saddened (commentary by Smedley Butler)

Re: saddened

Hey guys,

I think it's great that your forum be so welcome to open discussion between us all--wouldn't it be boring for you to never have us liberals 2 cents? Also, it's only through talking that I might start to see things your way.
BTW, you guys raise the issues of Hutu and Tutus or Zimbabwe. Was it any different what happens in Palestine and Israel or in WWII with the slaughtering of Germans by Germans. Wouldn't the better explanation for the violence be economic and cultural (often going under the banner of religious)?

the best,
L

WWII slaughter of Germans by Germans? Jews are not Germans. They were not slaughtered, either. Look up the genetics of jews, most of it is done by Israeli universities.

None of us (me, anyway) would defend the treatment of Palestinians by the juden. OTOH, I don't take sides in fights between semites. The original mention by me, though, was simply to point out that cumbayah doesn't exist anywhere in the world with differing groups. You can't force people to live together. Simple as that. Better they have their own territories. The amazing thing, though, is people like you run around with Free Tibet bumper stickers yet oppose the idea of Whites being able to have their own societies free of nigger mayhem.

As far as "hate" goes, well, hate is a valid emotion. It is a healthy emotional response to nigger/non-White mayhem. It is the result of cultural conflict. Whites do not live like niggers, nor like Mestizos. The libtard ideal is that niggers should live like Whites. They can't and they won't. That is also why I said that libs are the ultimate racial supremacists-they assume that their way is the best way. It's not. Non-Whites should be in their own areas left to their own devices with no interference by Whites at all.
 
Re: saddened

Free Tibet bumper stickers yet oppose the idea of Whites being able to have their own societies free of nigger mayhem.


Un-quote


Idiot self brain washed Whites are the only one's with those Free Tibet bumper sticker's and they are almost every where. I know one and he is from a very upper class well off family, and never grew up.

They should IMO read some 100 year old plus National Geographic Magazine's about that hell hole back then.

Is the White race the only one in a one way genocidal war now ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXdgElbKe_w

Here is what the producer and star of the movie had to say about this movie of 60 years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PS0Dpo_uRDQ


Clearly White's are not the haters, but the builders and creators of Western Civilization, but today most large city public commons are not safe for White's to walk any where in the World.

White's have barely made it in past history at least twice.

Will we walk off the stage of history?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4v_yRFf4-Y
 
Re: saddened

HOMELESS JACK TALKS TRUTH, MEANING AND PURPOSE
by H. Millard © 2010



"You know man, I didn't always know this was what I was doing, but I've been searching for truth, meaning and purpose all my life. And, I think many others are in the same boat even if they may not consciously know it all the time.

" Anyway, I've found what I've been searching for and I now live consciously knowing that I am 100% on the right track.

"Let me give you the way it is in a nutshell, man. This all comes from Arman's teachings, but in my own words here.

"In the beginning, there was absolute nothing. All was dark and all was cold, because that's what you have when you have nothing. Dark is absence of light and cold is absence of heat. They are, when there is nothing.

"Then, something was created out of nothing and the something began as a single point as all things begin with a single point. And, the something expanded and it's been doing it ever since. Everything is from that single point.

"Maybe that was the Big Bang which I think was really the Big Fylfot. Anyway it's all turning, spinning, circling man. Orbits within orbits spiraling through time and space setting the pattern for everything else.

"In the something is the Field--the template of existence--and that's what is under and which permeates all of the something, including us and all of our reality. No, I can't prove it. You have to have faith in some things, man. Just faith. You have to believe.

"What was also sent forth was stardust--the physical part of the underlying Field and it makes up everything physical that now exists. That's it man, the hippies had it right, we're all stardust.

From this came the "seeds" of creation sent forth into the expanding somethingness to take root where they could, and to do what they do. And in those seeds were the chemicals, processes and trajectory to create DNA. And, the first molecule of DNA assembled itself from the so-called inert minerals.

"Anyway, let me shorten all this by focusing on humans, because that's where I'm heading with this. You see, we're just a branching from that first molecule of DNA--that single point that started all life on Earth. It was the father and mother of all life.

"You see, man, DNA is the molecule of life and it's programmed by nature to be on auto-pilot and to adapt, evolve and expand constantly and automatically and to attempt to fill all niches with itself as it eats its way across the universe.

"It's like nature or God invented this tiny little machine and threw it out into the emptiness and said, you're on your own, fill the universe with yourself. And, the DNA did just that and continues doing so. If there was any possible way something could be eaten to provide energy to help the DNA reproduce and expand, DNA found a way to do it.

"But, DNA doesn't give a damn how it adapts and evolves. It's as automatic as water seeking its own level. DNA just flows into all niches and it flows and grows through the living organisms that it makes.

"Now, I told you before, man, that our human genotype has about 3 billion combinations of the four chemicals of DNA that are abbreviated as A,T,C,G. But, here's the thing, man, it doesn't take much to make changes to the genotype--it's sensitive so it can adapt and evolve to changing conditions. Minor changes that may even go unseen by modern science can have major effects. Keep that in mind man, when you hear know-nothings tell you black,white, brown, yellow and red humans are all the same. They ain't man. Not by a long shot. They're different and you should trust your eyes. They ain't lyin'.

"Again, the DNA constantly changes in many ways, but remains the same at its core. Scientists haven't yet caught on to the fact of exactly how malleable and changeable it is. I mean, it starts changing when the temperature changes; when the bodies it is in feel stress; when the organisms that it creates enter new conditions; even by what we think. It's like the magical morphing machine. Set it loose and it seeks to fill all of existence with itself. But, I told you that already.

"So where does this leave us? Well, if we understand the above about the DNA that is in us, that has made us, and which is part of us we can enter the picture and steer our own evolution.

"Yup. We can guide our own evolution by the choices we make in life. Now, we have to take a long view of this, man. Evolution works in more than one way. There are the slow cumulative changes and there are jumps. We have to steer both. For the slow cumulative changes we have to understand that many generations are needed to make the changes. For the jumps we have to recognize those born among us who have made such jumps and if those jumps are in the right direction we have to act to get them into the gene pool faster and more surely.

"Get it man? Nature and DNA don't give a damn. It is up to us, at our level of existence, to work to ensure that we, as the organisms we are, move in the right direction for ourselves. We are ourselves alone, man. We're going to change no matter what because change is constant and must be constant in our spinning existence. We say, however, that we can guide those changes by following the teachings of Arman.

"Arman is the one who received the revelations that give us the road map that is best for us. Again, this is something we just have to believe in and have faith in, man. For doubters we can only say that Arman's teachings are against death and evil and they are for life and good. Arman teaches that we must have as many children in our image as possible--he means with the 46 chromosomes of our people and with no chromosomes of any other people--and that everything that furthers this is good and anything that slows it down or changes it is evil.

"Our highest destiny is to continue on the White path and to become more White, not less so, but there is a natural force--it's like gravity or quick sand--that wants us to blend back in with non-White humans from whom we evolved. If we do this, we disappear.

"Blending back in is genocide, man. It's extinction for us. I call it bedroom genocide because it all begins with reproduction or lack thereof or incorrect reproduction. Birth control, abortions, miscegenation, holding down our birthrate, engaging in meaningless wars, starting to have children too late in life; anything that holds down our birthrate or damages our internal Code--our Essence--are evil and they go against our highest destiny which absolutely requires that we have as many children in our image as possible.

"That's it in a nutshell, man. That's the truth, meaning and purpose I've found for my life. That's true religion. That's what I believe with every fiber of my body. And, I believe this has all been revealed from the ender of all arguments,God, through Arman.
# # #
 
Re: saddened

TRUST YOUR EYES
--YOU HAVE THEM FOR A REASON
by H. Millard © 2009



Let me state it directly. What follows may not sound religious to those who are only familiar with traditional religions, but it is religious and also philosophical to some of us and plays a large part in our belief system and how we view all of existence and all living things, including human beings and their different races.

Evolution is a reality and no one who understands anything at all about nature can doubt it.

What intelligent people can reasonably debate about evolution are the various mechanisms of how evolution works.

The first thing we need to understand in discussing evolution is that it involves more than living things and is much larger than Darwin's or Lamarck's theories or any other theories of evolution dealing primarily with life.

All theories about the evolution of life are just subsets of the larger and all encompassing reality of cosmic evolution--the constant movement and resulting expansion and change of everything in existence (including humans) starting with a singularity that started the whole process some 12 to 14 billion years ago and which is generally believed to be the big bang or something similar.

Can Something Come From Nothing?
Religion most impactfully enters the picture when we are faced with the mystery of what caused the big bang and what was before the big bang. Ultimately, as we back track, we must ask how the somethingness of our universe came from an absolute nothingness (assuming there was a time when there was nothingness). This is the area where there is no answer other than that there was/is a something that can create itself out of nothing and which can then create other things out of itself or something else that it created.

We have a word for that which can create itself from absolute nothing: God. Whether or not this word, as used here, has the proper popular meanings inherent in the word itself, we don't know. But, until science can explain how something comes from nothing, it'll do for some discussions. And, science may be getting close to understanding how something comes from nothing with its investigation of sub-atomic particles, which as you probably know, are sometimes particles and sometimes waves and which seem to switch back and forth. Of course, "waves," while not matter, are still "something," so we have to get behind the waves to really understand.

