Surviving Race-Based Group Conflicts

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Indeed it is, but it also seems to be the best means of self-defense for groups of people under attack.
It seems like "seems" seems to be the operative word in what you said. Besides those who sponsor such can you name some audience groups that it has worked out for in the long run? It didn't 'seem' to work too well for the Germans.

It appears to me, as I have tried to explain in my posts that this particular Identity variant, at the ontological core of 'Judeo-Christianity', is designed as a virtual shibboleth, or in the words of B'rer Rabbit: 'a tar baby in the briar patch'.

Because, at the end of the day, people don't like to believe that their synthetic (nationalist) shit stinks, we are all really today just neo-Romans versus the neo-Jews. Nothing has changed in two thousand years except for that we have more efficient weapons. I remember growing up being told not to get into the middle of a mad dog fight, but the balance of the people in the world have no choice in the matter, because the synthetic Roman / Jew conflict ultimately comes to them, just as their respective oracles scripted.

People really like their Identity for various reasons, but Shlomo Sand in his Invention of the Jewish People gave an excellent exposition of how there is no real ethnic 'nations' as we like to think of today. These are all hyped up artificial constructs, including the 19th century CE narrative basis for contemporary Israel. BTW, it was Thomas Cromwell who invented the underlying mechanisms of the modern 'nation' as we know it.

I generally don't get too angry about this any more, as I realize how long and how many layers of deception are involved in figuring all this out. But I do get mad when people, who claim to have good motives can't follow simple and decent requests to behave properly, and then try to make the other parties look guilty.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Indeed it is, but it also seems to be the best means of self-defense for groups of people under attack.
In our troubled world, nothing seems to work all that well.

On the one hand, a successful tribally-based nationalistic movement can amass substantial defensive military firepower as well as vast economic resources. It's hard to deny that the Israelis (with their very successful nationalism) are doing better than the Palestinians.

But the Palestinians (and Native Americans) also tried to create militarily powerful nations, and the strategy failed utterly.
 
Besides those who sponsor such can you name some audience groups that it has worked out for in the long run? It didn't 'seem' to work too well for the Germans.
It worked well for Jews. When confronted by German hostility in the 1930s, Jews the world over coalesced around their racial group to destroy Germans. Destroying Germany took precedence over the individual Jew's religion or atheism, their nationality, their political leanings, or their social class.

In U.S. prisons white minorities coalesce into a race-based self-defense group to defend against attack by the black majority regardless of the white's religion, social class, or nationality. This works well for the whites.

Richard what do you believe is a better means of self-defense for groups of people under attack than race nationalism?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
It worked well for Jews. When confronted by German hostility in the 1930s, Jews the world over coalesced around their racial group to destroy Germans. Destroying Germany took precedence over the individual Jew's religion or atheism, their nationality, their political leanings, or their social class.
I generally see this case, and variants of this argument, in particular as making a single level argument in a vacuum, when in reality this is a chess game with very deep roots. One based on vanity / pride appeals to bogus Identity machinations which I have begun to flesh out elsewhere. As that old Islamic proverb goes: "Context [and maybe perspective] is Everything".

As such, one might extend your example to the case of the Zealots and Sicarii and ask how well it worked out for them? Of course, both wings of Postflaviana agree that the surviving Jews of the Empire from this time were converted into the institutionalized Roman buffer class of the day. I have termed this the Sheepdog Class, implying that there are Shepherd and Sheep classes as well. This system survived under the transition to Catholicism and the primacy of the papal pontifex maximus. James Carroll, a former Catholic priest detailed this well, in his Constantine's Sword, even going through all the major Catholic theology from Augustine forward to demonstrate the integral importance of the Jewish demon to the existential viability of Christianity. To wit, the collective popes say: 'please don't kill them all'. In fact, it was the popes who established the ghetto system where Jews could live safely in their approved occupations behind walls. But are the popes Catholic or goy? How the F would I know? Whatever the case, they certainly were gentil as the strict definition of the term delineates.

