Publish a proposed Treasury regulation that prohibits the sending home of remittances by people who cannot document lawful presence in the United States.

And then you just create a new class of businessman, the money sender by proxy who takes a percentage of the remittance for the use of his citizenship credentials. Or uses a legitimate import/export business as a cover for money smuggling.

And they you would have to block online business from delivering to foreign addresses, and you would have to find a way to stop people in the US from ordering stuff from Ali Express to be delivered to Mexico or Central America.

Naturally you will also need to outlaw Bitcoin and similar digital currencies too.

Wow, you are creating a whole new industry and will probably need to create a government department to handle it , and perhaps a cabinet level Secretary of Dollar Permissions and Secret Police Operations who will be appointed by the board of Goldman Sachs.

ANN COULTER for the first MAGA prez.
Trump converted to Jewish a while back.

“LOL. Look little crow, I hate to break it to you, but you lose again.”

Are you a secret king?

“Just as was the case with Prof. Tony Martin in which you falsely accused him of misquoting Jewish demographers Lee Saltow and Ira Rosenwaike, you are now accusing me of not proving LBJ has Jewish roots.”

I accused Martin of making false statements about the extent of Jewish involvement in slavery as well as misinterpreting those sources. Try to keep up.

“If you go back at the beginning of this exchange, when someone had made the claim that LBJ was Jewish, you incredulously responded “Sources?””

Indeed, a source was provided. But one has to verify the information found in the source, right? When digging deeper, the author simply said that LBJ’s ancestors had last names who were Jewish. That does not mean LBJ is Jewish. There was no attempt on the author’s part to prove this claim with specific evidence. Again, Hank stated that “LBJ was probably the first Jewish president”. It could or could not be true.

“Now, if you think 5TJT did some sloppy research in investigating LBJ’s genealogy, take it up with them. You asked for a source, you got one.”

Apparently, you trust and distrust Jews when it serves your purpose.

About damn time you take some responsibility for your actions.

LOL. Look little crow, I hate to break it to you, but you lose again.

Just as was the case with Prof. Tony Martin in which you falsely accused him of misquoting Jewish demographers Lee Saltow and Ira Rosenwaike, you are now accusing me of not proving LBJ has Jewish roots.

If you go back at the beginning of this exchange, when someone had made the claim that LBJ was Jewish, you incredulously responded “Sources?”

I interjected and provided you with a source: an article posted on 5TJT’s (The Five Towns Jewish Times) website:

The Five Towns Jewish Times, is a weekly Jewish newspaper serving the Jewish communities of the Five Towns in southwestern Nassau County, New York, and the greater New York area, covering the area’s large and growing Orthodox Jewish community.

Now, if you think 5TJT did some sloppy research in investigating LBJ’s genealogy, take it up with them. You asked for a source, you got one.

Now, be a good little bird and fly away… sad little bird.

“Oh, I don’t know.”

Sure you know. We are not to believe Jews until they supply us with the information that conforms to our worldview. Then what they are saying is Gospel. You are trying to have your babka and eat it, too.

“Knowing the particulars of the USS Liberty attack, most would agree that making the case that LBJ had Jewish roots would not be very helpful to their cause. But I’m just speculating, here.”

In other words, we do not know for certain if LBJ has Jewish roots. So thank you for admitting your error. About damn time you take some responsibility for your actions.

i agree.

One can call a jew a charlatan, bankster, ne-er-do-well, shyster, shylock, kike, or any other derogatory term and it will roll off his back like water off a duck, but call a jew a “jew”, and he will recoil in horror, having been “found out”.

Again, are not Jews known liars? Why trust them now?

Oh, I don’t know. Perhaps because people in general tend to lie to benefit themselves or put themselves in a more favourable light, not the other way around.

Knowing the particulars of the USS Liberty attack, most would agree that making the case that LBJ had Jewish roots would not be very helpful to their cause. But I’m just speculating, here.

“If that were indeed the case, why would he choose to conclude his article with these words…”

Because he is speculating!…and he is Jewish. I thought Jews are known liars.

“why would a newspaper serving orthodox Jewish communities in New York choose to speculate that LBJ was Jewish, if he wasn’t?”

So the author can make a name for himself.
So the website can generate traffic.
So the Jews can claim they had a president who was “one of them”.

Again, are not Jews known liars? Why trust them now?

In other words, the author is SPECULATING, which is NOT FACT.

If that were indeed the case, why would he choose to conclude his article with these words:

There is little doubt that he was Jewish.

Also, why would a newspaper serving orthodox Jewish communities in New York choose to speculate that LBJ was Jewish, if he wasn’t?

Something’s not adding up.

The author of that piece from 2013 merely ASSUMES that LBJ is Jewish based on his ancestors having “common Jewish names” like Huffman, Ament, and Perrin. Moreover, the author says “The facts indicate”…without actually supplying them! The evidence required is actual birth certificates and/or additional confirmation from particular sources. What scholars have investigated this matter in a more thorough manner that could lend credibility to the claim? In other words, the author is SPECULATING, which is NOT FACT. In other words, it is possible LBJ was Jewish, but not definitive.

Lyndon Johnson formulated and participated in the “false flag” operation which resulted in the deliberate Israeli attack on the USS Liberty (GTR-5) on 8 June 1967.
All hands were supposed to perish, blaming Egypt for the attack and opening up the Israeli annexation of parts of Egypt. When the sailors on the ship reconnected a communications antenna aboard the ship and contacted the fleet for help, Lyndon Johnson ordered that no help be given. Johnson wanted “all hands dead” so that his “friend and ally” Israel could complete their mission.
When the ship refused to sink, all bets were off. It was quickly called a case of “misidentification” despite proof to the contrary.
34 Americans lost their lives and 173 were wounded.
The dirty bastard Israelis even strafed the lifeboats, in contravention of international law.
Lyndon Johnson himself quoted that he “did not want to embarrass an ally”.
Admiral John S. McCain (yeah, senator John McCain’s admiral “daddy”) participated in the cover-up.
The Liberty survivors were scattered throughout the Navy and ordered not to discuss the “incident”.
To this day, there has never been a proper investigation into this “act of war” by Israel.
It is interesting to note that the USS Liberty (GTR-5) is the most decorated ship in the Navy.
To add insult to injury, the ship’s skipper was awarded the Medal of Honor, not at the White House, which is protocol, but at an obscure, out-of-the-way Naval base.
If I had my way, Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, and Admiral John McCain would have been brought up on charges of TREASON and sentences of death duly carried out.
As to Israel, I would have turned Israel into a “glass parking lot” on 9 June 1967.

Do you or anybody else have direct evidence showing that LBJ was ACTUALLY A JEW, i.e. had Jewish blood?

The following quote is taken from an article posted on the website 5TJT or The Five Towns Jewish Times:

The Five Towns Jewish Times is a weekly newspaper serving the Jewish communities of the Five Towns in southwestern Nassau County, New York, and the greater New York area, covering the area’s large and growing Orthodox Jewish community.

ADDITONAL NOTE:
Lyndon Johnson’s maternal ancestors, the Huffmans, apparently migrated to Frederick, Maryland from Germany sometime in the mid-eighteenth century. Later they moved to Bourbon, Kentucky and eventually settled in Texas in the mid-to-late nineteenth century.

According to Jewish law, if a person’s mother is Jewish, then that person is automatically Jewish, regardless of the father’s ethnicity or religion. The facts indicate that both of Lyndon Johnson’s great-grandparents, on the maternal side, were Jewish.

These were the grandparents of Lyndon’s mother, Rebecca Baines. Their names were John S. Huffman and Mary Elizabeth Perrin. John Huffman’s mother was Suzanne Ament, a common Jewish name. Perrin is also a common Jewish name.

Huffman and Perrin had a daughter, Ruth Ament Huffman, who married Joseph Baines and together they had a daughter, Rebekah Baines, Lyndon Johnson’s mother. The line of Jewish mothers can be traced back three generations in Lyndon Johnson’s family tree. There is little doubt that he was Jewish.

http://www.5tjt.com/our-first-jewish-president-lyndon-johnson-an-update/#

When Hank said that “LBJ was probably the first Jewish president”, it is implying that LBJ was Jewish. Do you or anybody else have direct evidence showing that LBJ was ACTUALLY A JEW, i.e. had Jewish blood?

See, Hank tried to pull shenanigans. He should have said that “LBJ was probably the first president who looked out for Jewish interest”. So LBJ apparently he looked out for Jewish interests, which is no different than any president who looked out for the interests for different races, ethnicities, or religions.

Again, is there direct proof that LBJ’s ancestry is Jewish?

Sources?

Key excerpts from the Jewish Institute’s Our First Jewish President Lyndon Johnson? – an update!!:

A key resource for uncovering LBJ’s pro-Jewish activity is the unpublished 1989 doctoral thesis by University of Texas student Louis Gomolak, “Prologue: LBJ’s Foreign Affairs Background, 1908-1948.” Johnson’s activities were confirmed by other historians in interviews with his wife, family members and political associates.