And, if science eventually comes up with a good answer that is proven to be true and which does not involve what we would usually refer to as God, it matters not to us--who believe as we do--for the very workings of nature that have led to our existence are enough to justify awe and religious feelings and beliefs by which we can guide our lives. We don't need a big guy in the sky in order to believe and live our lives in the best way for us. Nature and its lessons inform us just fine even if there is no heavenly spirit peeking at us from behind the trees.

A Singularity
At its simplest, and just to emphasize this, evolution always begins with a singularity, a one, a point. And, this singularity, this one, this point, multiplies or expands. From one come many. It is ever so.

In life, evolution is from non-sentient minerals into forms that can make more like themselves. At the heart of all life that we know about is DNA--the four simple chemicals repeated over and over and which produce a code or genotype that exists in all of our cells and which then "projects" out or spins the phenotype--our external appearance. It is the DNA that gathers up the non-sentient minerals, the building blocks of life, and from them, builds us. It's as though the DNA is an artist building a clay model from the inside out and, when finished, the model comes alive and carries the internal artist within it. Which is the real person? The inner artist or the model he built?

Self Sorting Shuffle
Another way we look at and often visualize DNA is to think of it as being like a huge deck of playing cards--billions of cards in the deck--with just one of the letters A,T,C, G on each card. We then see nature or God as the card dealer who eternally shuffles the cards and deals different hands. And, how does God or nature shuffle these cards? With the eternal spinning of existence. Does this require an intelligence? Not in our view. It is self-ordering. Spinning creates and destroys. It also separates and joins and mixes. Just throw the cards into the whirlwind and they'll sort themselves out some way or other.

So, DNA showed up somehow on Earth. It then created a single cell to contain it. That led to multi-cellular life. Life multiplied, changed, adapted, evolved. The process has been going on ever since. But, what is at the heart of all life? DNA. Four simple chemicals repeated and played with over and over and over until all life that we know about, in all its seeming complexity, was created. And, it continues.

DNA itself, or some part of it, is our soul and our essence. It spins us out as though it's on a central axis and throws out what we are. As it spins, an arm is spun out over here, a leg over there. Up here goes an eye. It makes us, as a reflection of itself. It is the code that is the real us.

So, life is created from DNA, and it adapts and it changes. New forms are created. Many millions fail and are dead ends. Some others become new singularities and begin a new branching.

But, you already know all of the above, maybe not exactly in those terms, but in terms you learned in school.

Nature Doesn't Care If You Live Or Die--It's Up To You To Do The Right Things
You probably also learned or figured out that nature doesn't care which individual living things die. It doesn't even care if millions of species die. It just keeps tinkering with the DNA, changing a letter here and there, moving this one, changing this other one. And, these minute changes often cause other changes and add up. If the changes are needed at any particular time--that is, if they provide a survival advantage--then they may continue on via natural selection.

As it tinkers, nature builds-in to each life form or variant, ways for it to survive and to change and adapt to changing conditions and to multiply their kind in a race to dominate the niche or niches in which they live. If the living things in a certain niche aren't the fittest to fill that niche, they'll be replaced by others that are.

It's as though nature is not only tinkering, but is also playing a game as it watches all living things compete to survive and dominate. And to keep things interesting, nature will throw in various environmental disasters, challenges and changes, along with seemingly random events, unexpected mutations, unlucky deaths and other things to see which living things can adapt.

It is clear that nature doesn't care which living things in the struggle for existence win, and nature will always tinker some more so that whatever form seems to be winning will suddenly have some newer competition that may be better and tougher than past competitors. And, this process goes on and will never end so long as the spinning continues. If the spinning stops, existence stops. Remember, even in so called inanimate objects there is movement and spinning at the atomic and sub-atomic level. That rock may look inert, but inside, there is constant movement and spinning.

Our Tooth And Claw
Instead of tooth and claw, nature has given humans a large brain to help us survive. That's why our brain exists; to help us survive so we can multiply. All the other functions of our brain, including the many that we pride ourselves on, are side effects.

Now, in order for our brain to be able to help us survive, it is has the five senses of sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch which constantly send it signals about the world around the living being.

The King Of Our Senses And Why It Must Not Be Denied
Of these five senses, the king of them, at least in our species, is sight. Even if this weren't a matter of belief, we could reason to this conclusion by knowing that our sight is hooked up to our sexual instincts. We find sexual partners primarily through sight, and we know that the purpose of all life is to multiply--thus, that sense that leads us to multiply to our maximum is, by default, the king of the senses.

Generally speaking, our eyes do not lie. Deny what you see at your own peril. If something looks unsafe, it probably is. If someone doesn't look like you, they're probably not like you. Yes, there are exceptions, but they're rare in the big picture.

This emphasis on sight is also important to us because we have now reached a point in our evolution where we must, because we can, take over from blind evolution and actually decide on the best paths for us to take. In other words, because we can think these things, we must make the right choices.

Again, we are to be primarily guided in this by our eyes.

If we are to survive--meaning if our genotype is to survive--we must look like us. By looking like us--having our particular group phenotype, we know that our internal code--our genotype, is spinning out us, and not living things that are not us.

So, in order for us to survive as us, we must bear children who look like us in their major features. To do this, we must mate within our genotype. To easily determine who has our genotype, nature, remember, has given us our eyes to know who is like us and who is not. You quickly know with just a glance who is like you and who isn't. Don't deny your eyes. They're not lying.

Not Clones--But Very, Very Similar
There will be minor variations from us in our children, because sexual reproduction is set up to produce differences and variants so that some variant of the original will have a chance to survive in changing circumstances. Indeed, our children are not supposed to be exact clones of us--they're supposed to be very like us, but with minor changes. Our means of producing children ensures that our children have a slightly different DNA hand of cards than we have. That's why a male in our species supplies 23 of his chromosomes to a new child and the female supplies 23 of her chromosomes. That shuffles the DNA.

As I wrote in an earlier essay, one of the major changes we have as a distinct people that distinguishes us from other distinct peoples is our white skin. We have this particular mutation or adaptation so we can produce proper amounts of Vitamin D in the areas of the planet where we moved once we left Africa. But, when you change the DNA a little over here, other things also change. Some changes don't mean much and some do. The point is that our white skin mutation did more than just change the color of our skin, and it's the same with our other mutations--bone structure, hair texture, eye shapes and colors, and internal things in the brain that we can't see. Change a few letters in the DNA code and you change the world...sometimes.

Race Is To Humans As Breed Is To Dogs
Consider all of the above as you hear propaganda about there being only one human race (false) or that all humans are the same (false) or that skin color doesn't matter (false) or that all the thousands of other differences between different races don't matter (false). The differences you can see are a reflection of the inner code. Remember, always, eyesight is the king of our senses. It is to be used and respected. It is not to be denied if you want to continue to survive. Your sight tells you about the inner code in what you see externally. The outward person is a reflection of the inner code.

Here's something else that needs to be emphasized. The individual human being--you and I and all the rest of us--is not that important in the big scheme of things. It is the code that the human being carries--the genotype--that is important and which must survive.

Our Real Purpose And Mission In Life
Our mission in life, whether we understand it or not, is the same as with all other life. It is to pass on our internal code, our genotype and multiply like crazy. That's why we're alive. We're not here to have fun or enjoy life. We are here to breed. It is the same with all life. That is our mission. All the rest of what we do in life is secondary. Certain insects spend much of their lives in various forms of underground hibernation. They then emerge for a very short time--sometimes just a few hours--in order to mate and produce more like themselves. Then they die. Humans may not hibernate, but our purpose, just as with these insects, is to make more like ourselves. We as individuals are expendable. Our internal code is not. It is primary.

The winners in life's race to the finish line are those who breed the most and have their genes dominate. The losers are those who don't breed the most and whose genes don't take over the gene pool.

See And Know The Differences
Nature has designed us so that we are not supposed to overlook differences, but see them. That's why differences are often visible to the king of our senses. We are supposed to see and know that there are different races and that some humans are not like us. People are color coded, but they're also coded in other ways that we can see with our eyes. We should not try to deny what we see.

Remain Separate And Isolated If You Want To Evolve According To Our Beliefs
Non-whites may not always bear us ill will, but they are a danger to us as surely as are germs which also don't bear us ill will. It's just part of the eternal struggle.

The reason that non-whites are a danger to us is that our highest destiny is to become more white, not less so (this is a matter of religious belief), and at this stage in our evolution, since we split off from the rest of mankind in fairly recent times (about 35,000--50,000 years ago) and because there has been some gene flow, we have not reached the safe harbor of specieshood where we can no longer breed with them.

Do Not Become Blended
It's a fact that many of our mutations and adaptations are not yet fixed and are thus recessive. As I've written elsewhere, this simply means that it takes two of our kind to produce a new one of our kind. This being the case, we can easily be pulled back into the non-white masses of mankind by having children with them. If this is widespread enough, it has the potential to stop us from evolving and to destroy our unique genotypes. I call this genocide.

To put it more directly, our continued existence as a distinct people--as a white people--is dependent on us not mating with non-white peoples. We must resist the blending.

Religious Beliefs Need No Justification
I wrote at the top of this essay that much of what you're reading here is part of our religious beliefs. As such, they don't need scientific justification, even though we do often supply the science that bolsters our beliefs. As far as this belief about remaining white in order to move higher toward our particular destiny, we can only say that this is just a matter of religious belief and leave it at that. Some believe that this is our revealed destiny and that it is what God has demanded of us.

