RSS
Take up the White Man’s burden
And reap his old reward,
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guardRudyard Kipling, The White Man’s Burden
Along with ‘Whiteness Studies’ and ‘Black Lives Matter,’ the concept of ‘decolonization’ is currently rampant in Western institutions of higher education. In the most recent example, academics at England’s University of Cambridge are considering how to implement a call from a small group of Black and leftist undergraduates to “decolonize” its English literature syllabus by taking in more Black and ethnic minority writers and bringing ‘post-colonial thought’ (a branch of critical theory) to its existing curriculum. Seen in the context of similar agitation at Yale last year, ongoing “Rhodes Must Fall” agitation in South Africa, the removal of portraits of White founders from King’s College London, and attacks on statues of prominent White historical figures in the United States, the ‘decolonization’ effort is clearly part of an escalating craze for removing White presence and reducing White space throughout the West. This reduction of White space is occurring in demographic, cultural, and even historical areas; the latter involving a ludicrous ‘Blackwashing’ of periods of European history which were overwhelmingly monocultural, with gross exaggerations of non-White presence in places like Roman Britain.
Today, White nations are being demonstrably colonized by non-Whites, White culture is increasingly marginalized (or dismissed as non-existent), and White history is being rewritten to support and advance the agenda of contemporary multiculturalism. Whites are thus abused as colonizers while simultaneously being subjected to an unprecedented and multifaceted colonization. This jarring incongruence between rhetoric and reality requires an interrogation of what is meant by terms like “colonize,” “empire,” and even “genocide,” particularly in regard to the political uses they have come to acquire, and also an interrogation of what we understand by historical processes of colonization. It is argued here that the growing clamor for ‘decolonization,’ like Whiteness studies, exists only to encourage and facilitate an aggressive anti-White discourse.
Several years ago I had the opportunity to attend a conference on ‘genocide studies,’ during which I was introduced to the work of the leading academic in this field, the Australian scholar A. Dirk Moses. Despite his last name (which apparently is also English and Welsh as well as Jewish), Moses evidences no discernible Jewish ancestry, his father John Moses being a notable Anglican priest and his mother Ingrid a full-blooded German from Lower Saxony. Moses has built his career around broad explorations of the themes of colonialism and genocide, and the relationship between the two. Although he wasn’t present at this particular conference, I was very much interested in those presentations concerning his work, which I have since come to regard as being generally of a very high quality and, most importantly, wide-ranging and devoid of the mawkish (not to mention mendacious) moralism that often saturates Jewish academic treatments of these themes. To my mind Moses remains one of the most essential writers on colonialism, conquest and genocide as perennial features of the human existence, and I would have a difficult time engaging in discussion on these subjects with someone unfamiliar with his work. Importantly, Moses argues that terms like “colonization” have fluid rather than fixed definitions, especially in their discursive usage, and stresses that the meaning of such terms as “colonization” and “imperialism” have rather been adapted in recent decades in order to facilitate a political agenda — to condemn European nations and to question Western moral legitimacy.
For example, in his introduction to Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (2008), Moses contends that conquest and occupation are human universals rather than the preserve of uniquely evil European peoples and their culture. He writes that “‘Empire,’ ‘colony,’ and ‘genocide’ are keywords particularly laden with controversial connotations,” but that “few are the societies that were not once part of empires, whether its core or periphery. Few are the societies that were not the product of a colonization process, whether haphazard or planned.”[1]A.D. Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (New York: Berghahn, 2008), p.3. Despite the universal presence of conquest, displacement, and domination in human history, Moses notes that the usage of the terminology of these themes has come to focus inordinately on the recent European past:
‘Empire’ and ‘colony’ are viewed through exclusively nineteenth- and twentieth-century lenses and have become words of implicit opprobrium because they connote European domination of the non-European world. … ‘Imperialism’ was coined in the middle of the nineteenth century to criticize ambitions for domination and expansion. A century later, to accuse a country of colonialism was to condemn it for enslaving and exploiting another.[2]Ibid, p.4.
(A.D. Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (New York: Berghahn, 2008), p.3.)
When utilizing these keywords then, modern ethnic activists strategically take the European expansionism of the nineteenth century as their starting point, excluding many prior centuries during which non-White participation in conquest, slavery, expansion, and imperialism was at least equally in evidence. Colonialism has thus ceased to be regarded in modern social and academic discourse as a human universal, easily explained by evolutionary impulses, and has instead come to be regarded as a dynamic in which uniquely exploitative Whites disturb the putatively utopian existence of non-Whites (a myth bolstered and promoted by Boasian anthropology), before subjecting them to unimaginably horrific treatment. Because of the lop-sided nature of contemporary discourse on colonialism and empire, Moses notes that nothing less than “the moral legitimacy of Western civilization is at stake” when defining and utilizing these keywords.[3]Ibid, p.5.
(A.D. Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (New York: Berghahn, 2008), p.3.)
One of the most interesting, and frustrating, aspects of this questioning of Western moral legitimacy is that Whites have allowed themselves to be subjected to it, sometimes even encouraging it. On some levels it would be comforting to attribute this self-flagellation exclusively to very recent alien influences, but the truth is more complex. Europeans may have had unprecedented success in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in expanding their spheres of material interest and cultural influence, but they also engaged in an unprecedented level of self-critique because of it. Moses suggests that White participation or co-operation in the questioning of the moral legitimacy of Western civilization is in part a “culmination of a long tradition of European legal and political critique of colonization and empire. … European theologians, philosophers and lawyers have been debating the morality of occupation since the Spanish conquest of the Americas in the sixteenth century.”[4]Ibid, p.9.
(A.D. Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (New York: Berghahn, 2008), p.3.)
This “long tradition of European legal and political critique of colonization and empire” could be read as evidence in support of Kevin MacDonald’s theory of ‘pathological altruism’ in European society, or the idea that Europeans have uniquely constructed their societies to place extreme emphasis on moral conformity and the rights of the individual. Whites (and the legitimacy of their civilization) are thus especially vulnerable in modern discussions of colonization, slavery, and empire, not because their actions in these areas were particularly nefarious, but because they are the only successful ethnic group in these spheres willing to subject itself to such a critique, not only by others within the ethnic group, but also by ethnic outsiders claiming moral superiority. Perhaps best encapsulated in Kipling’s poem “The White Man’s Burden“(1899), written in response to the Philippine-American War, the European experience of expansion and empire has always been double-sided, combining a love of exploration and glory with uneasy introspection prompted, as Kipling put it, by “the judgment of your peers.” It is particularly telling that in the course of hundreds of conversations with figures at all levels of the Alt Right (according to all media hype, a bastion of aggressive ethnic chauvinism), I have yet to come across a single individual advocating an expansionist or colonial policy — the preferred option being a total segregation from non-Whites and a policy of non-interference in their affairs.
