Reclaiming Our Culture: Politics

Reclaiming Our Culture: Politics
R.E. Prindle

God gave men all earth to love,
But since our hearts are small,
Ordained for each one spot should prove
Beloved over all…

–Rudyard Kipling

The inevitable consequence of the burgeoning of the world population is that distances disappear; we are all in contact with each other. Thus globalism is the result, a global economy has emerged trumping all local economies. Adaptation to change is the name of the game while it is easier to adapt up than to adapt down.

New classes of people have emerged. Businessmen as a group have no local loyalty. The United States, France, China mean nothing more to them than markets, money to be made. Thus, they transcend all regional or local politics, indeed, they appoint the managers of each regional market, be it the US, France, China or wherever. These managers formerly known as Presidents or Prime Ministers are now nothing more than managers. True there is the charade of elections but their is no real choice, you either vote for their candidate #1 or their candidate #2.

They employ, much as J.P. Morgan managed the loosely knit group of capitalists beneath him, the members of the regional governments, formerly known as congresses or parliaments, to manage the region. But the whole regional government is now divorced from the State or Department population they ostensibly serve. Actually they are responsible to the wishes of the Global Money Trust. This is the change you got whether you believe in it or not.

The States and localities function, or can function more or less independently of the regional managers, much as the redoubtable Jan Brewer of Arizona does. Bless her.

The States and localities are the actual functioning units. Thus, the issue at that level is not of political parties but of ideologies; which mores are going to rule.

You and I in our localities while being cognizant of the Global nature of economics have no direct need of it. We can only be concerned with our one spot ordained for us. It is what happens on the ground we stand on that matters.

…That, as He watched Creation’s birth,
So we, in godlike mood,
May of our love create our earth
And see that it is good.

Rudyard Kipling

So, what do we care about a Global Money Trust that cares nothing for us and its regional appointees. Let them govern that which concerns us not, and let us govern the matters that concern us.

Laws that seem reasonable to them are very unreasonable to us. Someone in rural Northern California has no interest in laws that apply only to the Atlantic Seaboard or New York City.

Our message to the Global Money Trust and the regional manager of the US, meaning Manager Obama, is you mind your business and we’ll mind our own.

We don’t need no stinking regional laws.

Reclaiming Control Of Our Culture

Reclaiming Control Of Our Culture
R.E. Prindle

One of the results of pre-1914 immigration was that Aryans resigned control of the US culture to the immigrants themselves. Even the administration of immigration itself was placed in the hands of the immigrants. The unspoken deal was that the immigrants would recognize the superiority of our political system and culture renouncing their in our favor. This was called the Melting Pot theory. It was delusional and not realistic. The Melting Pot was never to be realized.

Of course there were certain people, denounced as Nativists bigots, who pointed out that theory was based on a false premise and couldn’t work. Liberals hooted them down as bigots and morally corrupt narrow people.

While this struggle was going on immigrants who thought our political system was inferior to theirs were going about laying the ground work for supplanting our system and culture with theirs. First among these peoples were the Jews.

As has been shown by the recent founding of the Paideia organization in Sweden by the ex-pat US Jew Barbara Spectre with the intention of suppressing the history of nineteenth century Aryan culture in favor of what she calls ‘Jewish Knowledge’, this has been their modern goal since the Jewish Emancipation of the French Revolution to the present.

It is no surprise then that from their landing on US shores the Jews set about supplanting Aryan systems and culture with their own.

This attempt fid not go unnoticed. A set of plans entitled the Protocols Of Zion professing this goal made its appearance but was vehemently denied as one would expect. Inn any event the Protocols were written toward the end of the nineteenth century and were obsolete by the time they were promulgated. Based on nineteenth century propaganda methods the twentieth century at its opening provided new unparalleled propaganda venues that went on increasing and improving: movies, radio, recording, TV and improved publishing techniques. The mass market was in front of them.