It would be easy if the dangers that face us for our continued existence and evolution looked like horrible monsters from movies, but they don't. This is the real world, and the things that can harm us often don't look as though they can.

Good And Bad
We must use our minds to discriminate between good and bad for us. And, it does come down to this determination of deciding good and bad based on what is good for us alone. That which causes us to expand as the distinct people we are is good. That which causes us to contract, is bad.

We must avoid the things that can harm us. And, in the modern world, this is becoming increasingly difficult as on every hand people want you to mix with people unlike yourself. If you don't, they call you names and may even persecute you. You must remain strong and know that separation and isolation is a religious duty. It is revealed from the ultimate source.

Remember, that which can harm you does not have to hate you or bear you ill will. All that is required is that it can harm you. And, if it can harm you, then it should be avoided. Your continued survival and existence depend on you using your brain to discern and make the right decisions for the best of the genotype.

Trust your eyes and breed often and correctly to multiply the genotype. Don't deny the eternal struggle; become a conscious and active director of it.
# # #
 
Re: saddened

Earl Turner, Thank you for this illuminating perspective.

I never accepted that line about blacks being what they are because of the history of the USA, but your exposition of the Canadians really blasted that canard out of the water! Would that all Americans, particularly children, could view this with your history attached.

v
 
Re: saddened

Earl Turner, Thank you for this illuminating perspective.

I never accepted that line about blacks being what they are because of the history of the USA, but your exposition of the Canadians really blasted that canard out of the water! Would that all Americans, particularly children, could view this with your history attached.

v

You're welcome, vorlos. I'm glad to know that you learned something from what I shared.

If you'd like to watch more Canadian TNB videos on JEWtube, you ought to check out this particular channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/PayNoMind416

This channel has plenty of cRap "music" videos on it which you could pass on, but it also has plenty of Canadian jewsmedia videos on it about many various forms of TNB that have recently occurred in Toronto and other parts of Canada.
 
Re: saddened

I learned something, as well. Thanks. :)

I knew that Canada had a nigger problem but hadn't given any thought to the fact that the history of that nation in regards to nigger slavery, etc. was so much different than that of the US.
 
Re: saddened

Appalled,

Have you reviewed all of our site, not just the reported crimes? It is there you will learn useful facts, that is, unless you wish to remain willfully blind, ignorant and brainwashed.

I realize you are comforted, no doubt, by the drooling vacuity of your shallow intellect, but consider that in discomfort, you may find the acquisition of facts way more reassuring in the long run.

Regards,

v
 
Re: saddened

I learned something, as well. Thanks. :)

I knew that Canada had a nigger problem but hadn't given any thought to the fact that the history of that nation in regards to nigger slavery, etc. was so much different than that of the US.

I wish every WN living in Amerikwa could get to see Toronto like I did. Well, actually, I did not come to realize how niggerfuxated certain parts of Toronto are until after I left that city and Canada itself. This is because I was living and working in just the White-majority parts of Toronto.

Actually, it would be more apt if I called the land on the Amerikwan northern border Kwanada instead, because every White I met there was a kwan in one way or another. For example, just about all of them were quite hysterically anti-gun and felt that calling 911 was the only solution for any given situation.

When I first arrived in Toronto, I was told by both friends and acquaintances, White Toronto natives that is, to avoid going to the Jane Finch area of the city. What nobody told me was the real reason why I should avoid the Jane Finch area. What I found out much later was that this reason was basically because of the area's niggerfuxation and TNB.

So anyway, Kwanada is basically rather close to being a European-style socialist country as far as I'm concerned. This means that everybody pays higher taxes there than most Amerikwans do, which is all supposedly for making life "more fair" for everybody if that is to be believed. Yet, despite this, and despite all of the concerns over "racial diversity" and "multiculturalism" that have been bandied about in Kwanada over I would say the last thirty plus years, the niggers in Toronto, and other cities like Montreal, are still very much like the niggers here in Amerikwa. What's rather amusing to me is that there are apparently some White Kwanadians who will blame Amerikwa's niggers and their "hip hop" culture for this, albeit not in any sort of direct fashion. That, and Amerikwa's gun laws too, since sometimes guns sold in Amerikwa do get smuggled into Kwanada, but never the Kwanadian niggers themselves. Sound familiar?
 
Re: saddened

Instead of directing your hate towards minority criminals, why don't you direct some of that to the white collar crime and corruption--such as that that occurring in the banking system.

Appalled: Great idea. My suggestion to you is that since the Internet is free and available to everyone, why don't you start a Discussion Forum similar to NNN but dealing with white collar crime and corruption.* Let us know when it is up and running so we can check it out. FYI, I am not a racist but I am sick and tired of the way our liberal mainstream media filters, alters and distorts the news so that we do not get a true and accurate picture of what is going on in regards to VIOLENT crime here in America and around the world. There would be NO need for this website to exist if the truth about the real nature of VIOLENT crime was being told in the mainstream media.

"Truth is NOT racism"-Glenn Beck

*If you did this, my opinion is that your site would receive little to no traffic because, unlike violent crime, white collar crime is reported fairly accurately in the mainstream media.
 
Re: saddened

I don't assume anything-but observation reveals that most liberals that defend the robbing, raping, murdering Negroes or Latinos do NOT live anywhere close to the hood; nor do they send their children to inner-city public schools riding on a bus. Even Jimmy Carter had enough sense to send Amy to a D.C. public school only under the protection of armed Secret Service agents.

I once taught at a public school system and taught at several different schools in two different states and I know damnwell that the most vociferous liberals that lay claim to equal rights and affirmative action and all the rest of the diversity blather have the least contact with the Negro or the Latino; just because someone claims to have lived in Chicago or Detroit, this fact alone does not mean they or their family have any daily direct contact with anything other than NPR.

The saddest part of your story would be your children, if you have any. Because of your stupidity and failure to properly identify the threat and your inability to convey any sense of a cultural identity beyond "affirmative action", the "melting pot' or "diversity" you therefore do not posses what is required by evolution to survive as a species. You and your children are most likely to be raped or murdered or infected, just as so many other liberal's offspring whose stories are chronicled elsewhere in this forum.

As usual, the Insane speak volumes against forum members and their "racism" and say NOT A SINGLE WORD about ANY of the voluminous horrendous rapes and murders and robberies and assaults and infections disproportionately propagated by the Negro and Latino and duly reported in this forum.
 
Re: saddened

http://www.newnation.org/NNN-wichita.html


Thank you Reset for your excellent reply posting to this woman poster IMO.



http://www.angrywhitefemale.net/kevin-shifflet.html
A little boy in his fenced yard with his grandmother.


There is an uncontrolable pathology IMO to get YT that has been fostered by media for many decades now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-Fi_Murders


http://www.komonews.com/news/archive/4064001.html

Here is a sad story of what a White woman did through naive media worship to her own family.
We can not protect our own by law, and I mean once upon a time not long along ago we had laws that would not allow such unions.
 
Re: saddened

YouTube- How To Brainwash A Nation
BRAINWASHING
A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/brainwsh.shtml#c14


An Address By Beria

American students at the Lenin University, I welcome your attendance at these classes on Psychopolitics.

Psychopolitics is an important if less known division of Geopolitics. It is less known because it must necessarily deal with highly educated personnel, the very top strata of "mental healing."

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are gown in chaos, distrust, economic depression, and scientific turmoil. Ac last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only communism can resolve the problems of the masses.

A psychopolitician must work hard to produce the maximum chaos in the fields of "mental healing." He must recruit and use all the agencies and facilities of "mental healing." He must labor to increase the personnel and facilities of "mental healing" until at last the entire field of mental science is entirely dominated by Communist principles and desires.

To achieve these goals the psychopolitician must crush every "homegrown" variety of mental healing in America. Actual teachings of James, Eddy, and Pentecostal Bible faith healers amongst your misguided people must be swept aside. They must be discredited, defamed, arrested, stamped upon even by their own government until there is no credit in them and only Communist-oriented "healing" remains. You must work until every teacher of psychology unknowingly or knowingly teaches only Communist doctrine under the guise of "psychology." You must labor until every doctor and psychiatrist is either a psycho-politician or an unwitting assistant to our aims.

You must labor until we have dominion over the minds and bodies of every important person in your nation. You must achieve such disrepute for the state of insanity and such authority over its pronouncement that not one statesman so labeled could again be given credence by his people. You must work until suicide arising from mental imbalance is common and calls forth no general investigation or remark.

With the institutions for the insane you have in your country prisons that can hold a million persons and can hold them without civil rights or any hope of freedom. And upon these people can be practiced shock and surgery so that never again will they draw a sane breath. You must make these treatments common and accepted. And you must sweep aside any treatment or any group of persons seeking to treat by effective means.

You must dominate as respected men in the fields of psychiatry and psychology. You must dominate the hospitals and universities. You must carry forward the myth that only a European doctor is competent in the field of insanity and thus excuse amongst you the high incidence of foreign birth and training. If and when we seize Vienna you shall then have a common ground of meeting and can come and take your instructions as worshipers of Freud along with other psychiatrists.