Research into Johnson’s personal history indicates that he inherited his concern for the Jewish people from his family. His aunt Jessie Johnson Hatcher, a major influence on LBJ, was a member of the Zionist Organization of America. According to Gomolak, Aunt Jessie had nurtured LBJ’s commitment to befriending Jews for 50 years. As young boy, Lyndon watched his politically active grandfather “Big Sam” and father “Little Sam” seek clemency for Leo Frank, the Jewish victim of a blood libel in Atlanta. Frank was lynched by a mob in 1915, and the Ku Klux Klan in Texas threatened to kill the Johnsons. The Johnsons later told friends that Lyndon’s family hid in their cellar while his father and uncles stood guard with shotguns on their porch in case of KKK attacks. Johnson’s speech writer later stated, “Johnson often cited Leo Frank’s lynching as the source of his opposition to both anti-Semitism and isolationism.”…

Lady Bird elaborated, “Jews had been woven into the warp and woof of all [Lyndon’s] years.”

https://jewishinstituteprogress.blogspot.com/2016/08/our-first-jewish-president-lyndon.html?m=1

“Not that it means a whole lot, but LBJ was probably the first Jewish president.”

Sources?

Not that it means a whole lot, but LBJ was probably the first Jewish president.

“If a century of testing isn’t enough, then clearly nothing will ever be enough.”

It is not the testing per se, but it is the application of those tests and their interpretation. When was the last time sub-Saharan Africans were given these IQ tests–what is it recent or in the past? To how many people? How were the results analyzed? What other considerations were taken into account?

“I’m surprised a religious nut…”

Another ad hominem. YOU are the one characterizing me in this light. That is a false statement. I could also say that you are an anti-religious nut. That may not be an accurate assessment. What is happening here is that your worldview is being directly challenged, and so you are in a corner like a caged animal lashing out.

“You pretend you believe in the existence of different human races, but are unable to articulate any significant biological differences between them.”

There is one race–human. People have categorized us by different races and physical characteristics reflective of that race. I have clearly acknowledged those points. What you are doing here is saying that certain categories are more relevant or important, and as a result, those designations to you are the end all and be all.

“That makes you an anti-racist, whether you like it or not.”

Again, that would be your opinion, not fact.

It is interesting that you are avoiding certain questions posed to you which are germane to our discussion. Why?

Do not white people have the liberty to make up their own minds when it comes to procreating even if it means going outside your race?

Who gave you the ultimate authority to make decisions for other people? MUST they be in lockstep with your line of thinking, lest they be designated as a “cuck” or “race traitor”?

Do you believe that “white people” are only considered “white” if they meet your prescribed criteria?

Corvinus: “Assuredly, there is evidence for both sides of this conundrum. And the acolytes for each side will say that their position is “right” or “correct”.”

If a century of testing isn’t enough, then clearly nothing will ever be enough. I’m surprised a religious nut like you isn’t still skeptical of that radical new theory by Copernicus, that the Earth revolves around the sun, instead of vice versa. There’s some room for doubt there, after all. Both sides have their adherents. The jury’s still out on whether the Earth is flat, too. As you say, “the acolytes for each side will say that their position is “right” or “correct”.” The Bible certainly backs you flat-earthers up. Lots of verses can be cited in support of the notion that the Earth is flat and that the sun revolves around it.

Well Corvinus, you’ve made yourself look like a fool again. You pretend you believe in the existence of different human races, but are unable to articulate any significant biological differences between them. That makes you an anti-racist, whether you like it or not.

“No, not just my opinion, dolt. All of the major Christian churches are against racism, i.e., anti-racist. Their members agree with that policy. That’s easily verifiable, objective fact.”

I am talking about your opinion–“The toxicity of Christianity is due to its anti-racism”. This statement is NOT “verifiable, objective fact”. You really need to pay closer attention.

“It’s only a conundrum if you refuse to believe the weight of the evidence that says it’s mostly genetic.”

Assuredly, there is evidence for both sides of this conundrum. And the acolytes for each side will say that their position is “right” or “correct”.

“it’s what a century of psychometric testing has established.”

Which itself has undergone scrutiny.

“If you can’t or won’t admit this racial difference in intelligence is due to genetics”

Genetics and environment. Which one is more prominent depends on your mileage.

Now, let’s try this again.

Do not white people have the liberty to make up their own minds when it comes to procreating even if it means going outside your race?

Who gave you the ultimate authority to make decisions for other people? MUST they be in lockstep with your line of thinking, lest they be designated as a “cuck” or “race traitor”?

Do you believe that “white people” are only considered “white” if they meet your prescribed criteria?

Corvinus: “Your opinion”

No, not just my opinion, dolt. All of the major Christian churches are against racism, i.e., anti-racist. Their members agree with that policy. That’s easily verifiable, objective fact.

Corvinus: “LOL, no, the white race is not going extinct. ”

Any race may go extinct. Where now are the Neanderthals, or the Denisovans? The logical end result of the race mixing your toxic Christianity encourages is extinction for whites.

Corvinus: “Says who?”

Says taxonomic rules. Color differences alone aren’t a significant enough difference to merit classifying an organism as a separate race. Albino negros aren’t classified as white, nor does a deeply tanned white man get classified as a negro.

Corvinus: “You mean blacks. It could be genetics, but it could also be environment, or it could be both. That is the conundrum.”

It’s only a conundrum if you refuse to believe the weight of the evidence that says it’s mostly genetic. The negro/white difference in average intelligence (IQ) of 1 standard deviation or more is certainly significant, and it’s what a century of psychometric testing has established.

If you can’t or won’t admit this racial difference in intelligence is due to genetics, then you can possibly come up with something else that would be a significant difference. For example, in my opinion it is likely also the case that negroes’ propensity to criminality and their failure to prosper in technological societies is largely due to their genetics, and that is very significant. I doubt you agree, but as I said before, if you can’t name any significant biological differences between the races then you’re an anti-racist, whether you want to admit it or not. Try again, if you dare. But if you fail again, you’ll make yourself look even stupider than you do already.

“My point stands. Christianity is anti-racist…”

Your opinion.

“And anti-racism is obviously toxic to the continued existence of the white race…”

According to you.

“because it encourages race mixing and hence its extinction.”

LOL, no, the white race is not going extinct.

Do not white people have the liberty to make up their own minds when it comes to procreating even if it means going outside your race? Who gave you the ultimate authority to make decisions for other people? MUST they be in lockstep with your line of thinking, lest they be designated as a “cuck” or “race traitor”? Do you believe that “white people” are only considered “white” if they meet your prescribed criteria?

The toxicity of Christianity is due to its anti-racism, which is an objective fact, not an assumption of mine.”

No, that is an assumption. YOU think that Christianity is toxic because of its anti-racism. The fact is that Christianity is pro-humanity. Of course, you do realize that white southern Christians were pro-racist–they used the Good Book to justify enslaving blacks for their own personal financial gain. In response, white northern AND southern Christians referred to Bible passages that slavery was immoral and unjust. In other words, the concept of racism is not inherent in Christianity, but it is a creation of people.

“Your reference to “the human race” in this context was an anti-racist trope.”

Actually, when I make reference to the human race, I am recognizing the significance of biological race.

“If now want to pretend you don’t, then state clearly just what biological differences between the races you think are significant.”

I already mentioned them, as they are significant when determining the differences between the races–hair texture, eye color, skin color. YOU personally find them trivial.

“For if there are no significant differences, then there is no need for a taxonomic distinction.”

Says who?

“Are negroes, for example, less intelligent than whites due to their genetics?”

You mean blacks. It could be genetics, but it could also be environment, or it could be both. That is the conundrum.

“Calling it “subjective” is just another way of denying its objective reality”

“Your position so far is just typical toxic Christian anti-racism…”

Which is basically your opinion, not fact.

“The Bible supports ethnonationalism, moron.”

Do you enjoy Grey Poupon with your red herring? Try to pay close attention. The Bible supports all Christians under His Kingdom. God does not recognize Christian blacks and Christian whites as being “different” in his eyes. They are simply Christian. The inclusion of race in Christianity is not of His designs, but by human beings. YOU were the one who inserted this “argument” about nations being able to create immigration policy that denies people the opportunity to move there. I never stated directly nor indirectly my thoughts on the matter.

You do realize that Aquinas that he would support foreigners who were Christian to join their brethren in that country, considering that he sets as the first condition for acceptance a desire to integrate fully into what would today be considered the culture and life of the nation. So if these foreigners are black, white, or Hispanic, and are Christian, they are welcome to come in. Moreover, Aquinas supported that foreigners deserved to be treated with charity, respect and courtesy, which is due to any human of good will. In these cases, the law can and should protect foreigners from being badly treated or molested.

“Aquinas’ further elaboration on this in his writings (where he gives ample scriptural citations) makes it abundantly clear nations are free to exclude any races they choose…”

Even black or Hispanic Christians?

PeterAUS: “There was a Christian alliance which defended Europe from Ottoman/Muslim onslaught.”

Because Christianity is congenitally anti-racist, any Christian alliance that defends race defends it only accidentally, not as the main point of the alliance. Christians in those days would have been glad to accept Muslims as their Christian brothers and intermarry with them if they had agreed to convert. Some of them did. See Shakespeare’s playOthello for a literary depiction of this.

This is shown in another way by the nowadays little-acknowledged fact that Christianity first expanded to the east before it went west and conquered Europe. Christianity penetrated as far as India and China before many of these outposts were overrun by the Muslim onslaught centuries later. So there never was any racial barrier as far as Christianity was concerned.

