addition, traditional, hard-won freedoms—especially freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms – would be relentlessly protected. No citizen would fear an incursion on his home by agents of the state, or threatened with loss of livelihood, for simply questioning a government policy.
The vast spying capabilities of a white nationalist government would not undermine the people’s peace of mind, but would only be utilized after the most scrutinizing investigation.
Political correctness on college campuses would be a thing of the past, a relic of dark days, through a renewed effort of inculcating in our young people the learning of real history in an inspiring truthful context.
Moreover, a white nationalist government would call for a return to the vision of its European Founding Fathers who valued the rights of our people to dissent and subsist according to their natural inclinations.
Race: Thomas Jefferson warned us that, while the African slaves would have to be freed, that once emancipation had occurred they would need their own country separate from ours if we expected to be equally free. “Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people [blacks] are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” –Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:72
Because of the so-called “civil rights” movement an ever increasing number of white Americans are beginning to see that it was only they who were supposed to give up any sense of racial solidarity. However, a white nationalist government would support self-determination for all races and peoples domestically and around the world. It would also allow European Americans to decide where they wish to live and enforce a right to decide how they will live, provided their choice does not cause an undue financial or social burden on the rest.
Nevertheless, perceiving that a wholly white America is not realistic for the foreseeable future, in certain regions a domestic geographic separation would be necessary for the preservation of all unique cultures and ethnicities; allowing the natural proclivities of every race to live among their own kind provided these regions were beneficial to the European American nation as a whole.
While some will be repulsed at such a proposal, consider that over the past forty years, our current form of government and dozens of private organizations have tried to put things right in a variety of ways — generous scholarship programs, head start, affirmative action, early intervention and the investment of untold trillions of dollars. Yet, after all of this effort, the living conditions of the average black child are actually worse than they were 40 years ago.
Back in 1960, one-fifth of black children were born out of wedlock; whereas today, it is more than half. There can be no more telling example of a policy that not merely fails to achieve its stated objectives, but makes matters materially worse, and at a terrible cost in terms of human misery. Which is to say living under an ostentatiously apartheid system that regarded them as less-than-human, where blacks had their own schools, their own colleges, their own churches, their own social structures and so forth – blacks had stronger marriages, lower crime and in many cases higher academic achievement than they do today.
African-Americans didn’t somehow become less intelligent today than they were 80 years ago and IQ scores are not the explanation. European-Americans didn’t somehow become more “racist” than we were 80 years ago — if anything, they have become less “racist.” The major negative change that occurred to blacks was integrating them into white culture under the faulty auspices of ‘democracy.’
Therefore, the quest for the concept of racial equality is by default a search for the lowest common denominator as demonstrated today. When European Americans’ perceptions are hindered by alien or caustic influences, especially from a media whose sole aim is to promote shallowness, political correctness and consumption, (a media that would be wholly reigned in without compunction under a white nationalist government), the pursuit of equality is, in reality, the destruction of quality.
A white nationalist government’s primary concern then would be what most benefits European Americans as a people, again with the preservation of genes and land undoubtedly being in everyone’s best interest. By acknowledging true diversity, which can only be preserved by way of segregation, all residents will be able to celebrate not only their own improvement but their rising numbers, intra-personal group influence, and undreamed of possibilities for the future.
War: Rather than sending off our best and brightest to fight and die for nationally unfavorable corporate commercial and government entities, a white nationalist America would above all else seek peaceful co-existence with other nations, so long as they did not threaten the organic destiny of our people.
Conclusion: Our people’s enemies
Far and wide the Marxist elite continue to educate our children that to defend our genetic and historical legacy is the very depiction of evil; while assisting in the long term goals of non-white segments of society and the world at large is righteous and good. The end result will be not only the measured genocide of European derived people but the genocide of all races through war, miscegenation and loss of identity. A white nationalist government flatly rejects these outcomes.
Therefore if current political and social trends persist it will become unavoidable, and therefore necessary to conclude that what European Americans’ enemies refer to as a “haters” and “bigots” is going to be needed to prevent this kind of upheaval and loss, even potential violence European America’s enemies themselves have candidly promoted for decades.
NOTE CONCERNING THE DEFINITION OF “WHITE” AND “WHITE NATIONALIST”
A White person is a human being of solely native European ancestry; or a human being who, if they have non-European antecedents, is nonetheless of a physical and genetic makeup that is within the range typical of people of solely European ancestry; or, the child of two Whites.A White Nationalist is a White person who is, by their actions and their voluntary public declaration, politically committed to the welfare of Whites, and to their continuing survival as a distinct and reproductively isolated group of human beings.
Diversity Causes Social Withdrawal
By john – Posted on 16 January 2010
Thomas Jefferson warned us that, while the African slaves would need to be freed, that once emancipation had occurred they would need their own country separate from ours if we expected to be equally free.
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people [blacks] are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” –Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:72
Likewise, John Jay understood that homogeneity rather than diversity was both a blessing and a prerequisite for social cohesion:
“I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.” — John Jay, Federalist #2
More than 200 years later, along comes Harvard Professor Robert Putnam and notes: “Rather, inhabitants of diverse communities tend to withdraw from collective life, to distrust their neighbours regardless of the colour of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more, but have less faith that they can make a difference.”(1)
Naturally, being a liberal Harvard Professor and because these facts contradict both the Professor’s preconceived notions and the conclusions that diversity advocates demand, Putnam delayed publishing these findings until he could invent some way to positive spin on them, stating that releasing the facts without a positive spin would be “irresponsible.”(2)
His positive spin, based strictly on invalid apples to oranges comparisons, is that diversity is good in the long run. He bases this conclusion, naturally, on historical immigration of people who were of slightly different ethnicities, but of the same anthropological race. He has absolutely NO positive data to indicate that multiracial diversity carries ANY long term benefits.
So skip the spin and concentrate on the facts. Diversity doesn’t build community, it destroys it. It makes people feel isolated and to withdraw from community life in every way that matters. Thus diverse communities are WEAK communities.
Of course, we didn’t have to tune in to Professor Putnam to know this — the evidence is clear every day to anyone who has eyes.
(1) Putnam, Robert (2007) Quoted by Philip Johnston 6/19/2007 in the Telegraph U.K.
(2) Lloyd, John, Financial Times, October 8, 2006
The EAU View of Race
By john – Posted on 16 January 2010
The subject of race, at its most basic level, shouldn’t even be controversial, because it is a simple fact of reality. Race exists, and is far more than a social construct, and it furthermore goes far deeper than superficial differences in skin color. In fact, skin color is the least (and among the least important differences) between races.
The reality of race is attested to at the most basic levels by forensic anthropology. Dr. George Gill is Professor of anthropology at the University of Colorado, and an expert in forensic anthropology. That is, he is able to distinguish the race of an individual by looking at that person’s bones alone. Dr. Gill states the matter plainly:
“The “reality of race” therefore depends more on the definition of reality than on the definition of race. If we choose to accept the system of racial taxonomy that physical anthropologists have traditionally established—major races: black, white, etc.—then one can classify human skeletons within it just as well as one can living humans. The bony traits of the nose, mouth, femur, and cranium are just as revealing to a good osteologist as skin color, hair form, nose form, and lips to the perceptive observer of living humanity. I have been able to prove to myself over the years, in actual legal cases, that I am more accurate at assessing race from skeletal remains than from looking at living people standing before me. So those of us in forensic anthropology know that the skeleton reflects race, whether “real” or not, just as well if not better than superficial soft tissue does. The idea that race is “only skin deep” is simply not true, as any experienced forensic anthropologist will affirm.”(1)
The professor goes on to note:
“For the time being at least, the people in “race denial” are in “reality denial” as well. … Therefore, they have pushed the politically correct agenda that human races are not biologically real, no matter what the evidence. Consequently, at the beginning of the 21st century, even as a majority of biological anthropologists favor the reality of the race perspective, not one introductory textbook of physical anthropology even presents that perspective as a possibility. In a case as flagrant as this, we are not dealing with science but rather with blatant, politically motivated censorship.”(1)
It just so happens that there are a huge number of credible sources that I could cite on this topic that demonstrate the reality of race and racial differences beyond any reasonable doubt. There are unfortunately people who, for reasons of philosophy, religion or politics, have a vested interest in deluding themselves into believing that race isn’t real. And I’ll never convince such folks anyway. But for those of you listening who have an open mind, and I suspect that is most of you, listen on!
