White Genocide?

Tags

Affirmative action, African American, America 911, American Liberty, Anders Behring Breivik, Anti-Racist is a Code word for Anti-White, Barack Obama, Christianity, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, miley cyrus, Pat Condell, Paul Weston, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, United States, White Genocide

It was in Birmingham on the 20th of April, 1968, that the political history of Modern England was quietly – but irrevocably – altered.

In a soft, seductive, Shakespearean tone, Conservative parliamentarian Enoch Powell delivered the talk on immigration since immortalised as ‘Rivers of Blood’.

In this address, Powell warned that Britain’s new immigration policy, should it continue indefinitely to the same extent, would disinherit the indigenous population of their rights, and in doing so set the scene for widespread civil conflict on English streets.

Shortly after the meeting was adjourned, the talk was reported by the media. The reaction was an uproar that shook British society to its very foundations.

Marches were held across the country, both for and against. The working-classes of the inner cities came out overwhelmingly in support of the MP, and claimed attention to the loss of industrial work for natives caused by immigration. The opponents of Powell’s sentiment meanwhile described his concerns as outrightly ‘fascist’, a word which, at that time, still had some emotional force behind it.

This is an excerpt from the speech itself:

“In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants… There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population… Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population …  As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see “the River Tiber foaming with much blood…. That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect.”

The prescience of this speech is at once clear and obvious. Indeed, such an austere articulation of the fashionable ‘White Genocide’ thesis has never since been produced.

The phrase ‘White Genocide’ is one I personally dislike. It is deliberately hyperbolic, not to mention insensitive to the memory of genuine historical events. Nevertheless, it has quickly become the banner for a broad coalition of internet Nationalists, both rational and irrational, hateful and merely concerned.

And even if the phrase is innapropriate, the process intimated by it is real enough to deserve analysis.

As it happens, Powell was exactly correct in his ‘five to seven million’ range of estimate. The 2001 census in Britain showed that 6 million non-Whites then resided in the country; a figure which rises logically to seven million if we add the projected number of illegal, unregistered immigrants (1,000,000+).

The 2011 census showed that the figure of non-white Brits had risen to eight million, a figure kept down by the White immgiration from Eastern-Europe, in particular from Poland. But with Poles removed, the percentage of White English (Anglo-Saxons) in England in 2011 was just over 80% or 4 in 5. By 2020, over one quarter of English citizens will be non-English. By 2030, that figure will be over one third.

The White English are already a minority in cities like London and Leicester, and will soon be in Birmingham, Bradford, Nottingham and Manchester too.

The White population furthermore is getting considerably older. About a third of White English people are over or nearing retirement age. This will soon leave the numbers of physically capable White English citizens at a point of parity with non-Whites.

This last point, as offensive it might strike the heart, matters a great deal. As Paul Weston of LibertyGB has pointed out, people of the older generation ‘don’t matter’ as much in the demographic balance of power, because if a situation of ethnic conflict erupted over the political sovereignty of English territory, older English citizens would be largely out of the game, thus leaving the fighting to a severely diminished pool of White youths, many of whom are indoctrinated Leftists with a generational identity stronger than a National one.

Given the factors described, I would estimate the date at which White English people lose practical domination over their homeland at 2020. At this point, the fighting capacity of White English and non-White English will be roughly comparable. Perhaps it will even be slightly to the non-white advantage given the mixed loyalties of young whites themselves.

So, all is lost for Whites then? Not quite. As I mentioned above, the figures are nuanced with details which should considerably qualify any interpretation. Perhaps the biggest (and most obvious) swing factor in all this is that not all non-White communities possess either the cohesion or the desire to pose a practical threat.

The Polish people, for example, cannot seriously be called a threat to English sovereignty. Nor can, I would argue, the largely apolitical Black population, most of whom are integrated into the cultural bloodstream by sport and music. Nor are the Hindus or the Sikhs an aggressive or even integrationist element, given their strong ties of family and identity with India.

Still, even if not in England, White Genocide might seem a more reasonable hypothesis elsewhere.

The United States is due to have a White minority by 2042. White babies already account for a minority of newborns, and a shrinking portion of school and university intake. How minorities react to this transition is unguessable. While racial harmony has long been considered an American ideal, it hasn’t always panned out that way in reality. The Los Angeles riot legacy, Hispanic/Black gang animosities, lingering Protestant anti-Semitism, Detroitification of big cities, Trayvon Martin, Mexico border wars, drugs violence, and many other factors provide ample tinder for a wayward spark to ignite.

In his book ‘White Girl Bleed a Lot’, Colin Flaherty documents the alarming rise in Black-on-White mob activity in parts of urban America. The most notorious example of this trend is the reported ‘Knock-out’ game (often described in racial terms as ‘Polar-Bear Hunting’) in which gangs of Blacks seek out vulnerable Whites and Asians and attempt to knock them unconscious with a single blow the head.

In South Africa and Zimbabwe too, there have regular mob atrocities committed against White officials and civilians alike. The same trend is observable in parts of France, Sweden and Belgium (these cases particularly targeting women).

By way of conclusion, the hypothesis of ‘White Genocide’ should, I think, be rebranded simply as ‘Anti-European racism’. The first term is a ghost, the second a reality. As the Twenty-first century progresses, and as demographics alter, expect anti-European sentiment to become as widespread as any other kind of racism before it.

The White peoples of the world – aging, diminishing and riddled with Feminism – are going to have to learn to organize for their common defence; perhaps not against anything so great as ‘genocide’, but certainly against pogroms, the scale of which are yet to be determined.

D, LDN.

Advertisement

Being Right and Doing Wrong: Breivik’s Jail Correspondence.

Tags

America 911, Anders Behring Breivik, BBC, Breivik, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Marit Christensen, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Norway, Norwegian, Oslo, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, United States

Shortly before he embarked on a gun and bomb rampage through Oslo, Anders Behring Breivik emailed a 1500 page ‘manifesto’ to over a thousand ‘contacts’ he had amassed via the internet. The text – entitled – ‘2083: A European Declaration of Independence’ – must now rank among the most downloaded and least read of modern political tracts.

The day after the shootings occurred, I downloaded it myself and attempted to scroll-read it on my laptop. Many headache pills later, I gave up. The compendium is too long. Life is too short. In any case, I didn’t need to read much of it to understand his thesis: i.e – that Muslims are set to conquer, via natural demographic growth, many European cities, and ultimately have a shot at taking over the continent entirely. To all intents and purposes, this was already my understanding.

Breivik is now in jail (or whatever Norwegians call a ‘jail’), and is kept for the most part in a segregated cell. His only connection with the outside world is via written correspondence.

Although a murderer should ideally be ignored (having destroyed his own moral legitimacy), I must admit to reading many of Breivik’s letters via transcriptions on the internet. This may be nothing more than morbid curiosity on my part, but I also believe these letters provide valuable insights we can all learn from.

Here is a lengthy excerpt from a letter written by Breivik to a girl called ‘Daisy’.

‘I lost/sacrificed my old family and friends on 22/7 (Note: the day of the attacks), so now and in the future the people I correspond with are in fact the closest thing I have to a family. Don’t let this freak you out though, as you should know I’m corresponding with many brothers and sisters worldwide. I’m currently living in isolation and will probably live in isolation for many many years. This is unproblematic as obviously, this was my own choice. I’m used to living ascetically so it will not be difficult to continue living this way. In fact, in many ways its exactly like living as a monk confined to a monastery. You have sacrificed all worldly goods and many other freedoms but you have gained a focused and balanced mind which is not plagued by greed, desires and lust – and you are allowed to work. I think if I say this enough times I will believe it, haha, but in a way its true enough, but it will take time getting used to and it may be challenging. We once had a tradition of selfless sacrifice in Christian Europe, and I hope I will contribute to re-establish this tradition among nationalists and cultural conservatives. The muslims have this tradition of selfless sacrifice, and this is why they are so dangerous, this while too many Europeans are decadent and selfish, with a lack of the ideals required for revolutionary change. But as we know so well, the wonderful thing is that multiculturalism is a self-defeating ideology so we know the unknown, the future belongs to us, it’s just difficult to predict the exact time it will happen.’

Throughout this text, Breivik casts himself as a classical hero; one who has given up his freedom for an honourable cause. I don’t believe (from reading this and many other letters) that he is bluffing. He really does believe it. At his trial Breivik said that the Norwegian state should give him a ‘medal’. At the time I put this down as sarcasm, but  maybe it wasn’t.

Another notable aspect of the text is the intelligence of its author. Breivik isn’t a fool, and nor is he (as the BBC had him) a video-games freak who simply got lost in another world. He seems to be a very bright, introspective and clear-thinking man, who chose (for whatever reason) the wrong solution to real problems.

When Breivik says ‘Europeans are decadent and selfish, with a lack of the ideals required for revolutionary change.’ – he is correct of course. But there is surely a middle ground (morally and practically) that we can move into. Massacres achieve nothing, except propaganda for the other side.

When Muslim terrorists attack Europe, the Counter-Jihad movement stands to benefit. When Breivik-style plots are revealed or carried out, this works in favour of the Muslims. Someone of Breivik’s intelligence should really have worked this out.

More recent than the quoted letter, Breivik registered a request for the formation of new Norwegian political party to be called “The Norwegian fascist party and Nordic league’. According to a transcribed screenshot of the text itself, the party’s purpose was to achieve “democratic fascist power in Norway to win parliamentary support for the establishment of a Norwegian-Nordic indigenous state in south-Østfold, named, Norway Yggdra.”

It is possible that Breivik is being satirical here, but far from certain. Regardless, “Democratic fascism” is an absurd concept and if it isn’t intended as satire then Breivik has clearly never read ‘La dottrina del fascismo’.

Anders Behring Breivik is evidence (if any were required) that knowledge is no guarantee of wisdom, and that one can both be right and choose to do wrong. His letters reveal a far more intelligent and (perhaps one shouldn’t say it) likable man than the crazed psychopath of July 2011, but his has been a wasted commitment and a pinpoint lesson in how not to combat the problem he correctly identified.

D, LDN.

When the Thunder Begins.

Tags

Anders Behring Breivik, anti-Semitism, Christopher Caldwell, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, English Defence League, Eurabia, Islamification of Britain, Mark Steyn, Morrissey, Multiculturalism, National Front Disco, Rihanna Muslim

The controversial (and stupidly ambiguous) Morrissey album-track ‘National Front Disco’ has been ringing in my head all week. One lyric in particular (addressed  – as the whole song is, to a young skinhead called ‘David’) has distracted my thinking:

‘David, we wonder/ we wonder if the thunder/ is ever really gonna begin…’

As I say, I’m not a fan of the song, but it did make me think.

Islamophobia is less a tendency now than an industry. We can no longer claim that we are being censored by newspapers, online searches, or publishing houses (if Mark Steyn can get published, there can be few limits). The censors have tried, but they have failed. Our worldview is rising faster than that of its detractors.

But with this popularity also arrives cause for doubt. If thousands of people, millions even, are receptive to this political voice, why is the struggle still limited to chat-rooms and blog-sites? When indeed will the popular ‘thunder’ roll?

After Lee Rigby was hacked to death near his barracks, there was, mixed in with the general shock and anger, a definite silver-lining of hope. I really did believe that Muslims had crossed a line that could not be recrossed. Only weeks later, the tragedy was fish & chip paper. 

So if not the brazen murder of our soldiers, what kind of event can change the political atmosphere?

I remember putting this question to a leading figure in British CounterJihad movement and he suggested that an event of sufficient severity had only recently (and narrowly) been avoided. A few months ago, Islamists were convicted in a British court of planning to bomb an EDL rally. Had they succeeded, he argued, they would have triggered great social disorder and secured the hatred of a whole generation of English youths.

What other processes could bring a resolution closer? I’ve been thinking about this all week and I’ve come up with the following three scenarios:

1. A CounterJihad Spring.

Another terrorist attack in Central London is almost certain. Sometime, somewhere, yet more innocent Brits will have to die, probably by fire or bullet.

But what if – after one such occurrence – some patriot group of note refuses to get angry and sets about getting even. Using social media, they instruct every party supporter to file into Parliament Square, bringing with them food, shelter and changes of clothing. Thousands show up, just as asked, and many more (from right around the country) pledge to join them. The media arrive to be told that the area is hereby ‘occupied’ until the government (no, let’s go further), until the EU pledges a total halt to Islamic immigration. Police would struggle to halt the spread of the protest and  – as long as it remained lawful and peaceful – it might well bear  genuine fruit.

2. Elite Defections.

Celebrities are Leftists by instinct. If you’re a musician, comedian, novelist or pop-journalist, you will only succeed by being ‘cutting-edge’ and this will inevitably place you with a multicultural crowd. Reflecting this, liberalism is almost mandatory among the British celebrity elite.

But what if – by some unknown trigger – a few celebrities of note began to defect away from the liberal consensus on Islam and caused a shift in broader society. It isn’t unthinkable. The policies of Islam on women, homosexuality, drug-use and the playing of musical instruments are completely at odds with everything the elite promotes. The alliance then between liberals and their own worst enemy cannot hold forever.

3. The Queen Dies.

I’ve mentioned elsewhere that the passing of the Queen will potentially have a major impact on the social climate of the UK. In the weeks following her passing, all political bets will truly be off. If one – just one – Muslim group waved a placard speculating that Her majesty was rotting in hell, or otherwise cast negative aspersions on her character, a unifying rage would glue the classes of England together in a way that would astonish foreign observers. Testifying to this, British Islamist groups, for all their enthusiasm in murdering our soldiers, have not yet summoned the courage to offend the Royals. That said, only a fool would rule it out. 

So, there’s three events which could bring this long argument toward something like a resolution. As for anything more immediate from our political leaders, don’t hold your breath.

D, LDN.

Fake Historical Echoes: The Nazis, the Jews and the Muslims of Europe.

Tags

Anders Behring Breivik, Antisemitism, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, Eurabia, Heinrich Himmler, Jew, Muslims, Nazi, Nazism, No to Turkey in the EU

When addressing the tone of right-wing reaction against Islam in Europe, liberals repeatedly suggest (in place of an actual argument) the same thought-experiment. Read an article criticizing Muslims in Europe, they say, and in your mind substitute the word “Muslim(s)” for “Jew(s)”.

The desired result of the experiment is to draw attention to a perceived similarity between anti-Muslim sentiment present in Europe today, and the atmosphere of state-sponsored Anti-Semitism under the Nazis.

Many have bought into this analogy, including friends of mine who are (although unsympathetic to Islam) understandably anxious to avoid being on the wrong side of a repeated history.

Superficially I suppose, the experiment does harvest a few causes for concern, but these are usually only found at the wild extremities of the Counter-Jihad fraternity.

Anders Behring Breivik for instance, wrote (or copy and pasted) in his manifesto that many Europeans opposed the deportation of Muslims because they each had a ‘special Mustafa’ whom they felt affection towards; a kind of ‘Good Muslim’ who, as an exception to the vulgar rule, forbade them to support any more general movement against Islam.

Reading this, Liberals were hasty (and correct) to point out an eerie likeness between Breivik’s sentiments and those expressed during Heinrich Himmler’s Posen Speech of 1943, in which the SS chief said the following: “It is one of those things that is easily said. ‘The Jewish people is being exterminated’…. And then along they all come, all the 80 million upright Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say: all the others are swine, but here is a first-class Jew.”

Here there is a clear similarity here between Breivik’s ‘special Mustafa’, and Himmler’s ”Decent Jew’. The echo suggested is real, disturbing and I cannot argue against it. Breivik and his ilk plainly are merely substituting (in their minds and words) “Muslim” for “Jew”, and this accords with a more general fascism in the Norwegian psychopath’s mindset. In the 1930s, the likes of Breivik would have been volunteers in the SS. He is of the same human type, transported through time into a different age.

Still, Anders Breivik does not speak for all of us, or indeed anyone that I know of. Nobody of note has excused his behaviour or signed up to his endorsement of political violence. If he sought through his efforts to bring Counter-Jihad sentiment into agreement with Hitler, he has completely failed.

ii.

The Nazi party was born into an age teeming with fear. Minus the thousand coincidences of the era, it would never have succeeded. Nazi ideology too, developed not out of one but many inter-weaving currents of early Twentieth century thought. Some of these were obscure, a majority however were very mainstream. The most notable of the latter were those scientific ideas concerning race.

Victorian Racial theorists managed to reduce the whole of humanity to a few giant sub-species, each with its own pattern of behaviour and allotment of talent. The Jews were considered to be, whilst not the stupidest race, certainly the most cunning and wicked.

Jewish ‘evil’ was thus considered genetic. They behaved in the ‘wicked’ way they did, because of an inbuilt desire to conquer the world, either via communism, or decadent liberalism. This wasn’t something rooted in Judaism therefore, but in biology. No Jew could become non-Jewish, even if they tried. Whatever they attempted to be, they would always be congenitally dangerous to the gentile population.

Such themes in Anti-Semitism are still with us today. Kevin Macdonald, one of the leading Anti-Semitic intellectuals of recent history, also argues that Jews are predictable and nefarious because of their genetics. In Macdonald’s theory, this is because of their high average IQ, aggression and verbal intelligence.

This kind of biological anti-Semitism seems to be very particular to Europeans. Little about it has changed over the years, except the scientific references.

What we see in the Modern age with respect to Muslims, is entirely distinct from the history described. People who wish to see Europe preserved as an independent civilization and not subsumed into a Muslim caliphate, are plainly not the same kind as the Nazis drew from.

For a start, we are not dull-eyed and heel-clicking authoritarians, but diverse, liberal, multi-coloured, and friendly. Some of us are religious, some of us atheist. Some of us are wildly conservative, some wildly Leftist. We all understand that these things don’t really matter when addressing a threat of such wide-ranging social import.

More vitally, our arguments, unlike those of the Nazis, are entirely reasonable and consistent with established moral norms.

We don’t hate Muslims because they are brown, but because they oppress those of their fellow brown people with whom we might agree. We see what happens to secularists, free-thinkers and progressives in Muslim societies, and so we are determined to keep ours from gaining a Muslim majority.

As a general rule, Jewish suffering during the Holocaust should only really be brought up in political arguments when there is a clear and logical reason to do so, as when for example discussing Ethno-nationalist movements like the BNP, Die Unsterblichen and KKK.

Otherwise, I find it is better to be cautious around such matters, and to show a little respect.

D, LDN.

Thoughts on Anders Behring Breivik

Tags

Anders Behring Breivik, BBC, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, English Defence League, Eurabia, Islamification of Britain, Islamism, Multiculturalism, Norway, Oslo

On July 22nd, 2011, I was brewing coffee in a b&b when I turned on the small television in my room and saw the city centre of Oslo filled with a cloud of blackish-silver smoke.

The BBC newsreader talking over the pictures was calm, if slightly disorientated. He – like everyone else – had no explanation for what was happening and so he mumbled some half-baked speculation instead.

“One has to remember that this isn’t perhaps as strange as it seems.” He said, “Norway has a small military contingent in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda are a global network. This could be a warning that they can strike anywhere.”

I suppose looking back there was some faint chance he was correct. Islamist terrorists had struck Stockholm not too long before the Oslo tragedy. But surely the method should have given reason to doubt this rather easy explanation.

The BBC was already aware of the type of attack that had occurred – a sophisticated truck-bomb, with reports of the truck being empty upon detonation. That meant it wasn’t a suicide bombing (Al-Qaeda’s method of choice) and that the bomb must have been either placed on a timer, or set off by remote-control.

Now, Al-Qaeda are not stupid. Too many people believe otherwise. But they are not James-Bond supervillains either. The greatest attack they ever pulled off – 9/11 – was brilliantly organised, but required no special training or technical expertise beyond the ability to steer a plane towards concrete.

The Oslo attack didn’t seem to fit the AQ profile, and sure enough the security ‘expert’ the presenter interviewed on the phone, sounded unsure of whether they were looking at anything connected with Islam at all. If they were, he stated, this was a very new, very worrying evolution of method.

I was reminded of the IRA. The blast looked remarkably similar to the car-bomb placed outside the BBC many years earlier. Was there a Norwegian separatist movement? An Environmental extremist movement?

It was only on the third time of guessing that the words ‘right-wing’ and ‘McVeigh’ appeared in my mind. After this I was certain.

I went out to meet a friend. After an hour passed, I checked back at the BBC news site on my phone. The pieces were slotting gruesomely together. A ‘second attacker’ was reported at an island youth-camp. He was apparently dressed as a police officer and was shooting anything that moved.

Still (pathetically) the BBC tried to link this to Norway’s involvement in ISAF.

By the evening, and after the single perpetrator had been ID’d, everything else quickly unraveled. A youtube video, a single ‘tweet’, and a 1500 page ‘manifesto’. It was the first ever anti-Jihad terrorist attack on Western soil.

For Leftists who always believed the Islamist threat to be a right-wing psychosis, this attack was almost too good to be true.

“You always say ‘we Islamophobes may be offensive but at least we don’t kill people’, well now we know you do!” One youtube uploader ranted.

“People on the right used to say ‘when was the last time you saw a Christian killing people for his faith’, well just a few hours ago we saw it!” said another.

Given the scale of the tragedy, it would have been immoral not to address these points seriously.

Perhaps the Islamist threat had been overstated…. Perhaps we’d used too much emotive language… Perhaps we’d exaggerated it….

A year and a half on from Anders Behring Breivik’s experiment, the Counter-Jihad movement is considerably weaker than before it.

The word ‘Norway’ is now enough to prevent many socially squeamish conservatives from talking of Cultural Marxism, the Muslim demographic threat to Europe, the rape-wave in Sweden or indeed anything mentioned by the killer.

Breivik’s youtube video – 2083 – uses photographic memes to illustrate important Counter-Jihad concepts like ‘Eurabia’, ‘Political correctness’, the influence of the Frankfurt school etc…

To mention these now is to remind people of a massacre.

What this what he was aiming for?

I am not a moderate on the Islam in Europe debate. I used to believe in integration as a solution, but now I am strongly in favour of a humane, organised repatriation of Muslim populations from Europe to whichever Muslim country will take them. Many European Muslims are educated above the standards of the Islamic world, and would be of benefit to whichever country they went to. Europe would also be obliged morally to give a generous financial sum to those that leave voluntarily, as well as to the countries which recieve them. This isn’t a million miles away from the measures proposed by Breivik in his manifesto. By his actions he has made such measures less, not more, likely.

The killer is now incarcerated in a cushy but secure prison in Norway. He has no internet access but regularly answers written correspondence from some disturbingly adoring fans (often skinheads, often Russian). None of the killer’s letters display any sign of remorse either for the teenagers he slaughtered or for the movement and set of values whose reputation he has tarnished.

If I could interview him, my question would be simple – “What good did you think this would do?”

The youtube video suggested some half-baked belief in a chain reaction. A drip that unleashes a downpour….

But did he really expect people to take that bloodbath as a positive inspiration? Did he think that the Counter-Jihad movement would be legitimised by it, or strengthened?

Well it hasn’t been.

The Norway killer, with his embrace of racist and totalitarian ideas, has made it much harder to speak up for such vital things as female emancipation, gay rights, animal rights, and secular democracy.

If Islam overtakes Europe, it will not be for a lack of popular opposition. More likely it will be because the resistance was unable to shake off a toxic connection with extreme views. The kind that divide unbelievers along arbitrary lines.

The kind that left dead teenagers on a heart-shaped island.

D, LDN.