And as Israel Shahak pointed out, in his book sardonically lionized by White Supremicists, whenever conditions in Europe failed for natural reasons or noble malfeasance, the respective nobles would drag out the Talmud and invoke verses denigrating the Jew, Jesus. This in the hopes of distracting attention away from themselves.

In another thread here, I posted quotes from a book and web pages, that detail the perfidy of the Catholic Church in foisting Cardinal Spellman's War, aka Vietnam, on America and Vietnam under the specious guise of the council of Lady Fatima, which the Church had earlier used to rally pious Catholics worldwide to support Hitler's crusade against the godless Bolsheviks, including in Spain. In both cases, the Church pulled the rug out from under its supposedly sacred causes. In the latter case, American were dragged into supporting French Catholic allied Vietnamese elites who were leaders of the heroin opium trade and the rent landlords over the villagers that used to control their own land without such a burden.

Speaking of rent, and the earlier discussion about serfs, it was Joseph that, at least in the narrative (Genesis 48) that effectively turned all the freeholding Egyptians into feudal serfs. You might then insist that Joseph was a Jew, as would most Jews of today. And at one time I might agree. But technically he really was of a different tribe, his son Ephraim having received the Eternal (global) Blessing of Abraham's and not the tribe of Judah, limited to kingship over Canaan/ Israel.

Joe insists that such as Churchill, likely the cuckholded bastard son of Albert I, and FDR were crypto-Jews, but the British-Israel system of Christianity insists that such British elites are of the tribe of Ephraim. Hmm. The late Nicholas DeVere (of the Earls of Oxford DeVere's and connections to Elizabeth and Shakespeare) insisted that his people were the real players of the Abraham lineage narrative, and I think this is exactly what he was alluding to.

As many people have come to understand, the 12 tribes are just convenient narrative vehicle to explain certain political relationships alluded to in the Genesis narrative, as I have been examining. Most of them are not related, especially by Jacob and the suspiciously synthetic and cynically laughing Isaac. In this light, the tribe of Judah, is made the Sheepdogs to the veiled Shepherds. They are detailed in their own holy book as being the offspring of the 4th son of the Hated Wife. Rather curious to me. While Ephraim is the favorite son of the favorite son of Jacob. Go figure.

But I am a lifelong contrarian, and I realize that most people like to take the easy and visible bait, the low hanging fruit. It is rather ironic to me, that having been a lifelong secularist, and still am, that I am now always seeing the plan, or script, being laid out in the Bible. I just don't see this in divine terms, but rather as the agency of some pretty smart elites, who understood the need to hide behind some dupes (Useful Idiots sheepdogs) to always take the blame for their machinations.

In U.S. prisons white minorities coalesce into a race-based self-defense group to defend against attack by the black majority regardless of the white's religion, social class, or nationality. This works well for the whites.
The American criminal and prison system is rather cynical IMHO in its encouragement of such aggregations. This works especially well for the elite whites outside the prison. As such I'm not sure this makes a good example of organic defense.
Richard what do you believe is a better means of self-defense for groups of people under attack than race nationalism?
Pulling our collective heads out of our asses. Especially the larger one.

I explained earlier, in this thread and elsewhere that Martin Bernal clearly demonstrated that European racial animus [outside the classic and synthetic Gentile / Jewish distinction] was whipped up by the very first academic product (Romanticism) of the 'modern' 'Scientific' university system sponsored by George (Hanover) II in the 1730's. The very first product. This was needed to justify the race based exploitation of the second and third worlds. How could Romanticism be wrong, when it was the product of the new Rational based Science? Is it rational Science if you merely claim that it is? To wit: 'It is obvious that White People are superior, ... because we have Feelings that derive from our divinely Providential Locality.' Well, ... obviously.

Are you under attack? If so, by who?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Charlie Prime said:
Richard what do you believe is a better means of self-defense for groups of people under attack than race nationalism?

Richard said: Pulling our collective heads out of our asses. Especially the larger one.

To put this in other terms, if one is going to solve any problem, big or small, one must first have a reasonably accurate model of what the actual problem is in the first place before proposing a workable solution. If not, we are just engaging in endless Mobius Strip Onanism. (Hopefully this phraseology will not offend Saint Loren as my previous reference to such behavior did.)