Of course, one of the main reasons for our contemporary aversion to colonialism is that the collapse of empire has been catastrophic for us as a people — not in terms of lost resources, but because we immediately became subject to reverse colonization. Although accelerated by hostile alien influences, it remains indisputable that Europeans conducted their empires, particularly in their latter bureaucratic stages, in accordance with the principle that the colonized acquired a status nominally indistinct from each other as well as the conquering national/ethnic group. As Enoch Powell expressed it in relation to the British empire:
From the middle of the eighteenth century onwards, notwithstanding the loss of the American colonies, there occurred a striking expansion outside the United Kingdom of the dominions of the Crown, until those born within a quarter of the land surface of the globe were born within the allegiance, and were subsequently British subjects undistinguishable from one another in the law of the United Kingdom.[5]Quoted in M. Cross and M. Keith (eds), Racism, the City and the State (London: Routledge, 1993), p.181.
In Britain, this led to an initial mass influx of non-Whites from the colonies between the passage of the British Nationality Act (1948), which defined British citizenship in accordance with the principle outlined by Powell, and the Commonwealth Immigration Act (1962), which only moderately slowed the tide. An almost identical scenario played out in France between 1945 and 1974, and in the Netherlands, which took in, between 1945 and 1990, around 730,000 migrants from the former Dutch colonies of Indonesia, Surinam, and the Dutch Antilles. It should be stated that the principles outlined by Powell were almost certainly always intended to remain just that — principles, but the vulnerability was nonetheless made available for exploitation in the form of mass non-White adoption of European citizenships. A similar vulnerability of principle may be observed in the jus soli interpretation of citizenship employed by the United States, which has been equally subjected to countless exploitations.
Another reason why even ethnocentric Whites have developed a strong aversion to colonial ambitions is that our culture has intensively absorbed and internalized the anti-imperialism of leftist intellectuals like Sartre and Fanon, for whom all empires (excluding of course the Communist ones) entailed the exploitation and degradation of indigenous peoples. Even those of us who may not necessarily believe this to be the case, and in fact see many positives for indigenous peoples in their subjugation to European rule, fail to confidently articulate such a position because of the overwhelming social and cultural success of the leftist argument. This is despite often incongruous pockets of support for European imperialism, notably that of Raphael Lemkin, the Jewish coiner of the term ‘genocide,’ who asserted that empire enabled the diffusion of culture, enabling weaker societies “to adopt the institutions of more efficient ones or become absorbed by them because they better fulfil basic needs.”[6]Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History, p.11.
Scholarly titles offering a full-blooded apologetic for European imperialism, such as The Triumph of the West (1985) by J.M. Roberts, would struggle to get published in today’s academic climate, but Roberts’s honest comments on the dualistic nature of European colonialism, and ultimate rejection of perpetual guilt, bear repeating:
If we wish to reassure ourselves about our own moral sensibility, we need only to recognize that the bearers of western civilisation have often behaved with deliberate cruelty and ruthlessness towards other peoples, that some of them plundered their victims of wealth and their environment of resources, and that still others, even when more scrupulous or well-meaning, casually released shattering side-effects on societies and cultures they neither understood nor tried to understand. For centuries, many Europeans and many European peoples outside Europe showed astonishing cultural arrogance towards the rest of humanity. In doing so, they behaved much as men of power have always behaved in any vigorous civilization. What was different was just that they had so much more power than any earlier conquerors, and even more convincing grounds for feeling they were entitled to use it. All that said, if we are seriously concerned about our own sensitivity to ethical nuance, we ought also to recognize that administrators, missionaries, teachers were often right in thinking that they brought valuable gifts to non-Europeans. Those gifts included gentler standards of behavior towards the weak, the ideal of a more objective justice, the intellectual rigor of science, its fruits in better health and technology, and many other good things.[7]J.M. Roberts, The Triumph of the West (London: Guild Publishing, 1985), p.430.
It goes without saying that the “good things” mentioned by Roberts are excluded entirely from current discussions of colonialism, which forfeit honest confrontation with the past in favor of pursuing the promotion of ‘White guilt,’ excusing the failures of predominantly African populations (non-African former colonies like Singapore appear to have succeeded greatly both during and after their experience of European empire), and facilitating ethnic revenge. These ambitions have of course been nurtured in the West’s non-White populations for some time by the same cliques in academia, the media, and the wider culture. In just one particularly egregious example, in The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam Douglas Murray cites the Jewish academic, novelist, and journalist Will Self as telling one television audience that British identity was nothing more than “going overseas and subjugating black and brown people and taking their stuff and the fruits of their labours. That was a core part of the British identity, was the British Empire.”[8]D. Murray, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), p.33.
There is of course a substantial overlap not only in the self-comforting content of Jewish and African revenge fantasies, but also in their narrative structure. Just as narratives of Jewish victimhood rely on strict definitions of anti-Semitism (perpetrated by irrational Whites against innocent Jews), and a cropped timeline of events (often starting ‘spontaneously’ in 1933, Tsarist Russia, or the Crusades), the colonial grievance industry relies on strict definitions of colonialism (perpetrated by Whites and universally exploitative and abusive) and a cropped history of imperialism that begins only with the European age of expansion. The similarity may be regarded as due to the fact that Jews have been dominant in the production of ‘White guilt’ academic literature on empire and slavery (an excellent example being Peter Kolchin’s American Slavery, 1619–1877), as well as popular cultural products of the same timbre (e.g. Steven Spielberg’s Amistad). Also, just as Jews are often portrayed as uniquely innocent, Blacks are today said to be incapable of ‘racism.’
Such simplified narratives of both colonialism and anti-Semitism imply that Blacks and Jews are incapable of ambition, greed, cruelty or hostility toward outgroups — an intellectual position worthy of ridicule were it not for the fact it enjoys substantial, if logically inexplicable, status and influence in modern culture and academia.