The fact that a large number of traits are different between the various races is clearly demonstrated by the Ancestry By DNA test available from DNA Print Genomics. This test will tell you, plus or minus three percent by analyzing just 175 genetic markers, the percentage of your ancestry that is Caucasian, African, Asian or Native American – the classic races of physical anthropology.(2)
A little bit of logic will tell you that if racial admixtures as small as 3% are genetically detectable, and that if a forensic anthropologist can determine your race just by looking at your bones, race is an absolute, scientifically provable, physical reality. Way too many people base their interpretations of reality on their political or religious inclinations. In other words, they selectively ignore facts when doing so is convenient. By doing this, they end up making decisions on the basis of LIES – and thus the results of their decisions either accomplish great evil, or blow up in their faces. Such examples would include burning witches at the stake all across Europe, forcing Galileo to recant his heliocentric solar system model to avoid death, and the ridiculous notions of race being a mere “social construct” that get shoved down our collective throats in the modern era.
European Americans United isn’t like all of the politically-oriented groups of which you are aware. Rather than starting out with a political system as a preconceived notion and seeking to justify it by selectively reporting only the information that supports our views and suppressing or distorting the rest; we instead start at the level of provable factual reality and derive our political views from that.
This stands in stark contrast to far too many ethnic interest groups that celebrate their own unique identity, while conspiring with fellow-travelers in government, media and academia to deny European-Americans that very same expression.
So the first big idea you need to take away from this is that race exists, and it exists as non-superficial differences between major human populations at a genetic and inheritable level.
The acknowledgment of the factual reality of race and thus the existence of racial differences is a major step forward in understanding, and can serve as a springboard to the development more successful social policies that actually achieve their stated purpose.
Likewise, the denial of the reality of race and racial differences can be fatal. Dr. Sally Satel, a psychiatrist, made note of a number of racial differences in diseases, response to treatment, and reaction to medication in a 2002 article in the New York Times. She stated quite plainly:
“In practicing medicine, I am not colorblind. I always take note of my patient’s race. So do many of my colleagues. We do it because certain diseases and treatment responses cluster by ethnicity. Recognizing these patterns can help us diagnose disease more efficiently and prescribe medications more effectively.”(3)
Dr. Satel goes on to describe numerous racially-based differences in medication response including heart failure drugs like enalapril that work better for whites than for blacks, the lower doses of anti-depressants required for blacks as compared to whites and Asians, and the fact that Asians are more prone to narcotic-induced apnea and so require lower doses during surgery than whites or blacks. In fact, there is now a new drug on the market called BiDil for controlling high blood pressure in blacks specifically. It works well for blacks, but does nothing for whites at all.
Some extremely unenlightened individuals who have their heads in the sand regarding race may be shocked to learn that doctors routinely evaluate the race of a patient as an important factor in diagnosing and treating disease. But taking this important fact of reality into account can save a life.
Given this situation, the recent maltreatment of Nobel laureate Dr. James Watson is sickening. Dr. Watson, who won the Nobel prize for the discovery of DNA, and to whom all of mankind owes an incalculable debt of gratitude, was relieved of his duties – suspended from his job last week – for nothing more than acknowledging the factual reality of racial differences. But understanding those realities is essential for making realistic plans whose outcomes will be predictable.
So a corollary to my first point is that recognition of the factual reality of race is not automatically bad or evil in any way, and can, in practice, do a lot of good.
This brings me to another important point. Facts are simply that: facts. In and of itself a fact has no moral content or implications. The combination glycerin and nitric acid under certain conditions makes nitroglycerin. That’s a fact of reality. Nitroglycerin can be used to build highways over and through mountains, as a vasodilator to treat angina, or as the basis of a bomb that kills innocent children. The fact of nitroglycerin itself has no moral content. It is the way that fact is USED that provides the moral content.
So, as people with a sound ethical system, EAU members are constrained both to recognize the facts of reality without equivocation but also to use that factual reality in a fashion that upholds our highest ideals.
Unfortunately, the reality of racial differences can also lead some people to form comparisons in which some races are deemed to be “superior” or “inferior” to others, thus leading to subjugation and even the denial of the basic humanity of other races. This is unfortunate, because as Dr. J. Philippe Rushton (a staunch supporter of the reality of racial differences) has stated:
“The full range of behaviors, good and bad, is found in every group. No group has a monopoly on virtue or vice, wisdom or folly, capacity or incapacity.”(4)
Professor Rushton is merely pointing out something that most of us who are widely experienced in the world know from first-hand experience: white folks hold no monopoly on virtue, and there are many wonderful and decent non-white people on this earth. That’s a simple fact of reality as well, and it needs to be held, understood and acknowledged. Remember: social and political ideas that are based upon lies will ultimately fail.
Pay attention to this, because it is important. Attempts to serve the best interests of our People will not attract conscientious members of our Folk in sufficient numbers by vilifying other groups, denying their basic humanity or other such tactics. Our People are both fair-minded and intelligent. They have served in the Army with honorable black men. They have learned martial arts from exemplary Asians. They have put their lives in the hands of Jewish doctors and walked away whole. The evidence of their own eyes tells them that attempts to blanket-vilify an entire race or group of people are dishonest.
So the second big idea you need to take away from this … is that acknowledgment of the reality of race and racial differences does not, and ought not, ipso facto lead to ideas of racial supremacism and the evils attendant thereunto. The success of our endeavor to preserve and uplift our own People is predicated upon our faithful adherence to reality; not just the reality of race and racial differences, but the reality of common humanity.
Speaking of racial differences, it is important to understand the big picture of why it is imperative that these differences be preserved.
EAU is not a theological organization, and we take no position on religious matters except insofar as they may bear upon the achievement of our stated objectives. So when I speak of Nature with a capital “N” I am speaking of a Life force within the universe that runs counter to the force of entropy. If you are religious, you might equate this force with a deity; and if you did so you’d lose nothing in translation. I simply use the terms Nature and Life Force as a way of expressing the idea in a way that is universally applicable and won’t divide our Folk along religious lines.
Entropy, to refresh your memory, is a thermodynamic cosmological term describing the tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity. This is also known as heat death. We’ll come back to the concept of uniformity as it relates to entropy later. The point is that the natural tendency of all matter in the universe is to ultimately assume a simple, non-complex state with an energy of near-zero.
Life, and the evolution of life as we know it, has constantly increased in complexity. This force of life runs contrary to entropy; and it is for this reason that so many people see it as miraculous. Nature doesn’t put all of its eggs in one basket. Rather, it ceaselessly diversifies its portfolio of organisms from the simplest prions and viruses to trees and human beings. All of these organisms work together in a complex and inter-related symbiotic synergy.
The diversity of life is important. That is why you will find at least six genetically distinct variations of squirrels in North America alone. These variations are all capable of interbreeding, but even in cases where their territories overlap, they won’t freely choose to do so unless forced in some way. Obviously, these different sorts of squirrels have different physical characteristics, but they also have different behavioral tendencies. Some are diurnal, while others are nocturnal. Most are omnivores, but some are actually predators that eat other small vertebrates. Even with squirrels, race is more than skin deep.
Why does Nature diversify its portfolio? It’s hard to say without positing some sort of intelligent design. But what we can definitely say is that this diversity is responsible for the survival of life on earth, so it is incredibly fortuitous. At many times since the development of life, our planet has experienced major catastrophes that nearly destroyed the more complex life forms inhabiting our biosphere. As Philippe Claeys has described: ” … the solar system is a violent environment and … collisions taking place in the asteroid belt can have major repercussions for the evolution of life on Earth.”(5)
The dinosaurs existed from 230 million years ago to around 65 million years ago. Then, an extinction event occurred. The nature of this event is debated, and may have actually been a number of near simultaneous events that included massive volcanic eruptions that poisoned the atmosphere, the blast from a large meteor striking the Yucatan peninsula, and comet showers. The point, though is that Nature saw fit to diversify, and because of that certain dinosaurs survived to become the birds that exist today; and certain small mammals survived to become today’s humans.
