White Nationalism is about White Identity

White-Collar Supremacy

By  Kelly J. Baker, Nov. 25, 2016 (LINK to article)

Ms Baker seeks only to demonise "white nationalism” which she maliciously equates with white supremacism and racism.

Does it not occur to her that there might be more to it than that? White nationalism is on the rise, in America, Europe and other western countries, and those who would demonise and suppress it, should think again, because what they are demonising and suppressing is human tribal nature, which is as much a part of being human as human sexuality is.

It is ironic that people calling themselves "progressives", while celebrating our newly acquired sexual freedoms, lead the mob in condemning anyone wanting to express their own sense of tribal identity, at least if they are white with a sense of white identity, which is what white nationalism is really about: racial/ethnic IDENTITY.

When minorities choose to assert their own ethnic identities that's fine, but the moment members of the white majority attempt to do the same, they are condemned, mainly by fellow whites, as "white supremacists" and racists.

This issue is going to dominate, even more than it does now, the politics of the years ahead. We urgently need to stop demonising and suppressing human tribal nature with accusation of xenophobia (we are also an inherently territorial animal) or racial prejudice, which we all have, and instead study and understand it, which can only be from an evolutionary perspective: LINK.

In Defence of Human Tribalism

Trump Reflects White Male Fragility

By Charles M Blow, August 4 2016 (LINK to article)

"For as long as racism [i.e. racial prejudice] and tribalism and xenophobia exist in this country, Trump’s foibles will not signal his ultimate failure. . . .  Trump is an unfiltered primal scream of the fragility and fear consuming white male America."

I have news for Mr. Blow and his "progressive" friends, who dominate America: racial prejudice, tribalism and xenophobia will always exist, in America and in every other country, because inherent to human nature, which is very tribal.

Clearly, we need to control our prejudices, tribalism and xenophobia in a civilised fashion, just as we do our sexuality, and if we fail to comply with acceptable standards the law is there enforce them, but why this demonisation and suppression?

It is interesting to consider that human (especially female, homo- and trans-) sexuality also used to be demonised and suppressed by the state, just as racial prejudice, tribalism and xenophobia are now, suggesting to me that they serve, or served, the same purpose of intimidation and control of society by the state.

The modern state controls society by posing as a nation. Only, it is not a genuine nation at all, but a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse, to their own personal advantage and that of favoured (especially wealthy and academic/formerly priestly) clients, at the expense of society at large.

Why has this not been recognised by the academics we look to as authorities in understanding society and the state?

Like their medieval predecessors and counterparts, academics are themselves privileged clients and employees of the state, with a massive personal self-interest (subconscious more than conscious) in rationalising and defending its role, self-image (as our "nation") and ideologies (social, political, economic and racial, formerly religious), on which the state bases its claim to moral and knowledgeable authority.

Post-racial multiculturalism is, in effect, a secular replacement for the power-political role of medieval church ideology, whereby "original sin" (disobedience of divine, i.e. priestly/state authority) is replaced by "racial prejudice" (the natural human inclination - like original sin - to identity with members of one's own tribe, race or ethnic group, which was misguidedly made responsible for the Holocaust and equated with the evils of Nazi racism), which only submission to priestly/academic /state ideology and authority can save us from eternal damnation for, not as sinners, heathens or heretics, as in the past, but as bigots, xenophobes or racists.

So there you have it, Mr Blow. Like all "progressives" and advocates of mass immigration, DIVERSITY and post-racial multicultural society, you believe yourself to have God, truth and reason on your side, but you are mistaken, just as the Catholic Church was, and still is.

What's Wrong With Nativism?

This is in response to an article, A vote against the mass immigration society, by David Goodhart in Prospect Magazine, which I was unable to post a comment on (LINK to article).

The following quote is taken from the article:

"there is a hard core of nativists and racists . . "

What is wrong with nativism? Why should every indigenous population not enjoy certain indigenous rights and privileges?

Does the fact that our ancestors treated the indigenous peoples of the lands they colonised so badly mean that we should treat our own indigenous population with the same contempt? Our ruling elites seem to think so, although most of us are now ashamed of how our ancestors often behaved towards indigenous peoples.

And what is meant by "racist", which is often simply used to dismiss, demonise and dehumanise anyone who doesn't share the state's post-racial multicultural ideology? Racism is generally equated with the evils of racial hatred, racial supremacism, Jim Crow, Apartheid, and, of course, Nazism, while at the same time being equated with perfectly natural racial prejudice, which virtually everyone is guilty of. Like xenophobia, it is inherent to human nature, both of which need to be understood and controlled in a civilised fashion, but not demonised.

Show me anyone claiming to be without prejudice and I'll show you a liar, or someone with a serious lack of self-awareness.