Psychopolitics is a solemn charge. With it you can erase our enemies as insects. You can cripple the efficiency of leaders by striking insanity into their Families through the use of drugs. You can wipe them away with testimony as to their insanity. By our technologies you can even bring about insanity itself when the people seem too resistive.

You can change their loyalties by psychopolitics. Given a short time with a psychopolitician you can alter forever the loyalty of a soldier fallen into our hands or a statesman or a leader in his own country, or you can destroy his mind.

However, you labor under certain dangers. It may happen that remedies for our "treatments" may be discovered. It may occur that a public hue and cry may arise against "mental healing." It may thus occur that all mental healing might be placed in the hands of ministers and be taken out of the hands of our psychologists and psychiatrists. But the Capitalistic thirst for control, Capitalistic inhumanity, and a general public terror of insanity can be brought to guard against these things. But should they occur, should independent researchers actually discover means to undo psychopolitical procedures, you must not rest, you must not eat or sleep, you must not stint one tiniest bit of available money to campaign against it, discredit it, strike it down and render it void. For by an effective means our actions and researches could be undone.

In a Capitalistic state you are aided on all sides by the corruption of the philosophy of man and the times. You will discover that everything will aid you in your campaign to seize control, and use all "mental healing" to spread our doctrine and rid us of our enemies within their own borders.

Use the courts, use the judges, use the Constitution of the country, use its medical societies and its laws to further our ends. Do not stint in your labor in this direction. And when you have succeeded you will discover that you can now effect your own legislation at will and you can, by careful organization of healing societies, by constant campaigns about the terrors of society, by pretense as to your effectiveness make your Capitalist himself, by his own appropriations, finance a large portion of the quiet Communist conquest of the nation.

By psychopolitics create chaos. Leave a nation leaderless. Kill our enemies. And bring to Earth, through communism, the greatest peace Man has ever known.

Thank-you.


CHAPTER XV: Proposals that Must be Avoided

There are certain damaging movements that could interrupt a psychopolitical conquest. These, coming from some quarters of the country, might gain headway. They should be spotted before they do, and stamped out.

Proposals may be made by large and powerful groups in the country to return the insane to the care of those who have handled mental healing for tribes and populaces for centuries the priests. Any movement to place clergymen in charge of institutions should be fought on the grounds of incompetence and the insanity brought about by religion. The most destructive thing that could happen to a psychopolitical program would be to entrust the ministry with the care of the nations insane.

If mental hospitals operated by religious groups are in existence, they must be discredited and dosed, no matter what the cost, for the actual figures of recovery in such institutions might become known, and the lack of recovery in general institutions might be compared to them. This might lead to a movement to place the clergy in charge of the insane. Every argument must be advanced early, to overcome any possibility of this ever occurring.

A country's law must be made carefully to avoid granting any personal rights to the insane. Any suggested laws or Constitutional Amendments that would make the harming of the insane unlawful, should be fought to the extreme, on the grounds that only violent measures can succeed in their treatment. If the law were to protect the insane, as it normally does not, the entire psychopolitical program would quite possibly collapse.

Any movement to increase or place under surveillance the orders required to hospitalize the mentally ill should be discouraged. This should be left entirely in the hands of persons well under the control of psychopolitical operatives. It should be done with minimum formality, and no recovery of the insane from an institution should be possible by any process of law. Thus, any movement to add to the legal steps required in the processes of commitment and release should be discouraged on the grounds of emergency. To get around this, the best policy is to place a psychiatrist and a detention ward for the mentally ill in every hospital in a land.

Any writings of a psychopolitical nature, accidentally revealing themselves, should be prevented. All factual literature on the subject of insanity and its treatment should be suppressed, first by actual security, and second by complex verbiage that renders it incomprehensible. The actual figures on recovery or death should never be announced in any papers. Any investigation attempting to discover whether or not psychiatry or psychology has ever cured anyone should immediately be discouraged and laughed to scorn, and should mobilize at that point all psychopolitical operatives. At first, it should be ignored, but if this is not possible, the entire weight of all psychopoliticians in the nation should be pressed into service. Any tactic possible should be employed to prevent this from occurring. To rebut it, technical appearing papers should exist as to the tremendous number of cures effected by psychiatry and psychology, and whenever possible, percentages of cures, no matter how fictitious, should be worked into legislative papers, thus forming a background of evidence that would immediately rebut any effort to actually locate anyone who had ever been helped by psychiatry or psychology.

If the Communistic connections of a psychopolitician should become known, it should be attributed to his own carelessness, and he should, himself, be immediately branded as eccentric within his own profession.

Authors of literature that seeks to demonstrate the picture of a society under complete mental control and duress should be helped toward infamy or suicide to discredit their works.

Any legislation liberalizing any healing practice should be immediately fought and defeated. All healing practices should gravitate entirely to authoritative levels, and no other opinions should be admitted, as these might lead to exposure.

Movements to improve youth should be infiltrated and corrupted. Left alone, they might interrupt our campaigns to produce in youth delinquency, addiction, drunkenness, and sexual promiscuity. Communist workers in the field of newspapers and radio should be protected wherever possible by completely disabling, through Psychopolitics, any persons consistently attacking them. These, in their turn, should be persuaded to give all possible publicity to the benefits of psychopolitical activities under the heading of "science."

No healing group devoted to the mind must be allowed to exist within the borders of Russia or its satellites. Only well-vouched-for psychopolitical operatives can be allowed to continue in their practice, and this only for the benefit of the government or to work against enemy prisoners. Any effort to exclude psychiatrists or psychologists from the armed services must be fought. Any inquest into the "suicide" or sudden mental derangement of any political leader in a nation must be conducted only by psychopolitical operatives or their dupes, whether Psychopolitics is responsible or not.

Death and violence against persons attacking communism in a nation should be eschewed as forbidden. Violent activity against such persons might bring about their martyrdom. Defamation and the accusation of insanity alone should be employed, and they should be brought at last under the ministrations of psychopolitical operatives, such as psychiatrists and controlled psychologists.
Table of Contents
CHAPTER XVI: In Summary

In this time of unlimited weapons, and in national antagonisms where atomic war with capitalistic powers is possible, Psychopolitics must act efficiently as never before.

Any and all programs of Psychopolitics must be increased to aid and abet the activities of other Communist agents throughout the nation in question.

The failure of Psychopolitics might well bring about the atomic bombing of the Motherland.

If Psychopolitics succeeds in its mission throughout the capitalistic nations of the world, there will never be an atomic war, for Russia will have subjugated all of her enemies.

Communism has already spread across one-sixth of the inhabited world. Marxist Doctrines have already penetrated the remainder. An extension of the Communist social order is everywhere victorious. The spread of communism has never been by force of battle, but by conquest of the mind. In Psychopolitics we have refined this conquest to the nth degree. The psychopolitical operative must succeed, for his success means a world of Peace. His failure might well mean the destruction of the civilized portions of Earth by atomic power in the hands of capitalistic madmen.

The end thoroughly justifies the means. The degradation of populaces is less inhuman than their destruction by atomic fission, for to an animal who lives only once, any life is sweeter than death.

The end of war is the control of a conquered people. If a people can be conquered in the absence of war, the end of war will have been achieved without the destruction of war. A worthy goal.

The psychopolitician has his reward in the nearly unlimited control of populaces, in the uninhibited exercise of passion, and the glory of Communist conquest over the stupidity of the enemies of the People.
__________________
 
Re: saddened

A World Split Apart by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
By Editorial Staff
Published June 1978

Commencement Address Delivered At Harvard University

I am sincerely happy to be here with you on the occasion of the 327th commencement of this old and illustrious university. My congratulations and best wishes to all of today’s graduates.

Harvard’s motto is “VERITAS.”�� Many of you have already found out and others will find out in the course of their lives that truth eludes us as soon as our concentration begins to flag, all the while leaving the illusion that we are continuing to pursue it. This is the source of much discord. Also, truth seldom is sweet; it is almost invariably bitter. A measure of truth is included in my speech today, but I offer it as a friend, not as an adversary.

Three years ago in the United States I said certain things that were rejected and appeared unacceptable. Today, however, many people agree with what I said …

The split in today’s world is perceptible even to a hasty glance. Any of our contemporaries readily identifies two world powers, each of them already capable of destroying each other. However, the understanding of the split too often is limited to this political conception: the illusion according to which danger may be abolished through successful diplomatic negotiations or by achieving a balance of armed forces. The truth is that the split is both more profound and more alienating, that the rifts are more numerous than one can see at first glance. These deep manifold splits bear the danger of equally manifold disaster for all of us, in accordance with the ancient truth that a kingdom – in this case, our Earth – divided against itself cannot stand.

Contemporary Worlds

There is the concept of the Third World: thus, we already have three worlds. Undoubtedly, however, the number is even greater; we are just too far away to see. Every ancient and deeply rooted self-contained culture, especially if it is spread over a wide part of the earth’s surface, constitutes a self-contained world, full of riddles and surprises to Western thinking. As a minimum, we must include in this China, India, the Muslim world, and Africa, if indeed we accept the approximation of viewing the latter two as uniform.

For one thousand years Russia belonged to such a category, although Western thinking systematically committed the mistake of denying its special character and therefore never understood it, just as today the West does not understand Russia in Communist captivity. And while it may be that in past years Japan has increasingly become, in effect, a Far West, drawing ever closer to Western ways (I am no judge here), Israel, I think, should not be reckoned as part of the West, if only because of the decisive circumstance that its state system is fundamentally linked to its religion.