Such massive extinction events occur fairly regularly. It is widely believed that sometime between 60,000 and 100,000 years ago, a catastrophic event wiped out most human populations, leaving us only 15,000 breeding pairs.(6)
Now let’s detail some very interesting differences between the races. Africans are 55% more vulnerable to lung cancer than Caucasians; and Caucasians are twice as vulnerable to lung cancer as Asians.(7) If the planet experiences massive volcanic activity with accompanying air pollution, which it certainly could at any time, it would probably be wise to have some Asians around.
Certain populations, predominantly though not exclusively people of African ancestry, are prone to a metabolic disorder known as favism. Favism manifests mainly in males because it is conveyed by an X-linked gene. It causes a form of anemia when fava beans are eaten, and during other sorts of oxidative stress. But this particular disorder also conveys protection against the most deadly form of malaria. If global warming expands the range of malaria-carrying mosquitoes, it will be good to have some Africans around.
The potential threat posed by emerging viruses has been well-publicized; and there are currently as many as 47 million people infected with the deadly and incurable Human Immunodeficiency Virus worldwide. More than 25 million people have died from AIDS since 1981. Dr. Robin Kimmell has something to say about this that you may find very interesting:
“Many people who are resistant to HIV have a mutation in the CCR5 gene called CCR5-delta32. The CCR5-delta32 mutation results in a smaller protein that isn’t on the outside of the cell anymore. Most forms of HIV cannot infect cells if there is no CCR5 on the surface. People with two copies of the CCR5 delta32 gene (inherited from both parents) are virtually immune to HIV infection. This occurs in about 1% of Caucasian people. One copy of CCR5-delta32 seems to give some protection against infection, and makes the disease less severe if infection occurs. This is more common, it is found in up to 20% of Caucasians.”(8)
Dr. Kimmell goes on to describe the probable origin of this very useful gene:
“Why is the CCR5-delta32 mutation so frequent in Northern Europe? It is possible that this gene provided resistance to previous epidemics. If true, people with CCR5-delta32 mutation would have been more likely to survive and pass it down to their offspring. At the same time, there is a relative decreased survival of people with normal CCR5. Two different deadly diseases were widespread in Europe when this mutation is believed to have arisen. Resistance to bubonic plague (also called the Black Death) might have influenced CCR5-delta32 distribution. Recent findings name smallpox immunity as another strong possibility. Smallpox affects younger people than bubonic plague, which has a more potent effect on which genes get passed down to offspring. Also, the type of virus that causes smallpox uses receptors such as CCR5 and CXCR4 to enter cells. As you can see, the genes of both people and the bugs that infect us change through evolution, though at very different rates.”(9)
Are you starting to see a pattern here? I certainly hope so. As the result of tens of thousands of years of differentiated evolution, Nature has bequeathed beautiful, unique and important gifts, different gifts, to every race and variety of human being. We are just beginning to scratch the surface of these marvelous wonders, any one of which could make the difference in mankind’s survival in the future.
But not only that, the unique genetics of Europeans could help us discover treatments for HIV that will save the lives of Africans dying from AIDS. The unique genetics of Africans could help us discover treatments for malaria that could save the lives of Europeans in the future. The possibilities are endless.
Yes, the possibilities are endless; but those possibilities can only exist so long as the forces of Dissolution and Chaos do not succeed in their evil and genocidal plan to amalgamate the wonderful diversity of humanity into a medium-tan “United Nations Man” in their rapacious lust for power and all-consuming greed to unjustly expropriate the labor of others. They want an alienated unit of production and consumption with no history, no culture, and no future beyond created consumerist desires. A creature with no ancestry that can serve as a source of pride or a well of patriotism that could lead him to stand against his evil overlords. The medium-tan United Nations Man is NOT forward progress in the evolution of Life, but rather the surrender to entropy in the devolution to inert and homogenized matter. It is the opposite of life: it is DEATH.
Genocide is evil — uniquely evil — because of all the crimes that can possibly be committed, it is the ONLY crime that carries with it the very real potential of ending ALL human life. Genocide can take place through direct killing, to be sure, but can also take place through intermarriage. The disappearance of an entire race of humanity, whether a little at a time or all at once, is still the same thing. And the extinction of even ONE race of humanity could very likely mean the ultimate extinction of ALL of humanity. Chew on that for a minute.
So the third big idea I want you to understand is that the preservation of human biodiversity is incredibly important; and that genocide — whether through killing, loss of living space, disincentives for having children or intermarriage — is a unique evil that cannot be permitted against ANY human population. Even our own.
Now, I would like to speak about culture, and by extension, the bane of so-called “multiculturalism.”
Every unique human population on earth has developed its own culture. A culture can be defined as a set of rules for behavior; but also encompasses a world-view in the form of art, religious development, social interactions and so forth. Some cultures value learning, while others value strength. Some cultures value conformity, while others value individualism. Some cultures value ethnocentrism, while others value universalism. The list of differences goes on and on. The point is that the rules of a culture reward certain behaviors with increased reproductive opportunities while penalizing other behaviors with a corresponding decrease of opportunity. As a result, over time, a given People will work symbiotically with its culture to emphasize and enhance its strengths while minimizing its weaknesses. Therefore, by definition, a culture will be most friendly and most accessible to the descendants of the founders of that culture.
An important thing to understand, therefore, is that the culture that was developed by a People nurtures that People. As a result, disrupting or replacing that culture can have the unintended (or intended) result of genocide. It can also have the result of turning non-native Peoples who attempt to assimilate into a culture into a permanent underclass.
Let me give you an example that will appear rather controversial at first blush, but will make perfect sense once you’ve thought about it a little.
African-Americans have, unfortunately, constituted a permanent underclass in this country for hundreds of years. Certainly, they were brought here in bondage and held in involuntary servitude for hundreds of years as well. After that servitude was ended, they were still subjected to apartheid and were not accorded full status as citizens until forty years ago. Over the past forty years, our government and dozens of private organizations have tried to put things right in a variety of ways — generous scholarship programs, head start, affirmative action, early intervention and the investment of untold trillions of dollars. Yet, after all of this effort, the living conditions of the average black child are actually worse than they were 40 years ago. Back in 1960, one-fifth of black children were born out of wedlock; whereas today, it is more than half. There can be no more telling example of a policy that not merely fails to achieve its stated objectives, but makes matters materially worse, and at a terrible cost in terms of human misery.
There are huge achievement gaps between African-Americans and European-Americans in every measurable respect: incarceration rates, standardized testing, children without fathers and everything else. Many well-intended people attempt to explain these gaps; yet they all fall short. Some experts, in cases where no racism can be found, blame the achievement gap on something called “systemic racism,” which is just a catch-all category for things they can’t explain while maintaining their delusions about race. Other experts, like J. Philippe Rushton, explain that racial differences in IQ are at fault. While that may well be a contributing factor, the simple fact is that (according to Professor Rushton), half of all American blacks have IQs over 85, and half of all whites have IQs under 100; so there is enough of an overlap between the two groups in this arena that IQ simply doesn’t explain the phenomenon, particularly in the area of incarceration and crime rates.
Let ME explain the gap. Let’s go back to what culture does: it holds and nurtures the people who developed it, emphasizing their strengths and compensating for their weaknesses. When the Africans were brought to this continent in chains, they were not only stripped of their human dignity, but their culture. Stripped of their culture, even after being freed of their shackles, they are still immersed in a culture that co-evolved with Europeans rather than Africans; and as a result the culture is not merely unsuitable for most people of African ancestry, but downright poisonous.
And THAT is why African-Americans are doing worse in practically every category AFTER the races were integrated than they were before. Think about that a second. Living under an ostentatiously apartheid system that regarded them as less-than-human, where blacks had their own schools, their own colleges, their own churches, their own social structures and so forth – blacks had stronger marriages, lower crime and in many cases higher academic achievement than they do today. African-Americans didn’t somehow become less intelligent today than they were 80 years ago. IQ scores are not the explanation. European-Americans didn’t somehow become more “racist” than we were 80 years ago — if anything, we have become way less racist. The major change that occurred was INTEGRATING blacks into white culture. It was just like handing Superman a rod of kryptonite.