As movies and the new venues were unexploited those on the qui vive had the most incentive to exploit them and those people were the Jews. It was essential to control the content an personnel of these new opportunities. Thus with these more than powerful venues that caught the Aryans flat footed the Jews were able to begin the displacement of Aryan culture with their own.

When talking pictures became the norm about 1930 the way was clear. Radio that became commercial at about the same time placed the whole propaganda apparatus in Jewish hands.

The death camps of the Nazis placed the weapon of guilt in Jewish hands that was found to be irresistible. The actions of a few while unrepresentative of Jews in the case of Jewish criminals were declared representative of every single Aryan and White person. Thus, by at least the year 2000 Jewish culture and mores had taken prominence over Aryan. The Revolution is almost completed.

Our good will toward all has been traduced. It is only necessary to reject this Jewish influence to defeat the Jewish conquest.

As I indicated in my previous post it is necessary to establish our own presence in the movie and other propaganda industries and reaffirm our own cultural values. It is necessary perhaps as has been done in Canada and England to pass laws limiting the participation in the media of other nationalities.

When Canada and England, for instance, feared the dominance of American cultural influence whether movies, performing arts or other they had no compunction is legally limiting it. The came can be done in this country, Aryan Affirmative Action so to speak. Perhaps such would not be unlike the anti-Aryan Hate Laws championed by the Jews.

Obviously the system we developed, Democracy can be used to subvert the State without restraints. Let us put restraints in place to ensure the smooth operation of Democracy. The time for hope and change is now. A change is gonna come.

Last Year In Marienbad

Last Year In Marienbad
R.E. Prindle

Scene From Last Year In Marienbad- Great Flick

Scene From Last Year In Marienbad- Great Flick

In the rapidly forming Jewish fantasy of the conquest of the Aryans two articles have appeared defining the situation. The first appeared on Jewish World entitled Islamization Of Europe A Good Thing and the second on Tablet Ezine entitled The Haunted Spas Of Europe.

Both deal with the furious Jewish assault on the so-called anti-Semites of Europe. As a Jewish social construct anti-Semitism has no objective existence as is amply proven by Rabbi Baruch Efrati, the Jewish school head of the West Bank who boldly states: “There shall be no remnants and survivors from the impurity of Christianity.” The Jewish fixation on Christianity has no validity as most of the West turned Scientific during the last two centuries. So let’s just say that Efrati means Aryans when he says Christians.

Well, maybe Wolf Hitler was onto something. Maybe genocide is a universal desideratum having been part of Jewish culture dating from the time the Ages changed from Taurus to Aries. In a choice between genocide and victory I think the choice is clear. An us or them situation.

The subtitle to Natalie Naimark-Goldberg’s The Haunted Spas Of Europe is Jews Flocked To Retreats Like Marienbad, But What Couldn’t Be Healed Was Europe’s Anti-Semitism. To quote Natalie

…a new book by Mirjam Zadoff, Next Year In Marienbad: The Lost Worlds Of Jewish Spa Culture…comes to fill the void left by the destruction of a world once populated by a multitudinous European Jewry who lived and often bathed and relaxed together. Drawing from a wide variety of historical sources, Zadoff reconstructs the Jewish experience at the Western Bohemian spas, which she depicts as “Jewish spaces”, places where Jews felt at home after adopting the European middle-class practice of annual spa visits….

After adopting European practices? Jews have truly said they will occupy houses they didn’t build. In other words, displace those who did.

First the so-called anti-Semites built the spa culture. If the movie Last Year In Marienbad, shot in Bavaria, accurately portrays a spa they were spectacular resorts built by Aryan minds and hands to Aryan standards of beauty and comfort. And just when they get it built…here cum de Jews to make “Jewish space” and drive them out.

…Jews constituted the dominant group…It is not incidental that even in the heyday of the Jewish presence at the Bohemian spas, Jews had their own enclaves; coexistence with members of other religions was never widespread. Jews lived apart from the rest, segregated within their own (invisible) boundaries, as if in a protected sanctuary…

One can believe the contempt which these haughty scions of ‘purity‘, treated the impure brethren of Christianity, putting up invisible social barriers daring the anti-Semites to cross and then complaining about their own self-imposed ‘ghettos.’