I assert that we have been playing an insidious shell game along this Mobius Strip for thousands of years where it "seems" so obvious where the guilt lays. And after all the Bible tells us so, even if we no longer believe the Bible. But, did we really read that material and the other external data close enough? No.

There is an entire industry, dedicated to perpetuating this FU (to use Saint Loren's favorite acronym) paradigm, both inside and outside the religious bubble, and gee ... I wonder why? ... No I don't. When you start looking to close at the fan, people either consciously or unconsciously start to quickly understand what is really at stake. As Christians, neoChristians, or whatever else, we have all been co-opted generationally into a form of global organized crime, where some of us even get to have our collaborative 'real' sins ritually forgiven.

If it were not for my precarious day to day corporeal circumstances and Jerry's gracious willingness to help out, I would have given up this pursuit some time ago in absolute frustration, and general realization of the previous paragraph. I would much rather be in a nice warm crematorium oven, or conversely in my beloved mountains, the sublime pleasure of which was discovered much too late in life. That said, we have have made a lot of progress in proving Jesus correct, i.e. that only the Truth can set you Free. But first, you must understand who he was, who's Truth he was talking about, and what real Freedom means. When Roman slaves became freedmen they were still beholding to their patrones, "same as it ever was".

Separately, there are a number of issues with the whole concept of creating 'nations' out of races, and how this will ultimately lead to anything substantively different than what we have now, for various reasons.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Do you mean beg attackers to stop?
I think what we're saying is to recognize what the true situation is: we (as middle class or lower class working citizens) are not being attacked by Jews or Muslims, but rather the illusion of a race-based conflict is being instigated by elites of all races and creeds working more or less in concert.

So, white people who look to Trump as their savior are making a big mistake, just as Jews who put their faith in Netanyahu and the like. Trump is giving soothing talks at AIPAC and probably attending secret Masonic meetings with Netanyahu and the Saudis and ISIS, where they are all scheming to perpetrate false flags to whip all their followers into a frenzy.
 
(Amalek's threads are messy, so I broke out this discussion into a new thread.)

I think what we're saying is to recognize what the true situation is: we (as middle class or lower class working citizens) are not being attacked by Jews or Muslims, but rather the illusion of a race-based conflict is being instigated by elites of all races and creeds working more or less in concert.
I see two errors Jerry:

1. The Elites’ race-based conflict is not an illusion. It is real, happening on the streets at this moment, and will only increase in severity after the coming economic collapse.

2. Educating Americans about the reality of Elite machinations to pit them against each other for profit is not a valid self-defense strategy because it will not happen within the lifetime of my children.

I wish the world transformed next year into an Anarcho-Capitalist utopia wherein people were so rational and observant of the Non-Aggression Principle the need for coercive government evaporated away.

In the meantime, we have to work with the tools at hand to provide safety and sustenance for our children.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Do you mean beg attackers to stop?

I can't tell if you are serious, or just being flippant.
Jerry said it pretty well. But I'll add that, no, I don't mean "beg attackers to stop". I mean that blissfully ignorant beta-sheep must become accurately informed alpha-sheep and tell the shepherds and sheepdogs to bugger off. As such, sheep have to learn to look under every single rock and look for hidden agendas and determine who is benefiting - rather than biting off on the first seemingly tasty morsel. Sorry about the mixed metaphors.

Most human sheep are inclined to believe that their shepherd(s) are acting in their best interests, but in reality the shepherd is only being nice to you so that he can sheer you and at some point take you to market for slaughter once he has fattened you up enough. The 'good shepherd' is the central motif of Judeo-Christianity for a good reason.

What the shepherds want is for the various sheep to continually pull back, or just desire to pull back into their 'pure' (ethnic or religious based) flocks, thinking this is the solution to their problems. But this only gives the shepherds and sheepdogs even more power over them.

David Duke says he merely wants 'nations of races'? OK, then what comes next? When one of these nations decides that it needs some more lebensraum or wants their neighbor nation(s) to share their more abundant resources?