By all means, a certain percentage of black folks are able to thrive in a white culture; just as a certain percentage of white folks are able to thrive in a black culture. But these folks are the exceptions rather than the rule. As a rule, integrating the two races has ultimately harmed generations of innocent children who were the victims of a social experiment based upon the flawed Marxist premise of human identicalness.
So the fourth idea I want you to see, is that culture is extremely important. The cultures of various Peoples must be preserved and allowed to develop and evolve naturally; and it is wrong to attempt to integrate alien races into a culture. No matter how decent and honorable your intentions in doing so, you will almost always end up doing more harm than good either to the new People you are attempting to integrate, or to the original People of that culture.
There is a certain trait in Europeans that has historically caused us to believe in the superiority and desirability of our own cultures, inventions and ideas. By all means, like all Peoples, we should have a certain pride in our achievements. But what we have lacked historically is the objectivity to understand that while our cultures and cultural artifacts may be perfectly suitable for ourselves, they may not be equally beneficial for other Peoples; any more than the cultures of alien races would be beneficial to us. As a result, we have spread our cultures and artifacts worldwide, and seldom to the benefit of the autochthonous people we encountered.
So, from this springboard, let’s put the premises of multiculturalism under our microscope.
As we have already discussed, the various human races have different, unique, and valuable traits that merit preservation. While they are all equally human and thus entitled to equal respect and even equal treatment under law, it is important to distinguish between the concept of legal or political equality and identicalness.
Legal and political equality stem from the idea that all people should be accorded the same rights under our Constitution, and should receive equal punishments when convicted of the same crimes. For European-Americans, who have a very universalist mindset that balks at injustice, this is a no-brainer and, in fact, the only situation tolerable to most of our Folk. Nevertheless, various intellectual movements that did NOT have the best interests of our people at heart sought to exploit the love that our Folk has of fairness and justice in order to confound the idea of equality with that of identicalness.(10)
As we have previously discussed, the races of man are far from identical, and furthermore ought not be integrated into the same culture, or exist under the same government. Thomas Jefferson, who abhorred the institution of slavery, saw things much the same way. He wrote of Africans thusly:
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.”(11)
But there is more than that. A multiracial environment, in and of itself, destroys the natural cohesion, trust and civic duty felt by members of the community. As Jonathan Tilove reported in July: “New studies confirm earlier evidence that, at least in the short- to mid-term, diversity weakens civic ties, fostering mutual mistrust and detachment.”(12) The reporter goes on to describe the Mosaic study and a new study by Harvard Professor Robert Putnam:
“The Mosaic work is complemented by a massive national study by Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam, who reports that in the face of large-scale immigration, many Americans are overwhelmed by diversity. Putnam calls it “socio-psychological system overload.” With stunning regularity, he found Americans in more diverse locales tending to “hunker down and pull in like a turtle,” suspicious not just of the new or different, but of everybody. “They don’t trust their neighbors or shop clerks, they are not as involved in the community,” Putnam said. “The only two things that go up as diversity rises are protest marches and TV watching.”(13)
Certainly, I shouldn’t have to tell you that this sort of situation is not a recipe for a strong society. It demonstrates clear social harm to people of ALL races. Professor J. Philippe Rushton verifies this same phenomenon from a different angle when he states:
“Charitable donations are typically made in greater quantities within ethnic groups than between them and social psychological studies have documented that people are more likely to help members of their own race or country than members of other races or foreigners. The reason people give preferential treatment to genetically similar others is both simple and profound: they thereby replicate their genes more effectively.”(14)
Stop and think about this for a moment, and especially consider the implications of racial diversity, versus racial homogeneity, and the need for the massive welfare state that is sucking us so dry we can hardly afford to have children. MAYBE some members of SOME races benefit economically from multi-racialism on a short-term basis. But in the long run, the glue of social cohesion is destroyed, and that doesn’t help anyone of any race. The life of a People cannot simply be measured by the economic benefits that accrue to its members. Rather, it must be also seen within vibrant and mutually beneficial social interactions where people take an active role in their culture. Multiculturalism puts an end to this by isolating people from each other – even people of the same group — and replacing REAL culture with the artificial culture of television and the opiates of consumerism and workaholism. Clearly, as a whole, multiculturalism is bad for everyone of every race.
But there are other benefits to the racial homogeneity intended by the founding fathers. For example, racial homogeneity promotes smoother cooperation, as Professor Kevin MacDonald writes:
“Genetic similarity theory extends beyond kin recognition by proposing mechanisms that assess phenotypic similarity as a marker for genetic similarity. These proposed mechanisms would then promote positive attitudes, greater cooperation, and a lower threshold for altruism for similar others. There is indeed considerable evidence, summarized in Rushton (1989) and Segal (1999), that phenotypic and genetic similarity are important factors in human assortment, helping behavior, and liking others.” (15)
Patriotism also benefits from racial homogeneity. As Robert Nisbet noted, patriotism “… is quite evidently strongest where a political nation is overwhelmingly composed of citizens who can be thought to be of common ethnic descent.”(16)
Understanding this, and looking at the multicultural morass in which we are mired, is it any wonder that our Defense Department has been forced to deploy troops for longer than wisdom would dictate? Likewise, they keep lowering their recruiting goals.
Of course, a casual examination of the number of local, State and Federal agencies dedicated to smoothing out the wrinkles between races, along with the huge number of private companies with staff dedicated to interracial issues should be enough to point out that racial diversity is actually an impediment to cooperation, rather than a lubricant. For an illuminating view of this fact, just type the words “race,” “discrimination,” and “workplace” into Google. You will find lawyers trolling for cases, corporations who are being sued for millions of dollars, so-called “diversity consultants,” and an endless list of government agencies. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see that multi-racial societies don’t run very smoothly.
One reason for this is the well-documented existence of ethnic nepotism. Professor Tatu Vanhanen states:
“Our behavioral predisposition to ethnic nepotism evolved in the struggle for existence because it was rational and useful. It is reasonable to assume that ethnic nepotism is equally shared by all human populations. Consequently all human populations and ethnic groups have an approximately equal tendency to resort to ethnic nepotism in interest conflicts. It explains the otherwise strange fact that ethnic interest conflicts appear in so many countries where people belong to clearly different ethnic groups, and that ethnic interest conflicts have emerged within all cultural regions and at all levels of socioeconomic development.” (17)
You can see this in the recent riots staged throughout central Europe by non-Europeans. These riots, and their scope, reached much further than France and turned entire cities into “no-go” zones where a native European caught after dark was in grave danger.
Dr. Tomislav Sunic adds to Dr. Vanhanen’s thoughts when he brings the following fact to our attention: “There is not a single case of a multiracial egalitarian society in recent history that has survived over an extended period of time. Sooner or later, it breaks up violently.” (18)
So, in essence, this is a biological characteristic of ALL humans of ALL races, and so the racial problems that all of the alphabet soup government agencies are trying to address cannot be solved in that fashion. The best solution to the problems of ethnic conflict is racial separation. Professor Vanhanen continues:
“Because every ethnic group wants to survive and at least manage its own affairs, if it is not capable of subjugating other groups, it would be advisable to give them sufficient autonomy, and leave them room to pursue their interests in national politics on the basis of equality. If ethnic groups occupy separate territories, it might be useful to establish federal structure even in relatively small countries.” (19)
So the fifth idea I want you to take away with you today is that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster. Far from being a strength, it weakens all groups who partake while leading to unnecessary conflict. Racial separation in a state of equality and mutual respect is the most humanitarian solution for the ultimate betterment of ALL people.
This leads us right back where we ended with the last Western Voices broadcast: looking right into the tunnel of resource scarcity and we can see the headlights of the oncoming train of interethnic violence running toward us. We don’t have to like it. We don’t have to appreciate it. But what we MUST do is put on our big-boy pants and DEAL with it, ideally through the proverbial “ounce of prevention.”