My point stands. Christianity is anti-racist, and anti-racism is obviously toxic to the continued existence of the white race, because it encourages race mixing and hence its extinction.

The handle “‘Corvinus” is the last one (O.K one of the last ones…) I’d be agreeing with here, BUT, you are not correct here:

…..the toxicity of Christianity is due to its anti-racism, which is an objective fact, not an assumption of mine. It’s pretty stupid of you not to understand this.

There was a Christian alliance which defended Europe from Ottoman/Muslim onslaught.
It was, again, Christian (Orthodox) alliance which pushed the Ottomans to where they are now.

If you really want to blame Christianity for the current “globo-homo” universe that could, probably, work only in USA and Western Europe, and mostly in Protestant part.
Catholics (NOT the regimes there……people….) are quite another matter.

And, much more in Eastern Europe.

I mean, the core bulwark against Muslim comeback/invasion in Europe are hardcore Christian communities in Orthodox and Catholic parts of Balkans.
Christianity was EXACTLY what preserved Croat, and especially Serb and Macedonian peoples there. Greeks too. Bulgarians.

So, you could, perhaps, moderate your obsession with Christianity in general by replacing “Christianity” with “Anglo-Saxon Protestantism”…. or whatever.

Corvinus: “You ASSUME that Christianity is toxic here.”

As concerns the continued existence of the white race, the toxicity of Christianity is due to its anti-racism, which is an objective fact, not an assumption of mine. It’s pretty stupid of you not to understand this.

Corvinus: “You were creating a straw man here, as I never stated directly or indirectly that [racial differences] did not exist and they were other than important.”

Your reference to “the human race” in this context was an anti-racist trope. “There is no race but the human race!” is what one constantly hears from those who deny the significance of biological race. Since you have admitted you are a Christian, and denying that significance is the position of all of the major churches and the vast majority of adherents, it was a safe assumption that you too, believe this.

If now want to pretend you don’t, then state clearly just what biological differences between the races you think are significant. For if there are no significant differences, then there is no need for a taxonomic distinction. Are negroes, for example, less intelligent than whites due to their genetics? That’s what virtually all the testing shows, yet you claim it’s “subjective” somehow. Calling it “subjective” is just another way of denying its objective reality; denying the significance of that racial difference. The differences you do admit are objective (hair texture, eye color, skin color, etc.) are mostly trivial, i.e., not significant. Your position so far is just typical toxic Christian anti-racism, in denial of science, and essentially unchanged after 2000 years. If you can’t name any significant biological differences between the races then you’re an anti-racist, whether you want to admit it or not.

The Bible supports ethnonationalism, moron.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2017/01/31/saint-thomas-aquinas-opposed-open-borders/

Aquinas’ further elaboration on this in his writings (where he gives ample scriptural citations) makes it abundantly clear nations are free to exclude any races they choose, particularly if those races are hostile/incompatible.

The fact that all races can become Christian doesn’t amount to citizenship policy for a nation.

“No, you just uttered some piety about “the human race”, apparently meant to imply the insignificance of biological race in humans”

You are completely focusing on the biological part here, as if it is the end all and be all. That is your personal opinion. It is “your truth”, not THE truth. Of course the biological race in humans is important, but it is not necessarily of the utmost importance, as you are indicating.

Understand that throughout the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, people used different terms to showcase racial differences. Two of the words – Mongoloid and Caucazoid – have linguistic bases that refer to geographic areas, with Negroid referring to color. Moreover, in 1866, Frederick Farrar lectured on the “Aptitude of Races” which he divided into 3 groups–Savage, Semi-Civilized, Civilized. Note that these explanations are based on subjective cultural criteria, which ultimately undermines the vitality of the human race.

“which is a basic tenet of your toxic Christianity. This confirmed my point.”

You ASSUME that Christianity is toxic here. As a result, anything I say will automaticallybe construed by yourself as “confirming your point”, which ultimately rests on a false premise.

“Yes you are. You took 556 words in 6 paragraphs to restate what I just told you in one sentence: that all taxonomic categories are constructed by humans, yet also reflect objective reality.”

No, that is other than accurate here. I was refusing part of your position as well as clarifying my position. So please be more precise. When it comes to people creating categories like species and genera, those categories reflect a host of common physical and environmental traits that we, as people, agree to based on our personal and collective, objective reality.

When it comes to people creating categories like race, that gets trickier. The physical part like skin tone, hair, and proneness to certain diseases–which are also human constructs–that would be objective reality. When it comes to intelligence and behavior and their acquisition, that is subjective in nature. But when did people actually begin to denote those differences? For what purposes? Those are also interesting questions.

“Why do you admit that they exist and denote important differences, but not race?”

You were creating a straw man here, as I never stated directly or indirectly that they did not exist and they were other than important.

“Congratulations, you’ve fallen flat on your face once again.”

LOL. Projection is your strong suit, I will admit.

Congratulations, you’ve fallen flat on your face once again.

… and again, and again, and again, and again, …

“It is ad hominem, and I refuted your point. ”

No, you just uttered some piety about “the human race”, apparently meant to imply the insignificance of biological race in humans, which is a basic tenet of your toxic Christianity. This confirmed my point.

“I am probably stating the obvious here…”

Yes you are. You took 556 words in 6 paragraphs to restate what I just told you in one sentence: that all taxonomic categories are constructed by humans, yet also reflect objective reality.

You also failed to answer the challenge, as I predicted you would. Species and genera a just as much human constructs as race. Why do you admit that they exist and denote important differences, but not race?

Congratulations, you’ve fallen flat on your face once again.

If I had said your argument is wrong because you are stupid, then that would be ad hominem. But saying as I did that you are stupid because what you said only confirmed my point when you thought you were refuting it isn’t ad hominem. It’s simply accurate.”

It is ad hominem, and I refuted your point. Clearly, you are being other than accurate here.

“Naturally you will not understand this distinction either, because you are too stupid.”

Again, all you have left is ad hominem. You are debasing yourself, and for what?

“You want to say that human races don’t exist because they are human constructs, but don’t understand that all taxonomic categories are constructed by humans, yet also reflect objective reality.”

Let me provide the proper context here. Race is linked to biology; ethnicity is linked to culture. Race is a biological and social construct. Ethnicity is a social construct. Ethnicity is the term for the culture of people in a given geographic region, including their language, heritage, religion and customs. To be a member of an ethnic group is to conform to some or all of those practices. In a nutshell, race refers to a group of people who possess similar and distinct physical characteristics, while ethnicity refers to a category of people who regard themselves to be different from other groups based on common ancestral, cultural, national, and social experience.

Furthermore, natural science consists of mental constructs, created with the objective of explaining sensory experience of our world. Human beings affix labels to make sense of our environment. For example, the California spotted owl is an animal, i.e. biological construct. The scientific name of the creature is a human designation—strix occidentalis. That is, binomial nomenclature refers to a formal system, developed by people, to name species. The California owl was not a “California owl” until someone actually and specifically labeled it.

Men and women had sought, and continue to seek, to explain sensory experience of our world. Race, biology, ethnicity–all are concepts created by human beings as an organizational tool to offer a consistency about the natural world in which they observe. “Canis” refers to a real thing, but human beings designated that term—canis, which means “dog” in Latin, and also refers to their prominent teeth used for killing their prey. Dogs (like cats) did not magically appear as those animals automatically to human beings. People had to describe the characteristics in a manner that made sense to them by developing criteria to differentiate the species in their natural habitats.

When it comes to breeds are manufactured through selective breeding (artificial selection). A Boston terrier is an explicitly defined animal: the AKC ultimately decides which dog meets the criteria. I am probably stating the obvious here, but geographic isolation, and natural or sexual selection, have resulted in some alleles in human beings being more frequent in some groups compared to human beings, and ancestry determines the distribution of some genes.

As far as I know, the major genetic clusters consisted of Europeans/West Asians (whites), sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans with a discrepancy rate of only 0.14%. It also seems to me that this debate over race as a biological construct–I happen to believe race is both a biological and social construct–originated in the desire to establish the genetic inferiority of some races compared to others. Thus, this designation as one race being simply superior or better compared to another race squarely due to biological differences, without considering environmental factors, is subjective in nature.

From what I gather, race was also (wrongly) used up until the 1900’s to describe different ethnic groups, as in the English race, or the German race, as in to provide labels for human differences based on the available evidence. The line of reasoning was rudimentary in nature, as they embedded supposedly true behavioral and psychological traits in their reported observations, which was assumed to be other than changeable. So when Europeans encountered Africans and North/South Americans, naturally they would employ this logic.

If you mean among politicians, I would say that there are none we can admire.

WHITE TRASHIONALISTS

1) Few of them KNOW their ethnic background. When I moved to Phoenix from Southeast Michigan, I notice that nobody knew what sort of European ancestry they had. Except of course the Italians, who obviously look physically different from other whites.

2) Some like Milo were half-Jewish. A few were Jewish, full-stop.

3) One or two were Italians or Polish. I knew one who was Sicilian who despised Mexicans, loathed them, but was one of those Ralph Macchio/KARATE KID swarthy types. The Polish skinhead looked a bit like Bronson and obviously some Mongol got into his gene pool.

It has little to do with Jews and everything to do with the Almighty Dollar.

“The ends justify the means,” says the corporate-controlled Uniparty.

Pretending to be against mass-scale, wage-undercutting immigration was the means, and winning the election was the end.