How short a time ago, relatively, the small world of modern Europe was easily seizing colonies all over the globe, not only without anticipating any real resistance, but usually with contempt for any possible values in the conquered people’s approach to life. It all seemed an overwhelming success, with no geographic limits. Western society expanded in a triumph of human independence and power. And all of a sudden the twentieth century brought the clear realization of this society’s fragility.

We now see that the conquests proved to be short lived and precarious (and this, in turn, points to defects in the Western view of the world which led to these conquests). Relations with the former colonial world now have switched to the opposite extreme and the Western world often exhibits an excess of obsequiousness, but it is difficult yet to estimate the size of the bill which former colonial countries will present to the West and it is difficult to predict whether the surrender not only of its last colonies, but of everything it owns, will be sufficient for the West to clear this account.

Convergence

But the persisting blindness of superiority continues to hold the belief that all the vast regions of our planet should develop and mature to the level of contemporary Western systems, the best in theory and the most attractive in practice; that all those other worlds are but temporarily prevented (by wicked leaders or by severe crises or by their own barbarity and incomprehension) from pursuing Western pluralistic democracy and adopting the Western way of life. Countries are judged on the merit of their progress in that direction. But in fact such a conception is a fruit of Western incomprehension of the essence of other worlds, a result of mistakenly measuring them all with a Western yardstick. The real picture of our planet’s development bears little resemblance to all this.

The anguish of a divided world gave birth to the theory of convergence between the leading Western countries and the Soviet Union. It is a soothing theory which overlooks the fact that these worlds are not evolving toward each other and that neither one can be transformed into the other without violence. Besides, convergence inevitably means acceptance of the other side’s defects, too. and this can hardly suit anyone.

If I were today addressing an audience in my country, in my examination of the overall pattern of the world’s rifts I would have concentrated on the calamities of the East. But since my forced exile in the West has now lasted four years and since my audience is a Western one, I think it may be of greater interest to concentrate on certain aspects of the contemporary West, such as I see them.

A Decline In Courage

A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, causing an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. There are many courageous individuals, but they have no determining influence on public life.

Political and intellectual functionaries exhibit this depression, passivity, and perplexity in their actions and in their statements, and even more so in their self-serving rationales as to how realistic, reasonable, and intellectually and even morally justified it is to base state policies on weakness and cowardice. And the decline in courage, at times attaining what could be termed a lack of manhood, is ironically emphasized by occasional outbursts and inflexibility on the part of those same functionaries when dealing with weak governments and with countries that lack support, or with doomed currents which clearly cannot offer resistance. But they get tongue-tied and paralyzed when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and international terrorists.

Must one point out that from ancient times a decline in courage has been considered the first symptom of the end?

Well-Being

When the modern Western states were being formed, it was proclaimed as a principle that governments are meant to serve man and that man lives in order to be free and pursue happiness. (See, for example, the American Declaration of Independence.) Now at last during past decades technical and social progress has permitted the realization of such aspirations: the welfare state.

Every citizen has been granted the desired freedom and material goods in such quantity and in such quality as to guarantee in theory the achievement of happiness, in the debased sense of the word which has come into being during those same decades. (In the process, however, one psychological detail has been overlooked: the constant desire to have still more things and a still better life and the struggle to this end imprint many Western faces with worry and even depression, though it is customary to carefully conceal such feelings. This active and tense competition comes to dominate all human thought and does not in the least open a way to free spiritual development.)

The individual’s independence from many types of state pressure has been guaranteed; the majority of the people have been granted well-being to an extent their fathers and grandfathers could not even dream about; it has become possible to raise young people according to these ideals, preparing them for and summoning them toward physical bloom, happiness, and leisure, the possession of material goods, money, and leisure, toward an almost unlimited freedom in the choice of pleasures. So who should now renounce all this, why and for the sake of what should one risk one’s precious life in defense of the common good and particularly in the nebulous case when the security of one’s nation must be defended in an as yet distant land?

Even biology tells us that a high degree of habitual well-being is not advantageous to a living organism. Today, well-being in the life of Western society has begun to take off its pernicious mask.

Legalistic Life

Western society has chosen for itself the organization best suited to its purposes and one I might call legalistic. The limits of human rights and rightness are determined by a system of laws; such limits are very broad. People in the West have acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting, and manipulating law (though laws tend to be too complicated for an average person to understand without the help of an expert). Every conflict is solved according to the letter of the law and this is considered to be the ultimate solution.

If one is risen from a legal point of view, nothing more is required, nobody may mention that one could still not be right, and urge self-restraint or a renunciation of these rights, call for sacrifice and selfless risk: this would simply sound absurd. Voluntary self-restraint is almost unheard of: everybody strives toward further expansion to the extreme limit of the legal frames. (An oil company is legally blameless when it buys up an invention of a new type of energy in order to prevent its use. A food product manufacturer is legally blameless when he poisons his produce to make it last longer: after all, people are free not to purchase it.)

I have spent all my life under a Communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society based on the letter of the law and never reaching any higher fails to take full advantage of the full range of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relationships, this creates an atmosphere of spiritual mediocrity that paralyzes man’s noblest impulses.

And it will be simply impossible to bear up to the trials of this threatening century with nothing but the supports of a legalistic structure.

The Direction of Freedom

Today’s Western society has revealed the inequality between the freedom for good deeds and the freedom for evil deeds. A statesman who wants to achieve something highly constructive for his country has to move cautiously and even timidly; thousands of hasty (and irresponsible) critics cling to him at all times; he is constantly rebuffed by parliament and the press. He has to prove that his every step is well founded and absolutely flawless. Indeed, an outstanding, truly great person who has unusual and unexpected initiatives in mind does not get any chance to assert himself; dozens of traps will be set for him from the beginning. Thus mediocrity triumphs under the guise of democratic restraints.

It is feasible and easy everywhere to undermine administrative power and it has in fact been drastically weakened in all Western countries. The defense of individual rights has reached such extremes as to make society as a whole defenseless against certain individuals. It is time, in the West, to defend not so much human rights as human obligations.

On the other hand, destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society has turned out to have scarce defense against the abyss of human decadence, for example against the misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, such as motion pictures full of pornography, crime, and horror. This is all considered to be part of freedom and to be counterbalanced, in theory, by the young people’s right not to look and not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil.

And what shall we say about the dark realms of overt criminality? Legal limits (especially in the United States) are broad enough to encourage not only individual freedom but also some misuse of such freedom. The culprit can go unpunished or obtain undeserved leniency – all with the support of thousands of defenders in the society. When a government earnestly undertakes to root out terrorism, public opinion immediately accuses it of violating the terrorist’s civil rights. There is quite a number of such cases.

This tilt of freedom toward evil has come about gradually, but it evidently stems from a humanistic and benevolent concept according to which man – the master of the world – does not bear any evil within himself, and all the defects of life are caused by misguided social systems, which must therefore be corrected. Yet strangely enough, though the best social conditions have been achieved in the West, there still remains a great deal of crime; there even is considerably more of it than in the destitute and lawless Soviet society. (There is a multitude of prisoners in our camps who are termed criminals, but most of them never committed any crime; they merely tried to defend themselves against a lawless state by resorting to means outside the legal framework.)

The Direction of the Press

The press, too, of course, enjoys the widest freedom. (I shall be using the word “press”�� to include all the media.) But what use does it make of it?

Here again, the overriding concern is not to infringe the letter of the law. There is no true moral responsibility for distortion or disproportion. What sort of responsibility does a journalist or a newspaper have to the readership or to history? If they have misled public opinion by inaccurate information or wrong conclusions, even if they have contributed to mistakes on a state level, do we know of any case of open regret voiced by the same journalist or the same newspaper? No; this would damage sales. A nation may be the worse for such a mistake, but the journalist always gets away with it. It is most likely that he will start writing the exact opposite to his previous statements with renewed aplomb.

Because instant and credible information is required, it becomes necessary to resort to guesswork, rumors, and suppositions to fill in the voids, and none of them will ever be refuted; they settle into the readers’ memory. How many hasty, immature, superficial, and misleading judgments are expressed everyday, confusing readers, and then left hanging?

The press can act the role of public opinion or miseducate it. Thus we may see terrorists heroized, or secret matters pertaining to the nation’s defense publicly revealed, or we may witness shameless intrusion into the privacy of well-known people according to the slogan “Everyone is entitled to know everything.”�� (But this is a false slogan of a false era; far greater in value is the forfeited right of people not to know, not to have their divine souls stuffed with gossip, nonsense, vain talk. A person who works and leads a meaningful life has no need for this excessive and burdening flow of information.)

Hastiness and superficiality – these are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century and more than anywhere else this is manifested in the press. In-depth analysis of a problem is anathema to the press; it is contrary to its nature. The press merely picks out sensational formulas.

Such as it is, however, the press has become the greatest power within Western countries, exceeding that of the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Yet one would like to ask: According to what law has it been elected and to whom is it responsible? In the Communist East, a journalist is frankly appointed as a state official. But who has voted Western journalists into their positions of power, for how long a time, and with what prerogatives?