Finally, I would like to talk to you a bit about the psychology of persons of European ancestry. It is impossible to completely stereotype such a large population; but in general it can be stated that we are forward thinking, fair-minded, universalist, conscientious and not particularly ethnically conscious.
This latter fact is the most dangerous matter, because it leaves us extremely vulnerable to genocide through assimilation. Religious leaders, television studios and public school administrators all push inter-racial mating as the ultimate Good. Maybe they see this is a solution to ethnic violence. If they do, they are wrong since even countries like Brazil have ethnic violence. We need to get the word out to our people, and to do that we need YOU.
At the same time, a philosophical framework of racial awareness that concentrates on a victim-mentality, vilification of other groups, or denying to other groups the very things we claim for ourselves will be rejected by the overwhelming majority of our Folk because it will contradict their fundamental sense of fairness. Philosophies that are racially aware but do NOT heed this admonition will find themselves disproportionately attracting members who are less conscientious than the rest of the population. As a consequence, such philosophies ultimately do more harm than good for our Folk.
EAU’s philosophy on race is a philosophy of love for our own Folk to be sure, but also for the earth and all of its diverse creatures, including other races. We are far-sighted enough to see the inter-related nature of all of Creation, and realize that the long-term survival of our own Folk may well depend on the survival of other races. Unfortunately, the globalist elites will stop nothing in their quest for profits, and think nothing of the destruction of human biodiversity that can never be replaced and could ultimately result in their own descendants dying.
(1) Gill, George, Does Race Exist? A Proponents Perspective, Nova Online http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/gill.html
(2) Please see the products available at http://www.dnaprint.com/welcome/productsandservices/anestrybydna/
(3) Satel, Sally (2002), I am a Racially Profiling Doctor, New York Times, May 5, 2002
(4) Rushton, J. Philippe (2007), Indians Aren’t That Intelligent (On Average) http://www.vdare.com/rushton/070926_indians.htm
(5) Dunham, Will (2007), Distant Space Collision Meant Doom for Dinosaurs, Reuters, Sep 5, 2007
(6) Dawkins, Richard (2004). “The Grasshopper’s Tale”, The Ancestor’s Tale, A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 416. ISBN 0-618-00583-8.
(7) Stein, Rob (2006), Race May Be Factor In Lung Cancer, Washington Post January 26, 2006; Page A12
(8) Kimmell, Robin ( ), The Evolving Genetics of HIV – Can genes stop HIV?
10) MacDonald, Kevin, (2002) What Makes Western Culture Unique?
(11) Jefferson, Thomas (1821), Autobiography
(12) Tilove, Jonathan (2007) Beneath surface, Americans ambivalent about diversity, Newhouse News Service, July 08, 2007
(14) Rushton, Phillippe J., Evolution, Altruism and Genetic Similarity Theory. See also Rushton’s “Race, Evolution and Behavior”, Chapter 4
(15) Macdonald, Kevin “The Numbers Game: Ethnic Conflict in the Contemporary World”
(16) Nisbet, Robert “Twilight of Authority”, 1975 p65
(17)Vanhanen, Tatu “Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism”, 1999
(18)Sunic, Tomislav (2007) Homo Americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age
(19) Vanhanen, Tatu “Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism”, 1999
The Walking Dead: Lives Without Meaning
By john – Posted on 16 January 2010
Have you ever had one of those moments when you thought your demise was imminent, and your life sort of flashed before your eyes? At times like that, one is often beset with regrets. What is the nature of those regrets? Individuals who have experienced this sort of event will know exactly what I’m talking about here …
You do not fret over the fancy car you couldn’t afford. You do not fret over whether your neighbors appreciated your finely manicured lawn. You do not fret that you didn’t spend enough hours in the corporate meat grinder, or that your income wasn’t high enough. The regrets you have pertain to people — almost always people other than yourself. You regret the people you might have wronged that you never made whole. You regret the time, attention and support that you should have given to loved ones, but did not. You regret the things you could have done that would have helped others, the results of which would have survived your physical death. You regret your cowardice for opportunities untaken and your failure to do the right things when you still had a chance.
At that moment in time when you are certain that your soul and body will soon part, the things that you can’t take with you — titles, money, envious neighbors — lose their meaning. They don’t really lose their meaning … really … because they never had any meaning intrinsically anyway. Imminent death concentrates the mind, bringing an awful clarity so that we can see that things like wealth or a closet full of Chinese manufactured junk could never be legitimate ends, in and of themselves. Rather, such things as wealth, material goods and status only have value — the kind of value that transcends death and leaves us with no regrets — if they are employed in certain meaningful ways. Certainly, accumulated wealth can serve as a seed to help the next generation’s accomplishments — but ONLY if you have already imbued the next generation with a noble character worthy of their inheritance. Eric Wodening encapsulated the idea I am describing beautifully when he said: “We are our DEEDS.” You are not your car. You are not your house. You are not your job, bank accounts, titles or degrees. What you are — and ALL that you are — is your deeds.
The trouble is, when you experience an accident, heart attack or stroke and are on your way to the emergency room in a screaming ambulance is not the time to figure that out. As your bodily systems shut down and your consciousness becomes a narrowing tunnel that shrinks to a pinpoint before finally being extinguished forever — you do not want your final thoughts to be of bitter regret for things undone. By all means, there will always be deeds undone and wishes unfulfilled; but you should also have the satisfaction of knowing that you truly did your best, that you lived a good life, and that your deeds — the essence of who you are — will bear fruit in succeeding generations.
As I said, during a sudden heart attack, stroke or other calamity is not the time to figure that out or have an epiphany. Usually, by then, it is too late. If, by that time, you have not figured out that the purpose of your life lies in deeds rather than material things, it’s too late and you will have lived a life devoid of meaning. In essence, you will have accomplished little more with your life than mark time while being used like a gear in a machine to produce, consume, borrow, spend and obey. In terms of the all-important content of your deeds, you will be the walking dead as your meaningless life will be no more eventful than your death … just marking time between the delivery room and the funeral home.
Hopefully, if you are listening to my voice, you’ve already figured this out. That’s good. If you have a long enough time horizon to already anticipate your own death, then you are making your life COUNT. That’s good too.
But too many of our people — FAR too many — don’t know what you do. They still think life is about shiny cars, upscale neighborhoods, working 60 hours a week, impressing neighbors or coworkers and worshipping their own hedonistic whims — no matter how ultimately destructive their whims may be. This is a psycho-spiritual illness, and the results are staring us in the face every day of the week.
How do I prove the widespread nature of this psycho-spiritual illness? Through just a handful of statistics you SHOULD find truly horrifying.
According to a February article in Scientific American, “Remarkably, in 2002 more than one in three doctor’s office visits by women involved the prescription of an antidepressant, either for the writing of a new prescription or for the maintenance of an existing one, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”(1)
As often as violence is reported in the news, you may be shocked to learn that suicides outnumber homicides in America by 5:3,(2) and that 72% of all suicides in the United States are committed by white men.(3) Children are far from immune. Over the past 20 years, the suicide rate for kids aged 5-14 has doubled(4), and suicide has become the third leading cause of death among our teens.(5) According to the latest statistics, “As many as 8 percent of adolescents attempt suicide today. And completed suicides have increased by 300 percent over the last 30 years.”(6)
Depression has become a huge problem, so pervasive that the World Health Organization projects that by 2020 it will be the second largest cause of debility in the developed world — second only to heart disease. Just as with suicide, our children aren’t immune. According to government statistics, “The statistics on teen depression are sobering. Studies indicate that one in five children have some sort of mental, behavioral, or emotional problem, and that one in ten may have a serious emotional problem. Among adolescents, one in eight may suffer from depression.”(7)
Naturally, drug and alcohol abuse has skyrocketed. Among high school seniors, 6.5% have use ecstasy, 7.8% have used cocaine, 8.4% have used hallucinogens, and 11.4% have abused prescription drugs such as amphetamines, sedatives, tranquilizers and pain-killers.(8) Alcohol abuse has become so endemic that the combined death toll of over 47,000 per year — and that EXCLUDES accidents and homicides — dwarfs the total number of people who die from violence in which a firearm is used. And that INCLUDES all of the gangland drive-by shootings in the inner cities.(9)
Let’s be honest. You don’t have to be a genius to look at statistics like these and understand that our people suffer from a psycho-spiritual illness. Besides the above, this illness has increased rates of divorce, reduced rates of marriage and childbirth, and increased the proportion of our children born without fathers at all.