As Natalie says coexistence with the Jews was made impossible, not because of Aryan attitudes but Jewish attitudes.



…Take…Carlsbad…in the first decade of the 20th century. Wishing for a kosher meal, one would have found oneself being asked the kind of kashrus one preferred, for there was a restaurant that catered to the stringencies of every sect. A similar range of choices would confront whoever looked for a prayer house from imposing synagogues or “Temples” liberal style, to prayer rooms set up ad hoc by Chasidim courts that arrived accompanying the rebbe during his annual cure, and other traditional minyanim for those to who organs and mixed choirs were unpalatable.

Where is the discrimination by anti-Semitic Aryans that Jews say they encountered? These Jews were welcome to come. What of the holocaust, then? Was the crowd of rebbes any different than Rabbi Efrati who preaches that ‘there shall be no remnants and survivors from Christianity’, that is to say Aryans? Of course not. As Fyodor Dostoievsky famously wrote, the Jews would gladly have murdered all the Russians if they had the opportunity. And post-1917 when they did have the opportunity they seized it as best they could.

Holocaust? Holocaust, Bollockscaust! So what? It’s not a matter of Aryans killing Jews, it’s whether the Jews will kill the Aryans. Tit for tat. How can anyone fault Wolf Hitler for protecting his own kind?

What did Aryans do to Jews for hundreds of years as Efrati whines that the good rabbis wouldn’t have done to Aryans if they had the chance. In 1666 the Jews were prepared to murder all Aryans but then the Millennium passed without the appearance of the ‘messiach‘.

How do Jews treat American Aryans today? They have passed laws disenfranchising Aryans. Anti-Aryan hate groups like the Southern (Jewish) Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee and their subject NAACP egregiously violate the rights of Aryans by threatening any hotel (read spa) that rents their facilities for Aryan group meetings. They sponsor murder groups to disrupt Aryan meetings in places like Chicago.

Holocaust? Holocaust, Bollockscaust. This is war and has been war for four thousand years. The casualties on both sides have been enormous and apparently will be even more enormous if Rabbi Efrati and his kind have their way. Well, if he really wants to take us on, now is as good a time as any. Declare yourselves, enough of this sneak genocide of Mayor Bloomberg in NYC. Last year in Marienbad; this year in New York City.

Disregard any insults such as anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is merely a social construct serving Jewish ends.

Understanding Anti-Aryan Hate Laws V: The Colonial Experience

Understanding Anti-Aryan Hate Laws V: The Colonial Period


R.E. Prindle

We Aryans have a more than thin grasp of historical cause and effect. One can’t understand the impetus for Anti-Aryan Hate Laws without bearing in mind the colonial period from, say, 1600 to 1900. Now, Aryans did nothing than other conquerors had done, probably less. The Mongols of Genghis and Kublai Khan were totally destructive of civilization. They subjected the Russians to defeat and the worst humiliations for centuries.

The difference in the Aryan conquest of the world was that we were fair skinned while defeating all the coloreds of the world subjecting the Earth to our rule. There is no way to white wash any conquest. The conquerors are without exception arrogant. But, the Aryans were of a different skin tone while despising the darker species.

Technologically the Aryans were far superior to the rest of the entire planet combined. The Semites, Jews and Arabs alike, were root bound by their religion and remain so. The Chinese had been stalled for a couple thousand years; there was no hope for any change. The Aborigines of Australia? Well, what can one say.

Our superiority alone combined with fairness was enough to create the deepest hatred. True, Aryans found the world sunk in disease and poverty but unlike any other conquerors in history Aryan medicine and science removed all the diseases, improved nutrition, a concept none of the coloreds had ever conceived, and put the entire world on the track of prosperity. But, well, those are small things compared to having been a White conqueror rather than another colored one.