Equally understated in contemporary discussions of colonial scenarios is the role of native elites, an area that I am particularly interested in. I’ve long regarded the Jewish presence in Europe and European societies as a unique form of colonialism (though without the “good things” mentioned by Roberts), and this presence has been demonstrably reliant from its very early beginnings on co-operation with native European elites, as well as being very tenuous during times of political instability. Similarly, A. Dirk Moses warns against the adoption of narratives of colonialism which “regard the encounter between European and Indigene as grossly asymmetric, thereby playing down both indigenous agency and the often-tenuous European grip on power, particularly in the early stages of colonization. In German Southwest Africa, for instance, the German governor was initially reliant on local chiefs.”[9]Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History, p.16. Moses has stated elsewhere that Germans during the Weimar Republic “regarded themselves as an indigenous people who were being slowly colonized by foreigners, namely Jews.”[10]A. D. Moses, ‘Colonialism,’ in P. Hayes & J.K. Roth, The Oxford Handbook of Holocaust Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), p.72. Even Raphael Lemkin himself once stated that colonialism involved a situation whereby the subjugated group was “a majority controlled by a powerful minority,” perhaps missing entirely the profundity of such a statement when applied to the activities of his own people.[11]Ibid, p.9.
(A. D. Moses, ‘Colonialism,’ in P. Hayes & J.K. Roth, The Oxford Handbook of Holocaust Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), p.72.) The power of the minority often intermingled with the power of self-interested native elites. Thus, just as European understandings of the Jewish Question would be woefully incomplete without a confrontation of the issue of venal and treasonous European elites, so the attempts by post-colonial ethnic groups to place exclusive blame for their grievances on Europeans are equally inadequate.
Similarities between the European experience under Jewish influence, and the African experience under European empire are of course limited. As stated above, European influence in Africa was a net benefit, bringing manifold cultural, social, and technological benefits to African societies. No similar claim could be made about Jewish influence at any point in European history. Nor should Europeans get into the contemporary African habit of engaging in a morality-based ‘blame game’ as a means of trying to ‘decolonize’ our own nations — either of Jewish influence, or the presence of millions of newcomers from all corners of the earth. Unlike Africans, our people are remarkably successful, often against all odds and despite the negative machinations of outsiders and the corruption of their own elites. If we accept Moses’s assertion that colonization and imperialism represent a kind of pinnacle in the universal human participation in competition, then we should be wary of imbuing that competition with too much redundant moralism.
The avoidance of moralism is perhaps even more necessary for a people such as ourselves, for whom moral concerns are primary; a kind of racial Achilles heel. Simply put, we are unlikely to find success in wielding a weapon to which we are uniquely vulnerable. Our struggle against invaders, both old and new, should be based on the obvious truth that it is quite simply in our interests to defend the homogenous nature of our territory as a means of promoting a safe and successful future for our children. This is where our ‘moral’ code should begin and end.
Finally, it is worth remarking upon the rhetorical bankruptcy and transparent agenda of slogans calling for the ‘decolonization’ of academia, English literature, and our public spaces. Decolonization, by almost any definition, implies that a ‘thing’ existed in some state prior to colonization. Looked at bluntly, a complete decolonization of African society would entail a total return to the pre-imperial state of the African tribes, stripped of the positive cultural ‘diffusions’ described by Lemkin, affirmed by Moses, and praised by Roberts. There is almost certainly not a single African alive today, either in Africa or living among other peoples, who would willingly engage in such a total ‘decolonization.’ For one thing, it would imply an enormous loss in population given that the recent dramatic upsurge in African population has been fueled by Western technology and medicine.
Applied within White societies or to academic subjects of White origin such as English literature, ‘decolonization’ is technically impossible, at least from the Black perspective, because both the prior and existing state of the ‘thing’ is White, technologically and culturally advanced, etc. What Blacks truly mean, whether they understand the dialectical tricks devised by those inciting them or not, is that they want a colonization. They want to colonize White nations, White spaces, White literature with a Black or multi-ethnic presence that was never there at any prior time. Efforts to invent or exaggerate, for example, a sub-Saharan presence in Roman Britain are intended to construct a mythical multicultural ‘prior state’ that ‘decolonization’ will return us to. But these are malicious fictions. The discourse of ‘decolonization’ is simply a mask for the ongoing colonization of the West.
Notes
[1] A.D. Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History (New York: Berghahn, 2008), p.3.
[2] Ibid, p.4.
[3] Ibid, p.5.
[4] Ibid, p.9.
[5] Quoted in M. Cross and M. Keith (eds), Racism, the City and the State (London: Routledge, 1993), p.181.
[6] Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History, p.11.
[7] J.M. Roberts, The Triumph of the West (London: Guild Publishing, 1985), p.430.
[8] D. Murray, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam (London: Bloomsbury, 2017), p.33.
[9] Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History, p.16.
[10] A. D. Moses, ‘Colonialism,’ in P. Hayes & J.K. Roth, The Oxford Handbook of Holocaust Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), p.72.
[11] Ibid, p.9.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Quote “Colonialism has thus ceased to be regarded in modern social and academic discourse as a human universal, easily explained by evolutionary impulses”
I ask for evidence that colonialism is a universal easily explained by Darwin. If society rewards greed then people will be greedy. It is capitalism that breeds evil not the human.
Irony is that people who claim to be post-colonial immediately adopt white SJW thought from their college professors.
If they really were decolonizing their minds, they would reject western values altogether and replace them with their own native values. Except most of these people know nothing of their own values and thus hide under the alleged universalism of western ideas, making them supreme hypocrites.
As our population becomes less white, however, more and more whites will be forced to step away from this painting and view it with fresh eyes. They will have no choice, given that the greater presence of unruly nonwhites will make viewing this painting even from a moderate distance increasingly dangerous. Such nonwhites possess the same insecurities as the Jews but tend to be more violent and totalitarian in expressing them. As their power and confidence swells, however, these nonwhites will increase their efforts to thought-police whites into coming closer to the painting or shutting their eyes to it entirely, which is tantamount to complete submission. They will do this through threats and they will do this through violence, and they will continue to be egged on or ignored by our elites, Jewish or otherwise. In any event, a white population blinded from the Truth, unable to control its destiny, and completely denuded of its fighting spirit will not survive long. – https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/08/a-perspective-as-wide-as-the-world/
The case for colonialism
by Bruce Gilley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Gilley
– http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01436597.2017.1369037
Archived Abstract:
– http://archive.is/Q0BKX
ABOLISH ALL SCIENCE ‘COS ITS RACIST! -SJW University Student
Video Link
Its honestly sickening to see this level of science denialism in universities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdmann_Isert
He was appointed Chief Surgeon to Christiansborg (Osu, Accra) in Danish Guinea, arriving there in 1783. He sought this position because of his burning desire to collect plant specimens from West Africa. Once there, realizing that the inhabitants had no written language, he felt it his duty to record – for future generations – details of all aspects of life on the Gold Coast, as he observed them, thus creating an ethnographic, as well as botanical, work.