Doing nothing to curtail mass-scale, welfare-aided illegal immigration while increasing legal immigration is the means, and riches for a few via labor cost savings is the ends.

Trump only intended to keep 3 promises: 1) a tax cut for corporations, which was used mostly to hire the 1.5 — 1.7 million foreign nationals legally admitted each year under Trump or to buy back their own stock; 2) a tax cut for rich heirs; 3) another child tax credit expansion, similar to the one granted by Obama to the same group, that further rigs the labor market for dual-earner parents, a group taking two household-supporting jobs with benefits out of an economy wherein 95 million citizens between the ages of 16 — 65 are sidelined from the laborforce.

The dual earners—with two incomes to cover housing costs, which have risen by 72% since 1995–spent that un-needed and mostly un-deserved, extra $1,000 on things like one more excused vacation from their family-friendly, absenteeism-friendly, above-firing jobs, while low-wage daycare attendants or elderly grandparents raise their kids for them.

A vote for Hillary would have yielded the same type of unfair, neoliberal, social-engineering taxation policy that favors often frequently absentee employees based on a lifestyle choice, but without the debt-increasing tax cut for corporations that prefer to employ foreign nationals and without the tax cut for wealthy heirs.

After winning, Trump advanced the economic interests of a handful of citizens, mostly those in the top 20% and noncitizens at the bottom who are unable to vote, specifically the non-citizen servants of the top 20%.

He favored many noncitizens over many likely-voter citizens.

Trump’s policies favor noncitizens who undercut citizens in the labor market, whether that is the H1-B visa workers, living 10 to an apartment in cities where rent is unaffordable for US citizens, the H1-B visas who are bound to their corporate sponsors.

Trump’s policies also favor the H2-B visas, undercutting non-welfare-eligible citizens by working for less pay since monthly welfare covers their groceries and rent, with an added sex-and-reproduction bonus from Uncle Sam in the form of a refundable child tax credit up to $6,431 for their US-born kids.

Many of the welfare-eligible illegal immigrant servants of the wealthy are also not paying SS tax, but are still collecting a heaping platter of monthly welfare to reward them for womb-productive sex. They do this by keeping their traceable income under the welfare programs’ limits. No, Trump has not reduced this much. A ten percent reduction in welfare just for illegal immigrants is not a major reduction.

Although he pretended to be against this rigged, anti-US-worker system to win the election, Trump, like all of the Democrats and Republicans in the Uniparty, must do the bidding of foreign nationals because of their welfare-assisted ability to work for very low pay. By siding with foreign nationals, Trump is really just siding with their employers, the corporate campaign donors, the Cheap Labor Lobby that writes all of the anti-citizen legislation in this Fake Republic.

Remember that being a poor, rural white does not make someone a White Trashionalist. Many White Trashionalists are the product of intelligent parents from wealthy families. Somehow, all the genetic advantages pass them over.

Note, also, the high degree of homosexuality present among White Trashionalists. They openly say that they would rather have sex with a white man over a black women (even a pretty black woman), simply because race transcends sexual orientation, and that no baby is better than a mulatto baby.

White Trashionalists are individuals within which genetic wastematter collects. The white race has the unique ability to segregate and expel genetic waste into carrier individuals who are unlikely to reproduce. It is why functional whites (the other 80% of us) are so successful.

Corvinus: “Once you resort primarily to ad hominem, you already lost the argument.”

If I had said your argument is wrong because you are stupid, then that would be ad hominem. But saying as I did that you are stupid because what you said only confirmed my point when you thought you were refuting it isn’t ad hominem. It’s simply accurate.

Naturally you will not understand this distinction either, because you are too stupid.

Corvinus: ” It is you who are fixated on the human construct referred to as “race”.”

You want to say that human races don’t exist because they are human constructs, but don’t understand that all taxonomic categories are constructed by humans, yet also reflect objective reality. Now I will grant in advance that even you (probably) are not stupid enough to argue that species or genera don’t exist because they are a human construct. If so, then your challenge is to explain why species and genera exist but not races.

In this, you will fall flat on your face again, of course; only this time, not just because you are too stupid, but because it can’t be done.

“Since you are an anti-racist Christian…”

I am a Christian who strives to love thy neighbors. Please be more accurate next time.

” your remark only confirms what I wrote about Christianity’s denial of the importance of race”.

Actually, Christianity views the human race as being of the utmost importance. It is you who are fixated on the human construct referred to as “race”.

“But of course, you are too stupid to understand that.”

Once you resort primarily to ad hominem, you already lost the argument.

“You’re an example in miniature of Christianity’s toxic effects.”

That would be Fake News.

“Like the granting of citizenship and the vote to negroes, such laws were passed and enforced by legislatures and civilian authorities that were virtually all white.”

You mean white Americans. Again, please be more accurate next time.

“More, they are almost always voluntarily obeyed by white people who are quite proud of doing so. This is the culture that Christianity has produced.”

Actually, the culture that Christianity has produced has strived to be is mindful of their place in this world. Why would not Christians, who as citizens of a nation, be proud of adhering to the laws of God and the laws of their land? You make it sound that such conduct is evil in nature.

She despises Jews. Forget anything else, including the fact that it is the Jewish presence in the US that has prevented Pakistanis and North Africans from getting a foothold like they did in the UK or Europe which in turn prevented Cleetus Ray Bob’s daughter from being groomed.

Therefore she is adored by white nationalists.

The reason is there is nothing Jews can do to her. If she ends up back on welfare in Minneapolis what the hell, it is better than Somalia.

THOMM

Here is the irony. Jews, always ridiculed as near-Communist socialist, actually fare far better in free-market economics that the GOP constituency that is hard-right.

Saul Epstein doesn’t howl for Fed bailouts and need welfare in his NYC brownstone. It is Billy Bubba Klaxton who would fare slightly better under socialism.

And the National Socialists of Germany were just that. You cannot have fascism, socialist, dictatorships in capitalist countries where wild individualism and celebration of free enterprise defines the political system.

Because most white nationalists are poor and come from poor remote regions even blacks and Mexicans do not want to live, they are dependent upon the government.

They use to vote Democrat. Working poor whites put Clinton in office, which makes his wife’s statement about deplorables rather ironic since her husband was elected for being an unabashed redneck while Bush was the despised Old Money East Coast Elite WASP. We used to call these people “Reagan Democrats”.

But Hillary mostly wanted programs which benefited blacks and Cholos. She quite possible wanted to marginalize the white deplorables who first put her in power in 1992 forever.

I was only speaking in jest about switching to the Democrats. If the Democrats turn into the “White People Party” then I will vote for them. Some thing will happen soon in the future, you can bet on that.
Itz about time. Change can happen. It can happen soon.

So the answer is to do nothing and pretend you are somehow superior to everybody that lives in the real world? I didn’t notice anybody who was better than Trump actually running, did you?

We aren’t talking about IQ …..that crowd was 90 % over 20 somethings…..I say again they should have something better to do than form a mob (in which 4 people were shot) for a dead rapper…..they should find some heroes beside murdered rappers.
Its about culture.

Robert Dolan: “It wasn’t so long ago that whites HAD racial solidarity. Someone mentioned the jewish civil rights act that took away the right of free association for white people. ”

Like the granting of citizenship and the vote to negroes, such laws were passed and enforced by legislatures and civilian authorities that were virtually all white. More, they are almost always voluntarily obeyed by white people who are quite proud of doing so. This is the culture that Christianity has produced.

Robert Dolan: “And Lincoln wanted to send the blacks back to Africa.”

Obviously you are one of those historically ignorant people who doesn’t know that Lincoln only advocated assisting their voluntary departure. He never even suggested they should be rounded up and shipped off whether they wanted to go or not. He knew, of course, that the vast majority of them would never leave. That’s why later, in his last public address before being assassinated, he called for making them citizens and giving them the vote.

Robert Dolan: “Furthermore, despite the jewing and kvetching in the comments above, Kevin Macdonald’s trilogy is by far the best explanation for what is actually happening in the world today.”

In Culture of Critique Kevin MacDonald tries to understand twentieth century developments without taking into account what happened in the nineteenth. Naturally, the picture that results is distorted. Civil rights for negroes wasn’t an invention of Jews in recent decades. Citizenship and the vote were granted to them long before by white Christian American voters. The source of America’s civil rights movement can be found in the 1860s, among white Christians.

Robert Dolan: “There is no other source that comes close. KMAC correctly identifies jewish influence as the reason for the decline of the west.”

Christianity is a Jewish influence.

Corvinus: “Actually, Christianity focuses on the importance of the human race. Looks like you are in error yet again.”

Since you are an anti-racist Christian, your remark only confirms what I wrote about Christianity’s denial of the importance of race. But of course, you are too stupid to understand that.

You’re an example in miniature of Christianity’s toxic effects.

Unbelievable….blacks will never progress , nothing better to do than be a mob for a dead rapper.

But blacks don’t have to be told to identify with their own people, do they. So there are some forms of intelligence that are hard wired and have nothing to do with IQ. IQ-type intelligence is only a small part of any intelligence profile.

You are right. But remember that White Trashionalists are leftists at heart. They want socialism and big government. Just like the Third Reich was economically socialist.