Thus, the entire issue is the irreparable one of Whiteness. The coloreds state explicitly that Whiteness, by any means necessary, must be eliminated from the face of the planet.

The coloreds cannot and will not rest until this is done. There is no concession that can be made that will change this. Having been rulers we must remain rulers or perish. Although bad the situation is not unredeemable. Dive and rule is always a viable approach. Agitate all differences, set side against side, people against people. There can be no peace without conquest.

Retake the education of Aryan children and then breed like flies. Forget overpopulation, there won’t be any in the long run. Observe no laws that discriminate against us.

This is our life and we must live on our own terms.


A Prayer For Rachel Shukert

A Prayer For Rachel Shukert


R.E. Prindle

     Rachel Shukert on Tablet Magazine has tackled the only person mentioned in the media as often as the Jews- Adolf Hitler.  Well, Rachel, let’s talk about Hitler and the 1917-1945 historical period of which for some odd reason Hitler has become the emblem.

     Of those twenty-eight truly horrific years Hitler played only a small part.  How did this age of horrors begin?  With the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.  Who led the the Bolshevik Revolution?  The Jews.  How many defenseless  people were slaughtered by this Jewish led Revolution?  Tens of millions.  The years from 1917 to 1945 are years of indescribable human suffering.

     Jewish led slaughters of Aryans defy description.  In one account Jews operated charnel houses into which Russians were led to be slaughtered like cattle, dismembered and shoved out the other end as Jews waded ankle deep through blood and gore.  This part of history has been excised from the history books by the ‘victors.’

     The horrors of Bela Kun in Hungary are mentioned nowhere.  Instead we hear of the ‘monster’ Henry Ford who slaughtered no one.

     Is it surprising that a Hitler arose in Germany to forfend these horrors taking place in Jewish/Communist Russia?  Does anyone really believe that Russian atrocities would not have been repeated in Germany if the Jewish revolution had succeeded in that country?  Of course they would have.  The German Volkists in greater numbers than any Jews would have been run through extermination camps just like those run by Jews in the gulag of the USSR.  Where is the German guilt?

     The Russians even had their name stripped from them by the Revolutionaries, changed to the non-descript Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

     Shouldn’t Hitler and the various Volkist Parties have been concerned lest the same happen in Germany to them?  Germany wiped off the map by Jews to be replaced by some anonymous collection with a name such as the Union of Central European Soviet Socialist Republics?

     Was Hitler a worse demon than the Bolshevik Revolution?  Only a fool could argue that.

     I quite agree with you that it is time for the Jewish hysteria concerning Hitler to end.  It’s time to put Hitler into a historical perspective that explains real reasons for Hitler’s response to possible German annihilation.  It does no good to plead Jewish innocence; in the United States of today the Jewish spokesman, Noel Ignatiev, has toured prestigious universities as an honored spokesman calling for the annihilation of White people by any means necessary. 

     Ignatiev’s program is not an innovation; it can only be a continuation of a Jewish program begun in Russia in 1917.

     ‘Fess up, Rache.  Deal with some truth.  I can’t tell you how my heart went out to you when I read this paragraph in your article.

     There may be no human, living or dead, who has spent as much time thinking about Hitler as me.  I was raised as part of the “Never Forget” Jewish Day School generation, rarely offered a piece of leisure reading by a parent, teacher, or other authority figure that didn’t have to do with little Marta or Franz or Itzik hiding in a crawlspace somewhere.  I sudied these books with morbid obsessiveness, until I had internalized the terror of their message to the point that I spent most of my “play” time packing and re-packing my Snoopy suitcase with the items I thought I would most need when we had to go in hiding.  And as for “never forgetting,”  for nearly five years I couldn’t take a shower without experiencing a panic attack.  As a teenager, I went on the March of the Living, and even now, as an adult, an entire bookcase in my one-bedroom apartment is devoted to what my husband lovingly calls “her Nazi books.”