Why were our forefathers not sensible enough to establish plantations right there in the fertile continent of Africa; plantations for sugar, coffee, cacao, cotton and other articles that had become so necessary in Europe?
“…if we had come to them with an olive branch in our hand instead of murderous steel, the natives would willingly have given us access to the best and most fertile parts of their lands, areas which for untold years had been lying desolate.”
These African people would have helped us in freedom and, for low wages would have given us greatness and riches with no offense against nature, or our personal and national consciences.
Convinced of the feasibility of the plantations, an edict was issued in the name of King Christian VII by his son Prince Frederick (who was then Regent because of his father’s mental illness) on 16 March 1792, which came into effect on 1 January 1803. Denmark-Norway thus bears the honour of being the first established sovereign state to prohibit the transatlantic slave trade. But ultimately, the experimental plantations proved to be unsuccessful.
Letters on West Africa and the Slave Trade. Paul Erdmann Isert’s Journey to Guinea and the Carribean Islands in Columbia (1788) https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Erdmann-Journey-Carribean-Columbia/dp/9988647018
Source: https://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/493514/THE-DANISH-NATIONAL-ARCHIVES-Timeline-on-the-Danish-slave-trade/
The World Bank contact for Ghana is located on:
– http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/contacts
Beyond the Paycheck Placer Dome Care Project in Southern Africa
Video Link
Placer Dome’s Care project was the first private sector project to ever win a World Bank Development Innovation Award.
“If society rewards greed then people will be greedy. It is capitalism that breeds evil not the human.”
No such thing as a greedy socialist then. Got it.
It was because the Allies refused to surrender to Germany and Japan, give up their empires, and acquiesce to a new German order in Europe, even though they would have been able to keep their homelands and many of their holdings. They were too greedy and proud, and rather than giving up their empires and their non-white imperial subjects, wanted to keep them and use the subjects as troops against the Axis. They basically gave up citizenship to their subjects when they decided to rely on them for their survival as sovereign states.
“Colonialism has thus ceased to be regarded in modern social and academic discourse as a human universal, easily explained by evolutionary impulses”
Sure, it’s universal, but the genesis is not morally content free evolution, but Original Sin.
The Alt Right’s disapproval of colonialism is not just practical but is the result of an instinctual recognition that the alleged “good things” of colonialism such as modernity, development, and science are not good at all but are the supreme dangers whose telos is the inexorable annihilation of man and being.
Thanks for publishing this thoughtful, well-written, and courageous essay. I have never heard of Mr Joyce before, but will seek out his work in the future. Kudos to Mr Unz and his Review.
Across the planet it is the cities that have colonized the land, through the “democratic” process. The entire US has been colonized by the District of Columbia, just think of the term “fly-over country”.
The status quo will continue until the jews are disarmed of their primary weapon: control of money itself. This time could be rapidly approaching and when the EBT cards aren’t reloaded and government stops spewing government cheese, then even these affirmative action intellectuals will be busy colonizing Walmarts, Malls and gated communities.
The idea that colonisation is just a white phenomenon is nonsense.
The Aztecs in about a hundred years colonised, by force, large territories in what now is S America.
After the colonisation there was a good government, food storage and distribution.
There is a lot te be said against western colonisation, but two remarks.
Someone from N Africa said in a documentary a few years ago ‘in colonial times we were better off’.
The income per capita in the Dutch East Indies in 1940 Indonesia reached again in the seventies.
Life imitates art ….
Video Link
…
Is there any evidence for your side? All societies and peoples that I know of spent plenty of resources taking things from their neighbors.
That’s the reason no Marxist nation ever conquered another nation or acted to destrroy any group of people it ruled.
A most excellent essay.
Except for the Jewish point; their intellectual contribution makes them a net contributor.
Colonialism is bad for whites. When whites (meaning peoples of European culture and language via genetics) practice colonialism on ‘other’ whites, they are destroying white culture. When whites practice colonialism on non-whites, they produce more and more whites who feel sorry for the non-whites. Eventually, the bleeding hearts create a fantasy about the non-whites as especially pure and insightful, and then they make all whites the ogre.
Here in Europe, the aversion to colonialism came, not so much from moral principles, as from the European concept of the nation-state, of which decolonisation is in fact a logical corollary. The concept of the nation-state flowed from the principles of the French Revolution and has been spreading slowly across Europe ever since. In its pure form, the concept of the nation-state is that each and every European ethnic group (nation) is entitled to have its own sovereign state, which should embrace all members of that group. Even today, of course, very few European countries are nation-states in the pure form. Many have at least some small ethnic minorities and some ethnic groups are split between different states. In the 19th century, when the multi-ethnic empires dominated the European scene and when the word “nation” meant little more than the population of the state, no one saw anything wrong with colonialism. After WWI, when the concept of the nation-state really took hold and “intra-European” colonialism began to fall apart, the European-educated elites of the colonies began to say “why not us?”. In terms of European political principles, there was no way of saying no to that. All the colonial elites were asking was to do in their own indigenous territories what we Europeans were doing in our indigenous territories. After WWII, that led to the wave of decolonisation that we saw so that, nowadays, the only European empire still in existence is the Russian Federation.
The problem is that the European concept of the nation-state cannot be applied to the white settler states (the US, Australia …). They are not, and never can be, nation-states and, unlike European whites, the descendants of the settlers are not the indigenous people of their modern territory. There is no existential threat to white people in Europe, but a South Africa-style scenario is always possible in the settler states as other ethnic groups, whether the indigenous people or non-European immigrants, become predominant. The white population of the settler states are going to have to make their peace in whatever way they think appropriate with the land to which their ancestors brought them and with the other people who now live there. Human civilisation is an infinitely slowly forward-moving perpetual motion machine. There is no “end of history” and no turning back. Without their being any need whatsoever to debate the rights and wrongs of colonialism, therefore, trying to turn back the clock to the colonial era is quite simply impossible.
I think despite all of the black washing going on there’s still black history in Europe that is not acknowledged or given the level of attention due.
Take Pushkin’s great-grandfather, a black man, who ruled over Estonia about 250 years ago. No one in Estonia seems to have heard of him as far as I can tell. But all Baltic school children should be taught about the life of this black man.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abram_Petrovich_Gannibal
By all means, let’s remove the awful White presence, but let’s make it real. No more White presence for your electricity, no more White presence for your water and sewer, for farms, for transportation, energy supplies, remove EVERYTHING White. Why should they have the behind-the-scenes Whiteness-effect (lights and running water, food, a roof, all the things Blacks could NEVER put together for themselves, ever) along with a complete subjugation of the very people that keep things comfortable for those who would slay us? Is that not the very embodiment of the slavery they claim we still impose? Well they can go fuck themselves. And shame on the Whites that cooperate.
