Phenotype, not Genotype:

I've made this clear thousands of times, but people are still apparently confused as to why exactly I am pro-white, and anti-jew.

I believe in absolute, objective, universal morality. I am not a relativist. I do not give special privileges to whites over any other group. If whites were the worst race on Earth, I'd hate whites the most, and I'd probably be lobbying all sorts of groups to resist the white menace, regardless of the fact that I am white. My personal situation has nothing to do with right and wrong, good and evil, superior and inferior. This simply isn't the case though. In fact, we find that of all groups, jews are the absolute worst, and whites are the absolute best. This is a very inconvenient truth. But it is the truth. I believe in Truth and follow wherever it leads. I don't believe in 'whiteness' and follow wherever 'whiteness' leads. Whites have earned my loyalty through their behavior, just as jews have earned my hostility through their behavior. Not because of any particular string of AGCT's on their DNA strip. Not because I might share some string of AGCT's with someone else somewhere. Who cares? I certainly don't. Existence is not moral, only behavior can be moral or immoral. A rock exists. Humans act.

Truth does not exist somewhere 'out there.' It isn't a resource you can mine from a mountainside, nor is it a star we can build a rocket ship and fly over to. It is a moment in time, when a synapse fires, actively, thinking something true. It's when a mind, somewhere, has grasped the truth and is currently creating it, ex nihilo, in that most masterfully complex of all forces in the universe, the mind.

Beauty isn't just sitting there, or doing its own thing. It exists only at a split second in time, when a synapse fires, looking at something, and realizes this is beautiful. When the mind has fully grasped just how awe inspiring X is, when there is a sort of snapping into place of appreciation for what they are reflecting upon, there, and no where else, is beauty. It is there only then, and no other time. For beauty to be resurrected, the synapses would have to fire again, or some other mind would have to come along and experience the same revelation. Between those times, it is gone again. There is no beauty in an uninhabited planet, no matter what the view.

Love isn't just floating around, it doesn't make clouds and rain, or shoot arrows at people. Love is a frozen moment in time, when your synapses fire, and you realize, this is a part of me. When a mind transcends its narrow self and identifies with the other, becoming a larger whole. "Love is the recognition of the other into the conceptualization of the self." It is a thought, an active process ongoing in the mind, it is a verb.

Good is a verb. It is due to intelligence, and is the product of thought. Emotions are also a part of thought, emotions are just conclusions, thought out conclusions, just like logic is. All good is contained in the intelligent mind thinking various good thoughts. When the brain stops, so too does all morality. There is nothing left in that husk, just as there is nothing of value in a dead universe, an unintelligent amoeba, or, much worse, someone who works actively to suppress all good thoughts in the world.

And this is why jews are the worst people on Earth. For over a century now, their boazian school of Anthropology, their politics, their liberalism, has been dedicated to suppressing the truth. They have stopped all progress in science, politics, and ethics, cold. They have banned eugenics, which could have made people infinitely happier, fitter, wiser, and more intelligent than they are today. They have caused dysgenics, by flooding the people who were already more evolved, with people who were already less evolved. They are actively destroying any chance for intelligence to inherit the earth, and are pushing with all their might for bestiality and barbarism to reign instead. It doesn't really matter why. It just matters that this is absolutely, unchallengeably, what they are doing.

Jews have done everything in their power to destroy Beauty. They replaced the beautiful architecture and art of the European, with the ugly and twisted corruption of modern art. They have replaced the soaring heights of Classical music, opera, and ballet, with rap, sitcoms, and grinding. They have even promoted race mixing, destroying the inherent beauty of the white race by polluting it with all sorts of inferior breeds that can only possibly make it worse. They have striven relentlessly to lower people's moral standards, so that previously sublime experiences like sex have become cheap and ugly, even disgusting and perverse. Jews, no one else, did this. Freud, the jewish pornographers, the whole hollywood media. They cannot escape culpability for these crimes.

Jews are at the forefront of destroying love. They use their tool, 'deconstructionism,' to deconstruct all relationships, all bonds, between mankind. They have destroyed, quite intentionally, even announcing this as their avowed goal, a person's love for his nation, his homeland, his extended family, his nuclear family, his ancestry, his faith, his traditions, his language, his culture, even his wife. Leaving him with nothing. Loving nothing, and unloved by anyone. The jews claim that by deconstructing all 'prejudices,' all 'silly hangups,' they have freed people to love only those they choose to love. And yet, once you have removed absolutely everything to cleave to, and are 'completely free' as an individual, you no longer CAN love anyone or anything. The entire point of love is to subsume your individuality into something more, something else, something better. A perfect individual is incapable of love. A lover can never be an individual, looking out only for himself, concerned only with his own well-being. By promoting selfishness, self-centeredness, and destroying all possible ties, making even marriage 'a silly tradition with no purpose,' so that people must live all their lives single, or jumping ice floe to ice floe with temporary fling after temporary fling -- jews have made a full out assault on love. Their media has done it, their universities have done it, even their laws have done it -- promoting homosexual marriage, or distributing condoms in school, or providing welfare benefits to unmarried, but not married mothers.

If anyone wants to pretend jews are not behind the media, the deconstructionism of the universities, the modern art museums, pornography, miscegenation, immigration, and boazian egalitarianism, be my guest. The facts are the facts, they cannot be denied, they're available for anyone who wants to look up the prominent names and ethnicity behind every single one of these movements. I don't care why they do it, I just hate and oppose them for doing it. There is no excuse for evil. What they are doing is evil. They are stomping out all the light in the world, and turning the future into a dark age. An age more miserable than anything that came before, regardless of all our material wealth. Because at least in the past you could marry and have children. You could be around a community that knew and accepted you. You could learn your history and teach it to your kids, without becoming a thought criminal. You could speak your native tongue and expect to be understood.

Jews are the most evil people on earth. Their mass murder of white Russians under Lenin and Stalin is just the tip of the iceberg. Far worse is their murder of white souls, the ones who were born with the capacity for and a yearning towards love, beauty, and truth, but have been hoodwinked, deceived, seduced into egoism, degeneracy, and lies. Jews not engaged in this behavior are of course exempt from my previous criticism. But they are such a vanishing minority (remember, 80% voted for Obama, and all the liberalism he represents), that it is proper to speak of jews as a group participating in these crimes. To say otherwise is just denying reality. It isn't a few rogue jews. Boaz and Freud and Marx are not a few rogue jews, they are the most admired and followed jews by all the other jews. Jews love these guys. They support them at all times, everywhere, in all fields. Jews were the most fervent proponents of communism, both in the USSR and the USA, they are still the most fervent proponents of socialism. They are the largest supporters of Freudian psychology, denouncing white alternatives like Jung. The intellectual heirs of Boaz in the field of anthropology are Jared Diamond, a jew, and Gould, a jew, both absolute liars who know full well everything they say is bullshit.

Blacks are just beasts, one can't expect your dog to win a nobel prize in physics, or compose a wonderful love story like Homer's Oddyssey. It's obvious blacks are just destroyers, they are too inept to do anything else. It's like putting an elephant in a china shop. Who thought to put the elephant into the china shop? Who encouraged immigration? Who ended segregation? Jews. Jews! The people who put the elephant in the china shop, against the strenuous objections of the owners of the china shop, the builders of the china, and all the onlookers who said it would not work, were jews. There is nothing to say about blacks, they are so hopelessly out of their depth, such hopeless pawns of their masters, that nothing they do or say matters. I don't listen to dogs barking, or blacks talking. Jews are different. Jews are the smartest people on earth. They are in full control of their faculties. They know full well the consequences of their actions. They know what they are doing. They know they are hunting down the light of the world and extinguishing it, lantern by lantern, until there is no truth, beauty, or love left. No one left who can appreciate it, no one left who can create it, no moral being left. Either people's faculties are simply insufficient to reach the level of morality, like the beastmen blacks, or their souls have been so crippled and tortured by the culture around them, that all higher things are lost forever -- like the yobs of the UK.

For these actions they knowingly perpetrate on the rest of the world, jews are practically Satan incarnate. Not because they have a string of AGCT's that repeat in one pattern instead of another. Not because their DNA reads "TTCGTCA". But because of their behavior. Their actions. What they've done to this poor, poor world.

Conversely, I don't give a damn about the genetic code of whites. If tomorrow our entire DNA string were scrambled and we were changed into something utterly different, without a trace left of our entire genome, but it didn't change our behavior, I wouldn't give a damn. DNA is just a tool. If our brains were all digitized, we were given new, metallic bodies, and we discarded DNA forever, what has been lost? Nothing, nothing important. We used one technology, DNA, to live as humans. Now we're using another technology, AI, to live as robots. Who cares? I don't. Whatever works. Whatever produces results. How obvious is this? What matters is whether our new digital brains are more capable of producing and appreciating truth, beauty, and love. That's it. If they are, then it's time to switch over. If they aren't, we should stay the same.

Whites are the greatest invention on earth. They were invented around 30,000 years ago, and have continued to evolve ever since. Nature produced, through random chance, the best combination so far of a moral being. A vessel with the intelligence to fathom good thoughts, and the benevolence to actually yearn for them. Blacks lack the first, jews lack the second. Whites have both. We are the best invention Nature has accidentally happened upon. In Nature's quest for power and survival, it handed us a beautiful, loving, truthful race, the crown jewel of morality and value. But we aren't perfect. We could still do better. There is no reason to stop here, or confuse the means with the end. The white genome is simply the means, a tool, a technology, towards our end -- Truth, Beauty, Love. If there is a better means, a better tool, than the white genome, we should use that instead. If this better means or tool is the asian genome, then so much the worse for us. We are simply obsolete, like the buggy whip, and should be discarded into the scrap heap of history. But this isn't the case, and thus our duty remains. To preserve the white race, so that we can preserve love, beauty, and truth, the fast diminishing light of this world.

Why am I so certain whites are the best? Because of our record. Cast your eyes back on our heritage. Is there anything so grand? So incredible? So spectacular? No. No matter how you measure it, not even close. Charles Murray's book, Human Accomplishment, is the final word on this issue. There is simply nothing more to say. In science and in the arts, white men are the source of at least 90% of all human accomplishment. 90% of truth and 90% of beauty, straight off the bat. Then we must recall that whites were the first people on earth to adopt monogamous marriage, that many cultures didn't even have a word for love, before we provided it to them, and that our treatment of women was the best on earth, and the final loop in the knot is done. Whites are the most loving people on earth. We're even more loving towards animals, and other races, the most altruistic, caring, giving people on earth. Due to the malevolence of others who take advantage of our naivety, this is a flaw. But among ourselves, it's just wonderful.

We are a race of titans. We so dwarf all the rest of mankind, that the white race is worth more than all of them combined. I can't even imagine how this point is debatable. Everyone on earth reads Shakespeare and gazes at Michelangelo's David. No one reads 'the tales of the aztec cannibal xeuztucucu' or whatever the hell amerindians came up with. No one goes to look at their skull racks of all the enemies they've killed. A few people read The Tale of Genji and Sun Tzu's Art of War. Neither compare in the least to Dostoevsky. Why can I say that? Because I've read all three. I've read the Persian Book of Kings, it's pathetic, long-winded, repetitive, and ignoble. It isn't worth a verse of the Iliad. It isn't worth a verse of the Aeneid! I've read the Bhagivad Gita, the Koran, they're nothing to our philosophers -- Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Kant, Plotinus, Hume -- why can I say that? Because I've read all of them too. All of them. All the greats. And the greatest of the non-whites are the mediocre nobody's among whites. They just can't compete. It is hopeless. We are light years of evolution ahead of them. Or rather, we WERE light years ahead of them, until jews got a stranglehold on our culture, and made it the pathetic mess we see today. Today, the best art, the best philosophy, comes from Japan. But the best Japan has, still can't compete with the best the white race had. Nor can it compete with the best whites could have again.

We are the once and future king.