     Yes, you are right, Rachel.  Just as my brain was sizzled in 1958 when the Jews controlling all three TV networks forced us all, Jews and Aryan alike, to watch zillions of piled up dead bodies being bulldozed into trenches in the camps.  I know what your people’s intent was but it was overkill.  It didn’t ‘sensitize’ me to Jewish suffering, it desensitized me.  Don’t blame me, but, I don’t care how many Jews died.  Perhaps the most anti-Semitic statement of all was the seizure of the airwaves to broadcast this stupid crap that no one wanted to see.  We wouldn’t haven’t wanted to see the horrific rape of the German women by the Soviets either.  But that wasn’t mentioned.

     Horrors that you were subjected to view every week even though nothing had ever been done to Jews in the US.  You were compelled to dwell on these horrors hour by hour, day after day, month after month, year after year.  My, god, who needs Judaism?  For your own good, Rachel, give it up.

     Bless you Rachel.  I know your heart is pure, but your religion is sordid.

Shot Across The Bow: Hollande, France, Aryans and Jews


Shot Across The Bow:

Hollande, France, Aryans And Jews


R.E. Prindle

     Robert Zaretsky, a Jew living in the United States, has made himself a participant in French politics based one supposes on his Jewishness.  This emboldens be, an Aryan living in the US, to do the same based on my Aryan affinity to the French.

     Bob is concerned that having lost Sarkozy who he considers not only a friend but an advocate of his Jews, the Pres. elect Francois Hollande may be ‘tepid’ in his advocacy or special concern for his  Jewish French citoyens.

     Bob says, ‘a real friend cannot only observe but criticize too.’ apparently referring to his own Jewish presence.  I would that Bob and his Jews would practice what the preach.

     I, for instance, consider myself a real friend of the Jews who can show my devoted friendship by criticizing as well as observing.  Unfortunately my Jewish friends who I love as my own Aryans do not appreciate criticism contructive or otherwise.

     The thanks I get for my caring enough to criticize is to be defamed on the ADL site by having my well intentioned criticisms reported as  examples of anti-Semitism.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  I’m trying to help.  After all for evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.

    And then as if to add insult to injury the Jewish Tablet ezine refuses to let me make constructive criticisms by denying me access to the site.  Where’s that at Bob?

     Now, the headline of Bob’s article carries the provoking headline:  A Shot Across The Bow:  Hollande Faces Challenge Of Winning Over Jews.  From my experience it will require considerable bootlicking, licking the dust off their feet as the Holy Bible says, to come close to that rather than any criticism much less observing.

     One wonders why Hollande would have to go to extreme lengths to ‘win over’ patriotic citoyens like the Jews who owe it their country to aid it in any way rather than demanding to be courted.  The Front National are very patriotic French citoyens who don’t even require winning over but it appears that Hollande and his Jews spurn them with the foot, or perhaps, they are offering it to be licked.  What more could the Jews demand?  Extermination camps for the French Aryans?  With Sarkozy gone perhaps the motive for a law requiring Aryan women to have sexual intercourse only with Africans will fade away too. 

     Just sayin’….

Pt. III: We Must Invent A New World

Part III

We Must Invent A New World


R.E. Prindle 

Matthieu Pigasse is a glib talker. His fine sounding generalities mask some concrete specifics. ‘We’ will quote him further:


The crisis and reactions to the crisis demonstrate this as a fallacy [that governments should have no power] that there exist good policies and bad ones, that there exist good and bad regulations.

We must act in these areas:

1. Production, in other words growth. We must tell ourselves that without growth, there can be no progress and no reduction of inequality.

2. Solidarity, which is a method as much as a necessity. There is no progress if it does not profit all and if it is not accepted by all. Solidarity in Europe is not only a part of our glorious past, it is our key to our tomorrow.

3. Public action, for the genius of Europe is first of all that of a collective project and a common destiny.


Sounds lovely doesn’t it? In the abstract but what does it mean in the specifics.