Fine. Just boot all blacks from the institutions they consider ‘colonized’. Let them build their own institutions from the ground up. We know they can’t govern themselves in Africa and urban US areas, so I doubt they’d be successful at that either.
If the Russian Federation is an empire, then how are Spain, the UK, Denmark, France and the Netherlands not empires too? Let’s throw Italy in while we’re at it.
If “capitalism” and colonialism was / is so horrible, then why is it that the former ‘colonialized’ people try their hardest to get into the “capitalist”/ ‘colonial’ countries?
Except he wasn’t black.
No surprise that Ignatiev is jewish.
”Ignatiev, the son of Jewish immigrants from Russia, was raised in Philadelphia.[4] He attended the University of Pennsylvania but dropped out after three years.
Under the name Noel Ignatin, he joined the Communist Party USA in January 1958, but in August left (along with Theodore W. Allen and Harry Haywood) to help form the Provisional Organizing Committee to Reconstitute the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party (POC). He was expelled from the POC in 1966.[5]
Later he became involved in the Students for a Democratic Society. When that organization fractured in the late 1960s, Ignatiev became part of the Third-worldist and Maoist New Communist Movement, forming the group Sojourner Truth Organization in 1970. Unlike other groups in the New Communist Movement, the STO and Ignatiev were also heavily influenced by the ideas of Trinidadian writer C. L. R. James.
For 20 years, Ignatiev worked in a Chicago steel mill in the manufacturing of farming equipment and electrical components. A Marxist activist, he was involved in strikes by the mostly-African-American laborers of the steel mill. In 1984, he was laid off from the steel mill, approximately a year after an arrest on charges of attacking a strike-breaker’s car with a paint bomb
The real denial is the left’s denial of the obvious, observable low IQs of blacks & browns.
In EVERY instance where blacks are in great numbers, control the governments of cities, counties, regions, states, countries, & continents we ALWAYS see:
massive murder rates
massive crime in general
degraded property
massive disease, especially STDs
massive drug abuse
general filth, squalor
massive, unable to support their own children, birthrates
massive youth pregnancies rates
massive school dropout rates
incredibly low IQs & test scores
violence as a way of life
fathers nowhere to be found
Andrew Joyce is not only a gifted writer, but a first-rate intellectual. Few can deflate pc cant with his dexterity. And he’s always prepared to blow back exhaust from the ever-present Zionist fog machine. Joyce pops the pc bubble wherever he goes. And he’s prolific. The endless and fraudulent sermons that rain down on Americans concerning race, immigration and ‘anti-Semitism’ are no match for his scholarly rebuttals.
For years I have savored Joyce’s analyses on the The Occidental Observer. It’s gratifying to see that he is arousing plenty of attention here on UNZ.
And on it goes. ..where it ends no one knows.
NYTimes: Can My Children Be Friends With White People?
By EKOW N. YANKAHNOV. 11, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/11/opinion/sunday/interracial-friendship-donald-trump.html?ref=oembed
” Donald Trump’s election has made it clear that I will teach my boys the lesson generations old, one that I for the most part nearly escaped. I will teach them to be cautious, I will teach them suspicion, and I will teach them distrust. Much sooner than I thought I would, I will have to discuss with my boys whether they can truly be friends with white people.”
*Ekow N. Yankah is a professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University
NYT Op-Ed: White People Are Violent Racists | The American …
Ekow N. Yankah, graduate not of Baton Rouge Community College, but of Columbia and Oxford, teaches law at Yeshiva University. He lives in the West Village, … theamericanconservative.com/dreher/yankah-whites-violent
California NAACP Is Pushing To Remove ‘Racist’ Star-Spangled Banner As National Anthem
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/california-naacp-pushing-remove-racist-195524080.html
’The California chapter of the NAACP is pushing for the removal of “The Star-Spangled Banner” as the national anthem, blaming it for much of controversy surrounding NFL players’ decision to kneel during the singing of it, The Sacramento Bee reports.
The group also plans on doing what they can to get Colin Kaepernick hired by another NFL team.
“”“”“We owe a lot of it to Kaepernick,” said NAACP California chapter president Alice Huffman. “I think all this controversy about the knee will go away once the song is removed.”
“”“”Huffman called the national anthem “racist” and “anti-black,” citing the lyrics of the third stanza during an interview with a local CBS station
An excellent and brave piece by Andrew Joyce for which we again must thank Ron Unz for hosting.
I would merely like to add a few comments. First to add to Roberts comments, we add those of Thomas Pakenham at the end of his Scramble for Africa. ‘Yet how many Africans would want to turn the clock back to the 1880s. The steamers and airlines of the world now bring material benefits to the 47 new states of the continent on a scale undreamt of a century ago. Best of all Europe has given Africa the aspiration for freedom and human dignity..”
Indeed! King Leopold’s statue is back in Kinshasa. The first thing the Eritreans did on realizing their independence in 1991 was to rebuild the old Italian railway from Massawa to Asmara. In many countries there is a movement to protect the colonial architectural heritage. And if you talk to Africans in Africa, many are appreciative of what Europeans left behind and how scathing they are of their own elites who join the blame fest. As one Zimbabwean said to me ‘you know things are going to go downhill when they start renaming the towns and the streets.’ That was in 1993 and you know where Zimbabwe is now.
As Robert Weissberg pointed out in a recent piece, those who climb most enthusiastically on the anti-colonial and racist bandwagon are African-Americans and second and third generation black immigrants who have never set foot in Africa nor have any intention to do so.
We whites are responsible for this. We accept this continuing denigration of ourselves, our culture and our achievements. We accept marginalization of our achievements by wildly exaggerating the role of blacks (the film Hidden Figures is a great example) and we never stop excusing black failure by hoisting the petard of racism and discrimination. If we are to start to get minorities to respect us, we better start respecting ourselves.
I am just not clear on what constitutes white culture.
There are exceptions like Prince George’s County, for example, and Barbados, etc.: https://www.unz.com/isteve/tyler-cowen-interviews-raj-chetty-on-my-critique/#comment-1888686
Why Is Barbados So Civilized?