It is funny that a Somali Muslim woman who hates America, a person who is the very poster-child of non-assimilation and the type of immigrants we DON’T want, is nonetheless a heroine to these 70 IQ WN wiggers.

Never heard of Nipsey. He must have been an African faggot or some such tri sexual freak.

Oddly, posters here hate Trump, and sing praise to Inbred Omar, the genitally mutilated, low IQ, Somali Muslim. Seems most of the posters are solid demrats of some sort, which is odd too, since Jews vote 70% demrat.

“Denial of the importance of race flows very naturally from the basic tenets of Christianity.”

Actually, Christianity focuses on the importance of the human race. Looks like you are in error yet again.

“I see our master jew apologist Corvinus is at it again.”

You mean keeper of setting the record straight.

“Yes, the civil-rights act DID destroy “freedom of association” for white males.”

Actually, no. White males can freely live where they want and with whom they want. There are a plethora of white enclaves left in America–Idaho, Iowa, Maine. The problem is that the Southrons got really greedy. They couldn’t even follow a simple law–separate but equal. Blame them.

“Jewish interests were instrumental in destroying white solidarity while retaining an extreme form of solidarity only for themselves.”

Clearly that is not the case, as you as a white person, along with the people you congregate with, have this solidarity. It’s just that other white people have a different type of solidarity that you do not personally approve of.

“”It’s not “smarts” or “IQ” that gives jews an advantage over gentile whites, but is their rabid insistence on cultural and social cohesiveness, insularity and nepotism (but only for themselves) that gives them an “advantage”.”

You are underestimating gentile whites who today do possess those traits. They have created communities of their own volition and choice, and that really bothers you.

“At the same time, jews pushed the concept of racial “equality”, (but only for gentile whites)…”

Actually, men and women from different races and backgrounds have pushed for this concept. Besides, in the eyes of the Lord, white Christians and black Christians are no different. Are you Christian by chance?

“backing it up with “civil-rights” and “equal accommodation” laws which are enforced by governments–but only against whites.”

You mean enforced by the people who elect representatives to our government.

“A great reckoning dealing with the jews is coming.”

Maybe. Then again, probably not.

I don’t know what good he is. Maybe he can serve as a bad example.

We have far too many of these bad examples today.

Do we have anyone we can actually admire?

Th Unz turned out to be a very interesting experience indeed..an amazing hybrid, incredible: A Khazar/Jew hating collection of right wing priding intellects, all opposed to Jewish domination but owned by a massive Jewish intellectual Ron Unz..including contributions opposed to Jewish domination by other Jewish intellectuals like Gilad Atzmon for eg

Jews and right wing elitist groups: both white groups but the right wing group seeing the Jew as other which they are not. the ethnic difference between the two groups are pure semantics and nothing else. and both are supremacist groups which have nothing to do with the collective ordinary interest of the people of the world..including ordinary white people.

winning or given opportunity both right wing whites and Jewish whites will build extreme technological social realities that would enslave ordinary folk, engineer them into perpetual stupidity: though according to the white right wing the people are stupid already, set in there stupid way..especially the niggers. therefore there may be no need to waste technology to fix them where they are. that is where they march, worn into the path, sunk and will not get out of that grove

what is the difference between the elitist right wing whites and Jews…their own propaganda which they have both come to believe over time. can they overcome that difference to become a solid group against the ordinary folk?

good question and not an outcome in the popular interest. or is it..or would it be?

both are elitist minorities worn into paths they cant get out of..that have little to do with reality, nature soon enough, and who in power are already provoking natural reaction that will consume humanity. nature is the template by which all exists..off and out of and, live in nature bounded by nature. humanity will learn its limits and potential in nature and live by these of create the conditions for our own elimination from nature.

nature is the template not what Insane Jews and white supremacists think. and that which would ensure human indefiniteness in nature is rather simple I am sure..like melanin in the skin and other sundry biological traits that bring and confer this or that advantage on the beholder who came into possession of them by nature according to where and how they evolved and continue to evolve.

image the great Irony of a man like Ron Unz, with a great huge brain as big as the sky, ultimately dying in front of a barefoot Dogon on in Mali who will live on apparently forever, barefoot and unconcerned about any dam mansion and things in it he wont have time to eat, wear or drive. God is a bitch isnt he..a white male according to right wing and Jew! is he god, even gay? what good a god is a god is he then?

waste of time with all this nonsense here..a pox on 2 houses..the Jewish Khazar one and the white right wing other. there is nothing of value in either house..only crap in there, war, torture, racist hate, religious exclusivity and exclusion, isolation opposed to diversity and human expansion. Biology appears to demand that we expand or die as a species. all of this here on the UNZ is opposed to expansion. so stay here and die then.

the human answer at this point is exactly what Marx proposed. the imp Karl had some good to say after all: into the hands of the people must social leadership pass, must not remain in the hands of power-mad minorities whose interest are limited, toxic, while the collective human interest must dominate social life or….

the collective interest can be represented by the people nationally and in the international groupings purposes such socially collective nations evolve to meet the global popular interest. if material development brings the popular interest to the fore, making it possible for the collective to take over and evolve popular systems of social organizations se be it. Marx had a point.

and here we are at a stage at which the total jackarse points of view of the various insane power minorities that does and can do nothing at all relevant to human survival as the world burns. the variants in systematic minority social control waste time and human opportunity in the insanity they must engage in to try to save their minority system of social control. they fight each, war upon war: they poison the food, water and air and intellectual superstructure to constrain the human intellect all the better to control humanity..or attempt to. the crap these elitist groups do do is endless, and endlessly deviant and destructive of global life and human chances in nature. and it is all ultimately pointless. Nature will win out in the end

Nature will win out in the end as it must..it is nature, the template, the base of all: it was always here and will always be in existence..nature, existential. but in winning out it does not necessarily mean with a remaining human presence. I dont see any inevitability of that. there is nutten at all principally worthy in human, in our existence that gives us any value that we assume like the elitist here take for granted in themselves. and these are the least worthy of all people as far as I see. but it has nutten to do with worth as such, in these senses. it is cause and effect..you can survive in nature…or you cant.

and if survival can be won by the development of the knowledge of how to we wont find it the way we live..totally contrary to nature, developing all we find that is opposed to nature, until we come internationally and currently to the mad global life we have evolved based on money..a monstrosity that can at any moment now go boom..or whimper from our sobs as we succumb to myriad health maladies we cave rise to by simply encouraging their evolution by adding endlessly, insanely our poisons to the environment

there is no answer, solution or path out at the UNZ. there is nutten of a positive nature here..only a bunch of elitist whites and their differences, in their struggle between themselves for the whole planet. but if the human species is to survive there ought to be something coming up the middle to usurp all this irrelevant shit soon enough, toss it by the wayside and garbage bins, replaced by what is utterly popular, simple, grasped and used by all. as that white intellect said..what was his name..Occam I think..the most simple option of all the alternatives is usually the valid and useful one

I see our master jew apologist Corvinus is at it again.
Yes, the civil-rights act DID destroy “freedom of association” for white males.
Jewish interests were instrumental in destroying white solidarity while retaining an extreme form of solidarity only for themselves.
It’s not “smarts” or “IQ” that gives jews an advantage over gentile whites, but is their rabid insistence on cultural and social cohesiveness, insularity and nepotism (but only for themselves) that gives them an “advantage”. This same cultural and social cohesiveness that is prized so highly by jewish interests is denied to gentile whites. Jews, to a man will fight to deny this same cultural and social cohesiveness to gentile whites that they themselves enjoy as it is a major part of the jewish purpose–the destruction of gentile white culture, which IS superior to any jewish cultural or social society. If jews did not possess this power, they would most likely be rag merchants, liquor merchants, or furniture merchants–nothing more. As I have previously stated, jewish success is based on cultural and social cohesiveness and insularity–NOT “smarts” or “IQ”. Once enough jews get into a position of power in the work world or education systems, they will hire and promote their own, even bypassing more qualified gentile white candidates.
Jews have latched on to cultural cohesiveness and nepotism, as it serves their purpose exceedingly well.
At the same time, jews pushed the concept of racial “equality”, (but only for gentile whites), backing it up with “civil-rights” and “equal accommodation” laws which are enforced by governments–but only against whites. These “civil-rights” laws are used as a “battering ram” against gentile whites to diffuse and fragment any semblance of gentile white solidarity and cohesiveness that may arise.
A great reckoning dealing with the jews is coming. As gentile whites become more marginalized, the accusation of being tagged as “racist” or a “holocaust denier” is rapidly losing its “sting”.
Increasingly, jews are more wary of being “called out” and recognized as “jews”. One can call a jew a shyster, shylock, bankster, criminal or ne-er-do-well, and it will roll off his back like water off a duck, BUT call a jew a “jew”, and he will recoil in horror, having been “found out”.

That Stormer link is gold.

My contention is that Trump never took any of this seriously, and never actually intended to win. I think the Trump campaign was the opposite of 4D Chess – it was all a gigantic accident. He ran because he wanted to create a spectacle around himself, and he had no idea just how unprepared the rest of the political system was for a person to do that.

LOL

Well said.

Every other comment from this “Realist” character revolves around dissuading the Right from voting. Smells awfully shilly, if you ask me.

“It wasn’t so long ago that whites HAD racial solidarity.”

You mean whites had religious and ethnic solidarity. The notion of “white solidarity” was only in terms of an “us versus them” mentality when convenient.