There is yet another surprise for someone coming from the totalitarian East with its rigorously unified press: One discovers a common trend of preferences within the Western press as a whole (the spirit of the time), generally accepted patterns of judgment, and maybe common corporate interests, the sum effect being not competition but unification. Unrestrained freedom exists for the press, but not for readership, because newspapers mostly transmit in a forceful and emphatic way those opinions which do not too openly contradict their own and that general trend.

A Fashion in Thinking

Without any censorship in the West, fashionable trends of thought and ideas are fastidiously separated from those that are not fashionable, and the latter, without ever being forbidden have little chance of finding their way into periodicals or books or being heard in colleges. Your scholars are free in the legal sense, but they are hemmed in by the idols of the prevailing fad. There is no open violence, as in the East; however, a selection dictated by fashion and the need to accommodate mass standards frequently prevents the most independent-minded persons from contributing to public life and gives rise to dangerous herd instincts that block dangerous herd development.

In America, I have received letters from highly intelligent persons – maybe a teacher in a faraway small college who could do much for the renewal and salvation of his country, but the country cannot hear him because the media will not provide him with a forum. This gives birth to strong mass prejudices, to a blindness which is perilous in our dynamic era. An example is the self-deluding interpretation of the state of affairs in the contemporary world that functions as a sort of petrified armor around people’s minds, to such a degree that human voices from seventeen countries of Eastern Europe and Eastern Asia cannot pierce it. It will be broken only by the inexorable crowbar of events.

I have mentioned a few traits of Western life which surprise and shock a new arrival to this world . The purpose and scope of this speech will not allow me to continue such a survey, in particular to look into the impact of these characteristics on important aspects of a nation’s life, such as elementary education, advanced education in the humanities, and art.

Socialism

It is almost universally recognized that the West shows all the world the way to successful economic development, even though in past years it has been sharply offset by chaotic inflation. However, many people living in the West are dissatisfied with their own society. They despise it or accuse it of no longer being up to the level of maturity by mankind. And this causes many to sway toward socialism, which is a false and dangerous current.

I hope that no one present will suspect me of expressing my partial criticism of the Western system in order to suggest socialism as an alternative. No; with the experience of a country where socialism has been realized, I shall not speak for such an alternative. The mathematician Igor Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliantly argued book entitled Socialism; this is a penetrating historical analysis demonstrating that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. Shafarevich’s book was published in France almost two years ago and so far no one has been found to refute it. It will shortly be published in English in the U.S.

Not a Model

But should I be asked, instead, whether I would propose the West, such as it is today, as a model to my country, I would frankly have to answer negatively. No, I could not recommend your society as an ideal for the transformation of ours. Through deep suffering, people in our own country have now achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state of spiritual exhaustion does not look attractive. Even those characteristics of your life which I have just enumerated are extremely saddening.

A fact which cannot be disputed is the weakening of human personality in the West while in the East it has become firmer and stronger. Six decades for our people and three decades for the people of Eastern Europe; during that time we have been through a spiritual training far in advance of Western experience. The complex and deadly crush of life has produced stronger, deeper, and more interesting personalities than those generated by standardized Western well-being. Therefore, if our society were to be transformed into yours, it would mean an improvement in certain aspects, but also a change for the worse on some particularly significant points.

Of course, a society cannot remain in an abyss of lawlessness, as is the case in our country. But it is also demeaning for it to stay on such a soulless and smooth plane of legalism, as is the case in yours. After the suffering of decades of violence and oppression, the human soul longs for things higher, warmer, and purer than those offered by today’s mass living habits, introduced as by a calling card by the revolting invasion of commercial advertising, by TV stupor, and by intolerable music.

All this is visible to numerous observers from all the worlds of our planet. The Western way of life is less and less likely to become the leading model.

There are telltale symptoms by which history gives warning to a threatened or perishing society. Such are, for instance, a decline of the arts or a lack of great statesmen. Indeed, sometimes the warnings are quite explicit and concrete. The center of your democracy and of your culture is left without electric power for a few hours only, and all of a sudden crowds of American citizens start looting and creating havoc. The smooth surface film must be very thin, then, the social system quite unstable and unhealthy.

But the fight for our planet, physical and spiritual, a fight of cosmic proportions, is not a vague matter of the future; it has already started. The forces of Evil have begun their decisive offensive. You can feel their pressure, yet your screens and publications are full of prescribed smiles and raised glasses. What is the joy about?

Humanism and its Consequences

How has this unfavorable relation of forces come about? How did the West decline from its triumphal march to its present debility? Have there been fatal turns and losses of direction in its development? It does not seem so. The West kept advancing steadily in accordance with its proclaimed social intentions, hand in hand with a dazzling progress in technology. And all of a sudden it found itself in its present state of weakness.

This means that the mistake must be at the root, at the very foundation of thought in modern times. I refer to the prevailing Western view of the world in modern times. I refer to the prevailing Western view of the world which was born in the Renaissance and has found political expression since the Age of Enlightenment. It became the basis for political and social doctrine and could be called rationalistic humanism or humanistic autonomy: the pro-claimed and practiced autonomy of man from any higher force above him. It could also be called anthropocentricity, with man seen as the center of all.

The turn introduced by the Renaissance was probably inevitable historically: the Middle Ages had come to a natural end by exhaustion, having become an intolerable despotic repression of man’s physical nature in favor of the spiritual one. But then we recoiled from the spirit and embraced all that is material, excessively and incommensurately. The humanistic way of thinking, which had proclaimed itself our guide, did not admit the existence of intrinsic evil in man, nor did it see any task higher than the attainment of happiness on earth. It started modern Western civilization on the dangerous trend of worshiping man and his material needs.

Everything beyond physical well-being and the accumulation of material goods, all other human requirements and characteristics of a subtle and higher nature, were left outside the area of attention of state and social systems, as if human life did not have any higher meaning. Thus gaps were left open for evil, and its drafts blow freely today. Mere freedom per se does not in the least solve all the problems of human life and even adds a number of new ones.

And yet in early democracies, as in American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted on the ground that man is God’s creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the heritage of the preceding one thousand years. Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual be granted boundless freedom with no purpose, simply for the satisfaction of his whims.

Subsequently, however, all such limitations were eroded everywhere in the West; a total emancipation occurred from the moral heritage of Christian centuries with their great reserves of mercy and sacrifice. State systems were becoming ever more materialistic. The West has finally achieved the rights of man, and even excess, but man’s sense of responsibility to God and society has grown dimmer and dimmer. In the past decades, the legalistic selfishness of the Western approach to the world has reached its peak and the world has found itself in a harsh spiritual crisis and a political impasse. All the celebrated technological achievements of progress, including the conquest of outer space, do not redeem the twentieth century’s moral poverty, which no one could have imagined even as late as the nineteenth century.

An Unexpected Kinship

As humanism in its development was becoming more and more materialistic, it also increasingly allowed concepts to be used first by socialism and then by communism, so that Karl Marx was able to say, in 1844, that “communism is naturalized humanism.”��

This statement has proved to be not entirely unreasonable. One does not see the same stones in the foundations of an eroded humanism and of any type of socialism: boundless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility (which under Communist regimes attains the stage of antireligious dictatorship); concentration on social structures with an allegedly scientific approach. (This last is typical of both the Age of Enlightenment and of Marxism.) It is no accident that all of communism’s rhetorical vows revolve around Man (with a capital M) and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today’s West and today’s East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.

The interrelationship is such, moreover, that the current of materialism which is farthest to the left, and is hence the most consistent, always proves to be stronger, more attractive, and victorious. Humanism which has lost its Christian heritage cannot prevail in this competition. Thus during the past centuries and especially in recent decades, as the process became more acute, the alignment of forces was as follows: Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism could not stand up to communism.

The communist regime in the East could endure and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who (feeling the kinship!) refused to see communism’s crimes, and when they no longer could do so, they tried to justify these crimes. The problem persists: In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. And yet Western intellectuals still look at it with considerable interest and empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East.

Before the Turn

I am not examining the case of a disaster brought on by a world war and the changes which it would produce in society. But as long as we wake up every morning under a peaceful sun, we must lead an everyday life. Yet there is a disaster which is already very much with us. I am referring to the calamity of an autonomous, irreligious humanistic consciousness.

It has made man the measure of all things on earth – imperfect man, who is never free of pride, self-interest, envy, vanity, and dozens of other defects. We are now paying for the mistakes which were not properly appraised at the beginning of the journey. On the way from the Renaissance to our days we have enriched our experience, but we have lost the concept of a Supreme Complete Entity which used to restrain our passions and our irresponsibility.

We have placed too much hope in politics and social reforms, only to find out that we were being deprived of our most precious possession: our spiritual life. It is trampled by the party mob in the East, by the commercial one in the West. This is the essence of the crisis: the split in the world is less terrifying than the similarity of the disease afflicting its main sections.

If, as claimed by humanism, man were born only to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to death, his task on earth evidently must be more spiritual: not a total engrossment in everyday life, not the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then their carefree consumption. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one’s life journey may become above all an experience of moral growth: to leave life a better human being than one started it.

It is imperative to reappraise the scale of the usual human values; its present incorrectness is astounding. It is not possible that assessment of the President’s performance should be reduced to the question of how much money one makes or to the availability of gasoline. Only by the voluntary nurturing in ourselves of freely accepted and serene self-restraint can mankind rise above the world stream of materialism.

