Nullification - Battlefield USA Compliation

Posted on September 21, 2013 by Battlefield USA

Origin Of The Term Racism

From comments at Western Rifle Shooters Association - Things Fall Apart

On my original post– I had hoped followers of this thread would do a little research on their own to see where this word RACISM originated and why. But I understand most people on this thread work and have lives—so I’ll make it easier for everyone. The first known use of the word racism was coined by LEON TROTSKY the Bolshevik/Marxist leader of the Red Army in the Soviet Union. He first used it in writing in his 1930 History of the Russian Revolution. The term was used numerous times by a Bolshevik Sexologist from Germany known as Magnus Hirschfeld he used the word numerous times to attack his critics. Hirschfeld worked close with the Frankfurt School which is a [sic] Communist Think Tank. The National Socialists deported most of the professors and shut it down. Many of the Marxist professors moved to New York City and set up shop at Columbia University. The Frankfurt School was re-established back in Germany in 1953. The school promotes critical theory, and political correctness in order to destroy traditional western culture and replace it with a Marxist world view. Most the propaganda of a communist nature has entered our society via these college professors and their sympathetic media apparatus. The Soviet KGB used the professors methods to target the US. The method is known as ideological subversion. Ideological Subversion is a four step process; Demoralization of a Nation, Destabilization, Crisis and finally Normalization. The long part is the demoralization phase. The idea is to change the perception of citizens’ reality to such an extent that no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country. If you can pump the heads of at least three generations of youth full of Marxist ideas of equality and social justice you can move to the destabilization phase. It doesn’t matter that the USSR no longer exists. Once the poison takes hold its irreversible and must be sorted out in the crisis phase. Labeling your ideological enemies as a RACIST is a weaponized word established and promoted by communist, It is used to immediately shutdown any valid points made by their enemies (Constitutionalists, Libertarians, Traditionalists etc.) Once the label is attached it closes the minds of the masses to those anti-Marxist view points.It has entered our societies vernacular. That even like minded liberty minded people will even target each other with the word without knowledge of its origins.

This day in history

From - Rebellion Blog (Old Rebel)

In 1305, Scottish leader and national hero, William Wallace, was executed in London.

Vox Day: Answering a Simple Question

Vox Day responds to a question:


Will Shetterly poses questions for me and for NK Jemisin. I don't know if she will see fit to answer him, but I certainly don't mind doing so:

What do you want, besides book sales? You both have strongly-held beliefs, Critical Race Theory and Human Biodiversity, but you're both silent about the practical application of those beliefs.

Vox Day, you say:

"I have repeatedly pointed out that the existence of different human sub-species and/or races does not make those different sub-species and/or races any less validly human. A dog is a dog whether it is a Bichon Frise or a Great Dane. A man is a man whether he is Yoruba or Prussian. My basic argument on race and civilization can be most accurately summarized as the observation that if you wish to pull a sled, you would be well advised to select Siberian huskies rather than chihuahuas or pit bulls."

If people with your beliefs were in power, what changes would there be? Legal segregation of the races as you understand them? A ban on miscegenation? Breeding programs to increase the virtues you see in the different human races, stronger blacks and smarter Asians to serve the more "alpha" whites?

Let me first point out something that many people fail to keep in mind when they are occupied with being offended at something I have said. I am a libertarian, so it should always be kept in mind that I am intrinsically skeptical of the idea that government can be effectively utilized to solve most societal problems, or even avoid making them worse, regardless of how serious we all agree those problems happen to be.  The fact that I point to something as being a problem should NEVER be taken as an implicit suggestion that the solution can be found in government action.

With regards to race, I would be more than content to see the U.S. federal government and other governments across the West firmly respect the right to self-determination, the right to free speech, and the right to freedom of economic association on the part of individual, as well as the political sovereignty of the several States.