“Someone mentioned the jewish civil rights act that took away the right of free association for white people. This is obvious stuff.”

First, it is the Civil Rights Act. Second, it did not take away the right of free association.

If Christianity wasn’t a unifying factor, then why did the jews target Christianity for destruction?
jews correctly indentified religion as an impediment to their ability to enslave whites.

“The Founding Fathers were race realists. They had no illusions regarding the mental capacity of the african slaves.”

They couldn’t even pick their own damn cotton.

“And Lincoln wanted to send the blacks back to Africa.”

Originally, but then he believed in their political equality.

“The cucking is a fairly recent development, and it’s clear that jews are the reason for the cucking.”

You mean intelligent white people have let themselves become hoodwinked?

“They got control of the money supply in 1913, and with endless money they are able to buy off all of our leaders….including Donald Trump.”

So why are you not running for political office. Are you not against “anti-cucks”?

“You can fault whites for having “pathological altruism,” and you can claim that religion made whites soft in the head, but you can’t refute the fact that jews now operate ALL of the control points of western civilization, and jewish influence is the major factor in the wrecking of Christendom.”

That is not a fact, that is supposition. Basically, you are saying white people are victims.

There is so much jewing going on here….. it’s hard to keep up.
It wasn’t so long ago that whites HAD racial solidarity. Someone mentioned the jewish civil rights act that took away the right of free association for white people. This is obvious stuff.
If Christianity wasn’t a unifying factor, then why did the jews target Christianity for destruction?
jews correctly indentified religion as an impediment to their ability to enslave whites.

The Founding Fathers were race realists. They had no illusions regarding the mental capacity of the african slaves.
And Lincoln wanted to send the blacks back to Africa.

No, I stand by what I said. The cucking is a fairly recent development, and it’s clear that jews are the reason for the cucking. They got control of the money supply in 1913, and with endless money they are able to buy off all of our leaders….including Donald Trump.

Furthermore, despite the jewing and kvetching in the comments above, Kevin Macdonald’s trilogy is by far the best explanation for what is actually happening in the world today. There is no other source that comes close. KMAC correctly identifies jewish influence as the reason for the decline of the west. You can fault whites for having “pathological altruism,” and you can claim that religion made whites soft in the head, but you can’t refute the fact that jews now operate ALL of the control points of western civilization, and jewish influence is the major factor in the wrecking of Christendom.

hahahaha! this is so sweet! listen to the tears of this poster above here.

Ordinary white people getting good wood, real wood, serious licks and the more they get beat up by their own the more stupid they get collectively if we are to judge by what they ordinary whites are saying all the time on sites like the UNZ

ordinary white people cant get over it, wont smarten up regardless..talking shit all the time. ordinary whites are sorry, describing a perspective of life that has little to do with reality and their own plight.

its wood for white people! they dont know who their real supports are..and why those are supports. and the whites here call nig nogs stupid all time in these pages..low IQ! but I dont see any smart white people here.

the white people here on th UNZ are stupid, are not facile in reality and will take serious wood from their betters until they smarten up and correct themselves..or end up dead, enslaved engineered etc

never thought I’d see the day but its here! its a good day anyway..a day of decision: make the right one and live. make the stupid one and……….

I see the stupid one is made already

yeah mon! just like smashing Libya, readying to do Ven next: a genocide there and there and over there…there there a genocide!

”Nig nogs will never progress because they chose to celebrate one of their own who was genuine and whom they all loved for his observed personal sincerity and way of life that was in tune with his own people ?????”

that’s keen right there! and only one got shot, 1 dead?

what! the cops did not get in there and feast on male Black bodies like they usually do when they see a crowd of nig nogs?

so how will nig nogs progress then..build a military, shoot ’em up in th world and take whats theirs..build a bank and go stick them up and make them use the bank for all their financial stuff and tax then for the privilege….???

what about stick them up, take their currency and make them pay interest every time they spend a dollar..OF THEIR OWN MONEY!

hahaha! that’s the best one yet!

“maaan! you nig nogs slow…too slow. Robbery is progress and progress is robbery. whats taking you so long! that’s high IQ. all you guys are just stupid, so stupid. you need to be prepared to kill and rob. you will always be poor otherwise”

Kushner, Inc. Book Review Part V: The Kushner Crime Family on the Road to the White House

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
April 12, 2019

When on November 8 at 2:29 AM, the Associated Press called Wisconsin for Trump and declared him the winner of the 2016 presidential election, Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller got to work on a victory speech.

Bannon was getting revved up to write something “fire-breathing”—something that gave a shout-out to the people he fondly called the “hobbits” and the “forgotten” men who had voted for Trump. He was clear on what was needed in the moment: “We’re marching on Washington.… This is a rally speech.”

[…]

We were all flying too high to see it at the time, but the speech Trump gave was calling for unity, thanking Hillary and calling her a good person, all kinds of surrendering.

And it turns out that Jared and Ivanka had convinced Trump to veto the Bannon/Miller speech, and “deescalate.”

[…]

No idea what your age is, but I was 20 in 1994 when crack-fried grown black men would walk up to you and offer to perform oral sex for money to purchase crack at bus stations or wired-up tweaker rednecks would follow a person begging change for their next hit of meth back then.

We are not too distant in age; I am less than a decade behind you.

I recall what you describe as not being a terribly uncommon occurrence here in Los Angeles during that time. On my way to the Central Library one afternoon circa 1998, a black man who clearly was not in his right mind was begging me for money, then added that he was even prepared to perform fellatio upon me should I spare him some cash. My upbringing was very strict, conservative, and frankly sheltered. When this person told me that, I recall abruptly crossing the street in abject terror, threading my way through passing cars, so horrified I was by him. My parents had profound disdain for blacks and I had (and still have) a great fear of the mentally infirm, so that explains my rather extreme reaction. (Incidentally, I must admit to inheriting my parents’ contempt for blacks and especially black culture.)

In the late 90’s, the poor white tweakers would dig through garbage like dogs to find returnables or an address to pull an identity theft with. And the problem with meth was most intense in the Southwest.

Back in my late teens and early 20s I knew a few such people. Nice people the whole lot of them, but unfortunately addled by their addictions. One of these acquaintances died from a meth-induced heart attack at age 21. Needless to say, I have never so much as touched recreational drugs in my entire life. Pointless and expensive habits.

I never saw Italians or Hispanos-Mediterranean whites-ravaged by drug addiction.

That has changed substantially. A common topic of conversation between my wife and I is our revulsion over how normalized drug use has become. I am not talking about marijuana, though its distinct odor has become practically ubiquitous in public spaces throughout California. Rather, use of meth, ecstasy, heroin, and countless virulent homemade concoctions are now remarkably commonplace among people our age and younger. And then there are the people addicted to prescription medications.

Traditionally there has been a strong disdain for drug use among Hispanics. (It was only northern Mexicans—the least cultured, intellectually developed, and most widely represented among their country’s immigrants—who have had a longstanding susceptibility to using marijuana.) Nevertheless, I was surprised to find that they were the only ethnic demographic with a majority opposed to our state’s legalization of marijuana back in 2016. But those stigmas are quickly being washed away as I type. Most of the younger people have a profound self-hate and shame about their ethnic background, jingoistic screeching about “brown pride” and the like notwithstanding. Because of that, because of a lack of security in their ethnic identity and their place within their community—what little remains of it, anyway—they become prone to self-destructive, deliberately time-consuming behaviors in order to fill in that void.

My theory is that people with a strongly developed sense of identity and community, as well as strong ties to family are less likely to be swayed towards addiction or sexual deviancy. Community-enforced shame is likely an important factor in keeping those tendencies in check. Somebody who is deeply connected with family and community would not want to engage in behaviors that would be a humiliation before them, after all.

As for the school system, public ones are terrible back East in most neighborhoods but my brother lives in a fairly upmarket zip code. In Los Angeles, even as an urban planner he did not make enough to send his daughter to a private school.

His wife was a Yorba Linda Japanese-American who really loathed the East. She did not like the cold, the snotty uptight people, the dirt and crowds. But for the sake of their daughter she moved there.

I believe it. Hardly anything is affordable in Los Angeles anymore. As late as the early 2000s, for example, one could easily find a two-bedroom apartment in the neighborhood I had grown up in for circa $500 a month. Today you would be lucky to find a closet for something approaching that price. (The median in that area for a two-bedroom now is about $2,300.)

Of course, it does not escape my notice that California’s population has literally doubled in the span of my lifetime. Our legislators and bureaucratic functionaries seem as if they will not be pleased until we are all living cheek-by-jowl as do the Japanese or Koreans in their major urban centers. Sometimes I give serious consideration to starting over back in my parents’ home country—until I realize that the same class of elite psychopaths wrecking the social fabric here are already well on their way to doing the same there. But I digress…

Fortunately, my wife (also Asian) happens to love the East Coast as she lived there during her college years.

We are actually looking to move there in the next few years. The particular area we are considering is considerably cheaper to rent and buy than Southern California and is close to her alma mater, where she is seeking work. For myself, the location affords me far wider access and opportunity for furthering my rather esoteric interests than does Southern California. (Although it has improved vastly in that respect over the past half century.)

anarchyst: ” The Catholic Church and other Christians were bamboozled into accepting the integration of the races,…”

This idea that whites don’t know what they’re doing is malicious. Once you assume that whites have no responsibility for their own actions, the battle is lost.