Remember that Barbados was the jewel in the crown of the British colonies, and was a colony until it was granted independence in 1966. Contrary to contemporary opinion, colonialism, especially the English variety, was (compared to the governments ruling in former colonies today), a very effective and successful system of government. – https://www.unz.com/isteve/why-is-barbados-so-civilized/#comment-1956532
I think an important distinction has to me made between Catholic/French/Belgian, etc. and Protestant/British/Dutch, etc. colonies here, when it comes to the promotion or prohibition of birth control, etc. and what kind of effect this has had on the difference in observed levels of civility and violence these nations exhibit even today. In my experience, even majority-African populations can be relatively civilized and prosperous if they have the combination and follow the formula of a lower fertility rate and a higher median age population. This demographic combination has a civilizing and pacifying effect on any culture and people, no matter the genetic, racial predisposition towards aggression, impulsivity, etc. due to a higher prevalence of “warrior gene” (low-activity MAOA alleles) carriers in certain populations: https://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-worlds-iq-86/#comment-2056086
This, incidentally, probably also explains why Hispanics born in the U.S. are more criminal on average than Hispanic immigrants; they are simply much younger, and therefore more unruly, rebellious, risk-taking, etc. U.S. born Hispanics’ median age is 19, whereas foreign-born U.S. Hispanics’ median age is 40, according to Pew Research.
Source: http://www.pewhispanic.org/ph_2015-03_statistical-portrait-of-hispanics-in-the-united-states-2013_current-09/
Youth Bulge: A Demographic Dividend or a Demographic Bomb in Developing Countries?
http://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/youth-bulge-a-demographic-dividend-or-a-demographic-bomb-in-developing-countries
The Effects of ‘Youth Bulge’ on Civil Conflicts
http://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/youth-bulge-a-demographic-dividend-or-a-demographic-bomb-in-developing-countries
Compare Protestant/British Barbados’ fertility rate history (currently it has a fertility rate of ~1.84):
Source: https://en.actualitix.com/country/brb/barbados-birth-rate.php
to Catholic/French Haiti’s fertility rate history (currently it has a fertility rate of ~2.8):
Source: https://en.actualitix.com/country/hti/haiti-birth-rate.php
Throughout the 1920s, Stopes and other feminist pioneers, including Dora Russell and Stella Browne, played a major role in breaking down taboos about sex and increasing knowledge, pleasure and improved reproductive health. Stopes was particularly influential in helping emerging birth control movements in a number of British colonies.[47] – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_birth_control#Modern_birth_control_movement
In France, the 1920 Birth Law contained a clause that criminalized dissemination of birth-control literature.[56] That law, however, was annulled in 1967 by the Neuwirth Law, thus authorizing contraception, which was followed in 1975 with the Veil Law. Women fought for reproductive rights and they helped end the nation’s ban on birth control in 1965.[57] In 1994, 5% of French women aged 20 to 49 who were at risk of unintended pregnancy did not use contraception.[58] – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_birth_control#Late_20th_century
Reasons for extremely high fertility
rates in Syria can be explained from a
cultural as well as a sociopolitical per-
spective. One explanation to the high fer-
tility rates especially before the 1980s da-
tes back to the early 20th century when
Syria was under the French mandate. The
French banned contraception and abor-
tion, following policies they enforced in
other colonies and in France itself. These
policies, which in no way countered the
Syrian preference for large families,
remained in effect even after Syria gained
its independence. – http://www.bioetica.ro/index.php/arhiva-bioetica/article/download/44/44
I had a detailed and contentious discussion/debate on this particular topic and what role it has played in the war in Syria, in the following comments thread: I believe demographics is the answer, because Iran took population growth and control more seriously than Syria et al. This is not tinfoil-hattery, this is a sober and objective analysis of demographics, economics, political corruption, resource availability, etc. – https://www.unz.com/jpetras/how-billionaires-become-billionaires/#comment-2043743
Completely unacceptable behaviour. If there are “credible threats” then the police should get involved. Retiring an article is not on, because that’s the end of everything.
“that I know” is the key to your comment – you obviously do not know of any of the peoples that lived lives in harmony with nature and their fellows.
I think your name Wally suits you! If people have very little and the neighbour has lots then why would you not seek more?
Hi Wally,
Me again. Have your read about IQ tests? Do you know that nurture plays a huge role in outcomes? Do you know that IQ does not measure innate intelligence? What is your IQ BTW? Maybe not much more than the poor downtrodden blacks and brownies that you mention.
It’s all about gimmedats and free cookies.
If these people had any pride, they would set up their own decolonized institutions and have drug-fuelled hippie feasts till 04:00 every single day. Then they could retreat to their schoolrooms and study books of 15 pages written in reduced vocabulary. After 5 years of that, finding a job in the ghetto should be easy.
I am sure that you would be the first to tell me that there has never been a successful socialist regime. What I can tell you though is that you probably have no idea what socialism means. Whether people that call themselves socialists are greedy or not is irrelevant anyway – the issue is what the system encourages – capitalism encourages greed, greedy people thrive. in socialism greedy people would not thrive.
Noel Ignatiev is a white man, espousing the genocide of white men.
On the darker side, we’re talking textbook case for a delusional identity crisis.
On the lighter side, we’re talking great material for a stand-up comic routine.
So why do they have so little?
So you are saying low IQ people know nothing about ‘nurture’.
I know all about IQ tests. They are the best predictor of outcome there is.
Just look at a globe.
My IQ is 152, yours?
Touche.
So called “socialism” is the very definition of failure.
If you disagree, then please give us an example of a successful “socialist” country.
All the available evidence would seem to suggest otherwise.
Mr. Joyce. Another interesting and thoughtful essay. But I have to challenge you on one point.
You write: “I’ve long regarded the Jewish presence in Europe and European societies as a unique form of colonialism (though without the “good things” mentioned by Roberts).”
Do you not see ANYTHING positive coming from the Jewish presence in European societies?
While I am deeply troubled by the Jewish question, in all its varied and often hostile manifestations, I think Jewish individuals have made significant contributions to Western Civilization and our culture. Jewish people have been a civilizing influence in many ways and I do not think it is fair to ignore their genuine contributions to European societies.
I would just prefer that their negative contributions be far more circumscribed and their positive contributions amplified.
What evidence?
I agree, it cannot be denied that Jews or people of Jewish descent contributed much to arts and sciences in Europe during the 19th and 20th centuries, this antisemitic one-sidedness hurts Mr Joyce’s argument.
Otherwise very interesting piece, there certainly is a determined attempt by some “historians” to retcon blacks and other “people of color” into European history, and I agree that the purpose of this is to legitimize mass immigration and colonization (similar with the alleged contributions of Islam to European civilization).
German reader, why do you disagree with suggestion that Baltic children should be taught about the black leader in their history?