This would likely lead to legal segregation in some states, most likely beginning, ironically enough, with the States where Hispanics are expected to soon be the majority. In most of the rest, I expect a return to Constitutional federalism and the concept of democratic laboratories would merely lead to bans on enforced desegregation and government violations of the freedom of association; history indicates that people have a tendency to naturally segregate as that is how most of the various population groups were formed in the first place.

I do not support bans on miscegenation nor do I believe they would be required in any environment that permitted genuine freedom of speech and association. Despite being inundated with heavy doses of pro-miscegenation and pro-equalitarian propaganda in the media, relatively few women of any race have shown themselves to be open to sexual involvement with men of other races.

Being an anti-eugenicist, I do not support breeding programs of any kind, especially not government-sponsored programs.

As for the idea of stronger blacks and smarter Asians serving whites, that could not be further from my own position on ideal interracial relations. My belief is that every population group, every human sub-species, every nation, is better served by furthering a homogeneous group interest.  To put it crudely, whites would do well to pick their own cotton and count their own money, blacks would do well to build their own power stations and grow their own crops, and yellows would do well to develop their own technologies and establish their own university systems. Let Israel be Israel and let Myanmar be Myanmar.

Inter-societal communication and assistance is a good thing, so long as it is the sort that involves teaching men to fish and not fishing for them... and if the fishermen are left alone to deal with the consequences of their catch. Trade is generally good. Information exchange is generally good. Even immigration can beneficial in small and limited doses. But the benefits of moderation does not extend to the extremes. For example, trade can benefit both sides, but truly free trade will inevitably destroy the more prosperous side.

It should be noted that the consequences of mass migration are all but indistinguishable from the effects of invasion and occupation, and multi-ethnic societies have shown a strong historical tendency to collapse amidst vicious ethnic violence. No one who recalls the intra-black violence in Rwanda, the intra-white violence in Yugoslavia, or the intra-yellow violence in Vietnam should be misled into thinking that expanding the range of population heterogeneousity is going to alleviate, rather than exacerbate, the eventual inter-ethnic violence.  Ms Jemisin may be more right than she knows about how everyone will eventually be forced to take a side, whether they want to or not.

I understand that three generations of Americans who have been raised to venerate the Civil Rights movement will find it hard, if not impossible, to grasp that history may ultimately prove to be firmly on the side of those they have always believed to be monsters of bigotry. But if what logic suggests is the most probable outcome indeed comes to pass, I suspect that forced segregation and non-violent ethnic cleansing will be the best case scenario in consequence of the damnable social engineering of the grand multicultural experiment that began in 1965.

It may already be too late for a peaceful return to historical segregation patterns. But if history is an even remotely reliable guide, the West will return to them one way or another. And keep in mind that my expectations of the future have nothing whatsoever to do with my personal preferences, any more than I wanted to see the global financial system seize up when I predicted the 2008 economic crisis six years before it happened.

There is a flaw in someone's assumptions. The error may be on my part. But based on the known historical patterns as well as the way in which increased integration throughout the West has observably increased racial tensions rather than eliminating them as the multiculturalists so confidently asserted, I very much doubt it.

So, to answer the original question, what do I want? I want to preserve the greatest, most advanced, and most humane civilization the human race has ever known. I want the West to avoid descending into violence and chaos on a scale that will threaten to end our advanced civilization as we know it. And I believe continued mass migration, forced desegregation, reconciliation, government intervention, and racial integration only serve to increase the likelihood of a nightmarish scenario taking place.

Fast Fact: Persons Lynched in the USA, 1882 - 1968

By The Elusive Wapiti

Wherin Ms. Oprah is taken to school by Kathy Shaidle.  First, Ms. Oprah's fast-and-loose application of three orders of magnitude to blacks lynched in pre-Civil Rights Act America:

In the [Parade Magazine] interview, Winfrey explained her sadness that so few Americans know about the history of the civil rights movement: “They don’t know diddly-squat. Diddly-squat.” She then said of the historic use of the [word "nigger"]:, “I always think of the millions of people who heard that as their last word as they were hanging from a tree.”