And it gets even worse, as alienated young men have penned suicide notes before committing murder-suicides. Before killing innocent people and committing suicide in an Omaha, Nebraska department store … Robert Hawkins wrote tellingly in his suicide note – and I quote — “I’ve just snapped. I can’t take this meaningless existence anymore.” He also made note of the values he had absorbed from popular culture when he wrote: “Now I’ll be famous.”
This phenomenon isn’t only for kids. When Charles Carl Roberts murdered innocent school children, his suicide note read: “I am filled with so much hate – hate towards myself, hate towards God, and unimaginable emptiness.”
“Meaningless existence” and “unimaginable emptiness” aren’t just phrases used in suicide notes left behind; they are also prevalent in therapy sessions attended by people struggling to overcome depression, anxiety and other illnesses: illnesses that are reaching epidemic proportions among our people. The cause of these problems can ultimately be traced to a lack of transcendent meaning in the lives of our people. Life is hard. Work is hard. Learning is hard. Coping with tragedy is hard. Anything worth achieving is hard. And it doesn’t matter how smart or strong somebody is; in order to get out of bed in the morning they need a reason to put their feet on the floor. That reason is the meaning of life – a meaning of which too many of our people are utterly bereft.
At certain points in life, we can derive meaning from the approval of authority figures. But eventually we see that the emperor is nude, so his approval isn’t enough anymore. At other times, we can derive meaning from the acquisition of material possessions – both from the way those possessions represent us to others, and from the possessions themselves. But at some point we reach a realization of our own mortality, and see their pursuit as being empty when pursued for their own sake. We can seek meaning in climbing a corporate ladder – until we are downsized for the third time in yet another corporate merger and realize that there is very little relationship between success in a corporate structure and our intrinsic value as people. As these transitory sources of meaning fall by the wayside, depression rears its head until we are either medicated enough not to notice or latch onto something else for a time. For a while, we can latch onto the continuation of our own lives as sufficient reason to get out of bed in the morning. But as we get older, we become more aware of the fact that in the end, we are dead anyway; and we need a reason to postpone the inevitable.
Most mental health workers are at a loss to truly help people in these situations; which is why insurance companies are more likely to pay for an anti-depressant medication than long-term psychotherapy. Long ago psychotherapy, as a profession, was hijacked by a dialectical materialist world-view that too often propagates the very illnesses it purports to cure. In fact, far too many psychotherapists are more likely to pathologize the solution than apply it. Finding a good psychotherapist is not impossible, but fairly arduous — a very difficult task for the people who need help most to undertake alone.
So – where do we turn to solve this problem? We have to cultivate a sense of transcendent meaning in our Folk. What do I mean by that? I mean that our people have to have a sense that the world is bigger than them – that it existed before their individual births, and will continue to exist after their deaths. They need to see themselves as a part of that – as the inheritors of history, and also the progenitors of history, even if in some small way. They need to have a time horizon and value system that emphasizes the effect their actions of today will have on the world of tomorrow, and they must care about the world of tomorrow. The specifics of how this manifests will vary from person to person, because of differences in both inclination and ability; but the overall framework must be in place.
There are a lot of paths to transcendent meaning, and these paths are as individual as the people who follow them. Moreover, these paths are not usually mutually exclusive, so that a given individual might follow more than one. Certainly, for many of us, raising our children is a substantial source of meaning. The next generation is both an awesome and a joyful responsibility that allows us to directly affect the path of the future. After that, we can find similar meaning in grandchildren. But these things only work to the extent that we can love — truly love — others enough that we can put their best interests above our own selfishness.
Some of us are able to find meaning in our occupations, through the direct or indirect positive effect it has on the lives of others and the future. But there are only so many jobs where one gets to save lives, enlighten minds, find cures for cancer or things like that. Most of us work fairly unexciting jobs as interchangeable and easily replaced “human resources,” and those jobs are insufficient in and of themselves to justify getting out of bed in the morning, except to the extent that they facilitate our lives and participation in other things that ARE important.
And the final way that people infuse their lives with meaning is through participation in various religions, community institutions, causes and advocacies that they believe will make their society into a better place for the next generation.
One of the problems we face is that, through media programming and the compulsory indoctrination camps we euphemistically call government schools, far too many of our people do not know what causes deserve their support.
The religion of their parents and grandparents is mocked and they are forced through peer pressure into a sort of one-size-fits all mindset in which no religion has value, because they are all seen to be equally valid. Their religious institutions become corrupted through so-called “interfaith councils” that effectively subject their holy books to a redaction marker while writing new things into the margins. Over time, many people have walked away disgusted.
Their community institutions were long-since co-opted by implicit collectivist totalitarians with a mindless United Nations worldview that makes them feel unwelcome.
And the causes and advocacies that are “approved” by the indoctrination camps and television characters usually leave them cold; because the moment they become immersed in some politically-correct advocacy — even if they can’t quite put their finger on it — they can feel that it’s a place where they don’t belong.
So they have nowhere to turn, and spend on average five hours a night — which is all of their waking hours outside of work — in a state of numb non-thought in front of the mass programming device we call television.
Sometimes, too, in spite of the indoctrination centers and media, due to critical thinking or a solid upbringing, folks gravitate toward patriotic causes like defending the Second Amendment right to self defense, or putting our increasingly totalitarian government institutions back into their constitutional shackles. And when they do, they find themselves to be vilified. Free inquiry and the ability for reasonable people to reasonably differ — or for people to see both sides of an issue — have been replaced by either character assassination or psycho-pathologizing dissent. It is no longer merely enough to tolerate the totalitarian lies, but failure to endorse them strongly enough is seen to be either proof of evil intentions or outright mental illness. East Germany never really went away — it was rebuilt right here; and the patriotic person feels it.
So they feel isolated, and alone — and participation in activism plummets.
Sometimes, a person with healthy instincts will understand that a whole bevy of laws are unfairly aimed at penalizing European Americans; but he dares not speak aloud about his feelings. If he does, he will be automatically tarred with the brush declaring that he secretly desires to set up assembly-line gas chambers, even though nothing could be further from his heart and mind. Of course, people who want to set up gas chambers really DO exist — such deranged people exist among all races and peoples — and often masquerade as something far more benign. So when he looks for people who want to represent the interests of his European-American Folk, all he can find are people with collectivist totalitarian world views that differ from those of our current masters only in terms of content, but not in structure or premise.
It makes him ill, and he abandons that cause feeling that there must be something wrong with HIM, even though his inborn American love of liberty is far from a fault. He falls into despair, knowing not just that everything is all wrong, but feeling utterly powerless and unable to discuss his true feelings even with a mental health professional for fear of condemnation.
I have already covered the ways that people invest their lives with transcendent meaning — through helping occupations like education, parenting, grandparenting, community and causes. Many things commonly left to occupations though — like education — can also be adopted as causes; and it is with causes that we can make a real difference that will outlive our physical bodies. The trick — if it can be called such — lies in overcoming the substantial psychological barriers that people — adults especially — have that keep them from living lives invested with meaning. These barriers have always existed to some degree among our Folk, but in the modern West with its soft-totalitarianism and consumeristic mindset that ignores the non-material aspects of humanity they have become a serious issue.