While this truth might be obvious to some, there are many who are still drinking the Kosher Kool-Aid that reassures The Dumb Goyim that Diversity Is Our Strength.
No, you’re right, it’s actually a very good idea…if Estonians learn that an African was involved in the oppression of their people by Russian imperialism, they might realize blacks aren’t always and forever victims and might not become as susceptible to guilt-tripping as Western Europeans have become.
Similar lessons about “people of color” in European history could perhaps also be introduced in the school systems of other European countries, e.g. in Italy they could maybe focus on Saracen and Ottoman slave raiders or on the behaviour of France’s Moroccan troops during WW2.
“If “capitalism” and colonialism was / is so horrible, then why is it that the former ‘colonialized’ people try their hardest to get into the “capitalist”/ ‘colonial’ countries?”
Because the capitalists/colonialists invaded the world and invited the world.
I don’t know much about the black man’s administration but what if he did a good job? That would encourage the Estonians to be open to the possibility of black politicians in Brussels or even in Tallinn.
“it cannot be denied that Jews or people of Jewish descent contributed much to arts and sciences in Europe during the 19th and 20th centuries”
Well, which arts? And which sciences? Jewish involvement in science was actually pretty middling prior to the 19th century. I’m fuzzy on the early 19th century, but certainly a large contribution in the 20th.
As for the ‘arts’, their main contribution in painting has been modern abstract atrocities (e.g., rothko, frankethaler, etc etc). The Dada movement was overtly political, weaponizing art against European culture by making a mockery of it.
Take the Jewish gallery owners, movie studio owners, theater owners, magazine owners (etc) out of the arts and replace them with Arabs, how many successful jewish abstract artists, actors, playwrights (etc) would there be?
I would just prefer that their negative contributions be far more circumscribed and their positive contributions amplified.
That’s what you get in the mainstream media and culture 24/7.
Great article. One thing that is missing is criticism of the ideology of “diversity”. That poisonous ideology which has become the defacto state religion in most White countries, will eventually destroy any country that continues down the “diversity” path. Either “diversity” gets destroyed or the country gets destroyed. Take your pick.
Read this:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2016/11/a-world-without-white-people.html
I don’t think that would be desirable. But yes, that’s the intent behind such retconning of European history of course.
In pretty much every field, e.g. to give you just one example, one of the founders of German palaeography (research in medieval manuscripts) and studies in Medieval Latin was Jewish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Traube_(palaeographer)
And you could add much more, in humanities, medicine, sciences. It’s not that I don’t believe criticism of Jews isn’t often justified (it certainly is), but to state that Jewish individuals have contributed nothing positive at all to Western civilization isn’t tenable imo.
And you’re writing your comment on a website and a commenting system whose creator is Jewish after all.
No they didn’t.
That’s merely a tired, unfounded, college freshman cliche that awkwardly avoided my question.
It’s amazing why anyone would cite Wikipedia when it comes to any topic that is known to be of special financial & political interests to deluded supremacist Jews.
Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189
Then there are the frauds Einstein & Salk.
Albert Einstein was a Fraud
http://coconutrevival.com/?p=5656
and
Video Linkand
Einstein, plagiarist of the century
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm
Salk the shyster
http://vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/2004b/SalkBombshell.htm
http://naturalsociety.com/vaccine-fraud-the-polio-elimination-by-vaccine-hoax/
http://whale.to/c/great_salk_vaccine_fiasco.html
Fraud seems to be a way of life for deluded Jews:
Deluded supremacist Jews have been marketing the ‘6,000,000’ lie since at least 1869.
http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php
A good place to start might be the entire curriculum of any British or American educational institution before ideological deconstruction cemented its oppressive occupation of academia (pre-1970s or thereabouts?).
Or you could just read Barzun’s Dawn to Decadence, although it’s obviously not big on optimism for said culture.
Because it doesnt happen. They get eaten by their bigger neighbor.
I would have to agree that Jews have made contributions. Whether those contributions have been a net positive after taking in to account the Barbara Spectre’s, Noel Ignatiev’s and Soros’s is another matter.
Disagree.
Joyce’s writing is loaded w/ academic jargon, wordy, too involved w/ abstractions. seems to be aimed at impressing a PhD committee, not with explaining fundamental points to a general audience.
instead of allowing himself to be drawn into the White vs Black “discourse,” Joyce — who is, I agree, an important contributor to the debate — would do a better job if he talked about various ethnic cultural groups — the French are different from Anglos different from Germans different from Persians different from Spaniards, etc. What makes them different?
regarding “Blacks,” and something this Forum is guilty of devolving to, a concentration on “White IQ = HIGH, Black IQ = low,” — that’s all meaningless and offensive generalizations, imo — applying “white” standards to a dense & rich Black/African cultures that we know precious little about.
Black people span the spectrum, just as ‘white’ people do; there were Black kings, princes, queens; Black people are from numerous cultural backgrounds spanning a vast geographic area: we should explore them, appreciate their long and significant histories, from their ancient roots.
This is especially important at a time when USA is competing with China to militarize / colonize Africa.
I think Whites in general appreciate and explore Black culture and history much more so than Blacks do ours. The IQ differences are real and pretending that they do not exist to make “diversity” work doesn’t help anyone.
There is no good argument for Whites to give up their territory, their tax dollars and their children’s future to prop up and help non-Whites. No other race would ever contemplate doing the same to help Whites. Try peddling “diversity” in Africa or Asia and see how far you get.
So if is understand you white culture begin with the British and US educational system educational system.
Does that mean I leave out the number zero, or our understanding of reason, logos, architecture, , art, and science which includes knowledge from the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Chinese, Jewish, Persians . . .
I just want to make sure that when I am considering what belongs to white people, we don’t get any polluted knowledge from other cultures. You know concepts such irrigation; toilets, aqueducts, canal, bridges, christian society, etc.
I just want to be clear how much of the knowledge contained in the below can be left out so that whites can claim unique knowledge by which to build a system only whites can developed without ay build or pollution from other people whose skin is not white.
http://www.scaruffi.com/know/history.html
http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/ancient-jewish-sciences/
http://historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistoriesResponsive.asp?historyid=ab42
http://www.all-art.org/contents.html
I think it would be helpful if we could decipher exactly what only white developed minus any input from any other people of nonwhites. Then maybe we could pinpoint what constitutes white culture. In just a brief scan and remembering my own education in epistemological training, non-whites seem to have interfered or contributed to our larger body of knowledge.
Several years ago, I visited several plantations, and learned that much of the structure and building methods were from slaves — I never would have thought — prefab construction, ventilation systems to air cool buildings and homes.