Today it would be retrogressive to hold on to the ossified formulas of the Enlightenment. Such social dogmatism leaves us helpless before the trials of our times.

Even if we are spared destruction by war, life will have to change in order not to perish on its own. We cannot avoid reassessing the fundamental definitions of human life and society. Is it true that man is above everything? Is there no Superior Spirit above him? Is it right that man’s life and society’s activities should be ruled by material expansion above all? Is it permissible to promote such expansion to the detriment of our integral spiritual life?

If the world has not approached its end, it has reached a major watershed in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. It will demand from us a spiritual blaze; we shall have to rise to a new height of vision, to a new level of life, where our physical nature will not be cursed, as in the Middle Ages, but even more importantly, our spiritual being will not be trampled upon, as in the Modern Era.

The ascension is similar to climbing onto the next anthropological stage. No one on earth has any other way left but – upward.

Reprinted from A World Split Apart by Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, (Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1978).
 
Re: saddened

http://www.vdare.com/stix/100526_mizzou_two.htm


Nicholas Stix [email him] lives in New York City, which he views from the perspective of its public transport system, experienced in his career as an educator. His weekly column appears at Men’s News Daily and many other Web sites. He has also written for Middle American News, the newspaper, New York Post, Newsday, Chronicles, Ideas on Liberty and the Weekly Standard. He maintains two blogs: A Different Drummer and Nicholas Stix, Uncensored


The left's paradise, as they are very loving people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkSVWMDm5i0
 
Re: saddened

Chuck Baldwin Archive Email a Friend...
Printer Friendly Version...


June 04, 2010

Freedom For A Change: A Must-Read Book
By Chuck Baldwin

My son, Tim Baldwin, is a constitutional attorney and historian. And now, after reading his just-released book, Freedom For A Change, I learned something else about him: he is quite the scholar. I dare say his new book, Freedom For A Change, rivals any great textbook of law and history written during the last hundred years. And I am not saying that because he is my son. I am saying that because it is the truth.

Tim's book is not for pussyfooters. It is not a book designed for light, casual reading. The book, Freedom For A Change, is an in-depth and exhaustive manual of American law and history (of over 500 pages) that should be read by every serious lover of liberty—especially those who call themselves Christians! The footnotes, alone, would make for a greater-than-average-size book and are chock-full of historical quotations and references.

Recommending the book, Freedom For A Change, are best-selling author Jerome Corsi ("The Late Great USA " and "The Obama Nation," etc.) and retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, author ("God & Caesar " and "Christianity and the Constitution," etc.), and professor of constitutional law at Thomas Goode Jones School of Law in Montgomery, Alabama, John Eidsmoe. Retired Air Force Brigadier General Charles E. Jones III penned the book's foreword.

Dr. Corsi said this about Tim's book: "Freedom For A Change is a must read for any American who wants to see a restoration and revival of freedom. Timothy Baldwin's research and exposition of the principles of freedom come straight from the sources that America's founding fathers read and used. It is certainly time that America experiences this Freedom For A Change!"

Colonel Eidsmoe said, "Freedom For A Change stands out among other books because of Baldwin's meticulous research, quotation, and documentation from the founding fathers' own writings, and from the sources they studied—Blackstone, Montesquieu, Locke, Grotius, Sidney, and above all, the Bible. Baldwin interacts with these sources and contrasts the original understanding of government with the usurpations of government officials today. Baldwin's analysis is clear, comprehensive, and convincing. To understand where America went wrong and what we Americans can do about it, Freedom For A Change is vital reading!"

From the foreword, General Jones writes, "Author Timothy Baldwin studiously wrote Freedom For A Change with great wisdom, understanding, and insight as he developed and expounded a complete and comprehensive picture of what made America free and what it will take to keep it free. Freedom For A Change is a necessary read for all politicians, constitutional scholars, and freedom-first citizens."

General Jones also wrote, "When the contents of Freedom For A Change are digested and applied, they will undoubtedly play a large part in the recovery of our once great republic."

Tim superbly reveals how America's Founding Fathers weaved the principles of the natural and revealed laws of God into the very foundation and fabric of our nation's formation. His research into the writings and public statements of America's founders is masterful! After reading Tim's book, no honest, objective reader—Christian or not—will be able to refute the facts and documentation proving America's founding as a nation of "free and independent states" under the natural and revealed laws of God.

The 4th chapter of Freedom For A Change, alone, is worth the price of the book. The chapter is titled "Understanding Government." Tim rightly expounds upon the truism that one cannot rightly understand the nature of government who does not understand the nature of man or the nature of God. He brilliantly proves that America's founders clearly understood all of the above and predicated our Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, and Bill of Rights upon this sagacious understanding. He meticulously unveils the principles of life, self-preservation and defense, reason, knowledge, freedom, and peace. He delves deeply into the propensity of government to oppress and enslave. And he spares no space in demonstrating the importance of understanding the nature of God in the formation and perpetuation of good government—something the vast majority of scholars and historians overlook.

Chapter 7, entitled "Government's Purpose," chapter 9, entitled "Government Administrators: Their Qualifications," and chapter 10, entitled "Government Administrators: Their Limits," are also crucial to understanding the principles that preserve and maintain liberty.

Christians, especially, will find Tim's in-depth analysis of the Biblical teaching found in Romans 13 regarding submission to governmental authority extremely enlightening. If for no other reason, every pastor and Christian in America should read Freedom For A Change in order to gain a true, Biblical understanding of this vitally important subject. In this regard, chapter 12, entitled "Submission To Government," is, without question, the very best analysis of the subject that I have ever read—bar none! Oh! How I wish every pastor in America would read this chapter!

Chapter 13, entitled "Resistance to Unlawful Government," is also worth the price of the book. It is the concluding chapter before four Appendixes that include the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and two chapters written by Tim's dad (me), which chronicle a burgeoning New World Order currently underway.

Here are the 13 chapter titles:

The Starting Point: The Thought Process

The Foundation: Natural and Revealed Laws

Responsibilities Derived from Natural and Revealed Laws

Understanding Government

Government Formation

Government Administrators: Of, By, and For the People

Government's Purpose

Government's Administration

Government Administrators: Their Qualifications

Government Administrators: Their Limits

Ordination of Government

Submission to Government

Resistance to Unlawful Government

Tim's book, Freedom For A Change, may be obtained by going to Amazon.com.

I urge everyone reading this column to immediately purchase Tim Baldwin's phenomenally researched book of American history entitled Freedom For A Change. Without a doubt, after reading it, you will be the one who is changed.

Dr. Chuck Baldwin is the pastor of Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. He hosts a weekly radio show. His website is here.


http://www.vdare.com/baldwin/100604_freedom.htm
 
Re: saddened

Hans Johnson, a demographer at the Public Policy Institute of California, said white women in recent decades have tended to pursue higher-education degrees and stay in the workplace, leading them to have fewer children. The white population is now "below the replacement" level, Johnson said. "They're simply not replacing themselves."

The median age among California's whites is 44, while the median age for the Hispanic population is 28, according to the study.

Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, said the study also reflected how skyrocketing real estate prices pushed workers from California during the housing bubble from 2005 through 2007.

"This is a good look at what happens when your housing prices get way out of line with the rest of the nation," Levy said. "It will be interesting to see what happens when the market corrects itself."
Reverse of a trend

Johnson said migration into California was a national trend until the 1990s, when the number of out-of-state transplants began to decline.

Lower-paid California workers headed to cities like Phoenix, Las Vegas and Seattle, where they could make similar wages but pay less for housing.

"California is no longer attracting large numbers of people from other states," Johnson said. "And a lot of those who did come to California from other states were white, reflecting the ethnic composition of the country as a whole.

"Now," he said, "that flow has dried up."

The decline among whites and increase in other groups in California is a long-standing trend, Johnson said.

"It's just faster now."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNSG1DQ1BL.DTL
__________________
 
Re: saddened

Scene from Victor Fleming's The Virginian (1929), starring Gary Cooper as The Virginian and Walter Huston as Trampas. Based on Owen Wister's novel and play, this is Gary Cooper's first all-talkie film and a hugely influential Western which put in place the themes, characters, plot and visuals that Westerns would follow for the next 40 years. This scene also contains the famous exchange between The Virginian and Trampas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSFJdbqYiTc&feature=related
 
Re: saddened

http://e-cpu.blogspot.com/


Steve Sailer Archive Email a Friend...
Printer Friendly Version...


June 06, 2010

What The Flotilla Furor Says About America’s Jewish Elite
By Steve Sailer

I haven't had anything to say previously about that fatal Israeli naval encounter with the Gaza-bound flotilla on May 31, 2010 â┚¬¦ because I don't much care. Israel is not the 51st state; it’s one of a couple of hundred other countries. If Israel wants to push around the Palestinians, well, that’s their business much more than it is my business.

What I do care about is America. My particular bias is that free, insightful public discussion is better for America than spin, ignorance, or wishful thinking. So I'm interested in the flotilla frenzy to the extent it has implications for the quality of American discourse.

Chosen, but not Special is a long op-ed in the June 4th New York Times by the gifted Jewish-American novelist Michael Chabon. He is the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay, an impressively researched historical novel that manages to be both literary and entertaining. It’s about two Jewish teens in New York who invent a Superman-style comic book superhero during Hitler’s ascendancy in 1939-1942.