Wikipedia describes cognitive dissonance as “a psychological state that describes the uncomfortable feeling when a person begins to understand that something the person believes to be true is, in fact, not true. Similar to ambivalence, the term cognitive dissonance describes conflicting thoughts or beliefs (cognitions) that occur at the same time, or when engaged in behaviors that conflict with one’s beliefs.” Most importantly, the article goes on to state: “Maintaining conflicting principles (e.g. logically incompatible beliefs) or rejecting reasonable behavior to avoid conflict can be increasingly maladaptive (non-beneficial) as the gap being bridged widens, and popular usage tends to stress the maladaptive aspect. Cognitive dissonance is often associated with the tendency for people to resist information that they don’t want to think about, because if they did it would create cognitive dissonance, and perhaps require them to act in ways that depart from their comfortable habits.”(10) The problem is that when a cause or advocacy ultimately conflicts either with demonstrable reality or one’s deepest values, then one tends to shut down, draw into a shell and shut things out. This is why the cynical politics of half-truths that prevail in the modern age have resulted in massive non-participation in politics.
But there is also a second barrier that can be defined as self-perception. Nobody considers himself to be bad. Whatever they are doing, whether it is sitting in front of the television for five hours every night or exporting their neighbors’ jobs to China, everyone has developed a justification that at least makes their actions seem unavoidable (i.e. there is no choice) and possibly even virtuous (i.e. it’s for the ultimate good). Nobody, whether a receptionist or a car-jacker, looks in the mirror in the morning and sees someone who is on the wrong track. Everybody from a loan shark to a communist or global corporatist has justifications built in their mind in spades for what they are doing.
Penetrating these layers of justification is extremely difficult; and is one of the reasons why Don Marquis noted: “If you make people think they’re thinking, they’ll love you; But if you really make them think, they’ll hate you.” Challenging someone’s existing justifications will at a minimum raise their ire; because in a very important sense you are calling their entire life into account. In all likelihood, they will bury their head in the sand or put their fingers in their ears, either physically or metaphorically. That’s why researchers have noticed that people tend to seek out sources that confirm their existing beliefs and opinions. Likewise, they surround themselves with friends who implicitly or explicitly approve of their choices.
That’s a pretty hard barrier to overcome all by itself; and that barrier serves as an obstacle to people investing their lives with a real sense of meaning. It helps to keep them on the wrong track.
Usually — and unfortunately — the only time most adults are vulnerable to a significant shift in their mindset is when they are in crisis – when the world seems to have fallen apart, and they see this as proof that their old beliefs and behaviors are flawed in some way. This is like the proverbial druggie “hitting bottom,” and then becoming amenable to rehabilitation. Sometimes even this doesn’t work, as they rant about everybody and everything else but their own beliefs and behaviors being the cause of their woes. We can see this plain as day in certain public apologies where a public figure will apologize for the phraseology of a statement, but not its intent; or, even worse, own up to no wrongdoing whatsoever and instead blame their plight on those who discovered their infractions. The case of an obese man filing a lawsuit against a fast-food chain — blaming them for causing his obesity is classic.
So — sometimes a change in mindset can be stimulated by a crisis, but sometimes not — and that largely depends upon the people and environment surrounding the crisis victim at the time. This is why we stress self-sufficiency of our members so strongly. The future holds a continuous downward economic slope for most ordinary people. Most people in this country have a negative net-worth as it is, and soon their debt-driven consumerist junk-buying binge will result in crisis. We’re already in a modest foreclosure crisis; but what the media doesn’t tell you is that foreclosures and bankruptcies have been steadily increasing for decades; and they’ll be increasing overall for the foreseeable future. More and more people will find themselves en extremis, and hitting bottom. By being more self-sufficient, we will be less affected by these economic forces; and will thus be natural authority figures for people in crisis. Instead of giving them a fish, we’ll teach them to fish too — and along with it we will teach them where to find real meaning in their lives as an active participant in history.
There is also a third barrier to people finding true meaning in their lives, and that can be described as “public self-image.” This can be defined as the way a person thinks that other people see him. This is much more insidious than merely choosing to drive a Volvo instead of a Buick in order to create a particular image; because that is merely window dressing. Far more important is the way the modern Left-Right totalitarian axis of evil incessantly moralizes and publicly condemns those who dare to disagree with their ideas or policies. Such condemnation usually questions either the moral worth of a disagreeing party as a human being, or the party’s mental competence.
This public moralization approach is extremely effective for a lot of reasons. First off, it moves debate on their policies away from factual grounds and basic values where they can never win, and instead moves the debate onto purely emotional grounds while simultaneously putting opponents on the defensive. Second, it enlists the powerful component of peer-pressure or even perceived peer pressure to at least shut up an opponent if not force him to change his mind. Finally, the intense moralization creates an atmosphere of guilt by association that can create ostracism by friends and family as well as job loss and economic hardship.
These three barriers turn millions of our people into occupants of a virtual gulag. Some — most, in fact — don’t even realize that they are imprisoned. That’s because these barriers primarily exist at an instinctual, subconscious or implicit level. They believe they are in control of their own thoughts and actions, when the globalists have been using knowledge of human psychology to manipulate them from womb to tomb. They don’t know they have been imprisoned, because the walls are made of glass and they are conditioned to never come close enough to touch those walls. If they can choose between a Sansa mp3 player and an Ipod — both subjected to copyright encryption and corporate surveillance, they consider themselves to be free. If they can talk on their cell phone with the government-mandated GPS tracking chip, they consider themselves to be free. If they can call up Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly via a NSA-monitored phone system and express politically-correct indignation about Reverend Jeremiah Wright, they consider themselves to be free. They plop down in front of a choice of 200 digital channels of entertainment; all controlled by a handful of companies whose satellite uplink stations are guarded by military personnel and consider themselves to be free. The government generously allows them to keep 60% of their paycheck, so they consider themselves to be free.
Of course, those of us who advocate for our Constitution and our People know we are not free, because we bump up against the walls of the glass cage every day. We realize that the bromide that we are the “most free nation on earth,” — while true — disguises the fact that our standard of value for comparison shouldn’t be China or Zimbabwe; but the America of 1801, 1840 or 1950. We are European Americans with a unique foundation and history of freedom; and comparisons to the socialist, communist or otherwise totalitarian nations that comprise the rest of the planet won’t wash.
But, now for the good news. There is a reason why I talk about psychology so much in my podcasts; and that is because knowledge of psychology is used by globalists to enslave our people — but can also be employed as a tool to secure not only our self-determination, but a greater degree of happiness and purpose among our Folk. Before talking about the good news, though — let me explain in broad terms how the bad guys use the three barriers I’ve described.
Human beings are one of the few creatures with a frontal mind sufficiently powerful that it can override the instinctive tendencies we have in order to pursue a course of action based upon beliefs and principles. Our frontal mind is so powerful that – on the basis of belief – we can willingly override even instincts for self-preservation and run INTO harm when common sense would dictate otherwise. It is this incredible power, harnessed to our force of will, that gives humans the ability to transcend the mundane and manifest our highest ideals. But it is also this power that allows people who do not have the best interests of our people at heart to cause us to act against the best interests of both ourselves and our posterity … simply by controlling the ideas that occupy our frontal minds. This is why they work to control media and create compulsory schooling. Once detrimental ideas are explicitly accepted in the frontal mind; then the three barriers have a tendency to KEEP those detrimental ideas in place so they aren’t easily dislodged.
BUT — these barriers aren’t foolproof. The fact that you are listening to me now proves that. You escaped from the propasphere, and now those barriers work to your benefit like a vaccine that inhibits re-infection with a virus.
How did you break through the propasphere?
There are three routes. In most cases you encountered facts that contradicted the beliefs our masters expect us to have and resolved that cognitive dissonance by embracing those facts and rejecting erroneous beliefs. In other cases, you had a religious belief that placed your behavior on a standard judged by an authority higher than your boss, and that allowed you to see and reject lies. If you were very fortunate, your parents prepared you by providing facts and critical thinking skills that ultimately served you in good stead.
If YOU can break through the propasphere and see the glass wall, then other people can too — and together, we can help them do that. One of the most wonderful things about exploring the way the implicit portions of our mind works, is that once we understand it, we become extremely self-aware. That self-awareness leads to critical self-examination; and an internal revolution.
Secession occurs in four phases. First, there is a mental secession. Then, there is a cultural secession. Next, there is an economic secession. Finally, there is a physical secession that merely serves as acknowledgment of a fact that already exists. This is why the globalists in media and government put so much effort and money into the indoctrination in public schools; why outright admitted Marxists are allowed to be college professors, and why every TV news network tells the same story just with a different face. They know that the first phase of a revolution that will unseat them — even if merely a peaceful revolution — starts in the MIND.