Cultural pressure is intimidating, but no external force compels whites to act as they do, or have the culture that they do. It wasn’t Jews who launched and fought the American Civil War, or who freed the negro slaves and made them citizens, the legal equals of whites. Nor was Jewish control of mass media necessary to achieve that result. America was virtually 100% white and Christian at the time.

They weren’t bamboozled into anything. Denial of the importance of race flows very naturally from the basic tenets of Christianity.

Robert Dolan: “Christianity was cucked in recent times, and prior to the cucking it was the single and only cohesive group strategy that we had, as Kevin Macdonald has observed in his brilliant work. ”

It can be argued that whites (i.e. Europeans) cucked when they accepted Christianity from Jews (i.e. non-whites), as Kevin MacDonald has failed to observe in his rather stupid books. MacDonald tries to pass his theories off as science, yet if Jews and whites are competitors locked in Darwinian struggle as he claims, haven’t they always been so? And if so, what does it say about Christianity? Letting the enemy draw up your game plan isn’t a wise decision. Nietzsche and others drew the obvious conclusion that Christianity itself was the original subversion. MacDonald’s failure to address this issue of Christianity-as-subversion is a fatal flaw in his so-called scholarship.

The history of Christian Europe is filled with religious wars between whites, not white racial solidarity. Anyone who maintains the contrary is hallucinating. I don’t see why anyone is surprised at this. Didn’t rabbi Jesus himself admit that was the plan?

Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on, five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.
-Luke 12:51-53

TwoDees Partain: “There, I fixed your punctuation error.”

There was no error.

Unbelievable….blacks will never progress , nothing better to do than be a mob for a dead rapper.

Gunfight ‘in the midst of Nipsey Hussle’s 25-mile LA procession’ leaves one dead and three wounded after tens of thousands turn out to pay respects to murdered rapper
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6914673/Four-people-shot-killing-one-middle-Nipsey-Hussle-procession-day-LA-memorial.html

if you know what the ‘progtards’ will do, are going to do with their power… what are the chances of you turning the tables on them by collectivizing the minorities into an organized majority, and terrorize the shit out of them before they do it to you?

?????????

why not? seems all nice and legal to me as you get the laws passed that allows you to needle the ‘progs’ unmercifully!

…american beverages but advisedly not with meals.

the carbon sweetens up the digestive acid short-circuiting digestion.

left to rot like a disgusting lump in the belly the rotting undigested food
turns into gas of the most voluminous and awful quality, that could seriously disturb parties of people, in deep and wide swath, with secrecy of emission: ‘jeepers creepers’ so to speak

so..if you eat a meal with Pepsi or a Coke stay home..unless you have a political meeting to go to, on the immigration issue, preferably with Trump in attendance..at which you could silently ‘bomb’ away at will, all meeting long

there is terrorism: then there is terrorism.

You are onto something here.

Still, perhaps a touch naive.
Glad you mentioned “members of the politburo were during the reign of J. Stalin.”.
The problem with all this, PTBs won’t let you keep “away”.

The danger in the current paradigm is, more power “progtards” acquire, more control of your life they’ll want.
They won’t let you alone.
And, on top of it, the “minorities” around will have you as a target for all their frustrations.
That is the combination which shall come to pass if “we” keep been ineffective.
Proles in Communist countries had one element better than “deplorables” in above scenario: there were no “other” around. The Hell was coming from the State only. Well, save Serb minority in Kosovo, but that’s another, perhaps interesting, story.
In “our” case, we’ll have both State and “other”. Deadly combination. literally.

Hehe…I guess that’s the reason some of us still blab around here. Trying to figure the way out of it.

Precisely.

(Christian) religious wars in Europe.

Just recently, simmering even today:
Catholics and Protestant in Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Catholics and Orthodox in Balkans

Catholic and Orthodox in Ukraine.

Having said that I don’t think it was just “dem Joos” who pushed for that in 60’s. Things were and still are, a bit more complicated.

Bottom line, we’d need to start looking past “dem Joos” and try to figure out why Whites, in Anglo countries, went for that.
In that sense, “Dr. Morgan” has something to say. My feeling anyway.

Okay lets just extrapolate your concept that not voting is simply “not voting” : Let us envision a situation where all sixty-plus million Republican voters decide not to vote in 2020.

I am sure you will agree with me that the Democrats will most certainly take back the WH, and that this would not be a scenario of simply “not voting”, rather the “not voting” of the Republicans handing the Democrats the WH on a silver platter.

Plus I would suggest that you contact the Mensa folks and inform them that according to your criteria thay are awarding qualification to undeserving persons, and perhaps they will demand that I return my gold-embossed Mensa certificate, which I have held for forty-plus years.

As far as you labeling myself as a : Bastard, I racked my brains trying to come up with an appropriate title for yourself, however fact is they would block my post if I did in fact post a fitting handle for your pathetic self.

AJM

Where I live, in Silicon Valley, the main arterial , both rail and non-freeway, El Camino Real, that runs from SF to San Jose and its next door railway is slated for rezoning from the State Capitol in Sacramento.

SB 50 calls for a half-mile zone on each side of transportation lines, to be given over to multi-family, low-rent housing. That would be a mile wide strip down the center of the Peninsula. Call It MLK Chavez Maduro Boulevard.

The local cities and counties are already roiled. The upper middle class and rich, as in Hillsborough and Atherton, as well as places like Palo Alto, etc…are amazed.

One report I read on HB 50, would result in 24,000 low income people of color installed in Palo Alto. The Horror. The Chinese are going to get especially roiled by this.

This is called implicit racism. The implicit is revealed when the White flesh is scratched deep enough to expose the explicit.

The Future will be chock full of this kind of thing as The Revolution gets noisier and the voting boxes spill over with dark ballots.

This is what it takes for the Counter-Revolution to show up.

As for Trump….he has to win elections. Pretty simple.

Joe Webb

Christianity was cucked in recent times, and prior to the cucking it was the single and only cohesive group strategy that we had, as Kevin Macdonald has observed in his brilliant work.

Prior to the Scofield Bible, jews were correctly seen as being under God’s wrath for having rejected the Son of God. Nothing has changed since the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
God did not decide in 1948 that it was time for jews to build a new temple and chase chickens around with a machete.

The plan for a new temple is just Babylon revisited. The jewish internationalists new world order is a plan to enslave all of humanity under jewish globohomo rule, and this is in direct opposition to God’s will.

Once again. It’s all about the Benjamin’s. Follow the money.

What gets me most of all, is WHY can’t we effectively organize

The answer is in your own name. Freedom to do as one pleases, without outer or inner restriction, forbids actually yielding to the requirements of membership in any organization.

The members of the ruling cabal in our country are as restricted in their behavior as any slave. If they deviate from their collective philosophy in any way they can be ostracized. They are glued to political correctness in the same way that members of the politburo were during the reign of J. Stalin.

Similar to the attitude held by most religious groups. The Amish call it “shunning”. You can become an unperson if you’re not careful. Remember Jimmy The Greek?

Better to enjoy freedom from association. True, you’ll never run the show. And beautiful people will not flock to your side in adoration. But, as long as the PTB don’t destroy the world with nuclear fire, you can enjoy the life of an outsider, scorned by the intelligentsia as deplorable.

You didn’t really want her approval anyway, did you?

Actually Catholicism and Christianity by inference had no problem with separation of the races.
The commenter’s assertion that Christianity has been “cucked” for the last hundred years or so is only partially correct.
There was an unwritten “rule” that one could associate with “their own kind” while simultaneously declaring that all humans were equal in worth to the Creator.
This “rule” acknowledged that there could be Catholics of varying races and ethnicities, and that they could follow the tenets of their religion “with their own kind”, without interference from the clergy of the day.
It was the so-called jewish-instigated and imposed “civil-rights” movement that destroyed all that. The Catholic Church and other Christians were bamboozled into accepting the integration of the races, and even now, uses it to good effect, with the religious-run relief organizations making millions from the illegal “refugee” resettlement trade.

“[Nonsense:] America had anti-racist strains in it from its founding 250 years ago. As I mentioned above, even at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, free negroes were citizens and allowed to vote in some of the states. Eventually, its congenital anti-racist sentiments plunged the nation into the Civil War, at the end of which citizenship and full legal equality was granted to the negro by an America that was virtually 100% white and Christian.
[/Nonsense] ”

There, I fixed your punctuation error.

I commented on your statement that the Tower of Babel story is a warning against multiculturalism. How does your reply defend your original statement? It doesn’t, does it? I think you should be more concerned with your own two digit IQ. Maybe you could work on it and learn how to argue at the same time.

Your time’s comin’, sweetheart.

Won’t be long now.

SIR

I am getting tired of hearing that the black urban underclass and redneck whites are once again the guinea pigs for what ever soul-destroying drugs mad scientists in China or Italian mafia or Colombia have decided to test the market with.

No idea what your age is, but I was 20 in 1994 when crack-fried grown black men would walk up to you and offer to perform oral sex for money to purchase crack at bus stations or wired-up tweaker rednecks would follow a person begging change for their next hit of meth back then.

In the late 90’s, the poor white tweakers would dig through garbage like dogs to find returnables or an address to pull an identity theft with. And the problem with meth was most intense in the Southwest.