Not because our genome reads "ACGGTCT". But because of our record. I am proud to be white, not because "ACGGTCT" is just an amazingly proud sequence of nucleotides, but because Goethe was white, and so was Euclid, and so was Beethoven. I'm a part of them, and they're a part of me, biologically, historically, culturally. I love them, and so they are me. And that is why their accomplishments are my own, and I can take pride in 'other people's things.' I am not just me, but everyone and everything I love. I can take pride in anything I love, because it's mine, I've incorporated it into myself. Beethoven's music is not just Beethoven's, beauty is produced in the brain that captures it, in the electric lightning flash of thought, that says, "this is beautiful." Beethoven couldn't do that on his own. He needed me too. I was part of the glory of his music -- the brain that could appreciate it, is a tool just like the instruments that play the music. His music is my music, is our music, and the beauty produced is the beauty I produced, with my head, with my heart, due to who I am. It was my accomplishment too. Neitzsche's philosophy is not just his, it's mine too. Because I understood it, reinterpreted it, applied it to the world of today. I thought it just like he did, it is mine too. Words that go unread produce nothing, only the brain that perceives and understands them, can bring them to life. I brought them to life, that makes me not as good as him, but good nonetheless. Proud nonetheless, to have done my part in creating truth in this world.

I get loads of hostility from people, because I attach no value to the white genotype. You're right, I don't. I attach a lot of value to the white phenotype, and I realize the white genotype is a tool that helps achieve the white phenotype. A tool that could be improved or replaced, and should be, but for now is the best we have. That's all it can be, because existence is not good, only actions are good. Love is a verb. Truth is a verb. Beauty is a verb. White is an adjective. It's not even a noun. ::laughs:: There's no comparison between the two. One is a minor detail, a mere tool, the other is our reason for being. Confusing the two is myopic and degrading. Who would ever be loyal to something less intelligent than we are? A collection of non-sentient genes? Why don't we worship dirt while we're at it? Ridiculous. I reserve my worship for higher things, the transcendental portion of our brains, our highest heights -- where we get a glimpse of how angels must think, but can never quite stay in their realm.

If white nationalism means a blind loyalty to a string of fucking letters, then to hell with white nationalism. If it means preserving the white race so that we can inherit the stars, then not only I, but many millions of people could rally behind it. Then it might, just might, actually happen. You can't appeal to people on the basis of nucleotide strings. I can't believe I even have to explain this, I can't believe I'm even saying this to ostensible adults. White nationalism is a Vision. It is an ideal. Ideals are not material. A materialist, biological reductionist, construction of our cause, is as worthless and unappealing as the communists who came before. Or the relativists and hedonists to either side. If they can't see this, then they are blind.

Another Explanation for the Citizen's Dividend:

The main objection to the citizen's dividend is that people don't have to work to earn it. It's just free money. People immediately begin to imagine a bunch of ill-dressed 'scroungers,' 'looters,' 'moochers,' and every other horror they've gotten used to ascribing to welfare.

This is unfortunate, because there are so many differences between the citizen's dividend, and welfare. For one thing, people Do earn their citizen's dividend. How? By being a good citizen.

I ask a lot out of Vinlanders. Not all of it is fun or easy. For one thing, they have to marry by age 20, have two kids by age 25, and they can't divorce. Adultery would be a crime and even pre-marital sex would have severe pressure put against it. Compared to the easy going lives of today, where people avoid all personal responsibility when it comes to sex, or their genetic responsibility to their ancestors and descendants when it comes to reproduction, I'm asking a lot MORE from my citizens than America does today.

Gays can't even fulfill my requirements for citizenship, marriage and two children, so they'd have to leave the country, that's certainly a hard row for them to hoe. Bisexuals would have to restrict themselves to members of the other sex. All sorts of other degeneracy, like promiscuity, polygamy, prostitution, trans-sexuals, transvestites, and who knows what, would also be gone. Everyone would have to live a decent, normal lifestyle behind doors. That's certainly asking a lot from Americans today, who have lost all sight of simple, decent, human, moral values.

Certainly the primary duty of Vinlanders is to actually have and raise children. This could even be magnified. for instance, it might be the duty of low IQ Vinlanders, or Vinlanders with various genetic ailments like a history of mental illness, to not have any children, have only one child, or at least screen their children and abort if the tests come out poorly. Likewise, it could be the duty of the nobility, people with high IQ and good personalities and stellar records of character, to have more than just two children. To have four or five, and raise them all with the utmost care and affection. This is asking a lot from a people habituated to spending their time and money on themselves. Our elites are the most to blame in this field. It's true they don't divorce or cheat as much as their inferiors, but they selfishly hoard their superior genes to themselves, leaving nothing for the next generation, by having the fewest kids of all demographic segments. The amount of effort and sacrifice of their personal interests I'm asking from them, to have and raise at least two kids, if not more, is certainly more expensive than the Citizen's Dividend they receive in the mail.

Women who are required to actually raise their kids, rather than send them off to daycare and then boarding school for life, certainly won't think the Citizen's Dividend is adequate reimbursement. And yet, it is meant as a reimbursement. It's meant as a measure that we value the work of women, that we value in real terms, the effort it takes to raise kids and do chores. That we can't do the important stuff in life, only these heroic women can, but at the very least we can ease the burden and take the financial aspect of worry off their minds. We ask a lot from couples to stay together through thick and thin, like all the centuries of old, but at least we can remove poverty as a source of marital friction. With both citizens, that's 24,000 a year, free and clear, from the government, to spend how you will. Enough to support both parents and both children, even if they can't find anything else.

The Citizen's Dividend reimburses so many other things too. If you can't find a job because we allow free trade and your job is outsourced, or we invest in technology and you become redundant, we feel your pain. We can't retard our economy especially for you, but what we can do, is not abandon you to a life of penury. We can give you a Citizen's Dividend, and it's also an apology. We're sorry society has no place for your work. We're sorry we've made you redundant. But you're never worthless, no one thinks that, the whole country still embraces you as one of our own, and that is why we are happy to give you this Citizen's Dividend, every year, for your entire life, come what may. We will be revoking all the socialist programs of today, the endless tax credits, the welfare, the corporate subsidies, the medicare, the social security. We'll even be instituting a regressive, flat sales tax that hits the poor as hard as the rich. A Citizen's Dividend is your reimbursement for all of this. It's not that we don't want to help you, it's that socialism doesn't work and doesn't succeed in helping people. It is wasteful and breeds huge numbers of parasites who get between the money and the people -- bureaucrats, businesses, whoever. For every dollar of socialism that reaches the people, something like 5 dollars was collected in taxes. The citizen's dividend is the exact opposite. We take five dollars, and we return five dollars. It means we can help people five times as much as before, at the exact same price.

Why would people resent the 'free money' of the Citizen's Dividend when they are fine with the socialism of today? It is the same thing, only infinitely more efficient and helpful to those in need. And if you're the sort who doesn't want to give a crust of bread to anyone anywhere, then you should STILL support the citizen's dividend, because it requires less in taxes, is less punishing to the rich, and at least you get a lot of your money back, in the citizen's dividend that arrives at your door. Just consider it a strange method of giving yourself money, and let it lie. It's fine to be a stingy curmudgeon, but most people want to help others. The young, the elderly, the sick, the poor, the unfortunate, and the misfit. The citizen's dividend is the best compromise you'll ever reach. Charles Murray is a libertarian and it was the compromise he came to, the closest thing to libertarianism society will ever adopt. If he can stomach it, so can you.

In Vinland, I've repeatedly said felony offenses would all carry the death penalty. Criminals are largely genetic, and we want them out of our gene pool, and out of our hair, permanently. It would also be a much faster system, no 12 years of appeals on ridiculous and specious grounds like in America today. For the sacrifice citizens have to make, to stop being criminals and have some discipline in their lives, there is -- the Citizen's Dividend. Thank you for not being a criminal, and here's a simple reason why you don't have to do crime -- you're already taken care of. No one is the guy from Les Miserables, stealing bread to feed his starving sister's family (not even his own! It wasn't even his irresponsible breeding!). The citizen's dividend simultaneously says, "Thank you for not being a criminal, and you have no further excuse for being a criminal, so mind your manners or it's off to the gallows with you." The gain in security is more than worth the cost of 'buying' people off. The cost of crime, and the criminal justice system used to fight it, is astronomical. All of that cost will vanish in Vinland, but in return, you'll have to pay the taxes that fund the citizen's dividend. It is the only way our carrot and stick plan of "Death penalty if you go wrong," "A good life if you are a good citizen who plays by the rules," can work.

If you're ever walking alone on a street at night, grumbling about all those 'moochers' receiving their dividend in the mail (no more and no less than you receive in your mail!), pause for a moment and notice how incredibly safe you are. How incredibly safe your wife and children are. How different this country is from the America that came before. Perhaps it didn't give away 'free money', like we do, but is that really important, compared to the fact that it gave criminals 'free license' to rape, rob, and murder you? Consider it a trade well worth making, it really is a reasonable exchange.

There's more to being a good citizen of Vinland. So far you have to a) marry, not divorce, and not cheat. b) have children (or not have children, as the case may be.) c) give up all deviant sexual behavior. d) face competition from all around the world in a ruthless capitalist system of only rewarding winners with jobs and wages. e) Give up all socialist benefits you may have previously had or expected to receive. f) face the death penalty if you do a serious crime. G) Pay a flat sales tax.

Women have to stay at home and raise their kids to adulthood, working only in a manner consistent with the child's benefit. That's asking a lot from them, but, it's no more than was asked of them for the thousands of years of human history, and at least this time they won't be single mothers, and they'll have the citizen's dividend.

Men have to be prepared to fight. Vinland will probably be born in battle, and will only survive through battle. Endless haters will seek to blot us out, just like the monarchs who marched on the French Republic, the war of 1812 America had to fight just to assert its independence yet again to Britain, and the Nazis assaulted from every side. Independence is never easy. A male citizen of Vinland first has to fight for it, and his children have to fight to keep it. Perhaps nukes will make conventional war impossible and men won't have to fight in that sense. But there will be an ongoing war all the same -- people trying to cross our borders illegally, propaganda being showered on us from abroad about how evil we are, rebels trying to upset our constitutional order, and only the strength and determination of our male citizenry will be able to preserve peace and order in such trying circumstances. The fact that men stand ready, that they support the constitutional order with all their hearts, that they will kill and die to keep our laws and preserve our people, is absolutely necessary for the survival of our Republic. Paying the men whose hearts stand ready to defend the homeland, with a Citizen's Dividend that thanks them for doing so -- for being the loyal, brave, and true white warriors they are -- is the least we can do. Like I say, it may have nothing to do with the military. It may just be that they rebuke, angrily and with passion, subverters of our nation from without and from within, and will not stand for intellectual sewage polluting their country from their friends or family -- that in and of itself is fighting. Is standing ready. Is deploying for the homeland. A citizen's dividend for such heartfelt citizens, is only fair. They love their nation enough to preserve it, so why don't we love them enough to preserve them? It's give and take.

There's more. People currently enjoy the right to vote. In Vinland, they won't. Giving people the vote was a mistake. Most people are not qualified to make the best choices for their nation's history. Only a select few we can trust will rise to those ranks. Perhaps they'll vote among themselves, or perhaps some iron dictator will just give decrees to an obedient bureacracy, or perhaps it will be some kind of complicated aristocratic division of powers full of checks and balances. In any event, the average citizen will be far removed from the seat of power. Even though the vote is largely meaningless and most people have never once achieved anything by voting, it's still a sacrifice to basically let go of the wheel and have faith in others to do what is right. To lose all say in your own life. We recognize your sacrifice, and all we can give as a return, is a country that takes better care of you, than any country you could've voted in. Part of that is the citizen's dividend. Part of it is crime prevention. Part of it is demanding moral behavior from yourself and those around you. But it all adds up. You lose the vote, in return, you receive the kind of nation you always wished you could have voted for. That's the kind of recompense we need to give people, for their loss of direct power they once enjoyed.

On that note, the demand for moral behavior is another sacrifice. No more smoking, drinking, taking drugs, gambling for money, cheating, sleeping around, hiring prostitutes, whatever. The vices end here. Innocent fun is innocent fun. Vice is vice. There will no longer be a conflation between the two. The piercings, tatoos, hair dyes, and all the rest of the 'I'm a rebel, hear me roar,' crap is gone. We expect decent, well behaved, fully dressed men and women who are proud of themselves and take care of themselves. The scenes of British night life, where everyone is puking drunk, stumbling into hospitals emaciated from heroine use, or wearing next to nothing but still crying because the guy you wanted turned you down -- are over. This kind of activity not only kills each person individually, it kills the whole nation. It's a rot without borders. It impacts everything around you, and everyone ends up paying the price. The eventual price is the fall of your nation to invaders and the extinction of your people. First comes the private nihilism of vice ridden lives, then the public nihilism of failing to upkeep your infra-structure, raise your children correctly, follow the law, and eventually surrendering all your borders to outsiders. It's happened over and over, from Rome to the UK of today. We can't let it happen again.

Our people have to be better than everyone else. It is possible to live a life free of vice and degeneracy. It's hard. It requires discipline and it requires devotion. But it's possible. it's been done before, not only by exceptional individuals, but entire societies -- like Victorian England, or the Spartans. Whites are capable of a holy life, and it will be that much easier, when the law legislates it, your peers expect it, and you are born into it. When every single tv show or movie is told in such a way to support it, so that you aren't led astray. Our country will use its laws to do its part, we will create a culture and education that supports you in your efforts to go cold turkey from all vice. But we recognize it is a sacrifice on your part, the sacrifice of many worlds of experience, some of it apparently very seductive and pleasant, considering how many people follow that path. But it is not our path. It will not be tolerated here, among us. We expect more from our citizens than just the average guy. And in return, we provide a Citizen's Dividend. "Thank you for being above average. Thank you for refraining from vice and degeneracy, which is the death knell of all nations. Thank you for doing your part in upholding your souls, and the souls of your children and the nation's soul. As respect and gratitude for doing your part, here is the Citizen's Dividend, that leaves no good deed unrewarded. We are aware of all you are doing for your country, and the country wants to do what we can for you. So here is a small part of that, the Citizen's Dividend."

A citizen of Vinland is practically a hero, a super-elite, of America today. He or she has so much to do, and so much he or she can't do, and so much he or she had but will have to give up -- that the citizen's dividend has been paid for in full. Every single one of them has earned it. It isn't free money. It's money to those deserving few, who managed to become citizens of Vinland, and are already the greatest friends, lovers, neighbors, husbands, wives, and countrymen you could ever ask for. Who have earned it through a rigorous number of sacrifices and qualifications, such that their conduct more than pays for the pitiful minimum standard of living we provide. These are not the 'moochers,' 'looters,' 'hobos,' and 'welfare recipients' you pictured at the beginning of the article. They are citizens. Citizens of Vinland. They are just as qualified as you are, to BE a citizen of Vinland. They went through fire to be here, to live here, and they are good, decent people. People no one should be angry at helping. People no one should look down on or resent just for living. They aren't going to be a bunch of unwashed, drunk, low IQ madmen like the picture of welfare recipients today. They don't go around burning stuff and trashing cars for fun between checks. They are citizens. Citizens of Vinland. Your extended family. The people who love what you love, and love you. Who loved you without ever knowing you, just for who you are, and accepted and supported you from start to finish. Who better than to give a little something to? Who better to pay taxes to? Who better to reward with a small portion of your wealth? If you're the unfortunate one, it's you who will be taken care of. If they are, it's you who will take care of them. But you're all fellow citizens. A handpicked, self-chosen few, who walked through fire together. The divide of 'providers' and 'parasites' just doesn't fit here. Not between family and friends. Not between comrades. Don't you see?

They earned it. Just like you have. Everyone has, who has what it takes, to be a citizen of Vinland.

White Nationalism is Future Oriented, and Thus the Future is With White Nationalism:

Old people remember a lot of unhelpful things. They remember the KKK marching around in terrorist-like intimidation tactics, shrouded in masks, carrying out bombings on innocent black girls in churches. They remember the nazis gassing 6 million jews, even though it never happened. They remember the pain of WW II and the joy of victory over this 'most evil of all foes.' They remember segregation, that nasty practice where blacks have their own water fountains and park benches, and can't even pollute whites with their presence -- when we're the ones who enslaved them and brought them, by force, to live alongside us! They remember crushing black poverty, where blacks were uneducated and lived in mud huts, without water or electricity, in the very midst of white prosperity and technology of the 1950's. They probably remember white trash, who were busy chewing tobacco or getting in drunken fistfights, making snide comments about 'niggers,' without realizing they were more shameful than the blacks they were insulting.

There is a lot to cringe over, and regret, in the racism of the past. It was not scientifically informed. It was not upper class. It was not defensive. It was not effective. For instance, South African Apartheid wanted to keep blacks in the country, doing menial labor, but refused to let them vote or hold political office. This kind of dual class citizen is an obvious injustice. Everyone should be treated equally by the law. White Nationalism is different, we don't want to oppress or control or demean anyone -- we want to separate from them, form our own country, and not HAVE any blacks to oppress, control, or demean. We don't want to terrorize blacks with white sheets over our head, and occasionally throw bombs into black churches -- because we don't want any blacks in the first place! We don't want blacks living in mud huts, or to call blacks crude names -- because we don't ever want to interact with a black in our life.

The right to separate from others, to right to found a community of shared values and shared characteristics, where everyone freely condones the nation's laws and system, should not be such a moral scandal. The land we ask for is of little economic worth and sparsely inhabited, and in any event, we have paid for over and over already. In white inventions that help feed the world, in white charity that has given trillions to non-whites, in white peacekeeping, in white foreign investments, in white disease inoculations, in white law codes that have freed hundreds of millions of people from barbarism. We have done our part. A tiny corner of the world where whites can live in peace among themselves, is not so much to ask in return. Billions of non-whites alive today, have only whites to thank. The nobel prize winner who recently died, the white who invented new strains of corn for mexico and elsewhere, ON HIS OWN has earned whites the right to the Northwest United States.

Why do people object to white nationalism? It can't be because it hurts and oppresses non-whites. We have no non-whites to hurt or oppress. We have no minorities to genocide. We have nobody to segregate from or apartheid on. We can't verb anyone! ::laughs:: If people object to the initial cost of the sorting, well why don't they object to California then? More people have been displaced from California than would have to be displaced from the Northwest Republic. Millions of whites have had to pull up stakes and retreat from the now majority-minority, bankrupt state of California. Who spoke for them? Who sympathized with them? After World War II, tens of millions of Germans were ethnically cleansed from their historic homelands (they didn't cross the border, the border crossed them.) in eastern Europe, two million of them died in the wretched circumstances -- a genocide twice as bad as the one done to the jews or the Armenians. Who sympathizes with them? Who cares about them? I don't believe people are crying their eyes out over the imagined plight of forced deportations of the handful of non-whites in the Northwest United States. It must be something else, if it were just humanitarian pity, that humanitarian pity would be spread evenly across the world, and apply to everyone. Not just people displaced by white nationalism. In any event, there are hundreds of ways we could pay just compensation, or exchange the value of property white nationalists hold in America for the value non-whites hold in the Northwest, even steven. It would not be a trail of tears. It would be such a minor cost, that the car accidents that deprive America of 40,000 people every year, is a greater tragedy than the entire process of deportations, a one time cost we will never pay again.

Are they afraid of the threat we would pose as a military on the rest of the world? Let me assure you, white nationalists want nothing to do with non-whites ever again. We have no reason to conquer or meddle in the lives of others -- we are completely disgusted with the outside world and wish for nothing but to be left alone. The last thing we'd want, after finally being free of outside interference, is to go out abroad again and collect a new set of non-whites to yet again be living within our borders!

Are they afraid America would be weaker and less economically sound without us? But why? If all races are equal, they should be able to make do with whoever lives in the US. In fact, since racists are all losers and 'the worst kind of scum,' they should be happy to see us all leave. Aren't we the ones causing all the friction between the races? Aren't we the ones keeping non-whites down? Aren't we the ones who cause all the problems in America? Without us, America should prosper to unheard of new heights. It's as though they secretly agree with us that whites are the only useful people and they need every last one of them to serve as economic assets in this fast-tanking world. But in that case, it's obvious to any neutral observer who is the oppressor, and who is the oppressed. If the real objection to whites leaving the US, is we are necessary to continue being serfs and slaves to the multicult empire that is America, then surely any third neutral party can agree that's a pathetic and unjustifiable argument that no one should have to listen to.

Are they afraid that the white nationalist example would be a 'beacon on the hill?' Are they like the kings who invaded the French Republic, for fear that it would upset the rule of monarchy across the continent, if a single Republic were allowed to stand? But this is again a rather crude argument, to a neutral third party's point of view. If our only threat to the outside world, is that we would make such a convincing argument in our own favor, such a great example to be emulated, that soon the whole world would adopt our wisdom and seek to prosper and succeed like we have, then how are we harming anyone? We would instead be the cause of great good in the world, despite the current rulers losing their power, because by definition we were an example that inspired others to emulate us.

Or do they oppose us simply because we lack the numbers to be taken seriously? The argument could go, "White nationalists are a smaller minority than even mormons. Mormons aren't allowed the state of Utah, so why should you be given Montana?" From this standpoint, whites want all the territory of the United States, and can't be bothered to share with crackpot lunatic fringes as though we are equal to the mainstream. But this argument isn't very good either. In polls, 20% of Americans currently wish to secede from the USA. We are hardly a small minority. Not only that, but huge numbers of whites consistently answer poll questions where they say that blacks, for instance, are lower IQ than whites. Huge numbers of whites want a return to the nuclear family. Huge numbers of whites want lower taxes and less socialism. Huge numbers of whites want to stop immigration. Huge numbers of whites want english to be the official language of the USA. And so on. We aren't on the lunatic fringe, there is a deep current of white opinion, that agrees with us on every single issue, but is too afraid to speak out or demand justice.

Do people object to the plans white nationalists have for the country they would found? On this I agree. If your argument is, "Yes, in abstract, a white republic in the northwest is justifiable, but when I look at the horrible system white nationalists plan to erect in that territory, I object to it, simply because it is a terrible plan that would only lead to misery and ruin." As founders of a new nation, we should first work out a decent constitution that really would lead to a good life for those who live under it. I want a country that's not only 'decent,' but the hope of the universe, the best that's ever been. Since no two white nationalists can agree on what makes a good country, and many endorse the silliest things, an outsider can simply say "white nationalists are not serious and thus can't be taken seriously."

There is progress on this front. Many white nationalists are settling behind darwinian evolution, scientific racism, eugenics, atheism, the citizen's dividend, the nuclear family, a love of the Classics of music and literature, a platonic class of nobility who serve as 'custodians' of the law and the state, and so on. Many white nationalists are willing to let eminent and well intentioned non-whites, including jews, into their new country, and base their discrimination not on prejudice but post-judice. They are willing to treat individuals as individuals, and weigh them on their own merits, when considering whether they should be allowed to emigrate to our country or not. Without any recognized leader and without any '12-point plan,' white nationalists couldn't found a country, or form a constitution, even if we were handed the Northwest. In that case, the USA has a perfectly valid objection to handing us the land. This will change.

New blood will join the ranks of white nationalism, old blood will leave it or die of old age. Christianity is losing its hold on the world. Genetics is making new revelations that soon everyone will have to admit is true, like the heritability of intelligence and personality. Young people will have far worse love lives, than the old people who came before them, and will feel far more passionate for conservative morality and draconian laws to enforce it. Basically, the more reality plays out, the more it reveals, clearer and clearer, the obvious and correct solution to our problems. The more history that is made, the more we can learn from history. The more existence, the more Truth in the universe. Eventually even the most dim-witted among us, cannot help but see, with crystal clear sight, the correct course of action, the correct leader and the correct constitution, for a new nation. It might take a century, it might take centuries for all I know. But eventually every false belief will have been discredited, or tried and failed, and only the Truth will remain. Because no matter how often the truth is tested, no matter how often the truth is disputed, no matter how often the truth is put on trial, it always turns out to be the truth. That is the incredible advantage of Truth over all lies. Reality is on the side of Truth, it will never betray it, and therefore, Truth cannot help but win. It cannot help but win in science, and it cannot help but win in politics. It just needs more time.

Many whites object to white nationalism, because they think America is perfect exactly the way it is. This will also change. Old people, who still remember the glory days of America landing on the moon, winning WW II, winning the Cold War, or just walking in beautiful parks and eating apple pie, will soon die out. The new generations will not have any fond memories of America. They will not have any reason to be patriotic. They will have no loyalty to a state that has done nothing but abuse and denigrate them all their lives. You can bet the girl who was gang raped for two hours in Richmond, California, where 12 bystanders sat and watched but not a single one tried to help, or called the police, does not think very highly of America. You can bet the 20% of Americans who are unemployed, and told their jobs 'aren't coming back,' don't think highly of America. You can bet a lot of people won't think highly of America, once we are majority minority, nothing works, everything is falling apart, crime is everywhere, and your vote is powerless to stop it because it is always overshadowed by the massive numbers of blacks and hispanics voting the other way. This issue will take care of itself, in time. The amount of suffering that is necessary to teach whites, in their very bones, that America is a terrible country, not suitable for habitation, may be regrettable, but if it propels people to found a new nation then it is worth it. In the long run, perhaps we need to learn these lessons, and until we have, we just aren't philosophically equipped to form a decent country that has recognized, addressed, and overcome the systemic weaknesses that plague the USA.

There is even a class of people who feel the white race no longer deserves to live, because of how suicidally they have behaved for the last century. They have a point, but there are innocents alongside the guilty. Certainly, I have no interest in preserving Christians, liberals, nihilists, or other white groups who have caused the very mess we are in today, but there has always been a core of white resistance that has resisted the status quo, and deserves their freedom and their chance in life. We don't fight for the fools and the cowards, but the good people who, like us, have earned their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There are still millions of them, a seed that will one day inhabit space and bloom into the most beautiful of world-trees. They are extremely precious people who need to be preserved, because both genetically and culturally, they are the best life has to offer. They are the eye through which the universe beholds itself and knows itself divine. Without them, there is only death and ugliness in a limitless horizon. They have to be preserved. For their ability to enrich the future almost infinitely, they are infinitely valuable themselves.

White independence is useless if we carry the same systemic flaws, the same failed beliefs, that ruined America and Europe in the first place. Whites were once 100% homogeneous and free, but their bad philosophy has gotten us to where we are today. Simply resetting the clock at 100% homogeneous and free, changes nothing. The same flaws will develop into the exact same conditions in the new country, as was true of the old. Therefore a white republic must first be preceded by an effective new pro-white philosophy. A system of thought and values that promotes a good life and an effective nation. Until white nationalists formulate and accept this philosophy, until they routinize it and have a disciplined adherence to it -- as disciplined as the 14 words being adopted by every single spokesman for whites and mentioned over and over again until every last white on earth knows what we stand for and why -- we cannot form a new nation, we wouldn't succeed in building it, and we have no right to one anyway.

If we take care of our philosophy, reality will take care of the rest. We have a long ways to go. Simple truths like atheism and evolution, that all facts on earth bear out clearly and for all to see, aren't even accepted. Higher logical conclusions like utilitarianism, the absolute and universal goods (love, beauty, and truth), the importance of virtue, the right to a citizen's dividend, valuing people for who they are instead of what they can do, are all beyond the average white nationalist. They are like little children who don't know how to swim in the oceans of deep thought that validate our cause. Somehow, these people must be shepherded towards enlightenment, step by tottering step. It's the same as last post -- deserve victory. If we are not the sort of people who would form a fine nation, a splendid nation, then we don't deserve one. The appropriate philosophy on life is necessary to a good life, it is by definition impossible for this to be otherwise. (If some other view were the key to a good life, then THAT would be the appropriate philosophy!) We don't currently hold the appropriate philosophy on life. This is quite clear from the endless errors I see white nationalists make, on an endless variety of questions, and all seemingly haphazardly and without principle. No one even argues logically, starting with a premise of what they value, and leading to a conclusion about what needs to be done to champion it. Every view is isolated and seemingly picked from the nether at random, to support whatever biased effort they're currently making. This sort of 'philosophy' won't do. It won't do at all.

Deserve victory. Become a clear sighted person, that light can travel through, without refraction or distortion. Become a well of truth, that water can stream through without pollution or corruption. Become a citizen of the kingdom of heaven, before demanding citizenship for a kingdom on earth. Your citizenship in the first, is your only ticket, your only passport, to your citizenship in the second. It just won't happen any other way.

Courage:

You know what I hate? Cowards.

There's a reason Plato discussed only four virtues, out of all the possibilities, as what makes a man. Wisdom, Temperance, Courage, and Justice. All of these words have incredibly deep meanings to a philosopher, they are not just buzz words to be thrown out on every possible occasion.

I've written a post on Justice. Perhaps it's time to write a post on Courage. I like my definition of justice -- justice is when evil doers are worse off than good people. That's all I ask. Be our lives ever so miserable, evil people should be even more miserable, they should not profit from their deeds. Punishing evil doers so that their lives are worse than good people's, is the heart and soul of justice -- the whole long and short of it. It isn't because I want to stop their behavior, though I'm certainly glad to see it stopped. It's because it isn't right for an evil person to benefit from his evil deeds towards others, or for a good person to suffer for doing good to others. This is innately wrong, and the balance books must be ledgered. The debt must be paid. If we have the power, we should always use it to punish evil and reward good, wherever we can, whenever we can. God is not just because he does not do this. For this, he can never be forgiven. In fact, from this fact alone, it's obvious no such God exists. If God existed there would be justice in the world. There is no justice, therefore, God does not exist. But if he did exist, he would never be my God. A God who allows evil to prosper and good to be punished, who rewards bad behavior and abandons the innocent, is no God of mine.

(And don't give me bullshit about the afterlife. By then it's far too late to right what's gone wrong. What about all the years in THIS life the evil thrived and the good suffered? You can't simply erase what's already happened by adding more shit on later. And don't give me bullshit about 'free will,' if it is right for police to restrain criminals by force, it is just as right for God to restrain criminals by force. The idea that we can't violate the 'free will' of rapists and thus must let them do whatever they please to the rest of us, is bullshit only religious people could possibly swallow, and only because they are quite content to use double-think and contradictions, simply to arrive at the conclusion they want, with no attempt whatsoever to remain logical or principled in making this argument.)

You'll also note that it's possible to contain all four virtues, without doing a single thing. Without being a single thing. Without owning a single thing. You can be tied up in a cellar and the four virtues are with you. You can be a king or a pauper and the four virtues are with you. Note how different the ancient philosophy is from today's values. Now it's about what you do, what you own, that determines your value. No one cares what people ARE. People want to know what job you have, how much money you make, how many sexual conquests you've made, and rush to judgment on that basis. I can't count the number of times people resort to arguments like, "You're just a loser who can't get laid," or "You're just a loser who couldn't get into law school," or "You're just a loser who makes less money than me." This is the concept of morality, of value, in the modern world. If you trot forth enough meaningless credentials and empty accomplishments, that have nothing to do with your moral fiber at all, if you boast about enough material possessions or fortunate circumstances, then you are 'superior' and your opinions are somehow sainted with the light of truth, just by the fact that they spewed out of your holy mouth.

I don't believe in this school, I despise it, I despise anyone who argues with it. They are beneath me. True good people are found out, when you sift long enough, truly valuable people, truly admirable people, when they come across a decision, a crossroads, and they make the right one. The one that demanded the most from their souls, and gave the least to their bodies. People who don't cheat. People who keep their promises. People who defend the innocent or the weak, even if it means exposing themselves to the same injuries. People who rarefy everyone and everything they meet, instead of degrading and debasing it. You know these people. They are like beings of light in a darkened world. They make you happy despite yourself. They make you contemplative, and reflective, and wondering if you couldn't be a bit better like them, every time you meet. These good people, are also the ones who honor the other good people. Who know right from wrong, and judge people by it. Simply saying you love or admire, a lovable or admirable figure, gives you more credit than a million dollars or a dozen doctorates. Mugabe has a million dollars and a dozen doctorates. It says nothing about your character. Only who you are, the choices you make, the paths you take at critical junctures, and the praise or blame you bestow on others when they make their choices, says anything about you. Until then, I don't want to hear it.

Recently, I've been disgusted with all the cowardice showing up in WN circles. Nick Griffen was a worthless coward during Question Time. He should've said "I deny your worthless Holocaust, go fuck yourself," to Jack Straw. Or, if he believes it, he should've explained why he changed his mind over the last 20 years or so. It's a knotty question, there is little evidence to work with, so obviously, without a time machine, honest people can come to very different conclusions. Both the same person over time, and different people at the same time. In my opinion, a complete lack of gassed bodies (note, tons of bodies of disease were found, but not a single body that was gassed was ever found. Are we to believe the Nazis were just extremely efficient when it came to wholly obliterating 6 million gassed bodies while leaving any bodies that died of natural causes, or even gunshot, to lay wherever they fell?), a complete lack of the apparatus needed for such gassings, like serious gas chambers with effective ventilation and serious crematories that could really melt millions of corpses to ashes in the course of a couple years, a complete lack of credible eye witnesses, video tape footage, photos, or anything else showing gas chambers, and a complete lack of documentation where anyone, anywhere said they were gassing jews within the Nazi government, is good enough for me. But I could be wrong, who knows. I could change my mind tomorrow, in light of new facts coming to the fore. I have nothing against Holocaustians who review the facts and come down on the side of the establishment. What I can't stand is a coward who thinks one thing in his heart, and says another thing to the public at large.

If Griffen were a man of honor, he had three options. He could've said "I deny your fucking Holocaust, it is the lie of the century." He could've said, "I used to deny it, but I changed my mind, because of X." Or he could've said, "This question is irrelevant, and certainly not a platform of the BNP, who I represent. Whatever I think in my private life about the holocaust, it has nothing to do with my party's platform, or the politics of today. Let's just move on." Or he could've even said something as simple as "No comment." !!! Just that! Just "No comment." ! And I would have respect for this coward. But no, he claims he never denied the Holocaust, denies his own quotes, and gives no reason whatsoever for his reversal -- with the implication that his reversal is entirely on the surface, and is just a two-faced duplicitous mask. his very manner of speaking and posture, are full of slimy, oily cowardice. Like he's afraid to believe in his own beliefs, like he feels guilty for his own views of right and wrong. Let's be simple, if you feel guilty for believing what you believe, you probably shouldn't believe it anymore! If you feel morally in the wrong for your stance on morals, it's about time to review your moral code! By God, he's worked for white nationalism all his life, but he's still ashamed of himself for doing so! He's still ashamed of his life's work, his very life code! That's cowardice, all the way down to the core.

Griffen lied when he said he is anti-David Duke. That he associates with David Duke only to 'rescue troubled youth.' What an absurd, obvious lie. He associates with David Duke because he agrees with him. At least on most issues, and closely enough, to consider him a comrade. He's friends with friends of David Duke. If he really rejected Duke, he could never accept a friend who accepted David Duke. The doer and the sanctioner of an act, or view, or statement, are one and the same. This is just elementary. But the coward says it anyway. he says it to an entire crowd, a worldwide audience, the most obvious of lies, the most bald-faced, craven excuse to ever come out of someone's mouth, just to escape the charge for the present moment. Who did he think it would sell to? Who did he think would believe it? Anything, apparently, just to escape the situation and not have to defend it. The man who is the spokesmen of a million British, who carries our one chance to stand up for our beliefs and defend our views, instead tries to escape them and run away. If that's how he feels, why didn't he let someone else go on Question Time??? Why doesn't he resign and let some other chairman who actually believes he is a good person, on the side of good, to go take these interviews?

Even the black woman was disgusted with him. He tried to somehow wheedle into her good favor, to grovel to her, to shower distinctions on her -- a black woman who is an inveterate enemy to the cause, who has no right to be in Britain, who is the very personification of ugly, stupid, sub-human inferiority, and he's trying to wag his tail, roll over, and lick her hand, as her most servile subject just looking for a pat on the head. It is possible, however unlikely, that I'd find some black I respected and honored. But it can't be her. It can't be the hitman, the liar, the affirmative action immigrant invader, trying to destroy your life's work, and everything you stand for, right in front of you. If he cannot even distinguish friend from foe, whose side is he on?