Well, we’re addressing that. We’ve created a news site at wvwnews.net that certainly puts forth opinion and ideas; but also brings substantial fact-based interdisciplinary research to the public. A lot of this research contains substantial amounts of sourcing material so that the facts are indisputable. This allows people to resolve cognitive dissonance in favor of fact. We also put forth an ethical value system that puts our behavior and lives in a proper perspective so that people can start to judge themselves by a higher standard. We are also letting people know that other people exist who are thinking the same thoughts — so their views are supported and the opinions of the uninformed are not as important to them anymore.
Along with this, we are aiming at prevention. Our college program helps to keep young adults out of the hands of peer-pressure based globalist indoctrination; and we are working on a Euro-School program both for home schoolers and kids that go to public schools that will help inoculate our kids against the psycho-spiritual poison in the world. These are all aimed at the mental phase of secession.
Though we don’t specifically endorse any particular religion, we are supportive of positive manifestations of religion that are healthy for the folk-soul of our people. We have members who are Asatruar or Odinists, members who are re-igniting the spark of the religion of the Roman Republic, members who are Latter Day Saints, members who follow Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant Christian denominations and Kinists with a more ethnocentric scriptural emphasis in Christianity. Those are just the religious practices of members who have shared their religious views with me — so no doubt there are others. Soon we will initiate a special project group emphasizing re-localization of agriculture as a way of building community. We have chapters who meet regularly; and members of those chapters often become close friends. In October we’ll also be having a festival and meeting to help bring members together who may work together from a distance, but have never met in person. All of these aim at the cultural phase of secession.
Finally, we have established an area on our members-only website for economic cooperation. This is the beginning of an economic secession AND economic self-sufficiency.
But most of our work and effort is directed at the all-important mental phase of helping people break the psychological bonds of our intended masters. As I mentioned earlier, the fact that you are listening to me means you’ve already made it past that particular hurdle. But there’s a second step that needs to be made.
Last week I was speaking with a government employee who, like us, is largely aware of the handwriting on the wall. He works his job with the feds out of financial necessity. This is no surprise as government now pays more than the private sector for most occupations; and is the only “industry” in the country that is growing while the private sector continues to shrink and wages nosedive. It shouldn’t be shocking that all three major Presidential candidates have already stated that tax increases will be necessary. But the thing that bothers my friend is that he knows that our government no longer serves the American people as it was intended; and has instead become a cynical caricature of itself whose strings are pulled by whatever special interests are best-heeled at the time. Every day when he walks into his job, he hates it.
And this is where the second step comes in. Even those of us who don’t work directly for government still have to smile and clench our teeth while sitting through sensitivity training classes or hold our tongues when promotions are taken by less-qualified people because our Folk are deliberately discriminated against. We all have to be polite at social functions with the in-laws when the great aunt talks glowingly of Barack Obama’s alleged charisma. Once you are aware of what is going on, you find yourself up against the glass wall every day; and it grates and frustrates you every day too.
Remember what I said earlier — a life filled with meaning comes not merely from thoughts, but from actions, and also remember that I mentioned that meaning can be pursued in more than one way, and in more than one way at a time.
You now stand at the brink of that second step, the step that makes the difference between a life that you will depart filled with bitter regret, or a life that you will depart with a sense of satisfaction for a job well done. If your occupation does not give you meaning, you can derive meaning from your family. And you can also go even further by engaging with community institutions, and even further by adopting a cause.
For any person there are many suitable causes, and they are not mutually exclusive. Certainly, as one of the Directors of EAU I commend our own causes and objectives for your consideration; but there can be others. The most important thing is that you find one or more causes, and act upon them. These causes need to place you within the historical context of a person who is contributing to something greater than himself, beneficial beyond just the immediate timeframe, and either directly or indirectly benefitting your Folk. Obviously, other Folk could also benefit and that’s okay — nobody should cut off his nose to spite his face — but the more you see your cause as helpful to people who are closely related to yourself, the more motivated you will be. That’s just a fact of nature that I covered in a podcast a few months back.
But the point is that no matter what it is … do something. Join Gun Owners of America or the National Rifle Association, get on their alert systems and pound your local and national representatives with postcards and email. Speak in front of a legislative hearing. Learn and then teach others how to shoot. Sign up with NumbersUSA for their alerts, and send instant faxes to politicians to help stop the immigration crisis. Join up with EAU if you haven’t already, and write a piece of positive music under the Creative Commons license that we can distribute or sign on to any of a half dozen special projects as befits your interests.
Escaping from the propasphere is only part of the story. You can’t put that cat in the bag and go back to sleep, because your conscience won’t let you. And every day you don’t act on what you know to be good and right is another day that you will feel bad. You need to complete the story.
Completing the story means committing yourself to a just cause for our Constitution, for Our People and for Freedom. You will derive a sense of your place in history, meaning and purpose.
One of my children knows about my role at EAU, and how I work for the best interests of our people. What makes me proudest is when she told me recently that when I retire from helping our Folk due to age or illness, she wants to step in an assume that role.
You know, things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. Every day the perimeter of the glass cage is shrinking, and our children will most certainly bump up against it. And if you don’t have children, just other people of the next generation will bump up against it. You don’t want them asking you questions like these: “Mom, why didn’t you keep the bad guys from taking away my right to self-defense?” “Dad, why didn’t you tell me the truth about the impending genocide of our race BEFORE I married and had non-white kids?” “Uncle, where were you when our government ceded its authority to the United Nations?” or — “Old lady, I heard that a long time ago people’s phones weren’t spied on all the time — is that true?”
Certainly, I will be able to face the people of the future with a clear conscience. I worked to prevent their genocide. I spoke up. I exercised my natural right of free speech and assembly, and called people’s attention to these things and contacted my representatives, and much more besides.
One of these days, and I don’t know when because it is never given to a man to know the hour of his passing — I will die. It’s pretty well settled among theologians and physicists that I won’t be able to take a Cadillac or High Definition Television with me when I go. But what I WILL take with me is the knowledge that my child will fill my shoes and that I have worked hard in the cause of freedom and self-determination for my people. Perhaps I will not have succeeded by then, and perhaps I will have. But either way I will have lived a life with meaning and purpose; and the one life that I have will have COUNTED for something good and beautiful. And that is all a person can really ask for out of life; and it is something that we all have the power to deliver to ourselves.
Every day that passes brings you another day closer to the day of your death. How you lived your life MATTERS. And because you cannot know how long your life will last, the time for you to embark upon a journey of meaning is NOW. Not next week, next month, or next year — but NOW. A life that matters is within yoru grasp; because not only is tomorrow going to be another day closer to your last day, it will also be a new beginning as the first day of the rest of your life.
Do not join the walking dead in their endless hours in front of the glowing indoctrination machine or in the shopping malls. Don’t be a statistic on an economist’s graph measuring consumer sentiment. Be more, be better, be everything that you can be.
Life is short, and I suggest you live it. Starting NOW.
(1) Barber, Charles (2008), The Medicated Americans: Antidepressant Prescriptions on the Rise, Scientific American, Feb 2008 http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-medicated-americans
(2) Suicide facts for 1999
(4) Prescott, James (2005) Suicide rates doubled for children of 5-14 years old over the past 20 years!
(5) Teenage Suicide, Wikipedia
(6) Sarafolean, Mary, PhD. “Depression in School-Age Children and Adolescents: Characteristics, Assessment and Prevention,” http://www.healthyplace.com/communities/depression/children.asp
(7) “About Teen Depression.” http://www.about-teen-depression.com/depression-statistics.html
(8) Statistics from the President’s office of National Drug Control Policy.
(9) Comparison of statistics from Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD (http://www.haciendapub.com/edcor12.html) and Wrong Diagnosis (http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/a/alcohol_abuse/stats.htm#medical_stats)
(10) Wikipedia, “Cognitive Dissonance” retrieved 4/27/2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance