Twilight of the Godless

Feminism is a Darwinian blind alley. In biological terms, there is nothing that identifies a maladaptive pattern so quickly as a below-replacement level of reproduction; an immediate consequence of feminism is what appears to be an irreversible decline in the birth rate. Nations pursue feminist policies at their peril.

~Katarina Runske

It’s no secret that Western man has given up breeding. A society needs to have 2.1 births per women in a lifetime if it’s going to maintain a steady population. Besides the U.S. and Iceland, no western nation is even close.

Putting the problem in chart form may help to illustrate its enormity. Here are some of the fertility rates for western countries and their projected white populations by 2050, not counting migration. I estimated 4.9 million nonwhites for the UK and knocked that out of the population, 6.4 in France, 1.7 in the Netherlands, 2.5 in Germany, and 10 million for all other EU countries. The total EU white population is 491.5 million- 25.5 million nonwhites = 466 million. Also, the TFR was adjusted from the official number of 1.51 to 1.45 due to the higher nonwhite birth rate. Canada has around 2.7 million nonwhites. Their overall TFR is 1.58; I estimated the white number at 1.5. Russia is about 20 percent nonwhite.

^EU member
*ex Soviet state, non EU member

It can be projected that the total number of white people lost from the EU, Canada, Switzerland, the Balkans, Norway and the ex-Soviet states including Russia will be around 279,000,000. To put that in perspective, that’s more than the losses due to World War I, World War II, the Nazi regime and all communist governments in history combined. Of course, deciding against having children is not equivalent to starving people in gulags. Still, whatever the causes of the birth slump, the result is hundreds of millions of lives not existing that otherwise would have.

Perhaps low birth rates are not a cultural phenomenon and the number of children people have is based more on economic considerations. Looking at birth rates for the world as a whole casts doubt on that possibility. The top five countries are Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Niger and Afghanistan. Not exactly places known for their prosperous middle-classes. Even within first-world countries, if there’s a correlation between wealth and fertility, it’s negative. In the U.S., black and Hispanic households are worth about one tenth of what white household are. But according to estimates, Hispanic women have 3.0 children each, blacks 2.2, and whites 2.0. Ukraine’s nominal GDP per capita is less than $4,000 a year while its TFR is indistinguishable from that of Italy ($39,000), Spain ($35,000) or the Czech Republic ($21,000).

We must conclude that there is something besides economics that is going on here. If you find a white population somewhere, it’s almost certain that it’s not going to be reproducing itself enough to survive.

There is one major exception.

After the 2004 presidential election, Steve Sailer famously analyzed Caucasian fertility rates in Red (those that voted for the Republican candidate) and Blue (those that voted Democratic) states. He found that the top 19 states in fertility (and 25 out of the top 26) voted for George W. Bush. Amongst the 50 states and Washington, DC, the correlation between white fertility rate and the Republican share of the white vote was 0.86 (0.84 in 2000).

Sailer hypothesizes that the lower cost of living in Red States makes child bearing more feasible.

In a tempting contrast, the cost-of-living calculator provided by Realtor.com says that a $100,000 salary in liberal Manhattan buys only as much as a $38,000 salary in conservative Pinehurst, North Carolina. Likewise, a San Francisco couple earning $100,000 between them can afford just as much in Cedar City, Utah, if the husband can find a $44,000-a-year job—and then the wife can stay home with their children. Moreover, the culture of Cedar City is more conducive to child rearing than San Francisco.

While this kind of thinking is on the right track, it doesn’t address why some women choose carriers and others families as much as it does why those with particular characteristics end up in one place rather than another. After all, those from New York are free to move to Idaho and vice versa. But it does show that we’re dealing with a cultural issue—one of the soul, not the pocketbook. Utah, the only majority Mormon state in the Union, has a 2.45 TFR. That’s pretty impressive, especially considering Utahans watch the same TV and listen to the same music (both of which encourage libertinism and nihilism) as the rest of America. While cost of living considerations may explain some of the difference in TFR between New York and Utah, they do less to shed light on the disparity between Utah and the rest on the socially conservative and sparsely populated heartland.

Taking an international perspective, there seems to be two ways to have a replacement fertility rate in the modern world.

A) Be really religious.

B) Be really r-selected.

Since Europeans aren’t Africans, that leaves option (A) as the only proven method for replacement Caucasian fertility. The potential success in this area of any secular philosophical system is speculative. Remember that next time you see Bill Maher on TV foaming at the mouth about those stupid Christians who won’t bow before the god of evolution. The ultimate irony is that championing Darwinism has, as Katarina Runske wrote of feminism, been a Darwinian dead end.

Put bluntly, liberal secular humanists are on the verge of extinction.

To get an idea of the cluelessness of the evangelical Darwinians, look not further than Richard Dawkins’s recent article “What Use is Religion?” The author begins by distinguishing between proximate and ultimate causes. To get an idea of what he’s talking about, think of a moth that flies into a lamp and kills itself. The proximate cause is that the physiology of the insect and physical properties of light cause the moth to behave in a suicidal way. An ultimate cause is evolutionary: in the conditions in which the insect evolved, the only light in the night sky was the moon, which the moth was able to use as a compass without ever running into it.

Saying we believe in religion because it feels good is a proximate explanation, the same way that saying we eat sugary foods because they taste good is. The evolutionary “why” just isn’t there.

Dawkins’ answer to “what use is religion?” has something to do with children, but nothing to do with the likelihood of having them.

My specific hypothesis of the necessity of religion is all about children.

More than any other species, we survive by the accumulated experience of previous generations. Theoretically, children might learn from experience not to swim in crocodile-infested waters. But to say the least, the child whose brain includes this rule of thumb will be at a selective advantage: Believe whatever the grown-ups tell you. Natural selection builds child brains just this way.

In addition, this very quality automatically makes them vulnerable to infection by mind viruses. For excellent survival reasons, child brains trusts parents and elders whom their parents tell them to trust. An automatic consequence is that the “truster” has no way of distinguishing good advice from bad. The child cannot tell that “If you swim in the river, you’ll be eaten by crocodiles” is good advice but “If you don’t sacrifice a goat at the time of the full moon, the crops will fail” is bad (or at least, unnecessary) advice.

Dawkins compares religion to an Internet virus in this way. A good computer does what you tell it. That makes it a wonderful machine capable of doing spreadsheets, but also likely to follow harmful instructions. To Dawkins, religion is a late arriver like the artificial light which kills the moth that is behaving in ways that in other conditions were evolutionarily adaptive.

The problem with using that explanation for religion is that spirituality has been around for too long. There has been plenty of time for evolution to preserve the positive results of blind obedience and do away with what’s harmful and wasteful. For similar reasons, Harpending and Cochran theorize in The 10,000 Year Explosion that Jewish intelligence was a recent adaptation. The Jews have unusually high intelligence and a susceptibility to a group of similar diseases. The genes for disease may have not had time to be selected against. They are around because they are part of the package that includes traits which are adaptive and make up for the fact that the carrier is more likely to die from a particular group of illnesses. Had Jewish intelligence been around for much longer—Harpending and Cochran say it reached its abnormal level in the Middle Ages—then evolution would’ve had time to create a healthier high-IQ race. If man’s spiritual side goes back tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of years, it’s unlikely that he couldn’t have evolved to both obey elders as a child and as an adult only believe things that he has empirical evidence for, if such a thing was adaptive. After all, evolution does produce secular, empirical-minded men (Dawkins and I among them). We simply haven’t been able to outbreed believers.

Since man’s been talking a lot longer than he’s been writing, it’s hard to date the birth spirituality or belief in life after death. As good a guess as any for the start of religion is when humans started taking the trouble to ceremoniously bury their dead. That’s been happening for at least 100,000 years. We may trace spirituality even further. OriginsNet.org has put together the evidence for religiosity in the great apes in their “Appendices for Chimp Spirituality.” As the article recounts, after a 10-year old female bonobo was killed by a leopard, the tribal elders encircled the body almost immediately, some making loud displays and calls, others sitting in solemn silence. The body was eventually groomed and cared for, and the high-status apes wouldn’t allow any other apes access to the body. Surely if these alpha apes could talk, they would’ve declared themselves a priesthood and said they were praying for the poor child’s soul!

There’s also evidence that animism and a certain reverence for nature has a very long lineage. Jane Goodall observered that at the onset of thunderstorms, chimpanzee males would often perform spectacular aggression displays, charging, swaying back and forth, and brandishing and shaking branches. Goodall sensed that the Chimpanzees were expressing something like the emotion of awe.

Religion may have evolved to protect us from slipping into hedonism, or to instill a sense of duty in order to go bear the difficulties of childbearing. It may simply be that those who thought God was on their side exterminated the prissy atheist cavemen (who probably also believed their women should be “liberated” and hunt for themselves.) The issues of the evolution of religion and exactly why it’s good for the fertility rate in the modern world are outside the scope of the article. There isn’t even an established theory on the evolution of the brain yet. (I’m partial to Geoffrey Miller’s belief that it has something to do with sexual selection, but I wouldn’t bet a week’s salary on it.)

What we can say with certainty is that Dawkins’s idea that religion brings nothing to man, or, indeed, harms him, is patently false, whether we see things from the perspective of how long faith has been around or what’s happening today to people without it. A quick look at the CIA Factbook proves that Dawkins is very wrong when he claims, “religion has no survival value for individual human beings, or for the benefit of their genes.” If, in the end, all evolution cares about is survival, it’s liberalism that must be considered the virus. Our ancestors who had religion survived while those of us without it might not.

The two most evolutionarily successful men in written history were probably Genghis Khan and the Prophet Muhammad. But only the latter invented a religious justification for his conquests. Now his ethny (loosely defined) continues to claim land while the Mongolians are a measly five million and dwindling. Among whites, the two most fertile groups are by far the mentioned Mormons and the Anabaptists. Though the Old Testament ignores the afterlife, the Hebrews’ great reward for pleasing God was that the they could spread their genes. Millennia later, God’s chosen are still around, while the Canaanites exist only in word.

There may be nothing we can do to stop the current trends. Whites may simply not be fit for the world they created. Perhaps the few that are have already become religious fanatics and simply need time to expand their numbers. We won’t know until there’s a white elite that doesn’t declare war on the traditional beliefs of their people. Russia may be providing a test case (albeit not a perfect one. The government may have started to encourage nationalism and religion, but there’s still the poisonous effects of the Western-American media).

Even if it was granted that the modern world, with its feminism and secularism, produced all the happiness one can imagine, it cannot last. A baby born today may live to see the extinction of the Lithuanians (projected to be a population of 760,000 by 2100, possibly all assimilated into other ethnicities). Any philosophy that guarantees that those that adopt it will be gone within a few generations can only be embraced by nihilists. The patriarchal and god-fearing will inherit the earth, one way or another.

by Richard Hoste on November 03, 2009

Destabilization through illegal immigration in Greece

Greece over the past decade has become a source country concerning the entrance of an unspecified amount of illegal immigrants, mostly from Asian and African states, that enter mainly through the Greek-Turkish borders and with the complicity or indifference of the authorities of the neighboring country, despite the bilateral and international agreements that have been sealed for this matter.

Illegal immigration is actually an asymmetrical threat aimed at destabilizing the Greek state and it is of critical interest to view it under the prism of Ankara’s stance concerning Greece’s role in the region. In simple terms Turkey uses the masses of desperate people being gathered in its territory in order to inflict great losses in the Greek economy and alter its ethnic and social profile. The latest information that have verified the above writings are videos and images depicting the Turkish Coast Guard deploring immigrants in the Greek Islands; that were shown in Greek national TV without any denial from the other side.

* Turkey as a Eurasian Crossing

The Turkish authorities have announced from time to time that they expel some 100,000 illegal immigrants from their territory each year, whilst between 1995 and 2005 they managed to expel over 575,000 and arrest 6,100 smugglers. Even though the flow of people from the East to the West seems unstoppable, and an 8 billion USD illegal industry has been created, cantered on the main metropolitan Turkish centers.

The same criminal groups that are apt into securing great earnings from the modern slave trade, are also involved in the narcotics and arms trade, thus presenting the real magnitude of the threat involved which is the multiplication of organized crime activities and the existence of a multifunctional parallel crime syndicated state in Turkey that is also a threat to Greek and European stability.

The prices for a “crossing” between the Turkish shore and the Aegean Islands – a few miles apart- costs from 2,000 to 5,000 US dollars and for an illegal route from Turkey to Northern Europe the smugglers demand up to 15,000 USD. The immigrants from the African countries travel to Izmir, Istanbul and Mersin through vessels crossing the Mediterranean Sea, whilst Arabs come mostly through the Syrian-Turkish borders.

The Asians (Pakistani, Kurds, and Afghani) pass through the Iranian-Turkish borders and it has to be noted that both countries do not have a visa regime.

Therefore the flow of people from Turkey is in fact unconstrained and there has not been pressure to Ankara to alter this state of affairs with its neighbor.

At this point it has to be noted that between Middle East, Iran and Greece there is only one country apart and that is Turkey. That is one of the main reasons USA does not lift the visa between Greece and the States because there is a real threat of terrorists, criminals and other traveling through the Atlantic once reaching Greek territory. As it was mentioned before that is much easier that originally though, judging by the fact that from Central Asia to the Aegean the border controls are either lax or non existent.

Once reaching Turkish territory the immigrants are literally stashed in old warehouses or decaying apartments and wait for their transfer. In the meantime -a period up to 2 years- they work as underpaid manual workers in the local tourist and industry businesses, thus minimizing labour costs in Turkey.

Which is why some European companies want Turkey in the EU... to exploit that cheap slave labor. Of course that would be another way to drag European workers into poverty, right?

Currently it can be safely estimated that there are 1 million illegal immigrants “in transit” from Turkey to Europe and many of them will end up in Greece and allocate themselves in the newly founded ghettos in the center of Athens, in the port of Patras or in various locations in the countryside, thus adding up to the 2.5 million illegal aliens already present in Greece.

Greece and Turkey had signed a bilateral agreement concerning organized crime and illegal immigration (17/12/2005), although it has not been practically put into action and most importantly Athens already accuses the other side that it does not conform at all in the obligations written in the official documents, such as re-acceptance of expelled people from Greece that had left previously the Turkish coastline.

* The Stakes Involved

Greece is on the front line of the European periphery, meaning its actions have wider ramifications for the overall security architecture of the Continent.

There are three parameters by which the issue can be viewed upon.Firstly there seems to be a trial by the Turkish state to exhaust the Greek security, police and military forces that apart from their conventional duties have to deal with the increasing problem of persons crossing daily and in great numbers the borders in land and in the sea. Additionally to that the creation of large Muslim communities will play a destabilizing role concerning the societal balances of Greece as recent experience in France, UK, Italy and the Netherlands has shown.

Moreover the undocumented aliens are responsible for the introduction of hygiene issues into the Greek territory and diseases such as tuberculosis that were almost extinct, have gain in strength recently. Further the Greek state budget is pressured due to the increased health, education, security, humanitarian and transport needs of a large number of people that don’t pay taxes nor do they bring capital into the country but instead they transfer abroad the largest amount of the wages they gain in Greece.

Lastly illegal immigration is a suitable terrain for the infiltration of European space by terrorists, criminals, espionage agents and any other category of the population wishing to avoid control and detention. Thus the future of Europe and Greece is being compromised due the lack of the basic principles of security in the international system, which is the verification of the identity of the passengers, a key factor for the existence of a stable and peaceful environment in the present day globalized era.

* Estimations


Athens should realize that the time has passed where the issue could have been resolved though the use of intellectual debates and non-practical dialogue between oblivious politicians.Actually the climax is near judging by the fact that the overpopulation in the East and the global economic crisis will arrive shortly, thus creating further strain in the borderlines.

* Therefore some practical steps are needed:

The domestic intelligence network of Greek informants and collaborators that cooperate with their Turkish counterparts should be neutralized and disbanded before any sustainable gain could be made.

The role of Turkey as discussed above and the regime relating to border crossings in the Middle East, should be made vocally known by the Greek Foreign Ministry to the global forums, conferences and the international organizations. The pampering of states and regimes that degrade the security of other societies should be brought to a halt and the full consequences of their actions should be publicly known.

For the moment the Greek diplomatic authorities are extravagantly at ease with the current distressful situation and completely out of tune in relation with the above proposed action.

Moreover the Greek patrol guards and teams should be able to make sensible use of their light firearm arsenal, since illegal crossing is in direct violation of a country’s independence and the numbers are so great that they constitute a sort of an invasion.

Furthermore that does not mean the killing of innocent civilians, but rather the use of hard power composed by the new technology “non lethal weapons”, the targeting of the smugglers-criminals involved, even the use of psychological warfare techniques into the territory of the neighboring country before even the preparation of the crossings begins.

The Greek state could also make use of its bilateral relations with countries such as Pakistan, Iran, Syria and others in order to persuade and pressure the foreign governments to take responsibility for their citizens ending up in Greece, many times without documents and passports. The creation of online data-bases with the latest techniques of facial recognition that verify for the identity of every immigrant can assist to that. It has to be noted that any initiative by Athens to those states will only have a minimal effect since the governments in there are mostly interested in dealing with their social issues by allowing the immigration of large numbers of unemployed and unskilled citizens and there are also indications concerning the initiatives by Islamic groups to form strong communities in Europe by exploiting the religious faith of the newly comers.

The stance of Greece should be in overall terms, that of a state that considers it s territory a “non suitable illegal immigration route” and make it know in an international level. Although the Greek governmental officials seem rather hesitant into implementing the above recommendations, the historical necessity and the international obligations of the country might activate them rather soon than latter.

1. Turkey is actively involved in the immigrants invasion of Europe
2. Turkey 's intentions are hostile
3. The US push Turkey on the EU but protect themselves with a special passport regime for Greece, as they know Greece is swamped with illegal immigrants from Turkey
4. Obviously the US aim at destabilizing Europe

Destabilization through illegal immigration in greece

Jews and immigration policy — Again

Kevin MacDonald: A friend sent along Steve Sailer’s review of historian Otis L. Graham’s Immigration Reform and America’s Unchosen Future. Misleading title. American immigration policy was chosen. It just wasn’t chosen by the vast majority of the American people, and this is Graham’s point. As I have tried to show, it was chosen by the organized Jewish community and put into action as a result of Jewish political pressure and financial wherewithal. Graham notes that the successful immigration restriction of 1924 was seen by historians as one of the reforms of the Progressive Era’s campaign against the excesses of capitalism, since immigration lowered wages.

It’s fair to say, however, that Jews never saw it that way and there’s at least a fair amount of truth in the idea that the 1924 law was enacted to achieve an ethnic status quo that Jews saw as unfair to them. (Jewish immigrants were correctly seen by restrictionists as disproportionately involved in political radicalism, and it was generally a period of ethnic defense of White America.)

As Sailer’s review shows, Jews have not ceased seeing the 1924 law as exclusion of Jews. Graham points out that Jews live in the past when it comes to thinking about immigration: “the “filiopietistic” urge (“of or relating to an often excessive veneration of ancestors …”) is particularly strong among Jewish media figures. Italian-Americans, in contrast, tend to approach the immigration policy question by thinking about the future rather than by obsessing over the past. This anti-rational emotional reflex about immigration contributes to the kitschy quality of MSM discourse on the topic.”

In other words, Jews see the 1924 immigration law as part of their lachrymose history among Europeans, It’s just another example of irrational anti-Semitism — an example that warrants the evil nature of the people and culture who created it. Since, as Sailer notes, Jews constitute half of the most influential media figures, and since the other half are rigorously vetted to exclude anyone who opposes what amounts to the Jewish consensus on immigration, there really isn’t much real debate in the above-ground media.

Of course, there is a lot of self-censorship. Graham recounts the example of Theodore White, then the most influential journalist in America (and a Jew), refusing to publish his views on immigration. “‘My New York friends would never forgive me. No, you guys are right [on immigration], but I can’t go public on this.’ ” Sailer quotes Graham:

Hearing White’s agitated response, I had my first glimpse of the especially intense emotional Jewish version of that taboo [against immigration skepticism]. His whole heritage, and his standing with all his Jewish friends, was imperiled (he was certain) if he went public with his worries about the state of immigration. …

I did not suspect it then, but this would become an important subtheme of our experience as immigration reformers. American Jews were exceptionally irrational about immigration for well-known reasons. They were also formidable opponents, or allies, in any issue of public policy in America.

In a nutshell, that’s the problem with Jews: They get what they want and what they want is not necessarily what others want (leading to conflicts of interest) or what is good for the country as a whole. It really wouldn’t matter if the only group that wanted open borders was African Americans. But it matters greatly that Jews do.

Incidentally, Otis Graham’s brother Hugh Davis Graham, agrees with me on the forces behind the 1965 law. He wrote in his 2002 book Collision Course (pp. 56-57):

Most important for the content of immigration reform [i.e., loosening], the driving force at the core of the movement, reaching back to the 1920s, were Jewish organizations long active in opposing racial and ethnic quotas. These included the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, and the American Federation of Jews from Eastern Europe. Jewish members of the Congress, particularly representatives from New York and Chicago, had maintained steady but largely ineffective pressure against the national origins quotas since the 1920s…. Following the shock of the Holocaust, Jewish leaders had been especially active in Washington in furthering immigration reform. To the public, the most visible evidence of the immigration reform drive was played by Jewish legislative leaders, such as Representative Celler and Senator Jacob Javits of New York. Less visible, but equally important, were the efforts of key advisers on presidential and agency staffs. These included senior policy advisers such as Julius Edelson and Harry Rosenfield in the Truman administration, Maxwell Rabb in the Eisenhower White House, and presidential aide Myer Feldman, assistant secretary of state Abba Schwartz, and deputy attorney general Norbert Schlei in the Kennedy-Johnson administration.

Survival of the Fattest

Posted by James Jackson on January 22, 2010

Enter a London coffee house or restaurant, check into a hotel, or wander by a building-site, and you will find the workforce almost exclusively foreign. Yet British unemployment continues to surge towards 2.5 million. Something is rotten in the heart of modern Britain, for that heart is the underclass and its malady is caused by welfare.

A process of reverse evolution is in train. It is no longer the fittest or the brightest, the fastest or the best, who survive and thrive in our contemporary jungle. It is the moronic and the bovine, the fattest and the least productive, who are cosseted and subsidized and excused their behavior. Because of it, they breed. After all, sex is free and the State will ever pick up the pieces. Collect £200 and Get out of Jail for free. While the benighted and exploited middle-classes pay their tax, marry late, and have fewer children, the underclass procreates with abandon. They have every reason, and no reason not to.

As Africa has systematically swallowed a trillion dollars in aid with precious little to show for it, so welfare at home has rendered a burgeoning social subgroup unable or unwilling to pull its (now grotesquely bloated) weight. The middle class pays dearly—housing these people, schooling them, nursing them for their myriad addictions and self-induced complaints, and then being mugged by them as they trudge home from their highly-taxed jobs.

Rather than imbue an ethic of hard work, discipline, and responsibility, through a process of handouts and hand-wringing we have promoted instead a culture in which it pays to be a dropout and where a man need not lift a finger (let alone a pick, shovel, mallet, chisel, or spanner) in order to earn a wage. Crack, smack, and street-robbery are so much more rewarding. Whoever imagined nothing is for free was profoundly wrong. The underclass not only rejects the notion there is nobility in work, it cannot actually see the point.

“I long to hear a politician ask the question: If you have so little money, what on earth persuaded you to have five children? We have stripped the underclass of pride, motivation, and personal responsibility and instead award it rights and benefits.”

Every decade that passes, the habits become engrained (some would say, enshrined) and the mindset reinforced. The underclass grows, and not merely because teenage girls fail to discover contraception and believe the swiftest route to a council house is via their own birth-canals. Enabling and sustaining it, feeding it with ceaseless waves of new recruits, is a liberal-left education establishment that has conspired to beach successive generations on the shoals of illiteracy and phonetic spelling and the sandbars of underachievement. Init, well wicked, knowhaddamean? Of course you do. Education used to point the way out of the ghetto. Today it simply consigns our young to a lifetime of delivering pizza.

Without the resources to renationalize industry, left-leaning governments have directed their energies towards taking the public back into state ownership. Create an underclass, make it dependent on your largesse, and you will garner its vote. That is the premise. Or maybe there is no logic; perhaps it is just the old knee-jerk and patronizing instincts of the left. They know best. And it has done irreparable harm. In place of parenting, there are social workers; instead of common sense, there is health and safety and the criminal records bureau; substituting for normal community interaction is diversity training; standing in for work there is always welfare. At every level the state intrudes and society suffers.

I am not advocating we eat the poor—far be it for me to promote a fatty diet—and nor do I suggest we abandon all financial safety-nets. I simply propose we ditch the tired vocabulary of victim-hood that categorizes the handout-consuming and habitually unemployed as the ‘most vulnerable in society’. It is the wealth-creators who are the most vulnerable.

Look closer and you will find that poverty is more often than not a matter of prioritization for those apparently caught in its maw. I long to hear a politician ask the question: If you have so little money, what on earth persuaded you to have five children? Why at Christmas do you purchase the latest consumer durables, computer-games and plasma-screen televisions and yet baulk at spending on private health insurance? How come you are so fat when fruit and vegetables are cheaply available? It will not happen. For we have infantilized the populace, stripping the underclass of pride, motivation, and personal responsibility and instead awarding it rights and benefits.

In the liberal-left world of the welfare state, everything is a condition, an illness, a fault of someone else. Even obesity is to be blamed on rogue genes, thyroid-malfunction or the antics of food manufacturers rather than on the sloth and greed of individuals. People forget the mouth is generally larger than the anus and thus cram it with more food. They have been allowed to forget.

The origin of yet another subspecies is revealed. But that’s okay. For the state will provide gastric bands and liposuction and will end up owning a few more souls.

Soft tyranny of liberalism

By Alexander Dugin

After the Gulf War, almost all mass media outlets in Russia, as well as in the West, injected into the common speak the formula «New World Order», coined by George Bush, and then used by other politicians including Gorbachev and Yeltsin. The New World Order, based on the establishment of a One World Government, as has been candidly admitted by odeologists of the Trilateral Commission and Bildenburg, is not simply a question of politico-economic domination of a certain «occult» ruling clique of international bankers.

This «Order» bases itself on the victory on a global scale of a certain special ideology, and so the concept concerns not only instruments of power, but also «ideological revolution», a «coup d’etat» consciousness, «new thinking». Vagueness of formulations, constant secretiveness and cautiousness, deliberate mysteriousness of the mondialists do not allow, until the last moment, to clearly discern the contour of this new ideology, which they decided to impose on the peoples of the world. And only after Iraq, as if following somebody’s orders, certain bans were take off and multiple publications appeared, which began to call things by their own names.

The New World Order represents in itself an eschatological, messianic project, much exceeding in scope other historical forms of planetary utopias - such as the early protestant movement in Europe, the Arab Khalifate, or communist plans for a World Revolution. Perhaps, these utopian projects served as preludes to the final form of mondialism, trials which tested integrational mechanisms, effectiveness of command structures, ideological priorities, methods in tactics, etc.

Taking this aside, contemporary mondialism, absorbing the experience of protestantism, eschatological heresies, communist revolutions, and geopolitical cataclysms of distant centuries, has sharpened its final formulations, finally determining what was pragmatic and incidental in previous forms, and what really composed the base tendency of history on the road to New World Order. After an entire sequence of vacillations, ambiguities, pragmatic steps and tactical black-outs, contemporary mondialism has finally formulated its fundamental principles regarding the pressing situation. These principles can be assigned to four levels:

1. Economical: the ideology of the New World Order presupposes a complete and mandatory establishment of the liberal capitalist market system all over the planet, with no regard to cultural and ethnic regions. All socio-economic systems carrying elements of «socialism», «social or national justice», «social protection» must be completely destroyed and turned into societies of «absolutely free market». All past flirtations of mondialism with «socialist» models are coming to a complete halt, and market liberalism is becoming the single economic dominant on the planet, ruled by the World Government.

2. Geopolitical: the ideology of the New World Order gives unconditional preference to countries comprising geographical and historical West in contrast to countries of the East. Even in the case of a relatively Western location of one country or another, it will always be favored in comparison with its neighbor to the east. The previously implemented scheme of geopolitical alliance of the West with the East against the Center (for example, capitalist West together with communist Russia against national- socialist Germany) is no longer in use by contemporary mondialism. Geopolitical priority of Western orientation is becoming absolute.

3. Ethnic: the ideology of the New World Order insists on utmost racial, national, ethnic, and cultural intermixing of peoples, giving preference to cosmopolitism of large cities. National and mini-national movements, used earlier by the mondialists in their fight against «greater nationalism» of the imperial type, will be decisively suppressed, as there will be no place left for them in this Order. On all levels, national politics of the World Government will be oriented towards intermixing, cosmopolitism, melting pot, and so forth.

4. Religious: the ideology of the New World Order is preparing the coming into the world of a certain mystical figure, the appearance of which, is supposed to sharply change the religious-ideological scene on the planet. Ideologists of mondialism are themselves convinced that what is meant by this is the coming into the world of Moshiah, the Messiah who will unveil laws of a new religion to humanity and will perform many miracles. The era of pragmatic use of atheist, rationalist, and materialist doctrines by mondialists is over. Now, they are proclaiming the coming of an epoch of «new religiosity».

This is exactly the picture emerging from an analysis of latest revelations by ideologists of the Tripartite Commission, Bildenburg Club, the American Council on Foreign Relations, and other authors, intellectually servicing international mondialism on very different levels - beginning with «neo-spiritualism» and ending with concrete economical and structural designs of pragmatic technocrats.

It is important to note that this ideology cannot be qualified as being either «right» or «left». More than that, within it exists an essential and conscious superposition of two layers, relating to polar political realities. The New World Order is radically and rigidly «rightist» on the economic level, as it assumes absolute primacy of private property, completely free markets, and triumph of individualistic appetites in the economic sphere. Simultaneously, the New World Order is radically and rigidly «leftist» on the cultural-political front, since the ideology of cosmopolitism, intermixing, ethical liberalism traditionally belongs in the category of «leftist» political priorities.

This combination of the economic «right» with the ideological «left» serves as the conceptual axis of contemporary mondialist strategy, a basis for the design of the coming civilization. This ambiguity is manifested even in the very term «liberalism», which, on the economical level stands for «absolutely free markets», but on the ideological level calls for a «mild ideology of permissiveness». Today, we can justifiably assert that the World Government will base its dictatorship not on some typical model of «totalitarian tyranny», but on principles of «liberalism». Revealingly, it is in this very case that the terrible eschatological parody called New World Order, will be perfected and completed.

Secondly, the West, standing at the head of geopolitical theories of the New World Order as the hemisphere where the Sun, Sun of History, sets, takes on the role of both a strategic and a cultural model. In the course of the last stage of realization of mondialist projects, natural symbolism must completely concur with geopolitical symbolism, and the complexity of preceding geopolitical bloc construction, maneuvers, and political alliances, which mondialists used earlier to reach their goals, now gives way to a crystal clear geopolitical logic, which even a simpleton is able to comprehend.

Thirdly, Moshiah, whose coming the far-flung mondialist institutions are supposed to facilitate, is, from the point of view of such diverse religious tendencies as Orthodox Christianity and Islam, clearly and without any doubt associated with the sinister figure of Antichrist. As follows from the very logic of apocalyptic drama, in the course of the last struggle, the clash will occur not between the Sacred and the profane, nor between Religion and atheism, but between Religion and pseudo-religion.

That is why Moshiah of the World Government is not simply a «cultural project», new «social myth», or «grotesque utopia», but is something much more serious, real, terrible. It is completely obvious that opponents of mondialism and enemies of the New World Order must take on a radically negative position in respect to this ideology. This means that it is necessary to counter the World Government and its plans with an alternative ideology, formulated by negating the doctrine of the New World Order.

The ideology radically opposed to mondialism can also be described on four levels.

1. Economical: priority of social justice, social protection, and «communal», national factor in the system of production and distribution.

2. Geopolitical: a clear orientation towards the East and solidarity with the easternmost geopolitical sectors in considering territorial conflicts, and so forth.

3. Ethnic: allegiance to national, ethnic, and racial traditions and traits of peoples and states, with a special preference for «greater nationalism» of the imperial type in contrast to mini-nationalisms with separatist tendencies.

4. Religious: devotion to original and traditional religious forms - most importantly, Orthodox Christianity and Islam, which clearly identify «new religiosity», New World Order, and Moshiah with the most sinister player in the eschatological drama, the Antichrist (Dadjal in Arabic).

Antimondialist ideological warfare front must also combine in itself elements of «leftist» and «rightist» ideologies, but we must be «rightist» in political terms (in other words, «nationalists», «traditionalists», etc.) and «leftist» in the economical sphere (in other words, supporters of social justice, «socialism», etc.) In fact, this very combination is not just a conventional and arbitrary political program, but a necessary condition in this stage of the struggle. Geopolitical priority of the East makes it incumbent upon us to completely renounce different «antiasian» biases, at times held by the Russian Right under the influence of a bad and completely untimely example of the European Right. «Antiasianism» plays only into the hands of the New World Order.

And, finally, allegiance to the Church, the teachings of Holy Fathers, Orthodox Christianity is a necessary and most important element of anti- mondialist struggle, since the substance and meaning of this struggle is in choosing True God, the «right side», the «blessed part». And no one will be able to save us from false charm, sin, temptation, death on this terrible journey, except for the Son of God. We must become His host, His army, His servants, and His missionaries. World Government is the last rebellion of the nether world against the Divine. Short will be the instant of their triumph. Eternal will be the joy of those who will join the ranks of «last fighters for Truth and Freedom in God».

The True Judge will «come unexpectedly».

Anarchistan in Athens

Posted by Aya Burweila on January 22, 2010

Flanked by the presidential guards known as the Evzones, one would imagine that the soldier entombed in front of the Greek parliament witnessed the last of violence when he fell fighting in the battlefield.

Alas, not so.

On January 9, at 7:59 pm, a bomb exploded in a trash bin next to The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. In a proclamation titled ‘Democracy Will Not Win’ and posted on a website hosted by state university servers, The Conspiracy of the Cells of Fire and the Terrorist Guerrilla Group claimed responsibility and promised to continue with its violent campaign. In response to this act of terror, Citizens’ Protection Minister Michalis Chrysochoidis made the following declaration:

“Some people want panic and fear but we are not afraid nor will we panic…This is an unguarded area and it will remain this way. We will not transform Athens into a militarized city. Athens is a safe and free city.”

Six days later, on January 15, a little after noon, a gang of masked attackers broke into the central office of the Deputy Justice Minister Apostolos Katsifaras. Finding Katsifaras missing, the thugs used their batons and hammers to brutally vent their anger on two of the minister’s employees, sending them both to the hospital. True to style, they trashed his office and scattered leaflets of anarchist propaganda before they left.

The minister was right about one thing though: Greeks are not scared and they are certainly not panicking. On the contrary, Greeks are tired, peeved, and angry at the increasingly emboldened terrorist groups and the swamp of anarchist subculture in which they swim.

If anything, these recent acts of desecration and violence reminded the nation of the time when mobs held Athens under siege in December 2008. Over a period of two weeks, anarcho-student mobs burned, looted, and gutted the Greek capital and cities across Greece. Schools and university departments became launching pads for roaming gangs of street thugs who eventually caused an estimated 1.5 billion euros in damages.

A far cry from being ‘militarized,’ Greeks stood aghast as a paralyzed government, instead of containing the rioters, ordered anti-riot squads to refrain from arresting the students or using any appreciable force. This short-sighted move not only prolonged the rioting and plundering, but almost succeeded in toppling the paralyzed government itself. Moreover, it brought to the forefront the consequences of government policies on higher education that over decades, enabled the radicalization and anomie of its youths. (Incidentally, no criminal investigation into the 2008 riots has been launched.)

”When the government tried to pass educational reforms, no less than ten thousand students did what they do best in the sabotage of higher education: Molotov cocktails and organized tantrums.”


The restoration of democracy in 1974 heralded a new and different era of violence in Greece that emanated from within rather than from without: regular terror and violence from leftist groups and mobs of anarchists who have entrenched themselves in the social and educational fabric of Greek society. According to the recent whining of one 44-year old anarchist, rioting is the only rational response to an administration that just ‘doesn’t understand their frustration at class division, the poor economy, a broken education system, and a corrupt government.’

Petulant self-pity aside, the anarchists and members of terror groups, who like to imagine themselves ‘re-enacting some sort of 19th century social revolution against the bourgeois,’ are neither poverty-stricken nor alienated. A good number of them enjoy access to higher education for which they pay no tuition and no fees. Many so-called students are fanatically committed to pathological demonstrations and compulsive vandalism as ‘a fun social activity’ and an emotional catharsis that combines wanton destruction with the extension of ’legitimate demands’ for all to hear.

Gallingly enough, students majoring in anarchy have made great use of a neoclassical enclave where they can congregate, commiserate, conspire, stash weapons, and hang out: the Athens National Technical University, better known as the Polytechnic. Like all universities across Greece, the Polytechnic is out of bounds for the police. An ’academic asylum law,’ passed shortly after the fall of the junta prohibits law enforcement from entering university grounds to pursue trouble makers and bring them to justice. In fact, when the government tried to pass educational reforms in the summer of 2006 that included limiting the infamous ‘asylum’ law, no less than ten thousand students rioted, occupied universities across the country, firebombed the police, and generally did what they do best in the sabotage of higher education: Molotov cocktails and organized tantrums.

At the end of the day, The Greek dream has always been to graduate from a university you can’t get expelled from to getting a job in the civil service that you can’t get fired from. Nonetheless, most would agree that state malfunction is no excuse for state destruction. And under no circumstances is anarchy and terror the solution or catalyst for the change Greece so urgently demands. With the country at the brink of financial ruin and mired in other serious socio-economic problems, this generation of anarchy are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
However, amidst the violence and vicious cycles, there is an enduring and rare inspiration in those charged with protecting The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Dressed in the traditional kilt worn by the men who fought the rugged and relentless resistance against Ottoman rule, the Evzones stand completely still at their posts, impervious to all threats and provocations—including cowardly terrorist attacks. Remarkably, even when they were warned of an imminent explosion, three Evzones guards refused to abandon their posts, an action for which they were given presidential recognition.

It would be fitting if both members of parliament and the media begin showing the same sincerity in protecting public interest as the Evzones show in protecting the unknown soldier who died not to destroy his country, but to honor it. As for the terrorists and anarchists, its high time they got a haircut, went back to school, and gave up the Marilyn Manson lyrics for Pericles’s ’Funeral Oration.’

See also:

Who's Behind the Anarchists in Greece?

Legalized Pornography and Demographic Genocide

Reginald Thompson

“A primary cause of low fertility in the Greco-Roman world was a male culture that held marriage in low esteem.” -Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity

A problem with legalized pornography is that if you allow pornography to become too widely consumed, its degraded vision of women will eat away at the capacity of men to fall in love with members of the opposite sex. This reduced capacity for romantic love will make the men of a society less interested in the joys and challenges of stable pair bond based reproduction. Pornography encourages recreational sex rather than marriage and children.

Also, pornography will discourage men from participating in stable pair bonds by tricking their Limbic Systems into thinking they’re getting so much sex that there’s no need to settle down.

Given that stable pair bond based sex is by far the most valuable from the standpoint of increasing the birth rate, I decided to do some research on whether legalized pornography correlates with a country having reduced fertility.

From Wikipedia I found a list of 45 Countries where it was possible to assign their pornography laws to one of three categories: Pornography Banned, Semi-Legalized Pornography, or fully Legalized Pornography.

Then I looked at the 2000 TFR Rates for these countries as provided by the CIA World Factbook:

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned 19 2.73

Pornography Semi-Legal 5 1.69

Pornography Fully Legal 21 1.67

As can be seen, there’s a stunningly large gap in fertility between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is wholly or partially legal. In fact, the gap is great enough that even with a sample size of only 45 countries, the Mann-Whitney test of the difference between two means gives a P Value of only .000005.

Could this discrepancy be driven by White countries almost all having legal pornography while having low Fertility for other reasons?

No it couldn’t, as the discrepancy is almost exactly the same even after we throw the White countries out of the equation!

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornogrpahy Banned 17 2.85

Pornography Semi-Legal 1 3.11

Pornography Legal 6 1.79

But what about the possibility that Muslims countries almost all have illegal pornography while at the same time having higher Birth Rates for other reasons?

That can’t be what’s driving the result either, as the correlation remains nearly as strong even after throwing out all the Muslim countries:

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned 19 2.35

Pornography Semi-Legal 5 1.69

Pornography Legal 10 1.63

At the same time there might be more subtle differences between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is not that could be partially driving this result.

The real question from a practical standpoint is whether legalizing pornography in a country will drive down fertility. If that is the case, we can rightfully conclude that reversing the legalization of pornography in a country would be of great benefit to its Birth Rate.

From the CDC I found tables showing the Total Fertility Rate for America in the years 1940 to 2000.

Then I decided to look up the Total Fertility Rate for the 5 years before and 5 years after two key Supreme Court rulings that made it essentially impossible to arrest an American for distributing or possessing obscene materials, and which opened never before seen floodgates of pornography.

Jacobellis v. Ohio Stanley v. Georgia

TFR For 5 Years Before 3.53 2.62

TFR For 5 Years After 2.77 2.04

As can be seen, America’s Total Fertility Rate suffered a profound decline in response to the Supreme Court’s two most important rulings in favor of the pornography industry.

Also, when I put whether a year came before or after Jacobellis v. Ohio and Stanley v. Georgia as Dummy Variables in a Multiple Regression, together they explained a staggering 77% of the variation in American fertility from 1940 to 2000!

I think the implications of these findings to White Advocates should be loud and clear: The use of pornography by Whites should be fought tooth and nail, and the banning of pornography in White majority countries and states should be set as a central long-term goal.

Notes: Jacobellis v. Ohio was a 1964 ruling by the Supreme Court that the exhibitor of a film judged obscene by the state of Ohio could not be prosecuted. This had the effect of making it nearly impossible for States to punish people for disseminating pornography.

Stanley v. Georgia was a 1969 ruling by the Supreme Court that invalidated all state laws forbidding the private possession of materials judged obscene. This effectively gave everyone in the country the legal right to buy and hold as much pornography as they could their hands on, thus creating a state of affairs never before seen in American history.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Dear Leaders (Bring Back The Greeks)

Posted by Taki Theodoracopulos on October 01, 2009

NEW YORK–Cement barriers, stanchions, cop cars, motorcycles, black SUV’s, flashing lights, bullhorn warnings to move to the side or else, mean-looking dudes in dark suits, dark glasses and talking into their cufflinks, a hobbit named Sarkozy jogging in Central Park to the exclusion of the rest of us, African dictator kleptocrats emptying jewelry shops on Fifth Avenue, Netanyahu walking down Park after the residents of that tony street had been removed, that was the Big Bagel last week when the zoo that’s the UN Security Council came to town. The hate fest rolls on, fueled by the arrogance of our supposed leaders and the reluctance by the hacks to call a spade a spade. African dictators who murder their subjects and keep billions abroad have no right to police escorts in civilized societies, yet that’s what they got last week. Uncle Sam’s pet, the Israeli prime minister, brings Avigdor Lieberman with him, the latter having gone on record that he wants to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from their rapidly diminishing lands. The ex-night club bouncer was an eyesore, worse than the hobbit jogging in shorts. After the freak show, I did have trouble sleeping knowing the world is such a malevolent place. Yes, the hint was dropped. Israel might go at it alone, with a nod and wink from Uncle S.

So, being the historian that I am, I ask you: When was the last time Iran attacked a foreign country?

Answer: Around 480 B.C. I’d say, give or take a few decades, until the great Kimon cleared the Greek islands from their plague.

What about Israel? Around 2006 and as recently as 2008 would be an accurate assessment. Oh well, Iran talks tough for internal purposes so it should be bombed. Israel has hundreds of nukes but whines a lot so we should turn a blind eye. Go figure, as they say in Qum.

Kimon came to mind because of the murderers and crooks that made life impossible last week in the Bagel. Oppressors and bullies, as far removed from statesmanship as Stanley Mathews or Bobby Charlton are from Hadji Diouf, the man who spits on opponents as well as fans and was imported from Senegal along with his fine manners. Kimon was the aristocrat without equal. Son of the great Miltiades, the winner of the battle of Marathon, he was exiled by the ungrateful Athenians, just as his father was. The reason was envy. Kimon liked the Spartans and encouraged Athens to fight the Persians instead of their own kind. When his sister went on his behalf to see that bogus aristo and pseudo democrat Pericles, she bared her breasts in order to curry favour. “You’re much too old for it,” said the sham great man rather gracelessly.

Any Kimons around today? You’ve got to be joking. The closest are people like Robert E. Lee, Sir Philip Sidney, Don John, winner of Lepanto, and I guess that’s about it. Marlborough was too mercenary, Napoleon too bloodthirsty, Alexander too ambitious, Wellington too petty, Manstein too Nazi. Perhaps Guderian and Washington. No, Kimon was the knight “sans peur and sans raproche” who set the bar for moral grandeur, and was a hell of a ladies’ man to boot. In fact he was often accused of frivolity by those not as lucky as he was with the fair sex, but frivolous Kimon was not. He loved and adored his wife, but his great looks, charm and victories on the battlefield could not keep women out of his bed. Athens should have erected one hundred statues of him, but only one stands today. Instead we have tens of Venizelos, not to mention Harry Truman, a haberdasher who has a lot in common with neo-Hellenes.

Every culture had the Greeks—and I do mean the ancient ones, not to be confused with the rabble of today—to turn to for inspiration, except of course for the Greeks themselves. They had to make it up as they went along, a bit like our greatest playwright Sir Tom Stoppard, but at least he had communism, John Houseman, and rock and roll to help him along. Not to mention Shakespeare. Homer had nothing, yet the Odyssey is the greatest epic poem ever. If there is a greater play than Oedipus, it has skipped by me, or any greater philosophers than Parmenides, Socrates, and Aristotle—I leave that nervous doubting ninny Plato aside—I must have been asleep all these years. We Greeks—I’m so ancient I consider myself one—bequeathed to Christianity the tools needed to refute heresy and prepared the world for the “unknown God” to whom the Greeks had already erected an altar, thus making it easy for Paul to teach the gospel.

Even the great Americans, Jefferson and Adams and Madison et al., relied on their studies of Athens’s failed experiment in democracy, something today’s clowns seem to forget. Democracy as practiced today stands for nothing, yet is the most overused word in the vocabulary of phonies. To hear politicians use it makes one’s skin crawl. I heard it one too many times last week by people who have sold their souls to corporations, by murderers like Qaddafi and by phonies like Gordon Brown, Netanyahu and Sarkozy. Time to change the wording. Korpocracy would be more appropriate, as they’re all full of crap in the first place!

Jewish Involvement In Black Slave Trade To The Americas

The following passages are from Dr. Raphael's book Jews and Judaism in the United States: A Documentary History (New York: Behrman House, Inc., Pub, 1983), pp. 14, 23-25.

"Jews also took an active part in the Dutch colonial slave trade; indeed, the bylaws of the Recife and Mauricia congregations (1648) included an imposta (Jewish tax) of five soldos for each Negro slave a Brazilian Jew purchased from the West Indies Company. Slave auctions were postponed if they fell on a Jewish holiday. In Curacao in the seventeenth century, as well as in the British colonies of Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth century, Jewish merchants played a major role in the slave trade. In fact, in all the American colonies, whether French (Martinique), British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated.

"This was no less true on the North American mainland, where during the eighteenth century Jews participated in the 'triangular trade' that brought slaves from Africa to the West Indies and there exchanged them for molasses, which in turn was taken to New England and converted into rum for sale in Africa. Isaac Da Costa of Charleston in the 1750's, David Franks of Philadelphia in the 1760's, and Aaron Lopez of Newport in the late 1760's and early 1770's dominated Jewish slave trading on the American continent."

Dr. Raphael discusses the central role of the Jews in the New World commerce and the African slave trade (pp. 23-25):

SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES JEWISH INTER-ISLAND TRADE: CURACAO, 1656

During the sixteenth century, exiled from their Spanish homeland and hard-pressed to escape the clutches of the Inquisition, Spanish and Portuguese Jews fled to the Netherlands; the Dutch enthusiastically welcomed these talented, skilled husinessmen.

While thriving in Amsterdam - where they became the hub of a unique urban Jewish universe and attained status that anticipated Jewish emancipation in the West by over a century - they began in the 1500's and 1600's to establish themselves in the Dutch and English colonies in the New World. These included Curacao, Surinam, Recife, and New Amsterdam (Dutch) as well as Barbados, Jamaica, Newport, and Savannah (English).

In these European outposts the Jews, with their years of mercantile experience and networks of friends and family providing market reports of great use, played a significant role in the merchant capitalism, commercial revolution, and territorial expansion that developed the New World and established the colonial economies. The Jewish-Caribbean nexus provided Jews with the opportunity to claim a disproportionate influence in seventeenth and eighteenth century New World commerce, and enabled West Indian Jewry-far outnumbering its coreligionists further north-to enjoy a centrality which North American Jewry would not achieve for a long time to come.

Groups of Jews began to arrive in Surinam in the middle of the seven-teenth century, after the Portuguese regained control of northern Brazil. By 1694, twenty-seven years after the British had surrendered Surinam to the Dutch, there were about 100 Jewish families and fifty single Jews there, or about 570 persons. They possessed more than forty estates and 9,000 slaves, contributed 25,905 pounds of sugar as a gift for the building of a hospital, and carried on an active trade with Newport and other colonial ports. By 1730, Jews owned 115 plantations and were a large part of a sugar export business which sent out 21,680,000 pounds of sugar to European and New World markets in 1730 alone.

Slave trading was a major feature of Jewish economic life in Surinam which as a major stopping-off point in the triangular trade. Both North American and Caribbean Jews played a key role in this commerce: records of a slave sale in 1707 reveal that the ten largest Jewish purchasers (10,400 guilders) spent more than 25 percent of the total funds (38,605 guilders) exchanged.

Jewish economic life in the Dutch West Indies, as in the North American colonies, consisted primarily of mercantile communities, with large inequities in the distribution of wealth. Most Jews were shopkeepers, middlemen, or petty merchants who received encouragement and support from Dutch authorities. In Curacao, for example, Jewish communal life began after the Portuguese victory in 1654.

In 1656, the community founded a congregation, and in the early 1670's brought its first rabbi to the island. Curacao, with its large natural harbor, was the steppng-stone to the other Caribbean islands and thus ideally suited geographically for commerce.

The Jews were the recipients of favorable charters containing generous economic privileges granted by the Dutch West Indies Company in Amsterdam. The economic life of the Jewish community of Curacao revolved around ownership of sugar plantations and marketing of sugar, the importing of manufactured goods, and a heavy involvement in the slave trade, within a decade of their arrival, Jews owned 80 percent of the Curacao plantations. The strength of the Jewish trade lay in connections in Western Europe as well as ownership of the ships used in commerce. While Jews carried on an active trade with French and English colonies in the Caribbean, their principal market was the Spanish Main (today Venezuela and Colombia).

Extant tax lists give us a glimpse of their dominance. Of the eighteen wealthiest Jews in the 1702 and 1707 tax lists, nine either owned a ship or had at least a share in a vessel. By 1721 a letter to the Amsterdam Jewish community claimed that "nearly all the navigation...was in the hands of the Jews."' Yet another indication of the economic success of Curacao's Jews is the fact that in 1707 the island's 377 residents were assessed by the Governor and his Council a total of 4,002 pesos; 104 Jews, or 27.6 percent of the taxpayers, contributed 1,380 pesos, or 34.5 percent of the entire amount assessed.

In the British West Indies, two 1680 tax lists survive, both from Barbados; they, too, provide useful information about Jewish economic life. In Bridgetown itself, out of a total of 404 households, 54 households or 300 persons were Jewish, 240 of them living in "ye Towne of S. Michael ye Bridge Town." Contrary to most impressions, "many, indeed, most of them, were very poor." There were only a few planters, and most Jews were not naturalized or endenizened (and thus could not import goods or pursue debtors in court). But for merchants holding letters of endenization, opportunities were not lacking. Barbados sugar-and its by-products rum and molasses-were in great demand, and in addition to playing a role in its export, Jewish merchants were active in the import trade.

Forty-five Jewish households were taxed in Barbados in 1680, and more than half of them contributed only 11.7 percent of the total sum raised. While the richest five gave almost half the Jewish total, they were but 11.1 percent of the taxable population. The tax list of 1679-80 shows a similar picture; of fifty-one householders, nineteen (37.2 percent) gave less than one-tenth of the total, while the four richest merchants gave almost one-third of the total.

An interesting record of interisland trade involving a Jewish merchant and the islands of Barbados and Curacao comes from correspondence of 1656. It reminds us that sometimes the commercial trips were not well planned and that Jewish captains - who frequently acted as commercial agents as well - would decide where to sell their cargo, at what price, and what goods to bring back on the return trip.

(End of excerpt)


Tony Martin is African studies professor at Wellesley College and has taught at Wellesley College, Massachusetts since 1973. He was tenured in 1975 and has been a full professor of African Studies since 1979. Prior to coming to Wellesley he taught at the University of Michigan-Flint, the Cipriani Labour College (Trinidad) and St. Mary's College (Trinidad). He has been a visiting professor at the University of Minnesota, Brandeis University, Brown University and The Colorado College. He also spent a year as an honorary research fellow at the University of the West Indies, Trinidad.

Professor Martin has authored or compiled or edited eleven books, including Literary Garveyism: Garvey, Black Arts and the Harlem Renaissance, and the classic study of the Garvey Movement, Race First: the Ideological and Organizational Struggles of Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association.. His most recent book is The Jewish Onslaught: Despatches from the Wellesley Battlefront. Martin qualified as a barrister-at-law at the Honourable Society of Gray's Inn (London) in 1965, did a B. Sc. honours degree in economics at the University of Hull (England) and the M.A. and Ph.D. in history at Michigan State University.

Martin's articles and reviews have appeared in the Journal of Negro History, American Historical Review, African Studies Review, Washington Post Book World, Journal of Caribbean History, Journal of American History, Black Books Bulletin, Science and Society, Jamaica Journal and many other places. His work is to be found in several anthologies and encyclopedias. He has received a number of academic and community awards.

Martin is well known as a lecturer in many countries. He has spoken to university and general audiences all over the United States, Canada, the Caribbean and England, and also in Africa, Australia, Bermuda and South America. In 1990 he delivered the annual DuBois/Padmore/Nkrumah lectures in Ghana.

Professor Martin is currently working on biographies of three Caribbean women - Amy Ashwood Garvey, Audrey Jeffers and Trinidad's Kathleen Davis ("Auntie Kay"). He is also nearing completion of a study of European Jewish immigration into Trinidad in the 1930s.


The Jewish Onslaught
Despatches From The Wellesley Battlefront
By Tony Martin

"...a polemic of the highest order... the best example of an African answering critics since David Walker's Appeal to the Colored Citizens of the World." - Molefi Asante, Journal Of Black Studies

"Professor Martin at long last deals with the Henry Gates/Cornel West attacks on Afrocentricity.... Martin provides a solid analysis of the historical use of Blacks by whites to discredit original Black thought deemed unacceptable by non-Blacks....

"I compare The Jewish Onslaught to the classic third chapter of DuBois' The Souls of Black Folk entitled 'Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others....' Martin has written a book that years from now will be considered a classic.... It is simply a must reading on a controversial subject that needs greater airing than some of the more timid political attempts of recent years." - Raymond Winbush, The Voice Of Black Studies

" Tony Martin has been forced to delve into the relationship between the Jews and Blacks and in the process, he has distilled a work that is informative, fascinating and one which will heighten the consciousness of Black people everywhere." - Carl Wint, The Sunday Gleaner

#1 Bestseller
(Your Black Books Guide)

Best Book Of The Year
(Black Literary Awards, 1994)
1993. vii+137pp. ISBN 0-912469-30-7.

Subject: Who owned the slaving ships?

Name Of Slave Ships And Their Owners:

The 'Abigail-Caracoa' - Aaron Lopez, Moses Levy, Jacob Crown
Isaac Levy and Nathan Simpson

The'Nassau' - Moses Levy

The 'Four Sisters' - Moses Levy

The 'Anne' & The 'Eliza' - Justus Bosch and John Abrams

The 'Prudent Betty' - Henry Cruger and Jacob Phoenix

The 'Hester' - Mordecai and David Gomez

The 'Elizabeth' - Mordecai and David Gomez

The 'Antigua' - Nathan Marston and Abram Lyell

The 'Betsy' - Wm. De Woolf

The 'Polly' - James De Woolf

The 'White Horse' - Jan de Sweevts

The 'Expedition' - John and Jacob Roosevelt

The 'Charlotte' - Moses and Sam Levy and Jacob Franks

The 'Franks' - Moses and Sam Levy

A video, "The Jewish Role in the Black Slave Trade," a speech by Prof. Tony Martin with an introduction by Hoffman, remains online at Google, as of this writing. Viewers who wish to see it before it, too is censored by Google, can access it here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3435039175602962781

The “Sin” of Humility

by Thomas Fleming October 9th, 2009

Humility is the great moral skandalon (stumbing block) of Christianity, in much the same way that Christ—the God who became man, suffered, and died a humiliating death—was the skandalon to the Jews. Thus it is a little amusing to read the complaints of so many uneducated neopagans—most of them anti-Semites—against Christian humility. Their reaction is exactly that of the well-bred Jew of Jesus’ time.

The virtue of humility is praised throughout the New Testament. The texts of the Gospels are studded with admonitions, parables, and tales, all designed to inculcate this teaching: the banquet at which we are not to take a seat of honor, the Pharisee who thanked God he was not like other men, Christ’s washing the feet of his disciples, the Roman centurion, used to giving orders, who thought himself so unworthy that it was not fitting that the Lord should enter his house. St. Paul’s epistles constantly warn against getting puffed up or people who think they are something—a marvelous phrase in Greek, where the word for something is the monosyllabic unaccented word ti.

The natural man, the old Adam—whether Christened or not—rebels against humility. What, am I supposed to put myself on par with a Third World savage or an effeminate neopagan? In one sense, yes. None of us is perfect as Our Lord would have us perfect. We all fall short, not just of the glory of God but of the human glory we were created to enjoy. If we wish God to forgive our failings, then we must not be too proud to forgive the failings of others: “Forgive us our debts/trespasses, as we forgive our debtors/those who trespass against us.”

This is, admittedly, a different moral universe from what is portrayed in most pagan literature, Homeric (though not Vergilian) epic in particular. Homer’s heroes are passionate and self-willed men, worthy even of some respect from the vastly more powerful gods. Yet this contrast is somewhat misguided, as it is sometimes stated, if it is intended to be a contrast of civilizations. In the first place, Homer is rather like the Old Testament of the Greeks, and the code of the Homeric warrior—”always do the best”—undergoes a good deal of refinement at the hands of poets and philosophers. Euripides and Menander, no less than Aristotle and Epictetus, would have had a good deal to say about some of the behavior of Homeric heroes—the lying of Odysseus, for example, the cruelty to captives.

But even within the context of Homer, there is a moral code that condemns excessive self-assertion. The quarrel between the equally arrogant Agamemnon and Achilles, with which the Iliad begins, is not a good thing for the army that suffers untold casualties as a result. Agamemnon, at least, comes to his senses, but Achilles is implacable, as his friend and comrade Ajax points out in the Embassy scene. In fact, he has become a monster, who hopes that the Greeks and Trojans will kill each other and leave only himself and Patroclus to sack Troy. Even the gods are afraid to interrupt his bestial mistreatment of Hector’s corpse.

Achilles temperament is characterized by hybris, an overweening self-confidence and self-importance that treats social equals with contempt. This is the great sin of Greek popular morality, the subject of countless tragedies. A man who behaved this way on the streets of Athens—slapping a citizen or pushing him—might be taken to court for hybris, as Demosthenes did to an enemy.

For Aristotle, who is one of the best guides to Greek folk wisdom, the proper attitude is a mean between self-effacing meekness and strutting arrogance. His student Theophrastus brilliantly portrays what the Greeks disliked in this quality of arrogance in his character sketches of men who are obnoxious, ambitious in petty matters, ungenerous, arrogant, and oligarchic, that is, domineering. Such types are simply not gentlemanly, what the Athenians called kalos kai agathos, fair and brave.

Later schools of philosophy went further in the direction of Christianity. The great Neoplatonist Plotinus sometimes sounds like a Christian saint, in his understanding and forbearance. It is arrogance—the arrogance of the Gnostics—that gets him angry. The Epicureans, who strove for untroubled peace of mind, avoided self-assertion, while the Stoics, whose morality so often anticipates Christianity, reminded themselves and their listeners and readers of how unimportant even the most lofty and powerful men are. The Stoic code is seen to best advantage in the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who did his duty completely and spent most of his adult life in the field against the savage Germans, when he would have vastly preferred to be at home with his books. This superb man, nonetheless, tells himself over and over both to be worthy of his family and his job and not to let his position as divine ruler go to his head. The most nearly Christian Emperor was also a persecutor of Christians, whom he believed to be stubborn and arrogant.

There are differences, albeit not vast, between the highest pagan understanding of humility and the Christian teaching. For Plotinus, the Epicureans, and the Stoics, the point to humility is that it frees the mind from unimportant distractions, to gain wisdom and understanding, and to live a philosophical life. In this, they were perhaps a bit freakish by ordinary standards, and it was even more bizarre for ordinary Christians to practice the extraordinary virtues of the philosophers—the point that Justin Martyr makes in his apologia addressed to Marcus Aurelius. The Christian is humble out of his love and gratitude to his God and saviour whose virtues he wishes to emulate and with whom he wishes to spend eternity. Still, serious decent pagans and good Christians outwardly behaved in much the same way. The late 4th century aristocrat Paulinus of Nola, was a very saintly man but, even after his conversion, he also remained every inch a gentleman.

By the time of Constantine, as pagans and Christian moralities converged, the more obvious contrast was with the northern European barbarians. In the Greco-Roman view, Celts and Germans acted like children. Livy portrays the Celts as strutting and boasting and threatening great deeds before a battle, but when they are stoutly resisted by more disciplined Romans, they flee in disarray. Caesar, admittedly disingenuous, portrays Ariovistus the German as boastful, and this is a constant theme of ancient writers, There is, admittedly, an element of propaganda in this, but since the barbarian nations did not learn to read and write, it is their own fault if we only hear the Roman side of the story. The Germans were bigger and generally stronger than the Romans, but the civilized discipline of the Romans prevailed against the German berserkers time after time. Even in the sixth century, Justinian’s armies eliminated the Gothic Kingdom of Italy. When the Goths surrendered to Belisarius at Ravenna, they apologized to their women, claiming that the vastly larger Roman army was made up of huge warriors. When the the small army of Eastern runts marched into the city, the women reviled their brave German husbands, brothers, and sons.

The Germans are a great nation, and they have made very important contributions to our common civilization. Some of their accomplishments must be due to their robust vigor and native talents, but they did not learn to put those talents to good use until they were civilized by the Roman Church and Roman civilization. Even crazy Nietzsche, a Lutheran pastor’s son whose hatred of Catholicism knew no bounds, confessed that Luther had unleashed the Germans from classical civilization and given them license to return to their native swinishness. This is much too harsh, both on Luther and on the Germans, but that was the opinion of the leading guru of neopaganism.

As Christian moral theology was developed, it had to take account of the nuances of situations–and of our barbarian ancestors’ propensities to self-love and arrogance. St. Thomas, in his discussion of humility in the Summa Theologiae, takes up the argument that humility is not a virtue because it is not recognized as such by Aristotle. He points out that Aristotle’s account of the virtues has to do with civic life, which concerns man’s subordination to man, while Christian humility is the subordination of man to God. This is a brilliant and concise way of making an important statement. Insofar as Christians hold important social or public positions, whether as Pope or Emperor or as officer or father, they have a duty to maintain a position that we have a duty to respect. What could be more lordly than the procession of Pope and cardinals in St. Peter’s, and yet those same princes of the Church are supposed to humble themselves to their confessors. A father may not think himself “better” than his sons, but he is in a position of authority and must insist upon his sons’ respecting that authority. In this way, it is entirely possible to maintain a complex hierarchy—and no hierarchy was more complex than what developed, East and West, in the Christian Roman Empire—while celebrating humility as one of the main virtues of Christian life.

St. Alphonsus has a fine treatment of superbia (pride) in Book V of his Theologia Moralis. Here is a crude summation of some of what he says, Alphonsus defines pride as “an inordinate (that is disproportionate) appetite for one’s own preeminence (excellentia)” of such a sort as does not wish to be subject either to God or to one’s human superiors. Pride is not complete so long as it does not reject property authority, divine or human. HeSD distinguishes between venial and mortal acts of pride. Mortal sins include expressions of pride aimed at harming our fellow men or are directed against the love of God. (Neopagans take care!) . Pride is a mortal sin when someone laps up praise for something that is a mortal sin. When someone introduces new customs or fashions into a commonwealth, foreseeing that by his example he would be imposing a moral necessity on others that they make expenditures beyond their ability and later would be unable to feed themselves or satisfy their creditors, he sins gravely, but it is only a venial sin if someone dresses extravagantly out of mere lightwittedness. It is also a sin to pretend, out of pride, to vices that one does not actually practice (such as the neopagan metrosexuals who claim to be playboys.)

Humility remains a stumbling block for even the most virtuous of pagans, but it is by no means an insurpassable obstacle to a pagan appreciation of Christian civilization. Even Gibbon admired great Christians like the last Constantine or Pope Leo IV, who defended Rome against the Saracens. What I suspect is really going on, when young neopagans—mostly urban metrosexuals—attack Christian humility is that that they are yearning to escape from their position as peripheral males and think that in the Wagnerian myths that can embrace a manhood they will never attain. In any event, their attack on Christian humility is as ill-informed as it is malicious, and there is a serious question whether it is useful to do any business with people who, without taking the trouble to learn anything, insist on reviling the religion of their supposed allies

Benito Mussolini Was Once a British Agent

(AP) A historian says Benito Mussolini was well paid as a British agent during World War I.

The Guardian newspaper reported Wednesday that Peter Martland of Cambridge University discovered that Mussolini was paid 100 pounds a week by Britain in 1917 - equal to about 6,000 pounds ($9,600) today.

The late Samuel Hoare, in charge of British agents in Rome at that time, revealed in his memoirs 55 years go that Mussolini was a paid agent. Martland found more details in Hoare's papers, including that Mussolini also sent Italian army veterans to beat up peace protesters in Milan, a dry run for his fascist blackshirt units.

"The last thing Britain wanted were pro-peace strikes bringing the factories in Milan to a halt. It was a lot of money to pay a man who was a journalist at the time, but compared to the 4 million pounds Britain was spending on the war every day, it was petty cash," The Guardian quoted Martland as saying.

The salary detail also was in historian Christopher Andrew's newly published history of the British intelligence agency MI5, to which Martland contributed.

In 1917, the future Italian dictator was editor of the Il Popolo d'Italia newspaper, which campaigned to keep Italy on the allied side in the war.

http://tinyurl.com/ykhxf9a

How to reduce the population of a nation

Igor Alexander’s Weblog

1. Make birth control, especially “the pill,” widely available.
2. Legalize abortion-on-demand.
3. Frighten teenagers away from having children after high school through mandatory “sex education” classes.
4. Promote feminism so that women put careers or hedonistic pursuits over having children, or develop such negative attitudes or unrealistic expectations towards men that they are incapable of making the compromises necessary to be in a long-term relationship with a man.
5. In the mass media, continually depict sex as a recreational, rather than procreational, activity.
6. Promote homosexuality and other sexually aberrant behaviors that won’t result in pregnancy (such as anal sex between heterosexuals).
7. Degrade the institution of marriage by allowing easy divorces and same-sex marriage, and by making divorce proceedings so grossly unfair towards men that few will want to marry.
8. Legalize hardcore pornography; flood society with porn so that men end up preferring masturbation over actually finding a mate to have children with. Make sure that the majority of hardcore porn emphasizes anal sex over normal heterosexual intercourse which could lead to pregnancy.
9. Feed male babies soy formula and other oestrogenic substances so that their reproductive systems don’t develop normally, making them unable to reproduce.
10. To reduce fertility, encourage a nutritionally-poor diet in which white flour, refined sugar, and processed vegetable oils account for most of the calories.
11. To reduce fertility, encourage a vegetarian diet, especially one in which unfermented soy products are the principal source of protein.
12. To reduce fertility, encourage people, especially teens and young adults, to take illicit drugs, as well as smoke and regularly abuse alcohol.