Here we have a problem of a white junior shepherd talking to white beta-sheep. But make no mistake, the Dukes are an aristocratic gentry family and his current sheep are just former serfs from Europe. Most people don't realize that the entire class makeup of Europe is made up of different ethnicities that cross so-called 'national' boundaries (which are artifices evolved out of the prior feudal era). The nobility (and gentry) of the different 'nations' are all inbred stock of one meta-clan, vastly different from the waves of agrarian commoners that arrived in early waves of immigration from Mesopotamia.

So, how are you going to create and define this White Nation, and who will be its leaders: elite shepherd(s), their proxy sheepdogs, or sheep? Likely not the latter.

The day after I mentioned Duke stories, Patty Duke-Astin passed away. She and her husband purchased my father's aunt's house on the shore of Lake Coeur d'Alene. That name, of course, means Heart of the Lion, the attribute famously applied to crusading Richard I, the one Plantagenet Richard that my distant Norman kin didn't help depose. The Lion Heart only spent a few months in England, having been from Aquitaine, but no big deal, as the present country has had 'German' kings for several centuries now, if we may loosely call them German.

These Hanovers (and Saxe-Coburgs) seemed to quietly love the Nazis, and had to change their Germanic throne name to the Windsors earlier. But odd, that the Nazis claimed not to care for the nobility? Hmmm. As I stated earlier, it was George II (Hanover) that sponsored the new 'modern' university system that gave us today's racism under the guise of the Romantic Movement. George's son, George III, was the king that presided over the happy English colonialists in America become disenchanted via bizarre policies coming from London. We have a link here to the book Ruler's of Evil, where it is explained how the Jesuits and the Freemasons secretly collaborated to foment rebellion centered around opposition to the bizarre London policies.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Amalek's threads are messy
Not sure who Amalek is? But I guess the fork in the thread makes sense though, we can keep the other thread for discussing the Jew vs Gentile dynamic.

I've taken the liberty of moving several other posts from that thread over here, to restore the context & continuity.

The Elites’ race-based conflict is not an illusion. It is real, happening on the streets at this moment, and will only increase in severity after the coming economic collapse.
I'm going to stick with the opinion that this meme of a street fight is largely an illusion. Even after Paris and Brussells, the chances of being killed or injured in such a conflict are miniscule. I suppose it could get worse, but I hope not.

Historically, the really huge death tolls have involved wars of nations against nations, or state-sponsored pogroms against racial or religious minorities.

In the meantime, we have to work with the tools at hand to provide safety and sustenance for our children.
I agree that winning followers for Postflavian values is a long-term strategy. What are the tools at hand, that you see as more useful in the current crisis?
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
1. The Elites’ race-based conflict is not an illusion. It is real, happening on the streets at this moment, and will only increase in severity after the coming economic collapse.
I think this may be an instance where Jerry is speaking in a different sense than you are taking it. I think Jerry is trying to say that the war is not organic, that is, not generated without assistance from some with a hidden agenda. And in this sense it is an illusion because he is talking about the ultimate cause not coming from the people you are afraid of. But in any case it is wider than just race as being the pertinent categories.

2. Educating Americans about the reality of Elite machinations to pit them against each other for profit is not a valid self-defense strategy because it will not happen within the lifetime of my children.
So because of this time aspect, you are willing to be the elite's tool in targeting other people? You seem to be admitting that there is an elite agenda, say globalism or something else, but if so, how do you know that they haven't read The Art of War, and have already gamed out your plan. Your plan, which used to be mine back in the day, which was advanced by the Mont Pellerin boys, Hapsburg et al.? In martial arts, they call this using the enemy's inertia against him.

I wish the world transformed next year into an Anarcho-Capitalist utopia wherein people were so rational and observant of the Non-Aggression Principle the need for coercive government evaporated away.
You wish? Were you born under a cabbage leaf?

The problem here, is that once you achieved your utopia, as you call it, there will be some who are unsatisfied with their lot. No, I'm not talking about the so-called lazy leeches, I'm talking about the opposite end of the spectrum. Out of this growing cabal of over-achievers will arise one or more strong men, who will make themselves the coercive law of the land. And now there is nothing you or your children can do about it. But this is only idle speculative musing, as you'll never achieve this non-state of affairs, because this is not part of the globalist game plan of the elites, who have most all the gold, and more mercenaries and weaponry than you or I can imagine or muster.

Is your wish just a wish, or is there something afoot? In either case, who exactly is on the target list, or is that secret? Do you have some kind of shibboleth test to determine who really wants to obey the Non-Aggression Principle? Hitler signed a Non-Aggression Pact with Stalin.

You are in denial of human psychology. In one of my early posts here I mentioned a CNBC documentary which interviewed a number of Wall Street players. They all did mergers and acquisitions, and they were asked if there was ever a point when they would have enough wealth from doing such deals. To a man they said never, but it was not about the wealth so much as doing the next deal, and they thought nothing of how many existing jobs were destroyed in the vulture process. This even stated by one who had blue-collar roots. This is because it is deeper than dry economic (either / or) debate about what system is best, but that regardless of class status or upbringing, the brain's reward and punishment system trumps everything.

I read a claim recently that the Phoenicians, perhaps the world's greatest long distance traders, were actually the longest lasting stable society. The reason given for this was that they understood that they could not allow huge differentials in wealth status to get out of hand. Thus, they insisted that all members of society had to be stakeholders in trading voyages, and that profits, or occasional losses, were distributed fairly. They did this by organizing all such voyages through a (coercive) central trading house authority.

As such, I think that in your anger and frustration, like mine before, almost 40 years on now, is preferring to throw too many babies out with the bathwater. You are asking for a pipe dream doomed to fail, and if allowed to manifest would almost put us back to the Stone Ages. That is after the race and class wars are over. But this, generally will not be allowed to manifest, and after the Anarchist boys with their Cookbook, do some damage, they will be the first metaphorically hung on the 6,000 crosses.

As I have stated elsewhere, you have been ironically turned into the modern day equivalent of the NATIONALIST Jewish Zealots and Sicarii. But hey, its all in the genes for you. But today's Jews are ironically mostly Gomerites according to their holy book.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
You wish? Were you born under a cabbage leaf?

The problem here, is that once you achieved your utopia, as you call it, there will be some who are unsatisfied with their lot.
Rick --

I think that, in expressing this wish, Charlie was expecting we would agree with him about what kind of utopia we're looking for. And more importantly, he was indicating that he didn't think that the anarcho-capitalist utopia (or any other Postflavian utopia) would be happening any time soon; in other words, he wasn't born under a cabbage leaf, any more than we were.

Couldn't we wait for Charlie to answer some of the earlier questions, before we go assuming what his answers are going to be?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Disclaimer: I might have been born under a cabbage leaf for all I know.

And I did buy into the Anarchist-Capitalist schema, but never did understand it as a Utopia. And then I woke up. And then I found out my Koch addiction was from a hidden agenda, and that their traditionalist Catholic roots are incompatible with Libertarian individualism. This as such Catholics, like the Mont Pellerin sponsors, are all about the opposite, that is: restoring the ancien regime.

In any case, I was unable to detect that Charlie was speaking less than literally here. He seems to be saying, to me, that our education project will not be workable as his and his children's timeframe will not allow. Either in one year or a somewhat longer time. But even if I have misinterpreted what Charlie said, I still stand by what I've written. While he may be correct that our efforts are merely spitting in the wind, I see a more dismal outcome for those which want to repeat history by playing their assigned role.

As another take on the Jewish nationalists, it seems many agree that the movement in general was stoked by the Maccabees, and yet we have clear evidence that they were really on the Greco-Roman Hellenistic side, aka the globalism of the day. Even to the extent that Josephus recorded that they pulled out of the final battle for the Herodian Temple on a prearranged signal, leaving their nationalist compatriots to the Romans.

I think that most of the American nationalists have a Zionist leaning from their religious upbringing (e.g. the Palins) and are thus cuckservatives to that extent. And so for this category there is no contradictory irony, but this creates a pre-existing schism in the White Nation Utopia. One among many.
 
Top