I think I can have an idea of western schools of thought but even then nonwhites bring understanding to the that as well.
It seems to mean failure, with “means for ‘socialists’ to foment revolution, with themselves as the beneficiaries” as the second definition.
As for what socialism “means” to this fellow, that is the third definition: “gobbedlygook by which socialists pursue definitions 1 and 2.”
I think it would be helpful if we could decipher exactly what only humans developed, minus any input from any other species (mules, horses, dogs, etc.). Then maybe we could pinpoint what constitutes human culture. In just a brief scan and remembering of my own education in epistemological training, non-humans seem to have interfered or contributed to our larger body of knowledge.
Several years ago, I visited Asia, and learned that nothing was built, prior to the modernity of the white man, without input from other species (horses, mules, donkeys, etc.).
There really is no human culture.
Also, Jews don’t exist. Jewry and Jewishness are social constructs.
Without non-white contributions, whites would be somewhere around 2010.
Vice-versa, non-whites would be somewhere around 1500.
What did Jews develop, outside of Western Civilization?
The Torah. Anything else?
I think you have stumbled on the dilemma of sorts. But culture and skin color are two very different constructs. So if in fact, skin color is unique to some higher existence, then there i something unique about whiteness that is can only attributed uniquely to whiteness.
Yellow peoples don’t have a singular culture. Blacks have no singular culture. But certainly if cultural purity is the case, they in the US could claim a culture uniquely US having been divorced from heir previous cultural underpinnings via slavery for some 600 hundred years and may have created something unique because of internal and external separation. Browns and reds have no singular culture, but the claim is made here of white culture.
I am nor being facetious — I would like to know what that culture is.
As for that unique quality that distinguishes humans from animals — one might single out the written word. But the deeper flaw in your suggestion is that we are species jumping. It might be a good idea to stay with one species at a time.
As for your commentary about Asia — I have never heard the suggestion – it sounds a tad strange, as language was once thought to have been born in Asia — Mesopotamia. But we are not searching out those cultural characteristics of yellow, greens, blue, blacks, red, browns, but whites.
That is the issue. If your response is that humans have intermingled to such a extent that whites are not unique — ok, but I think others would take issue.
As for the Judaic tradition — I can only respond that there are numerous references in our western stem to – the judeo-christian belief and practice — neither born of white people. In fact our baeline body of justice ethos is referred to as judeo-christian.
Humans uniquely develop written language. And there is sparse evidence that they obtained the idea from watching dogs or ape scratch into the earth.
Ultimately, they are not white either. so I remain lost s to what white culture looks like. It was just a thought. My own brand of gobble de gook, I suppose. Interesting response.
I have no doubt that supporting this advance would be ground breaking. A model minus early rocketry, water engineering, agriculture, writing.
That would be an interesting and no doubt dynamic model to develop.
All cultural constructs are manufactured. Making that observation does not help me acknowledge what is uniquely white as to culture.
Our Judeo-christian tradition . . .
The “Judeo-Christian” fraud by Vox Popoli:
For people who live in the US there is according to;
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2007/10/judeochristian_values.html
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/john-kasich-judeo-christian-agency-216001
https://spectator.org/24258_washington-post-judeo-christian-ethic-problem-be-solved/
https://www.weaselzippers.us/128433-paul-ryan-rips-obama-for-compromising-our-judeo-christian-values/
http://infospaze.com/Judeo-Christian_ethics
http://www.10news.com/news/national/trump-we-are-stopping-cold-the-attacks-on-judeo-christian-values-
In short judeo christian values Simply refers to a shared traditional ethos and practices. And while I would not contend that they have been under assault and some dismantle, I think it i safe to say the ideas are intertwined in our polity. Now suppose one wanted to avoid the whole jewish quetion, fine. You just want to cut out anything to with Jews, one is still left with christian interlaced traditions/values/ethos
If you want to embrace christian-muslim traditions or ethos, fine with me. However in bot cases, one is left with a vast body or social practices that are not uniquely derived from being white. For Muslims consider all incorporate judeo-christian history with all due vigor as part of their faith.
I think I have run my course on this matter. As the introduction of Muslim ethos has made the ability to embrace whiteness as a stand alone source of culture more difficult 0 extremely more difficult.
But I have appreciated the responses.
They wouldn’t be anywhere near the year 1500, unless you’re talking about Asians.
My my,that explains all this propaganda about the evil backward crusader barbarians vs noble kind Mohammedans, the myth of the golden period of Andalus, the so called “Dark ages”. It is better to have command of your own historical research than depend on outsiders, especially outsiders who hate you.
Video Link
Video Link
Video Link
Video Link
Without Western civilization, this is the highest lifestyle Jews would have achieved.
Dr Joyce has been writing, among others, for the Occidental Observer website for many years. You can find a large set of his previous essays – every one of them, like this one, meticulously researched, impeccably reasoned and beautifully written – included in the Author Archive list which is always linked on the front page of that site.
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net
Noel Ignatiev is not White in the least. He is a White-hating, anti-White racist, second-generation Ashkenazi Russian Jew.
Jews are not White. Ashkenazis – eastern European Jews – are DNA-descended from an aggressive, warlike Turkic tribe once known as Khazars, who took on Jewish identity in the 7th century. See Arthur Koestler’s seminal work The Thirteenth Tribe
‘Joyce’s writing is loaded w/ academic jargon, wordy, too involved w/ abstractions. seems to be aimed at impressing a PhD committee, not with explaining fundamental points to a general audience’
Im not particularly bright and I have read all of his essays at the Occidental Observer. I find them clear, easily to read and very well sourced/documented.
Just don’t bring up decolonizing ancestral Palestine.
Rubbish progandists throw the term around as a lie.
I repeat myself, this is accurate. The earliest use of the term ‘Judaeo-Christian’ was in Christian theology, referring specifically to the Juadaeising cults in early Christianity, and only became a term in the latter part of the century before last.
It disappears again until around the time of Zionist manipulations last century. Very low frequency of usage, some from the late ’40s or ’50s.
Very infrequent to the ’80s, the ‘term’ both clearly heretical on the part of Christians and manipulative on the part of Jews. However, the latter and their various slaves went all in on it, so that we have many heretics to use it as an encompassing term, and even lately a propagandistic commentor here referring to ‘Moses Christianity’, which is a lame attempt to rescue the nonse concept of ‘Judaeo-Christian’ for the many who have read enough and enough of history to know that it isn’t a valid idea in any framework, even for a non-Christian, unless of course, the person stating it is just a liar.