Then there's Craig Boedeker. Everyone makes a big deal out of him because he tries to make the softest, most inoffensive pro-white film possible. He is cast as this super moderate who is just trying to restore balance to the world, who would never dream of hurting a fly. I watched the film, and I was unimpressed. Sure, it was okay, but he got these people into interviews on the basis of a lie. He tricked people into thinking they were fighting racism, when in fact he was using them as spokesmen FOR racism. That already made me uncomfortable. Then there is that shameful moment where he throws all the white Americans before 1870 under the bus, saying "Sure, THEY were evil genociders and slavers, but I am descended of immigrants who came AFTER all that. Don't group ME with THOSE people." So whose side are you on, bub? The white race, or irish immigrants in America? Maybe they should be given affirmative action too, while the rest of us wasps suffer forever for our ancestors sins? Is that your position? For the record, I think the conquest of America from the Indians was one of the best events in world history. If the lost continent of Atlantis suddenly showed up in the pacific, full of another continent of savages, cannibals, hunter-gatherers, and stone-age illiterate barbarians, I'd go colonize them too. I think slavery was wrong, but hardly because of how it treated blacks. Blacks were already slaves when we purchased them, and they had a better life here than they ever could have had in Africa, both themselves, and their descendants. I object to slavery because of its impact on real people. It depresses the wages of the white working class that have to compete with them. It unleashed a barbarian, and incompetent, race on its white neighbors, who have become our perpetual albatross. It treats people as chattel and encourages the idea that humans of all sorts can be abused and used by others for purely economic advantage, without any moral concerns.

But I'd rather follow George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, both slave owners, to hell and back, than say one word of praise for MLK Jr. I have more respect for these slavers, despite their mistaken attitudes and actions on this one point, than I will ever have for the contemporary, non-slave holding whites of today, who preach for their own extinction and are too craven to stand up for their own children. For Boedeker to throw George Washington and Thomas Jefferson under the bus, to condemn centuries worth of white men at the very moment of our triumph -- The enlightenment, the Age of Discovery, the Industrial Revolution, our conquest of the entire world -- is treachery and cowardice of the highest order. He is no spokesmen for whites. just another cringing coward trying to claim how non-racist he is and flinching from every imagined insult that might be thrown his way, to the point of surrender and apology before ever even being attacked. It's like making a film protesting Stalin, where the first thing you do is admit the evil Kulaks had it coming, and it was quite right to liquidate them, but, but, *I*, personally, am innocent! I shouldn't be lumped in with them! Please, comrade stalin, spare me! Forget all the others, just spare me and we'll be at total peace and equaniminity with each other's policies and views!

If that's Boedeker's motive, and the film seems to corroborate it quite nicely, as he never mentions the 14 words, or anything else solidly in support of white people, but simply wants to 'not be called a racist,' then I say he is a coward. He knows what is right, but he won't stand up for it. He's too afraid of what people might think. He's as useless as all the rest. In corroboration to this, recently some investigator dredged up comments he'd made on youtube. I have no idea what they were, all I know is Craig Boedeker gave a weaselly answer about how they were 'out of context,' or 'spur of the moment.' It was like the full grown adult was a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar. This is a coward's excuse! What he should have said is, "I stand by every damn word, and if you don't like it, show me where I'm wrong. Anywhere. Prove one damn word I wrote is wrong in any way." Or if he really was sorry he said those words, he should have said, "I was wrong and I am sorry." Or if he really was misinterpreted, he should have said, "This is what I meant. Take it or leave it."

The fact that he said none of those things, and continues to hide behind a mask of anti-racism and moderation, just marks him as one more coward. Do you see how hard it is to be a good person, how few and far between real men are? Do you start to see what courage really means?

This is just the beginning. Recently Fjordman has been saying a lot of good things, I commend him for all the progress he's been making towards the truth. But how cowardly of him to say this:

"It is perfectly possible, indeed likely, that there is a large genetic component to culture, which would mean that the continuation and preservation of European civilization can only be accomplished through the preservation of our genetic heritage."

Enough hypotheticals are in there to choke a horse. It is possible that there is a large genetic component? Which would mean, only in that 'likely possibility', that the preservation of European civilization can only be accomplished through the preservation of our genetic heritage. But of course, it's also possible, perhaps even likely, that there is no large genetic component, in which case, oh well! Thanks for that huge vote of support Fjordman!

Fjordman of course knows that twin studies have already definitively shown that genetics are not just 'possible,' but in fact, the case. And the influence is not 'large,' but 'the great majority'. Around 80% of anything that makes you who you are. That adoption studies, where blacks were raised in white homes, had blacks ending up with the same IQ and life outcomes, as their biological parents. And having, get this, a 0% correlation to their adoptive parents. No influence at all! The blacks could have been raised by machines, for all the difference it made! Furthermore, he knows that like all statistics, the larger your sample size, the more fatalistic a situation becomes. Any individual atom can quantum tunnel to who knows where, and display the strangest of traits. But a desk stays in the same place forever, operating under the most basic of newtonian laws. The same is true of societies. Genetics may fail in predicting, perfectly, what any individual will do or be in life. But you can be damn sure that they will never fail in predicting how a society will turn out. With a billion genomes sharing like traits forming an aggregated whole, the truth will out. Africans create Africa. Europeans create Europe. It's that simple. To obfuscate this truth with 'likely,' 'possibly,' 'large influence,' blah blah, is just refusing to stick your flag in the ground and stand by your own words. This way, if anyone challenges him, he can retreat with claims that he's only theorizing and doesn't really know.

It is not just this. Fjordman refuses to endorse any course of conduct. He'll say the right things, but he won't say the 14 words. If not, why not? It's a good question. Is he against securing a future for white children? Is he okay with seeing our race vanish from the face of the earth? Perhaps he is right, perhaps we are entirely powerless to prevent it. Does he not have the moral duty, even once, to at least lodge a PROTEST to this fact? To say, "If I had my way, it would not be this way. I wish something quite other, than what is going to occur." It is a simple vow. We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. You either take it or leave it. It doesn't matter if you can never act on it, though I try to act on it every day and would give my life for it the moment it would be of any use. It matters just in saying it. It matters whether you have the balls to say it, or not. Whether you will take any stand, at any point, in your life. Or if you will just let the rising tide sweep over you, with no opposition to it at all. With not a single oath against it. Or for anything.

There is also this cringing cowardice in the statement, that is very subtly put. It's not that Fjordman loves white people. It's not that Fjordman wants to protect white people. No, never! That, of course, would be evil, racist, bigoted, prejudiced, and wrong. No, he just happens to like white civilization. If only we could somehow dispense with these annoying white people, while preserving their civilization, all would be right in the world. But unfortunately, that cannot be, so we must bear with this odious tribe of cancer-cells, for the sake of the civilization they produce.

You cannot separate a people's worth from their production. If a person is beautiful, you cannot love the beauty and think nothing of the person. If a nation is beautiful, you cannot love the beauty and think nothing of the nation. Good things exist only in the people who embody them. He does a disservice to all those white people, whom he admits have produced such a wonderful society, by saying THEY are dispensable, THEY don't matter. Only the fruits of their actions are worth anything. The fruits are indispensable, but the people who produced them can all go to the ovens for all he cares! Is that just? Is that gratitude? Is that his idea of gratitude? You can't thank someone for their performance and then slap them in the face, it just doesn't work that way.

I don't give a fig about European civilization. It has changed a thousand times, and it will change a thousand more. I love white people. There is a difference. I love white people because wherever they are, whoever they are, in whatever era, they are so incredibly better than everyone and everything else. They are more beautiful, more thoughtful, more caring, more successful, more powerful, more ambitious, more everything I love and admire. The greeks, the romans, the germans, the french, the russians, the british, the americans, all of them. Every era. You just look at them and start gushing with admiration and emotion for what incredible feats they managed in their time. Feats of industry, feats of intelligence, feats of strength, sure. But even better, feats of morality, artistry, and sheer divinity.

Whites fought at the Alamo. Whites fought the battle of berlin. Whites fought in stalingrad. Whites fought the battle of britain. Whites fought at the battle of plessy. Whites fought at the battle of blood river. Whites fought at Agincourt on St. Crispin's day. They were all heroes. Their valor, their refusal to surrender, their overcoming -- or being overcome by, hopelessly superior numbers, thrills my heart. I don't care what the state of european civilization was at the time. Virtue is eternal and immutable. Every one of these whites, on every side, were some of the most courageous souls to ever walk the earth. That's courage. If you can't even stand up for your beliefs on an anonymous internet site, if you can't even forthrightly say what you mean, what's in your heart, and stand for something --anything! Any moral principle you believe! Then you aren't worth the pinky finger of a single white warrior who died on any of these battlefields. You are nothing.

Look at the difference between Galileo and Watson! Galileo said, after all his denunciations -- "and yet it moves." And yet it moves! But watson, that vile coward, that despicable cowlick of a man, said he was totally in the wrong, he never meant it, please forgive me, votes for obama, donates to black charities, and practically writhes like a worm on the ground for blacks to love him again. The despicable two-bit whore! He, a nobel prize winner, who has won more nobel prizes in science than the entire black race, has no reason to apologize to anyone! He is better than the entire black race put together! The COWARD. If anyone could have told the truth and been heard, if anyone could have spoken truth to power, it was Him. But he abandoned the truth, he abandoned what he knew was right in his heart, and betrayed all of us. The whole white race may go extinct, women might be mass raped and little children's brains might be smashed against walls, because that worthless slimy coward didn't say what needed to be said when he had the chance.

There's one other group of cowards that immediately come to mind. Anyone who supposedly cares about the white race, but makes every argument on the liberal point of view, the argumentum ad hitlerum. Basically, these moral half wits, who operate from the ENEMY'S POINT OF VIEW, the ENEMY'S MORAL STANDARDS, the very SYSTEM we are trying to demolish, make some ridiculous comparison between Muslims and Nazis, and then prove that Muslims must therefore be evil because if you are in any way, shape or form, related to Nazis in any of the most logically absurd and convoluted ways, then you must be in the wrong. The press is demonizing whites, just like Nazis demonized jews, therefore the press is Nazi and we, whites, are in the right. Africans are discriminating against whites, just like Nazis discriminated against jews, therefore blacks are wrong and whites are in the right. The government is lying, just like Nazis lied about jews, thus the government is wrong and we are in the right. It doesn't matter what the topic is about, these faux-whites will do anything to somehow relate it to the Nazis and throw in their ritualistic condemnation of that 12 year period. They somehow think that if they show they hate Nazis even more than liberals, that if they oppose road construction because Nazis once built roads too, then THEY will be given a pass for THEIR beliefs. The cowardice! The rank treachery!

Guess what, there are a fuck load of similarities between the Nazis and the racists of today! You cannot run away from them, because if you do, you betray yourself!

The nazis didn't want Europe to be flooded with non-white immigrants. Neither do we.

The nazis didn't want unbridled capitalism to leave everyone bankrupt from hyperinflation. Neither do we.

The nazis didn't want german lands occupied by foreigners. Neither do we.

The nazis wanted the german family to be stronger and have more children. So do we.

The nazis wanted to protect the environment. So do we.

The nazis wanted to weed out their simpletons and insane. So do we.

The nazis didn't want communism to turn the whole world into the same killing pens as the USSR. Neither do we.

The nazis were willing to fight for their beliefs. So are we.


So every time you make an argument that undermines the nazis, you undermine yourself. When you make a random reference, a random, hit-and-run, attack on Nazism, all you are doing is cutting the very ground from under your feet. Do you really think that by demonizing a group that has 99% of its policies in common with your own, instead of, say, attacking policies and people we have nothing in common with -- you are making great progress towards the day of liberation? Of course not. It is, rhetorically, the worst argument you could possibly make. Sure, the nazis were wrong about things, maybe even a great many things, but they were white racists. You cannot escape that. In their most fundamental beliefs, they have more in common with us, than practically any other group in history. You cannot escape that. Even bringing up the nazis just makes you wince, because it is the trump card of anti-racists, and anti-whites, everywhere. So why do white racists do it? Because they know they are safe when they vilify nazis. Because they know it is the coward's way out. Say anything you like, so long as you bash a nazi at the end, maybe the liberals will forgive you. maybe society won't ostracize you. maybe you'll earn a few pats on the head by someone, somewhere. Because at least you hate those god damn nazis! Could you pick a weaker target? Could you bully a more hopeless opponent?

In some countries, it's illegal to defend nazis! You must be a real hero, to bash them, when no one is even allowed to speak up in their defense! That takes a lot of courage, boy! In every country, it's socially indefensible, to say anything in defense of the Nazis, so the outcome is the same. You take a swipe at a defenseless, helpless group, and preen like you're some great moral crusader -- you're just a bully. Bullies are cowards. Stand up to the strong of today, oppose the most unopposable group, condemn the most uncondemnable behavior -- then you're a moral crusader. Going after the easiest target on earth, a country, and a system, that was smashed not through weakness, but only through the united force of the entire rest of the planet, who never had a chance to succeed or fail, whose leaders and spokesmen were all executed, whose soldiers died by the millions on the front for something THEY clearly believed in, say what you might, but are no longer here to defend themselves -- GAH! It's craven! Craven! Craven! Who can endure this conduct? And from white racists no less! The ones supposedly on our side!