Curiously, it seems to be an Anglo-Saxon and black problem. I never saw Italians or Hispanos-Mediterranean whites-ravaged by drug addiction.

Now we hear that Opoids are the latest addiction.

As for the school system, public ones are terrible back East in most neighborhoods but my brother lives in a fairly upmarket zip code. In Los Angeles, even as an urban planner he did not make enough to send his daughter to a private school.

His wife was a Yorba Linda Japanese-American who really loathed the East. She did not like the cold, the snotty uptight people, the dirt and crowds. But for the sake of their daughter she moved there.

My parents were both descendants of Basques who fled Spain in the 1870s along with hordes of others in the fallout of the Third Carlist War and the resultant final termination of their foruak. They were not Mexicans. Incidentally, my parents liked them individually, but would also often refer to them collectively in private conversation as los hunos (the Huns), and their children as los motitos (the little motorcycles) because of the peculiar timbre their voices tend to take when upset or distressed.

My brother actually quit his job in Los Angeles as an urban planner and moved to the East so his kids could attend better schools-that is how terrible his perception of the school system is there, private or public.

Your brother is a smart man. L. A. U. S. D. schools are where dreams go to die. So bitter was my experience there that both my wife and I have resolved to home school all our children. (She, fortunately, attended a school system in a much higher income area and as a result enjoyed a superior experience to mine.)

As for killing drug dealers, not everyone is willing to clean chicken coups. Where there is demand, there will be retail suppliers.

Sad, but very true.

Robert Dolan: “Christianity was only recently cucked.”

No. It has been anti-racist from the beginning.

Robert Dolan: “God made the nations, the different kinds of people, with different languages.
That’s what the Bible says.”

Made them from the same material according to the Adam and Eve myth. Further, it’s very clear that the Christian’s obligation is to extend love (agape) to everyone. After all, Christ’s supposed love was for all mankind (John 2:2), and according to Paul (Galatians 3:28), his message was for everyone, regardless of race or gender. Also, Acts 17:26 explicitly states that all men are of one blood (“ex enos aimatos pan ethnos anthropon”) i.e., of the same race.

Robert Dolan: “Christianity has only been cucked for about 100 years.”

Nonsense. America had anti-racist strains in it from its founding 250 years ago. As I mentioned above, even at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, free negroes were citizens and allowed to vote in some of the states. Eventually, its congenital anti-racist sentiments plunged the nation into the Civil War, at the end of which citizenship and full legal equality was granted to the negro by an America that was virtually 100% white and Christian.

Robert Dolan: “For most of Christian history the religion served well as a cohesive group strategy.”

By “white” I mean people of European descent. From the very beginning Christianity elevated Jews (all of the apostles were Jews, as of course was also rabbi Jesus) and other non-whites and devalued racial kinship, i.e., white solidarity. This Christian takeover of the West caused the collapse of civilization in Europe. Christians threw down pagan temples and looted their treasuries, tortured and murdered pagan philosophers, defaced statues of the gods by carving crosses into their faces or breaking off parts of them, cut down pagan sacred groves, burned libraries, and made possession of pagan literature a capital offense. Men such as Charlemagne and Charles Martel killed hundreds of thousands of pagans who wouldn’t convert. This plunge into darkness and illiteracy lasted almost a thousand years. The Christians made the Taliban look like amateurs by comparison. There was no white racial cohesion as a result of Christianity, nor any racial group strategy. Never has been, nor will there ever be.

Keep in mind that I am no Communist supporter nor sympathizer. However, one cannot ignore that its ideals hold potent allure for academics, quite a few elected officials, and an endless horizon of diploma mill fodder. Step onto any American university and college campus today and see for yourself.

If you don’t think the globalist jews seek to compete with God, then you must be
extremely low IQ indeed.

Well, I was going to answer, point by point, but came across:

…..Communism survives, is arguably thriving, proving those “Red elites” ultimately correct…

We have different perceptions of reality, so let’s just agree to disagree and move on.

Navarro is a Basque name. Your parents were what? Mexican immigrants of Basque Spanish origin? Or is that your avatar?

Or were they Armenian? Iranian? From where did they immigrate?

My brother actually quit his job in Los Angeles as an urban planner and moved to the East so his kids could attend better schools-that is how terrible his perception of the school system is there, private or public.

As for drugs, you get tired of hearing that the white working class is being wiped out by this “Drug epidemic” or that “New drug crisis”. First it was crack cocaine in the eighties, then meth in the nineties and now Opoids.

It is wearying. As for killing drug dealers, not everyone is willing to clean chicken coups. Where there is demand, there will be retail suppliers.

You know…hahaha..that’s exactly what the Red elites were saying in the “Communist paradise” in Europe..

Were they wrong? It took several decades for communism to be dismantled in Europe. People who opposed it had no choice but to wait out the historical forces at play. For many, they died believing the system would indeed remain eternal.

Even so, apart from a brief period following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the U. S. S. R., communism and its various sub-ideologies, far from being utterly discredited, has emerged resurgent the past couple of decades in the West. Especially among elites and academics. Communism survives, is arguably thriving, proving those “Red elites” ultimately correct, albeit in a fashion wholly unimagined by them and their sympathizers.

I don’t know what good he is. Maybe he can serve as a bad example.

“The story of The Tower of Babel is a warning against multiculturalism.”

Wrong, but thanks for trying. The story of the Tower of Babel is a warning against presuming to compete with God. All those who were participating in the building started out speaking the same language. God made them speak languages unintelliglible to each other.

Love the jewy comment that whites should not identify as white and nothing can be done, just give up and accept taking it in the butt.

How much does the IDF pay people to push that line of BS?

…. all we can and must do is to preserve those things we love and treasure, pass them down to our immediate families and friends, and in this small way keep the individual flames of learning in the hopes that a distant, better future rekindles them anew.

Something like that.

As for…haha…

..The historical forces at work here cannot be turned back…

You know…hahaha..that’s exactly what the Red elites were saying in the “Communist paradise” in Europe.. You describe how nationalists felt, from ’45 to ’89, there.
What they were thinking in 50’s…feeling in 60’s, 70’s and early to mid-80’s.
It was impossible, then improbable, then hopeless, and then slightly probable.
And then…well, I am sure that around 20 % readers here are slightly aware of what happened then.

I am also sure..sort of…that Westerners, Americans in particular, could do better.
Shorten the period. Make the “transition” faster and better.

Still, as I see it: a long way to get in the proper attitude, let alone acquire necessary expertise.
There are….peculiar….mental blocks there at work.

Not boring, though.

Yep.

Especially:

In his oath of office, the president swears to protect the Constitution, not American whites. The Constitution itself could have limited citizenship and voting to whites only, but did not.

An oversight.
Still, it wouldn’t be hard to do what’s needed, Constitution or not.

The real problem is:

…the majority of them, steeped in their Christian culture of anti-racism, would have considered intolerable and deeply evil.

No easy way of that conundrum….

The White America the author refers to does not exist politically, [being] too atomized and unfocused to be relevant. […] Not only that, the term White is too broad by current definitions to effectively define any type of tribe.

Correct. I find it remarkable that white nationalists and the like themselves reduce “whites” to a monolithic bloc in just the same manner as their opponents across the ideological divide do. It seems to escape their notice that not only is the concept of “whiteness” a false one, but a construct of fairly recent invention.

Prior to the Second World War, the idea of American pan-white unity would have been considered laughable, even offensive to many. Consider H. L. Mencken’s lifelong hatred of WASPs and the French. Or the enduring friction between Protestant Anglo-Saxons and French Catholics in Quebec. It was only after the war, with Central Europe in ruins and its cultures discredited, that the all-American “white” was born: a creature with no community; suspended precariously in an eternal present, with no past as consolation, no future to hope for; whose existence signifies and promises nothing; beholden utterly to and making a religion out of their political, commercial, and sexual appetites; bequeathing only an existential void to their progeny, which yawns ever wider and darker with each passing generation.

Amusingly, the IQ differential they so much whine about it amounts to literally nothing in practic, political influence terms. Yes, IQ alone won’t save you whigger. Neither will “Western values” and your favourite composers. Lobbying will.

Once again, correct. This contemporary obsession with IQ is a curious one, especially given that the people responsible for the postwar unraveling of traditional society have mainly been high-IQ whites. Which is not meant as a criticism of highly refined intellect and capacity for innovation as such. However, society fails to understand that none of those things—high standard of living, individualism, technological innovation—can be accepted for “free”. To put it another way, each advantage and innovation are borne out of an impulse to improve the lot of a people, but also carries with it attendant implications and consequences unforeseen even by creators or their communities. In essence, such things become Faustian pacts which we cannot reverse.

So “whites” can “celebrate” their collective high IQ, but they cannot escape the reality that the disintegration and perversion of the world they had known are being effected by their elite kinfolk.

Lobbying will not help. Nothing can. The historical forces at work here cannot be turned back; to sincerely believe that political lobbying will somehow avert disaster is to indulge in a Canute-like exercise in futility. All we can do—and this will strike some as being very cold comfort—is to discard superhero-esque delusions of “saving” the world. Instead, all we can and must do is to preserve those things we love and treasure, pass them down to our immediate families and friends, and in this small way keep the individual flames of learning in the hopes that a distant, better future rekindles them anew.