Matt says that there is a crisis but he doesn’t say what that crisis is or who caused it and for what purpose, so we are left to interpret his words according to our understanding which may not accord with his belief that his beliefs must be accepted by all. Why must they? And he says Solidarity is a method. Really? Solidarity as I interpret it means a solid block, everyone moving in the same direction to the same drummer. When was that true of Europe as he states? What tradition can he demonstrate? And if there is a diversity of opinion how is that single opinion he advocates to be enforced and by whom? As Matt is a Communist one can only assume by Commissars appointed by some Lenin or Stalin, perhaps Matt himself.

But let us return to the crisis. This crisis as most of us understand it is the influx into Europe and America of conflicting ideologies and belief systems that cannot be reconciled with ours. The Moslems, for instance, if we are to have solidarity, believe it can only be under their ignorant system of Sharia law. At the same time the Jews say, nyet, nyet, it must be Talmudic law. Those of us who prefer Aryan customs, what are we to do, maintain exclusivity and let the Jews and Moslems exterminate one another? The remainder exterminating the other thus achieving solidarity?

These are real problems and not the beautiful theoretical model of Matt’s dreams. And then good policies and bad ones, good and bad regulations. Matt as a good Communist agrees with the flooding or Aryan lands with conflicting ideologies, religions and races. French text books under his guidance now denigrate French and European history in favor of inconsequential matters from Africa. Napoleon is given a few pages while the state with absolutely no history, Monomotapa located in the old Rhodesia is given many, many pages. Monomotapa is even represented as an African state which it was not. It was a Malagasy state exterminated by the Africans. What is being taught is not only inconsequential but untrue, a lie. He and his, actually unrepresentative minority, think this is a good policy while the majority vehemently disagree. The majority is democratically to be ignored.

Now he says that production is synonymous with growth and growth equals equality and progress. Then, we can’t have progress/production without growth. This is his point of view but there are others. But, he says, other opinions destroy solidarity and cannot be tolerated. So, where is growth to come from? There are five million Aryans in South Africa under the threat of genocide but Matt doesn’t want growth of that kind. No, he wants the genocidists who are killing Aryans. Does he not think Africans will kill Aryans in Europe as well as in South Africa? I’m betting he does and wants it to happen.

So Europe is being flooded with Black Africans which in turn creates a situation of inequality. But, Matts says, inequality is a bad policy, yet so long as there are Aryans and Negroes there will be inequality. How to eliminate that inequality. Eh, voila! He and Nick Sarkozy will pass a law that Aryan women must bear children to African fathers only. That was easy, wasn’t it?

Matt and Nicky are slippery customers with a very slippery vocabulary. They are not to be trusted. Shun them.

Pt. II, We Must Invent A New World

Pt. II

We Must Invent A New World


R.E. Prindle


Matt Pigasse’s manifesto of the future of mankind seems a bit dissociated from reality. He seems to be living in some parallel universe while commenting on this one. He does ask the pertinent question: So how can we approach tomorrow in a new way? I myself would hesitate to offer a suggestion finding nothing wrong in the approach to tomorrow from 1950 to 9/11/01. As far as I was concerned the world was as it good as it has ever been and probably will be. Of course, it’s major defect from Matt’s point of view is that it was a meritocracy which means you had to do something to earn your share; nothing was granted automatically on the basis of your color or race.

Matt has a ready answer to his question however:


We must invent a new world.

We must recover the meaning of progress, not progress as an automatic reflex or an empty word, but as an act of will.

Never become resigned, never submit, never retreat.

We must never see the market as a more effective means of coordinating individual actions.

No society can organize itself simply by virtue of the markets.

Thus we must be wary of the liberal illusion of a society that has no need to think out its future or define its regulations.

On the contrary it is up to politics to reinvent itself, to define new rules and new institutions.


Fine words indeed, but a maze of fine words through which it is difficult to find your way. Matt’s essay strikes me as the kind of high school essay that got raves from the teacher but had his fellow students shaking their heads.

Inventing a new world has no meaning while sounding like excellent science fiction. On what principles are ‘we’ to invent a new world and who are ‘we’ and how are ‘we’ to demonstrate our ability to invent a new world, whatever a new world may be, and how are ‘we’ to convince the old world to accept what ‘we’ devise in our own image? One suspects that this new world is already being invented by the destruction of Europe and its values to be replaced by the old world Jewish, Moslem and African values. It is clear from the influx of alien peoples into Europe and the United States that these two areas are the only ones being affected by Matt’s grand vision. It seems that Asia and Africa are not only not affected by Matt’s grand vision they haven’t even heard of it. How is it going to work without their cooperation?

Matt says that we must recover the idea of progress not as an automatic reflex but as an act of will. I can hear Matt’s high school teacher reading his essay in class, but what do his fine words mean? When was progress ever an automatic reflex and not an act of will? Were not Charles Darwin’s studies an act of will and did they not open society’s mind to ‘progressive’ notions? Was not General Electric’s motto that ‘Progress is our most important product?’ Weren’t their scientists inventing as an act of will? Where does Matt come up with crap like ‘automatic reflexes?’ Reflexes are automatic anyway. I’m beginning to worry about the future of Lazard Freres with Matt at the helm, let alone society.

‘We must not see the market as a more effective means of coordinating individual actions. No society can organize itself by virtue of the markets.’ I’m not sure these are even fine words while I have no idea what they mean. Are they a Communist attack on individualism? Are they a call to regulate free speech, and thought, scientific investigations that may produce unwanted results according to Matt? I have no idea. They words sound like they were intended to mean something but I can’t figure out what.

‘We must be wary of the liberal illusion…’ Is Matt posing as a Conservative or is he a Communist rejecting what they consider Liberal palliatives? No idea, Matt isn’t clear.

Then he comes up with this whopper: it is up to politics to reinvent itself, to define new rules and new institutions.

Well, new? Communism has already been tried and rejected; free enterprise was working fine but is apparently unpalatable to Matt. So having rejected collectivism and individualism Matt feels ‘it’s up to politics to reinvent itself.’ Tall order and good luck Matt, the choices are limited and they’ve all been explored.

We Must Invent A New World

We Must Invent A New World


R.E. Prindle

Matthieu Pigasse

      Matthieu Pigasse the CEO of Lazard Financial Advisory of France has opened a sideline in the field of Communist propaganda.  Eschewing the usual ‘progressive’ claptrap he presents what purports to be an intellectual manifesto.      In some perverted travesty of the Communist Manifesto he begins his with the stirring call:  Today, all of Europe is living in doubt.  Certainly dramatic but I can assure him that no one in Europe is living in doubt.   The Jews and Moslems have no doubts about their agenda, they know where they are headed as well as their Liberal sychophants which would include I should think our M. Pigasse himself.  The Conservatives have no doubts nor do the African hordes for whom Nicky Sarkozy wants to pass a law requiring Aryan women to bear their children thereby achieving equality and an end to ‘racism.’  As a matter of fact everyone seems to have no doubts at all.      Still, M. Pigasse states:  We are living through a turning point,  in great confusion.  Granted we are living through a turning point but neither Barry Obama nor his stooge, Nicky Sarkozy, seem to be in either confusion or doubt; they appear to be extremely self-possessed and confident.  Nevertheless, Matt states:  We must struggle against this doubt…  Well, go and and struggle, Matt; I’ve got things worked out myself.      Matt says:  We must must invent a new world….Many believe that in a so-called global and liberal economy, governments should have no power.  They are mistaken….       But, dictatorships along the lines of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Roosevelt and the one you propose have no place in the world.  No government has the right to tell women who they must fuck; nor does any have the right to teach five year old boys to butt-fuck in school as your totalitarians are attempting.      Ah, but, Matt says, we must have absolute equality, all differences must disappear.  Well, OK, Matt, let’s make the world over in my image, without a doubt the right thing to do and a thing I can wholeheartedly endorse.  I can’t imagine a better world than one filled with replicas of myself.  But, that’s not the equality you meant is it, Matt?  No.      You meant that Aryans must cease to excel, stifle themselves, right?  As you say:

      For five centuries, our continent (you mean to say, we Aryans; continents can’t do anything but drift.)  have been able to invent the ideas and goods that have transformed the world, yet it seems to have lost the secret of their manufacture.  It no longer knows if it is capable of inventing the world of tomorrow; it doesn’t know if it has a common future anymore.  Unquote.  (The site has ceasing functioning properly at this point.  Below is my own writing.)

As Tennyson once said Matt:  Better fifty years of Europe than a cycle of Cathay.  If we Aryans are not to create the world of the future, then who is, Matt?  Do you really think China is capable of transcending its stagnant past cycles?  Are we to look to Africa for hints as to our future?  Is that where scientific advances will come from, the Negro ‘equals’ of the Aryan?  Do you have doubts, Matt?  I don’t.  Nothing is to be expected from either the whole of Asia and/or Africa.  What indications are there that they can do what they’ve never done?

Meanwhile Zimbabwe and South Africa create areas of equality by exterminating the Aryans while you cheer from the comparative safety of France.

     Out of that three thousand dollar tailor made suit, Matt, and those fifteen hundred dollar shoes.  Get equal, kid, into your baggys and sneakers, no Michael Jordans either now.  Give away your magnificent salary and your expensive residence.  Move into the banlieux.  Get yourself a Negro wife.  We’ll believe in your idea of equality when we see you set the example.  We’re not going to do it, but we want to watch you.


Graham Sumner On Slavery I


Graham Sumner On Slavery

Graham Sumner writing in 1902 title Folklore. A perspective from a different time and place. Sumner was a remarkable prescient writer. This is from a chapter examining the history of slavery. P. 306, topic 312: The Future Of Slavery:

In the eighteenth century, in western Europe, there was a moral revolt against slavery. None of the excuses, or palliatives, were thought to be good. The English, by buying the slaves on their West India islands, took the money loss on themselves, but they threw back the islands to economic decay and enculturation. When the civilized world sees what its ideas and precepts have made of Hayti, it must be forced to doubt its own philosophy. The same view has spread. Slavery is now considered impossible, socially and politically evil and so not available for economic gain, even if it could win that. It is the only case in the history of the mores where the so-called moral motive has been made controlling. Whether it will remain in control is a question. The Germans, in the administration of their colonies, sneer at humanitarianism and eighteenth century social philosophy. They incline to the doctrine that all men must do their share in the world and come into the great modern industrial and commercial organization. They look around for laborers for their islands and seem disposed to seek them in the old way. In South Africa and in our own southern states the question of sanitary and police control is arising to present a new difficulty. Are free men free to endanger peace, order and health? Is a low and abandoned civilization free to imperil a high civilization, and entitled to freedom to do so? The humanitarians of the nineteenth century did not settle anything. The contact of two races and two civilizations cannot bed settle by any dogma. Evidence is presented every day that the problems are not settled and cannot be settled by dogmatic and sentimental generalities. Is not a sentiment made ridiculous when it is offered as a rule of action to a man who does not understand it and does not respond to it? In general, in the whole western Sahara district slaves are as much astonished to be told that their relation to the owners is wrong, and that they ought to break it, as boys amongst us would be to be told that their relation to their fathers was wrong and ought to be broken.

Actually slavery is the same as cradle to grave social welfare, while being impossible to maintain because as the population grows the expense of maintaining the slave community becomes unsupportable. Of the population perhaps only a third are producers but all have to be maintained in a reasonable manner, housed, clothed and fed. It become necessary to sell off the excess population. The South was headed for trouble. The slaves had to be freed to spare the Aryans.

But then, as Sumner points out, other problems arise. He apparently foresaw the hideous state of affairs in Zimbabwe and South Africa where AIDS and other health problems run riot. But no one wants to talk about that.