There is a wonderful quote from some churchman or other: "If I affirm every last position of my Church, if I argue for every single point of doctrine in my faith, save the very one that is currently under attack, I have not confessed Christ."

That's courage. That's the very meaning of courage. You don't waste your time bashing Nazis, because NAZIS AREN'T THE ONES KILLING YOUR RACE. NAZIS AREN'T INVADING AND ENSLAVING YOUR PEOPLE. If you take time to bash nazis, it isn't because nazis are so deserving of your bashing. maybe they are. But the churchman understood that any moral posture on anything, that is not currently under attack, that is not currently under dispute, which is not being threatened by a mass of authority or popularity or faddish nonsense -- is just a moral posture. If you go into the very breach, if you say, for instance, the most unpopular truth that can be possibly confessed in your society, and stand by it like a badger -- only then are you a moral being. Not a moral posture. A true, real man. A man! If the Christians can tell the difference, if Christians can tell hypocrisy from martyrdom, then so can we. By God we should not fall behind any man! We believe the truth, they believed lies, and yet they will sacrifice more for their lies than we will for the Truth! Absurd! But there it is! They will act more True to their Lies, then we will to our Truth! Chew on that, cowards! You are scum! I'm sorry to be associated with you! I hate that we have anything in common! I'd rather have a Christian martyr, a Muslim suicide bomber, or any real man than any of you! They at least follow through on their beliefs -- what is your excuse?

Frankly, I haven't even begun to discuss what true courage is. But I can say this: in all my actions, I have tried to fulfill this pillar of virtue to the last drop. What you see is what you get. I stand by every word I've ever written, even if they contradict each other, and even if they're ridiculously wrong. I stand by them, come what may! And there is nothing I haven't said, for fear of saying it, even though I knew it was true and right. If it's in my heart, it's here to see. And there are very, very few white nationalist pundits, of whom I can say the same. Virtue makes the man. Courage wins the day. What a bunch of rabble we are! As Richard Rahl said in wizard's 6th rule (or was it some other, no matter.) "DESERVE VICTORY."

DESERVE VICTORY. Be the sort of people who deserve to rule, to win, to overcome. To triumph. Be the sort of people who deserve laurel crowns, monuments, and accolades. If not, why not? If you can't deserve victory, what hope do you have of achieving it? If you will not even deserve victory, why should anyone else give it to you? We must deserve victory. We must be the sort of people, that the people can have faith in, celebrate, admire, and love. If we're to have followers, we must deserve them! We must be leaders first! How obvious is this! And yet our 'leaders,' by being cowards instead of men, continue to fail us at every turn. If you don't deserve victory, no one will give it to you. It's that simple. Deserve Victory.

Have some fucking balls.

The Shadow Elite:

Just as when Nixon relied on the opinion of the 'shadow majority' to deliver him from his woes of public gatherings and media denunciations, we must rely on the 'shadow elite' to deliver us from the world of today.

The majority are not equipped to be revolutionaries. They are not intelligent enough to see through the brainwashing their culture has set them through from day 1 in the media and the public schools. They are not courageous enough to buck the pressures of conformism and the carrot and stick of praise/ostracism. They are not idealistic enough to sacrifice present goods and comforts for a principle, a vision, a cause -- nor ruthless enough to smash anyone or anything that gets in the way. I do not blame them for their weaknesses. Everyone is born with a host of weaknesses, some have more, some have less, but we are all human, all too human. It would be nice to be born in a world of higher evolution, where everyone was intelligent, courageous, idealistic, and ruthless, but that just isn't the case. We must make do with the materials provided.

The shadow majority will not come to our aid. If they have some dim sense that something is wrong in the world, they will simply hope it all works out in heaven and pray to God for deliverance. Or they will trust the talking heads on the TV shows that everything is actually fine and improving every day. Or they will simply shut down and withdraw into themselves -- using Russia's tried and true methods of resistance -- drugs, drink, suicide and abortion. We've already seen what the majority of people do under tyrannies, under terrible living conditions, under genocides -- they shuffle along like sheep and offer no resistance at all. Not in Cambodia, not in China, not in Russia, not in South Africa.

True hope rests within the bosoms of the shadow elite. People with at least 120 IQ, who have not bought into the system, and are not being rewarded by the system. People who could be the doctors, lawyers, politicians, army generals, and everything inbetween -- people who could be the famous artists, inventors, actors, and so on -- but aren't. Just like in the UK, where the opposition party has a 'shadow' prime minister, a 'shadow' cabinet, and an entire roster of people ready to take on all of the government's roles, while not actually being the government. There is a cadre of elites, high IQ people wandering around America, (or whatever western country), who have fallen completely off the radar. Who aren't doing anything. Who either don't want to do anything, because it's all so pointless, or can't do anything, because the system is designed to stop them.

These people are the only source of power that hasn't been co-opted to serve the status quo. Therefore they must be the source of power for the revolution against the status quo. It's simply tautological. The people who aren't actively ruling, but could rule given the chance, are the only people who could cause, and win, a revolution. Who are these people? They will definitely be young people. Our society is a gerontocracy which actively denies youths the opportunity to become powerful or successful. Laws like social security, the income tax, medicare, and the banning of hiring based on IQ and reliance on credentials that take endless years of muckwork to acquire, all favor the old over the young. They will definitely be males. For one, women are too timid to fight a revolutionary war, they're too timid to even be called names or make an unpopular stand on an issue. But for another, women have it pretty nice in the world of today. They find school and college agreeable. They like not having to have children. They enjoy having a higher employment rate than men, in largely parasitic jobs like government employees who actually just live off the earning power of men who make the real money elsewhere in the economy. A shadow elite is someone who is not in the system, and not being rewarded by the system. That basically rules out women from the start.

They will be white, because whites are the only people being screwed by the system. As Old Atlantic Lighthouse has pointed out, the Slicer Coalition of jews and Asians from above, and affirmative action blacks and hispanics from below, have made whites a vanishingly thin minority in elite colleges like Harvard or Berkeley. Even though we are 60% of the population, we make up only 10% of the population of these colleges. This means an inordinate number of elite whites are currently chewing hay and staring into space without any means to get ahead while their inferiors get hired, promoted, and eventually like Obama get elected president, while never even having the grades to get into Harvard by any fair measure in the first place. This type of injustice isn't just due to the slicer coalition's displacement effect. It also has a lot to do with political correctness. A white man finds it physically impossible to succeed in the modern work environment. He is surrounded by things that offend him, but has to act like none of it does. People can trample all over him, but he can never retaliate in any way, shape, or form. Because hate speech is all one way. If a bunch of gays mock straights, that's fine. If a bunch of women mock men, that's fine. if a bunch of blacks mock whites, that's fine. If a bunch of jews mock goys, that's fine. But if a white man opens his mouth and says ANYTHING, ANYTHING at all either in defense of his self against all of these attacks, or in opposition to any other group, then the hammer comes down. He is fired, blackballed from further hiring, sent to diversity training camp and sensitivity seminars, or simply relegated to the edge of the universe with no hope of promotion.

If there is any conflict, which will inevitably occur, between a worker and his boss, or a boss and his worker, the white man cannot win. If the boss is non-white, a woman, or gay, then you cannot appeal to anyone against your boss, because you are clearly just a bigot. If your worker is non-white, a woman, or gay, then you cannot fire them or discipline them, because you are clearly doing this only because you are a bigot. There can be no good outcome for a white man in the workplace, because every time there is a conflict, the white man must give way. Consider how emasculating this process is, how soul-deadening it becomes, to always be biting your tongue, suppressing your opinions, and bowing and scraping to the inferiors all around you. Maybe the white man has to do his useless coworker's work for him, because he cannot object and say he is lazy or stupid, because the coworker is black, or gay, or a woman. Perhaps he can't object to the trashy language or dress style of a coworker, because she is a woman and that's sexual harassment. On and on and on. Since the courts of justice have set things up in such a way, that white men are always in the wrong -- that whenever a problem emerges at work, it is due to the white man and no one else -- that whenever there is a problem in a marriage, it is due to the man and no one else -- that whenever there is a problem in Africa, it is due to white men and no one else -- that whenever there is a riot in LA, it is due to white men and no one else -- it is practically impossible for white men to succeed in life.

The real men, the men with guts and a backbone, would never submit to all this groveling. They would abstain from the situation entirely, rather than be put in a position where some inferior black, woman, or gay can lord it over them. Either they will do nothing at all, or they'll found their own business, or they'll pursue some all male line of work, like computer programming, an electrician, the US special forces, or just anything that hasn't been invaded and corrupted by diversity yet. Talented white men are being choked away from elite jobs and powerful positions, by the stupid hoops of college and credentialism, the stifling political correctness of the diverse workforce, affirmative action, and an entire culture dedicated to keeping us down in the most myriad of tiny ways. Like commercials that always depict white men as the hapless and stupid clown. Or cop shows that only have white criminals, usually neo-nazis, in a country where blacks are nine times as likely to murder someone as whites. Or simply sons lacking their fathers because the mother divorced him. No doubt it's bad for a daughter to lack her father too, but I can't help but think it's particularly hard on the son. With no template for how a man should be, what can the son possibly grow up into? His mom?

There is a shadow elite, there is a group of disempowered, but high potential, young white men all over this country. Men who were born for better things, but end up on the road to nowhere, aimless and adrift.

Unfortunately, they are not angry. Because they have not yet made the connection, that they don't DESERVE the life they lead. That they didn't cause it, that it is not natural, and it doesn't have to be this way. That is the fundamental difference between a 'generation X', 'beatnik' style of shadow elite, and people like our founding fathers. Our founding fathers did not remotely have the majority of the USA behind them. They had only the fact that they were elites who were out of power, and not being served by the system, because the British had monopolized it all for themselves. The government, the economy, everything was monopolized by the British and served only the British. And yet the Americans were of the same stock, and had just as many qualified men for elite positions as the British. This shadow elite joined together, realized they did not DESERVE this injustice, that it was not natural, and that it could be changed. Then they pledged their lives, their fortune, and their sacred honor, to change it. Tens of thousands of deaths later, and after many personal sacrifices by every single signer of that Declaration of Independence, America had won its freedom. And the shadow elite became the ruling elite -- the greatest rulers in American, perhaps in world history. Forged in the crucible of war and passionate heroism, they went on to become statesmen, philosophers, and leaders for all time. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Thomas Paine, my heart swells at even the mention of their names. What men! What an age! And what a wonderful 50 years America had, being ruled by the same revolutionaries who won them their freedom in the first place! Who in living memory had put everything on the line, sacrificed everything, for an ideal! There can be no corruption in such a state. Nor can there be any deception. All one needed to ask was 'where were you at the battle of valley forge?' If you said, "I was walking in the snow carrying the flag," Then you are someone who could be trusted. They couldn't get elected by giving flowery speeches while dodging drafts like Clinton, or acting like a tough guy while staying stateside like Bush. You were either there in the thick of the revolution, or you were not a natural leader, a true elite, a good person, a courageous friend of America. To think! We once had a president who wrote our constitution! By God!

For the fifty years or so after the coming revolution, we will have the finest leadership in history -- again. They will be the people who walked through fire for the sacred cause. Who were shunned, penniless, hated, even jailed before the war -- and killed and died (if that's how the cookie crumbles) during the war. Because they cared that much. Because they weren't cowards and they weren't compromisers.

What needs to be spelled out to the shadow elites of this era, is that they should be angry. Red hot angry. Seething, smoldering with anger. Murderously angry. That's the first step. That this is a demented, evil world, out to get them. That they have been abused, usurped, displaced, and dispossessed at every turn. That they are being ruled by their inferiors, by worthless scum, by liars, hypocrites, and thieves. And that it doesn't have to be this way. Then, with a group of tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of intelligent, passionate, idealistic, courageous and ruthless young white men -- we will have a force to match the current elites and their cow-like simpleton masses that serve them.