In the NYT, Chabon uses Israel’s PR disaster to wrestle with the important question of Jewish intelligence. Awareness of higher average Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence happens to be the essential key to understanding the peculiarities of what you are allowed to write about in modern America.

Chabon discusses Jewish discomfort with the handful of gentiles who dare write about the fact of higher median Jewish IQ:

"For we Jews are not, it turns out, entirely comfortable living with the consequences of this myth, as becomes clear from the squirming and throat-clearing that take place among us whenever some non-Jew pipes up with his own observations about how clever and smart we are in our yiddishe kops. "

Yiddish kops is, of course, Yiddish for "Jewish brains." In contrast, goyisher kops means "gentile brains." The New Joys of Yiddish notes that the latter phrase "is not, alas, complimentary."

Chabon continues:

"These include people like the political scientist Charles Murray, author of an influential essay titled "Jewish Genius," or Kevin B. MacDonald, a psychology professor at California State University at Long Beach who argues that Jews essentially undertook a centuries-long program of self-breeding, selecting for traits of intelligence, guile and skill at calculation, as a kind of evolutionary adaptation to the buffetings of history and exile."

Chabon frets about the perceived dangers of gentiles talking about the high average IQ of Ashkenazi Jews:

"Such claims, in mouths of gentiles, are a disturbing echo of the charges of the pogrom-stokers, the genocidalists, the Father Coughlins, who come to sharpen their knives against the same grindstone of generalization on which we Jews have long polished the magnifying lenses of our self-regard. The man who praises you for your history of accomplishment may someday seek therein the grounds for your destruction."

Chabon, who is obviously stronger at creative than analytic thinking, announces, with no cited evidence other than the flotilla fiasco, that "Jews are stupid in roughly the same proportion as all the world’s people."

What’s valuable about his op-ed, however, is how it illuminates much about the subject of Jewish intelligence that is normally obscured---such as how convinced Jews are of their own intellectual superiority.

Chabon begins:

"’GAZA Flotilla Drives Israel Into a Sea of Stupidity’ declared the Israeli daily Haaretz on Monday, as though announcing the discovery of some hitherto unknown body of water. Citizens of other nations have long since resigned themselves, of course, to sailing those crowded waters, but for Israelisâ┚¬”��and, indeed, for Jews everywhereâ┚¬”��this felt like headline news."

Why? According to Chabon:

" â┚¬¦ for Jews the first reaction was shock, confusion, as we tried to get our heads around what appeared to be an unprecedented display of blockheadedness."

It shouldn’t have appeared unprecedented: the most obvious predecessor to Israel’s raid on the flotilla was its 1967 attack in roughly the same international waters on the USS Liberty, when the Israeli military killed 34 American seamen. Blockheadedness is the most innocent explanation that has yet been offered for Israel’s two-hour long air and sea assault on the clearly-marked American intelligence-gathering ship.

Personally, I care more about the Liberty than this Turkish-organized flotilla.

Of course, how many other Americans remember the Liberty? This event is certainly not frequently commemorated in our domestic media. Chabon, for instance, doesn’t mention itâ┚¬”��is he even aware of it?â┚¬”��although it might be the best example he could find in support of his rather flimsy thesis.

Chabon has much of value to say on how convinced Jews are of their own average brilliance:

"â┚¬¦ Jews around the world have long been accustomed to find in contemplating ourselves and that history: an inborn, half-legendary agility of intellect, amounting almost to a magical power."

He continues:

"As a Jewish child I was regularly instructed, both subtly and openly, that Jews, the people of Maimonides, Albert Einstein, Jonas Salk and Meyer Lansky, were on the whole smarter, cleverer, more brilliant, more astute than other people. And, duly, I would look around the Passover table, say, at the members of my family, and remark on the presence of a number of highly intelligent, quick-witted, shrewd, well-educated people filled to bursting with information, explanations and opinions on a diverse range of topics."

By the way, Chabon’s mother was a lawyer, while his father was both a lawyer and a doctor.

Ockham’s Razor would suggest that the reason why smart Jews like Chabon’s relatives think that Jews tend to be pretty smart isâ┚¬”��because Jews tend to be pretty smart. But William of Ockham’s Anglo logic is too simplistic for Chabon. You see, there are exceptions! And that, somehow, disproves the generalization:

"In my tractable and vainglorious eagerness to confirm the People of Einstein theory, my gaze would skip right overâ┚¬”��God love themâ┚¬”��any counterexamples present at that year’s Seder."

Chabon has a more complicated (and, thus, in his mind, better) explanation:

"â┚¬¦ to a Jew, it always comes as a shock to encounter stupid Jews. Philip Roth derived a major theme of Goodbye, Columbus from the uncanny experience. The shock comes not because we have never encountered any stupid Jews beforeâ┚¬”��Jews are stupid in roughly the same proportion as all the world’s peopleâ┚¬”��but simply because from an early age we have been trained, implicitly and explicitly, to ignore them."

That’s so smart it’s stupid.

If meeting stupid Jews always comes as a shock to Jews, even to one as brilliant and scornful as the author of Portnoy’s Complaint, then the straightforward explanation is that they are, indeed, relatively rare.

Exceptions don’t disprove tendencies. In fact, when exceptions are famous for their exceptionality, that’s evidence for the pattern. Unfortunately, in an intellectual climate where pointing out that a generalization is a "stereotype" (i.e., many people have noticed it) is consider a crushing refutation of its truthfulness, few grasp these logical rules.

In sum, Chabon is just being blockheaded in the socially approved manner.

Why do modern people congratulate themselves on being smart when they proclaim that something as interesting and important as Jewish intelligence is just a socially constructed myth? Do they have any idea how much work it requires to come up with a reasonable theory for Jewish brains?

Moreover, it’s absurd for Chabon to say that Jews have been brought up to ignore stupid Jews. Calling each other stupid was the favorite pastime of Eastern European shtetl Jews. AISH.com says:

"Face it. We Jews don't bear fools lightly. Who had time? So is it surprising that we have more words in Yiddish for fools than there are Golden Arches?"

Yiddish is the world’s best language for pointing out fine distinctions in your neighbor’s cognitive impairment: schnook, schlemiel, schmo, yutz, putz, schmuck, yekl, schlub, golem, nar, yold.

In reality, characteristic Jewish mistakes tend to arise from overthinking, from their facility at intellectually bullying dissidents reliant merely upon common sense.

Consider how many Jewish Communists spent the 22 months from the signing of the Nazi-Communist Pact on August 23, 1939 to Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941 thinking up reasons to denounce Churchill’s resistance to Hitler. That kind of astonishing doublethink inspired George Orwell’s 1984.

Tellingly, even though most of Chabon’s masterpiece, Kavalier & Clay, is set in 1940 and 1941 in Jewish New York City cultural circles, and even though Kavalier has recently escaped from Nazi-occupied Europe through the Soviet Union to Japan, the characters never mention the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. In reality, the Hitler-Stalin accord was an obsessive topic for New York Jews at the time, but it’s a little too disturbing for modern readers.

In essence, as Chabon’s Passover stories imply, Jewish liberal egalitarianism is a hoax. Jewish leftist intellectuals like Stephen Jay Gould and Steven Rose have been the foremost volunteer thought policemen on IQ differences, not because leftist Jews believe that all ethnic groups are equal in average intelligence, but because they don’t.

The root of political correctness is the Rube Goldbergian fear that if the goyisher kops are allowed to be exposed to realism about human differences, they will eventually realize that Jews tend to be smarter than them, and then they will come after the Jews with torches and pitchforks.

It’s a characteristic example of Jews using all those IQ points to overthink what’s increasingly a non-problem, only to wind up exacerbating bigger problems, such as contemporary immigration policy.

Of course, worrying about peasants with pitchforks in 2010 is laughable. And that’s what everyoneâ┚¬”��gentiles and Jewsâ┚¬”��should do with this line of thinking: laugh at it. Satire is the solution. If Jews were as amenable to kidding by gentiles as WASPs had been to Jewish comedians, they would be less prone to inflicting their complexes upon American policy.

Sadly, Chabon doesn’t get the joke. He concludes with a long peroration about how everyone, Jew and gentile alike, should just forget the "myth," the "nonsense," that Jews tend to be smarter and just hold Israel to the same standard as everywhere else.

That’s fine with me, but what about America?

Allow me to suggest a completely different moral. The clear evidence of higher average Ashkenazi IQ implies that American Jews should take to heart an admirable bit of 20th Century Jewish wisdom, one with which an expert on comic books like Chabon ought to be familiar---Stan Lee’s line in Spider-Man: "With great power comes great responsibility."

If, say, as reported by the Jewish Telegraph Agency, Jews make up over 1/3rd of the 2009 Forbes 400, and if Jews make up half of the 2009 Atlantic 50 of most influential political pundits, then that implies that Jews, owing in part to their higher average cognitive functioning, should embrace greater responsibility.

Instead of viewing themselves as beleaguered victims, they should admit that they now comprise an elite within America---and that they should apply to themselves an updated version of the old cavalier concept of noblesse oblige.


[Steve Sailer (email him) is movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog. His new book, AMERICA’S HALF-BLOOD PRINCE: BARACK OBAMA’S "STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE", is available here.]
 
Back
Top