And then Ms. Shaidle's correction to Ms. Oprah's race- and victim-mongering:

“According to a Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute study, between 1882 and 1968, 3,446 blacks were lynched at the hands of whites.”

Oh, and 1,297 whites.

Perhaps before Saint Oprah evangelizes us unwashed heathens about the Civil Rights movement, she would do us all a favor and get her Whig History correct.  Even better, I suggest she would do better by addressing the 6,329-ish black folks killed each year in the USA, 93% [page 13 of this PDF] of whom are killed by other blacks. But that would mean she would have to care more about blacks actually dying in the here and now at the hands of other blacks, than in guilt-tripping (and making beaucoup $$ in the process) whites via a false narrative of a past long since gone.

The Metastasis by Francis W. Porretto

From Porretto's Liberty's Torch: From Gerard Vanderleun's KA-CHING! site comes this pictorial gem:

This illustration is a whole education in political economy in a few thousand pixels.

Diversity is the death of the republic

Via Vox Day at Vox Popoli:

"The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family. The opinion advanced in the Notes on Virginia [by Thomas Jefferson] is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity; and to its particular customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government congenial with those under which they have lived; or if they should be led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism?" -Alexander Hamilton, From the New York Evening Post: an Examination of the President's Message, Continued, No. VIII, 1802"

Those who advocate diversity and immigration are not merely foolish, or ignorant, they are as actively and effectively anti-American as the most antipathetic individuals who are consciously attempting to destroy what is left of traditional, constitutional, civilized, European America.

Global Warming Graph (Historic Trends and Fluctuations)

Interesting graph for perspective via Free North Carolina

A Grand Day - Robert E. Howard And A Link

Today is the birthday of my fellow Texan, and acclaimed author Robert E. Howard.

I am honored to come out of my long drought to link to/post in full from one of my favorite daily blogs, the Rebellion Blog

Today's post from the Rebellion Blog Link: This day in history

In this post Old Rebel perfectly describes the why of this blog/this blog's name. So thanks, Old Rebel.

Please visit the Rebellion Blog, link it, and make it a daily visit. It does not disappoint.

And now reprinted in full:

Tuesday, January 22, 2013 This day in history

In 1906, Robert E. Howard was born. This native Texan became the king of pulp fiction, creating such memorable characters as Conan and Solomon Kane.

One of the real-life colorful characters who inspired the young writer was his grandfather, a Confederate veteran who literally "rode with Forrest":

Howard had a profound admiration for his grandfather’s exploits, a Confederate veteran, a man who “rode for four years with Bedford Forrest,” “was accounted the strongest man in his regiment and one of the strongest men in Forrest’s command. He could cleave a man from shoulder to waist with a single stroke of his saber,” [he] “loaned money, dealt some in cattle; he bought a sheep ranch, but, in the midst of a cattle country, with hired men running it, it was not a success. He wandered over into western New Mexico and worked a silver mine not far from the Arizona line” where “chief old Geronimo once stole a bunch of [his] horses.”

Howard also drew inspiration from his own Anglo-Celtic heritage. Tales of Celtic warfare fired his imagination, and certainly planted the seeds of the future exploits of Conan . In a letter to fellow author H.P. Lovecraft, Howard wrote:

Books dealing on Scottish history were easier for me to obtain than those dealing with Irish history, so in my childhood I knew infinitely more about Scottish history and legendry than Irish. I had a distinct Scottish patriotism, and liked nothing better than reading about the Scotch and English wars. I enacted these wars in my games and galloped full tilt through the mesquite on a bare-backed racing mare, hewing right and left with a Mexican machete and slicing off cactus pears which I pretended were the heads of English knights.

Howard's Conan stories portray its hero as an honest, fierce, manly, and incorruptible barbarian who cannot comprehend the soft, cynical, self-doubting, and decadent city dwellers he often has to rescue.

Not a bad example for the modern Southerner. Here's one excellent site, appropriately named Conan The Cimmerian, that celebrates Howard's pro-Southern legacy.