One thing people must realize is that America is a paper tiger. One blow and the whole thing will collapse. Just look at 9/11. A couple buildings fall down and the whole economy collapses, trillions of dollars are lost and everyone's too afraid to ride an airplane anymore. Just imagine what a real insurgency could do! They haven't seen anything yet. And 'their' forces consist of diverse untermenschen, women, old geezers, gays, and greasy street punks who weigh 80 pounds each. If we simply make our points well enough, tell the truth strongly enough, get out the message loud enough, the real men will all be on our side. And in war, it's the real men who count. How many men would it take to bust into the white house and seize the launch codes for our nuclear missles, while meanwhile seizing a sub at sea with an internal mutiny full of said nuclear missles? In a matter of minutes we'd have the same military strength as the entire US military and could hold the entire nation hostage to meet our demands for a free and independent northwest.

Maybe it's more complicated than that, I'm no strategist, but I don't think it's as complicated as people make it out to be. I don't think America's nearly as invincible as it pretends it is. I know that no one would fight a war over secession like they did in the Civil War. The American people will never sacrifice as much to keep sovereignty as the North did against the South. They are too soft, too afraid, and too weak willed to fight that kind of war again. In that case, all WE have to do is be as hard, strong willed, and fearless as the South was when it tried. In a world completely devoid of heroism, it doesn't take much to be a hero.

Vinland could be so much better than America. Every year America gets worse, Vinland will only look that much better. A place without crime, without affirmative action, without political correctness, without immigration, without a biased media, without adultery, without illegitimacy, without sodomy, without drugs, without poverty, without corruption, without degenerates or simpletons. A place founded by and dedicated to the race that gave us Wagner, Beethoven, Newton, Dostoeveskey, Watt, Hume, Plutarch, Plato, Homer, Tacitus, Mozart, Kant, Goethe, Rousseau, Euclid, Euler, Galileo, Rembrandt, Michelangelo, Titian, and everyone inbetween. A race that hands down has the most beautiful, moral, and honest genome on earth. A race that split the atom and went to the moon. And this time, a race that is aware of itself, its greatness, its moral purpose and its mission -- Truth, Beauty, and Love -- spread throughout the stars. Not praying and fasting to reach heaven. Not giving charity to mud people and having coffee colored multicultural rainbow children. Not holding hands and singing kumbayah. Not 'self-fulfillment.' Not atomized individualism. And not nihilism. Not all the phantoms that white nations have chased in the past, to their corruption and ruin. Truth, Beauty, and Love. And the living who embody them. Vinland would be the first nation of its kind, ruled by a chosen few who went through fire to achieve it, in a time of gathering darkness, squalor, and misery. It will be like night and day. And when that contrast shines bright enough, when we MAKE it shine bright enough, when even the most obtuse shadow elite can see the difference between the two, and longs with passionate intensity for that different world -- things will change.

Meanwhile, Back in Reality:

The Dow Jones is flirting with a new high, 10,000, and home sales are up compared to last year. Everyone is talking about the recovery. But there is no recovery. There is only the silent desperation of the proletariat as the waters continue to rise.

Consider: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091020/ap_on_re_us/us_poverty

"A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure."

"Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that because the revised formula factors in non-cash government aid, the amount of increase in poverty from 2007 to 2008 was generally smaller compared to the current measure.

"Food stamp participation rose during the first year of recession and appears to have softened what could have been an even greater increase in financial hardship," he said.

Sherman said the revised formula could take on greater importance in measuring poverty for 2009 as more Americans take advantage of tax credits and food stamps under the federal stimulus program. Food stamp assistance currently is at an all-time high of about 36 million."

So poverty would be even worse than 1 in 6, if we didn't include all of our current efforts to relieve poverty. Thirty Seven MILLION people on food stamps, that's around 1 in 8 people, or 12% of the population. People below the poverty line are even higher, 1 in 6 people. The unemployed are even higher, 1 in 5 people. And their unemployment benefits have run out. Who will help them now?

Consider: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091019/ap_on_bi_ge/us_vanishing_jobs

WASHINGTON – Even with an economic revival, many U.S. jobs lost during the recession may be gone forever and a weak employment market could linger for years.

Retrenching businesses will be slow in hiring back or replacing workers they laid off. Many of the 7.2 million jobs the economy has shed since the recession began in December 2007 may never come back.

Where does that leave the people? Beneath the poverty rate, and unemployable. The government tries to help, with ham fisted socialist programs like unemployment insurance, HUD housing, food stamps, medicaid, etc -- but still people fall through all the cracks, because there is no ONE program that everyone is eligible for, that cannot be taken away from you. If you are unemployed too long, have too much money left in the bank, and don't have a dependent child -- well too bad for you, you're not 'poor' yet. Go get pregnant and then get back to us. Even with social security and medicare servicing the old, they are more likely to be poor than the 18-64 year old crowd. A complete failure of those programs, who promised a wealthy retirement if you just payed a steep price all your working life in taxes. What if those 40 years had been sending them a citizen's dividend, which they could have saved, invested, or even spent, relying on the citizen's dividend in their old age to meet all their old age expenses? At the very least they would get to enjoy their purchasing power when they still had a use for it, rather than a sick, dying husk of a man gripping to a life that no longer wants or needs him. But of course, such is our socialist bureacratic jungle, that spending is discouraged and made nigh impossible by high taxes in one's youth, and then subsidized and inflated by no taxes on your old age, meaning the very time you have the least use for money, is the only time you get money to spend.

The economy is in shambles, the government programs meant to buffer people's losses, the safety net meant to help all the people capitalism doesn't reach, has failed. It did not save the elderly from poverty. It did not give people the 'incentives' they need to find jobs. ((the biggest complaint against the citizen's dividend is it provides no incentive for people to work -- and yet we are told that our 20% unemployment rate is here to stay and CANNOT be restored -- so why are we blaming the victims???)) It hasn't kept people from losing their homes. And worst of all, nothing is shielding the public from the rapacious debt collectors, who when they go bankrupt can just ask for trillions of dollars from the government, but the lone individual doesn't get a cent in relief. How is that fair? Companies are giving million dollar salaries to their workers, who were all bankrupt last year and using taxpayer money to stay afloat. But the people they made loans to, who are also bankrupt, aren't extended any money at all. This is the difference between ham-fisted socialism, that is spent on programs that don't work, don't provide a useful service, or cost more than they should, on one hand, and crony capitalism, that bails out politically favored minorities or powerful people with connections and political campaign donation clout on the other -- these are the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively! There is only one option, the citizen's dividend, that gives out money equally to all individuals, without any bureacracy inbetween, relying on the free market to make the most of the money, without any social engineering, and without any political favoritism, special interests, or corporate hog houses splurging on our nation's collective wealth.

With the citizen's dividend, the poor, the unemployed, the bankrupt, would all have a friend and a recourse. Today, if you are not a member of a favored minority, working for Goldman Sach's, old enough to receive Social Security, or poor enough to receive Medicaid -- on and on with the various restrictions -- you're just screwed. You're on your own. Despite the fact that our government takes about 50 cents on every dollar, it cannot be bothered to help the 47 million people in poverty today. What purpose does it serve? With the citizen's dividend, I could deliver real help, real relief, to everyone. Not just the poor, the unemployed, and the starving, the 37 million people on food stamps. But everyone. The children who can't afford college. The young family that can't afford a child. The working class family that can't afford to take their children on vacation to Europe, to see the beautiful architecture, museums, and streets of their ancestral homeland. The well off people who want to donate to charity. The entrepreneur with big dreams who can't secure a loan but wants to start a business. The wily investor who wants to turn the 12,000 a year he receives from the government into 24,000 a year down the road. EVERYONE. Everyone is that much better off, because the government is genuinely trying to help them, because the government represents all its people, and loves and cares about every single one of its citizens. And it can be done for cheaper, with less taxes, than we currently collect today!

It isn't because of the expense, it's because the citizen's dividend is equal. The government doesn't want to give out money equally, it wants people to be divided into quarreling factions, into parties, so that they can receive your vote, in exchange for getting your own tax dollars back. First they take half of every dollar we make, then they dangle it in front of us, as a bribe, that we might get some of it back, if we vote for them. This is outrageous. We are slaves, and our vote is just a part of the self-reinforcing slavery. A party that could purchase the loyalty of every single individual in the country, a one-party state that serves the entire people of that state, is the absolute opposite of the electoral politics of tax and bribe that democracy has gotten us to today.

This economic hemorrhaging continues even as the heedless government continues to pursue trillion dollar wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, expands its theater of operations into Pakistan, and threatens new wars with Iran. Does the madness ever stop? No, because the 'republican' party votes for war and the military, and in return gets employed as soldiers, or as a weapons manufacturer, or as a service provider to the troops. Everything benefits the faction, everything hurts the nation as a whole. These boondoggles at public expense will never be efficient, they have no need to be efficient, because if a small minority receives the money from a larger majority, they can afford for most of it to go to waste. But if the people simply received the same money they spent in taxes, back into their pockets, a little bit more if they are poor than they paid in taxes, a little bit less if they are rich than they paid in taxes -- there would be no waste because all the money would be in the free market, to be spent where private individuals felt it was most worthwhile. Not for wars in far off deserts. Not for health care for people who should already be dead. Not for a company that no longer makes any product of any worth but stays afloat regardless of merit. The money goes where it can do most good, as decided by each individual, and is incredibly flexible, because every month a new 1,000 check is received in the mail, and the apportioning process starts all over again. That would save the American economy and everyone who lives in it, nothing else will. Nothing.

Let's be clear, if there is some group of lowlifes who would use the citizen's dividend to buy drugs and booze, they don't matter. First off, if I had my way, alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes would be banned and people would have to enjoy life in a responsible, intellectual manner. So the issue wouldn't even come up. But second, these low lifes do not have the right to hold the rest of us hostage with their vices. They do not have the right to sabotage the true benefits the citizen's dividend could give the rest of us, the wonderful opportunities it opens up, the wonderful security it gives us, the wonderful chance to pay off our debts and thus the interest that keeps piling up in the future on them, the wonderful relief that unemployment doesn't immediately lead to the loss of your home, your family, and your pride. The immeasurable benefits the citizen's dividend gives to responsible, good people, whether they are young, old, out of luck or just never fit in to the economy, cannot be dismissed just because some people, somewhere or other, would waste or destroy their portion. To hell with them! Let them destroy it then. Meanwhile, the hundreds of millions that make up the rest of us, can get on with life, and never worry about food, heating, electricity or rent again.

It's a tragedy that someone, somewhere, would use the citizen's dividend to pay for destructive addictions instead of necessary expenses or investment opportunities -- but there's a much greater tragedy, and that's the world of today. The status quo. Right now there are 47 million people in poverty, 20% of Americans are unemployed, most are in debt, the government is running a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit and will go bankrupt itself in a few decades. Families are no longer stable because jobs are no longer stable, and income is no longer stable. More often than not, the woman is the only one employed and making more money than her husband, a condition so shameful on one hand, and disgusting on the other, that the woman sees no point in continuing the 'sham' and figures, if she's doing it all herself anyway, she may as well be single while she does it. This is the sort of societal chaos spreading forth from the bad economy. Divorce, single childhood, crime, foreign wars, corporate corruption, and debt, debt, everywhere. The citizen's dividend can solve all of these problems immediately, simultaneously, for less tax dollars than we already spend -- and harping on about people who won't work ((why should they? Even if they wanted to, no one would employ them anyway!)) or will just buy drugs ((And is that somehow worse than buying missles to shoot at innocent Iraqis a million miles away who never did a damn thing to us?)), is just that much smokescreen to hide the evil that is capitalist democracy.

If anyone cannot see the con that is capitalist democracy, even this late into its dissolution, what can I say! Have you noticed the government takeover of every role? Have you noticed how the government first takes all your money, then gives it back to you, bit by bit, by doing exactly what the government says, or voting in a block for the party that represents you? Have you noticed the implicit slavery of everyone forced to vote for a party simply to get its own tax dollars back? Have you noticed the phoniness of most employment, of almost all government employment, of corporate welfare and subsidies that hide the emptiness behind all the labor and all the 'production' in our country? Are you curious why such phony jobs are able to make so much phony money at the expense of everyone around them? Please, please open your eyes. In a world of technological supremacy, where a barrel of oil can do the work of 2500 man hours for 50 dollars, NO ONE SHOULD BE POOR ON EARTH. In the richest country in said world, with a per capita income of 46,000 -- THAT'S PER PERSON PER YEAR, no one should be poor in America! And yet here we are! Here we are! Over 1 in 10 on food stamps, over 1 in 6 in poverty, and the rest scraping to get by, full of divorce, misery, unemployment, retirement losses, and blows and buffets from all sides! Everyone should be asking themselves, where is the money going? Where is the money? We are the richest eon in world history, and America is the richest country in the world, but we're still impoverished and unemployed! Unaccountable! Unaccountable without malevolence. Unaccountable without systemic failure. Unaccountable without the democratic capitalist system, that makes things the way they are today.

Smash it. Restore the tax dollars directly to the people. Give the blessings of technological progress like increased acreage yield, increased automatization, increased internet efficiency, directly back to the people, as their portion of nature's bounty. Use it to raise a family the proper way, with a mother and a father, and both with enough time to raise their kids. Live a good life knowing nothing can go wrong, because you cannot fall through the cracks anymore. But first, you must smash the status quo. The powers that be will never give up the advantages they currently have. The wealth of the world, of its natural resources, plants, animals, and machines, due to no man but hoarded by a tiny few men, must be taken. As Convington said:

"Ex gladio libertas."

Freedom is won through the sword.

Why 90%?

There's always an urge, in the racialist community, to one up each other by being even more extreme and more devoted to the cause. There is also an urge to stay 'moderate' and 'respectable' so as to appeal to more people. Both of these urges should be suppressed, because they are not dedicated to the service of truth, which simply follows where the logic leads without bias or rebellion. There is a narrow region of thought, that is extreme enough, but not too extreme, which is the only workable path towards a white homeland, and that is -- 90%.

100% whites, no non-whites allowed, is a simple and direct solution to our problems. But it is not the best solution. In fact, it's not even a workable solution.

First, it's not the best solution. There are non-whites who are superior to whites. Genetically, they represent a valuable addition to the white gene pool. For instance, the ability to drink milk was introduced into England, if current studies are correct, by way of the Roman empire garrisoning some sarmatian cavalry there. As people are wont to do, inevitably the soldiers mixed with the native populace, and the gene had such a great natural selection value, that it soon swept all of England. The rest of the sarmatian gene pool had little going for it, and natural selection rendered it invisibly small -- but almost every single Englishman came with a lactose tolerance gene from there on. This is just one example of how interbreeding creates progress, and at a tiny, minuscule, invisible expense to the larger genome of whites. This isn't the only possibility though. It's a flat fact that jews are much smarter than whites, Asians also seem to have some capabilities we lack, for instance, they have larger brains than us. In an age dedicated to technology, every scrap of intelligence we can get is useful. Eugenics works by promoting good genes in the struggle for survival, but if we don't have access to those intelligence genes, we can never spread them to the rest of the populace, no matter how many generations of eugenics we use. Therefore we should be overjoyed to interbreed with a select group of smart people from any race -- note, I don't include blacks as human so they don't count. Again, good genes have natural selection value and spread like wildfire, whereas bad genes disappear into the giant majority or go extinct for lack of success. This means being an open country with access to good people, with their good genes, from all around the world, is the only way to continue improving. America is very wise to allow smart university students or professors to come from all over the world to study and live here. Ideally, we could contain, as a people, every intelligence gene in existence, evolved over tens of thousands of years independently in each region -- but if their powers were combined, and some lucky schmoe were to hit the jackpot with every single one? The Indian intelligence genes, the asian intelligence genes, the white intelligence genes, the jewish intelligence genes, the amerindian intelligence genes -- they would be smarter than the smartest person of any possible 'pure' breed could be. The same is true for disease resistance and health in general, it helps to widen your gene base.

It's not just genes though. Some non-whites have a superior culture to whites. If they adhere to our objective, absolute, and universal values better than we do, there is no sense in rejecting them. This is a tough act, because it requires non-whites revere white society and culture, and the white race, as much as we do. But it's entirely possible, and requiring these people miscegenate to avoid the creation of any diverse ghettos will make their descendants as white as our own. Many non-whites specifically moved here to live in a white populated and white dominated society. They like the white man's laws, the white man's ways, more than any other on earth. They know that everything good comes from whites staying in power and staying the majority, and they could be more fervent supporters of white rule than whites themselves. Famously, in Raspaille's Camp of the Saints, one of the lone holdouts to the tide of non-white invaders, one of the twenty or so people in France willing to fight for their homeland, was a black. The black loved France and didn't want to see it destroyed by non-whites. Such a person is not our enemy, he's a hero.

Furthermore, racism is so instinctual that a pure white homeland would just sub-divide again and again, nords vs. meds, italians vs. irish, croats vs. serbs, slavs vs. germans, all the way back down to 'the hatfields vs. the mccoys.' We don't need that kind of divisiveness. Tolerance and diversity are extremely valuable traits, they're the only path to peace. WW II should stand athwart any intolerant philosophy for the rest of time. The moment you mention being intolerant, everyone should pipe in -- "That's what people thought before WW II and look what happened." They are correct. They are precisely correct. We can not afford another WW II. Expanding the frontiers of tolerance helps build peace and harmony within the nation, as well as with the outside world. By pushing tolerance even past the frontier of whites, and stressing that we are a community of values, not gene-lines, we destroy all possible ethnic rivalries before they're born. No one cares whether you're Polish or French, we're all Americans -- or in the case of a future nation, we're all Vinlanders.

For economic reasons as well, it's best to keep our borders open to non-whites. Being allowed here for tourism, trade, as students, or whatever their purpose, helps improve our own economy and raises the living standards of the whites living here. We are a global economy and it's hopeless to resist this. We need to be shipping products overseas, and we need overseas products to be shipping here. That requires at least a modicum of tolerance and respect for the people of the outside world.

Graphs by La Griffe de Lion show that diversity in a neighborhood has no ill side effects, vis a vis the crime rate, until around 20% of the people are non-white. By 50% the crime becomes noticeably high, and by 90% it becomes unlivable, it becomes South Africa. Though crime and 'all other matters' probably shouldn't be conflated, I will do so anyway. A little bit of diversity never hurt anyone, it has no impact on the neighborhood or society, it has no impact on the gene pool (except a good one, since natural selection favors good genes, not bad ones.) it has no adverse impact on anything.

Second, 100% homogeneity, even if it were desirable, is unworkable. This is because America has become so mixed that the laws of entropy do not allow the blended to ever unblend. Millions of whites, if not the majority of them, have non-white friends, lovers, or relatives. They have grown up with these non-whites, they went to each other's weddings, they have formed inseparable bonds. They would rather the white race went extinct, some abstract theoretical worry, over losing the real and concrete bonds they have formed with friends and family. It isn't just the race-mixers, it is everyone involved with the race mixer. There is now such a 'frission' of integration that you would have to pry people from their particular non-white 'best friend' with a crowbar. When you back people into a corner, they have no choice but to fight. But if you tell them, "don't worry, if your non-white friend, family member, or lover, really is as great as you say he is, he'd be welcome to come live with us, just like you are." Suddenly, a gasp of relief -- "I don't have to disrupt my personal life to join the cause!" And "There are no personal costs and there are huge societal gains, sign me up!" Everyone is relieved that somebody ELSE'S non-white friend, lover, or family member is being kicked out, but not their own. Their non-white friend, lover, or family member, is obviously in that 'top 10%' bracket that relieves them of all worries, and disarms all opposition. Whites will never rally behind an all-white ethno-state, because too many whites have lived, for generations now, a diverse experience for so long, that they have adapted to it. There's no use proposing all the benefits of a white homeland, if it starts with, like Jesus said, "he who does not hate his father, his mother, his wife, and his children, can not love me." I don't know how Christianity did it, but they really did sell that message. We cannot. We cannot sell the message, "Join the revolution, lose all your family and friends!" Join the revolution, and show all those illiterate non-english speaking strangers the door --> that sells. Join the revolution, and wash the depravity out of hollywood and restore our education to pro-white history and literature classes --> that's appealing to a huge number of people. Join the revolution, and gain for the first time a minimum standard of living and a wife and children, to have and to hold, forever and ever --> that's something worth fighting for.

If whites are in sufficient power to pass the laws that need to be passed to improve our lives, I don't really give a damn who lives five blocks down the way. The important thing is the law code, the way society is structured. Once power is given only to those who deserve it, a custodial class of nobility who defends our law code like the Spartans and Athenians did ages ago, it will be impossible for non-whites to sabotage our country from within like they did this time. It was democracy's fault, not jews, that allowed them to donate over 50% of campaign funds to the democratic party. It is the first amendment's fault, not jews, that allowed them to control our TV, newspapers, and movie screens and fill us with lies. It is capitalism's fault, not hispanics, that made the importation of low wage workers the burning desire of all employers. Set up the correct system, the correct law code, and non-whites have no way to take advantage of it or to harm us. If non-whites are harming you, it is because there is still a chink in your law code's armor, and rather than be angry at the non-whites, we should be thanking them for pointing out such a huge flaw in our system so that we could correct it. Whatever abuses non-whites can make of our system, whites can make of it too. A system that is flawed is flawed. Correct the system, and the people will be incapable of doing evil, no matter what they desire. Just as good crime prevention can lower the murder rate to 1/10 what it used to be in New York City, without changing any of the demographics, a lack of crime prevention can create anarchy and looting in the streets overnight, where people who abided by the law their entire lives are suddenly ravening monsters.

This elasticity of the human psyche is phenomenal, but what it means, is that everything is about System. System, System, System, is the absolute focus of people's decisions. If the system is out of order, the people become dissolute and violent, immoral and evil. If the system is in order, the people become wise, courageous, temperate, and pious. Everyone is born a helpless child, they look to the SYSTEM to raise them into adulthood. With the right system, they will be raised correctly. Without it, they will look like Theodore Dalrymple's "Life at the Bottom." The british night life. Who cares that they're white? They're scum. Pure scum. And they're scum because the system failed them, there's nothing wrong with their genes. It's a cancer in their laws, devouring them from the inside out.

Whites need a nation of their own, not to just have a smorgasbord of whites so they can hang out and swap tales, but so that whites who want a certain SYSTEM put in place can have a nation of their own. There are certain laws that need passing, for the betterment of all people living within our borders. The possibility of a better life than this is so blatantly obvious, given how swiftly life has gone from Norman Rockwell America, to Dalrymple Britain. We are in desperate need of the power of sovereignty, so that a few desperately needed laws can be passed into our society, and save us from ourselves: The citizen's dividend replacing all unworkable and unjust social systems, mandatory marriage, the death penalty for crime, a new education, abolishing consumption-oriented debt and the Federal Reserve, a virtuous leadership, eugenics and space flight. A few brown or yellow or red or even black faces (if that's what it takes!), intermixed and intermixing with all the whites around us, is a small price to pay for ANY of those laws being advanced. Jews are the enemy not because of who they are, but because they won't let us pass these laws. If jews tomorrow became the biggest supporters and campaigners for these changes, I would cease to be an anti-semite the day after. it's the same for all the other racial groups, if they want to help create a better society, I have no objection to them either. I set the limit to non-whites at 90% so that I can be doubly, super sure that whites will never lose power to non-whites and the laws be changed again. I set it so that the white genome can't be flooded to extinction. I set it so that white culture can't be flooded to extinction. I also suspect that 10% of the population is about all one can expect to harvest from the outside world, that would have sufficient qualifications anyway. But I don't need 100% to accomplish any of those goals.

The BNP recently said it no longer aims for an all-white England, that this was simply not possible, it was a pipe dream, given how integrated England has become. The best they could manage is to limit immigration, deport troublemakers, and try to create a new law code that favors their white populace in general, and improves their lives. The BNP keeps stressing that it has more plans than just 'greater homogeneity,' it wants to improve the welfare laws, change the schools, get out of foreign wars, and so on. The BNP is right. That is the mature, responsible way to push for a white homeland. America is even more mixed than England, if it's no longer possible to convince whites in England to abandon their non-white friends, coworkers, lovers, and family members, then just consider the case of America! Hopeless! It will never happen. The sooner we reassure people they won't lose anyone dear to them, the better. The sooner we shoot for 90% instead of 100%, the better. The BNP got one million votes, there were one million people willing to set up the society the BNP wished for. There aren't a million people who want a 100% white country, or if there are, they sure aren't very vocal or active. It's simply a non-starter.

We shouldn't waste our effort pursuing non-starters with only 30 years left in our country's life. We just don't have that luxury.