I confess openly to being a nativist and racially prejudiced, but I'm not a racist, except perhaps to a moral supremacist who has no qualms about demonising and dehumanise anyone who doesn't share his and his state's ideology.

Post-racial multicultural society and ideology, it seems to me, after puzzling over it for many years, serve the state’s age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly unprejudiced, i.e. "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) more prejudiced, i.e. less "colour-blind", masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

It is used by the state and its elites (which the mob is keen to please and emulate) as an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, a modern, secular replacement, effectively, for the power-political role of medieval church ideology.

If you think about it, "celebrating DIVERSITY" is nothing less than Orwellian newspeak for native Britons (and white people everywhere) to celebrate our own ethnic displacement (white flight), replacement (we have already been reduced to an ethnic minority in large swathes of our major cities) and ultimate demise.

Editorial Board, Know Thy Self!

Our Best Defense Against Terrorists

By the Editorial Board, July 15 2016 (LINK to editorial)

The editorial scorns the following remark by a member of the "far right" National Front party in response to the atrocity (more than 80 dead) committed in the French city of Nice by Mohamed what's his name, which pretty much  reflects my own sentiments:

“Spare us the indignation of the vultures of the main parties who let the wolves in to carry out this carnage.”

Why is the Editorial Board so supportive of these "vultures", who have promoted mass immigration of alien peoples into the West, along with the ideology of post-racial multiculturalism that goes with it?

It is, I suggest, because they embrace the same attitude and ideology, which allows them to demonstrate what they consider to be their own moral superiority in respect to their supposed lack of prejudice towards people of different race and/or culture from themselves, which they like to contrast with the prejudiced, i.e. "racist" and xenophobic masses - the kind of people that Donald Trump and the "far right" appeal to.

What the Editorial Board fails to do is recognise the applicability of its own advice to itself.

In an editorial response, The Price of Fear, to the Paris attacks last November, the Editorial Board wisely warned its readers (LINK):

“In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way.”

This is exactly what happened in response to the extraordinary evil of Nazism and the Holocaust, an overreaction which produced an ideology which is the exact but equally extreme and insane opposite of Nazi racial ideology: post-racial multiculturalism, or one-human-racism, which demonises human tribal nature, with its natural prejudices and xenophobia, and allows those doing the demonising to claim a spurious moral authority for themselves, along with the social status, and personal, professional and/or political advantages that go with it.

Editorial Board, know thy self!

Multiculturalism is Working - for Mehdi Hasan

Sadiq Khan and the Future of Europe

By Mehdi Hasan, May 13, 2016 (LINK to article)

According the Mr Hasan,

" [The British model of] multiculturalism does not demand that prior identities be relinquished, in order to build a national identity."

This is very much his own perspective as someone from an "immigrant community". From MY perspective as a Native Briton (the indigenous community?), I am required to give up my prior, ethnically rooted, British identity and embrace a globalised, multi-ethnic British identity in its place - which I refuse to do, not because I'm a bigoted and racist xenophobe, as Mr Hasan would have you believe, but because self-respect and reason will not allow me to have my sense of national identity dictated to me by a mercenary, "patron British state", which has deceitfully posed as my nation for long enough.

The madness of mass immigration into our already overpopulated country, and the post-racial multicultural society and ideology that came with it, was imposed on the British people by the British state and Parliament (not least through the propaganda organ of the BBC), which suppressed all opposition to it as "racist", thereby throwing an interesting light on the nature of our so-called "democracy", which I elaborate on in the blogs I link to below.

It took me a long time to recognise the method to this madness, which, alongside state and capital interest in cheap foreign labour, is the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, whereby society is divided into a morally superior, now supposedly "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

Mr Hasan goes on to say that

"the problems Britain’s Muslims have likely have more to do with a history of racism than it does with an unwillingness to integrate."

Of course, it is the bigoted, racist and xenophobic natives who are to blame for any problems Muslims have in integrating into British society. It is always the other side that is to blame, especially when it is the white majority, whose leaders welcome the opportunity to assert their own moral authority in condemning such attitudes amongst their own "native community". White people are well known for their propensity to have such despicable attitudes and need to be kept on a tight lead by their moral superiors.

Finally, Mr Hasan says,

"Mr. Khan’s resounding victory [in becoming Mayor of London] was a stinging rebuke to the peddlers of prejudice."

Does he not recognise that EVERYONE is prejudiced about everyone and everything, that it is inherent to human nature. We are not capable of not being prejudiced. If Mr Hasan doesn't recognise his own prejudices (in favour of fellow Muslims and immigrants, and against Native Britons) he is seriously lacking self-awareness, and as a consequence is guilty of ruthlessly peddling his own form of prejudice.

We should be open and honest about our prejudices, instead of denying them in ourselves and seeking to demonise them in others

See BLOG in which I elaborate further on this important issue.

Xenophobia & Prejudice Are Human

Europe's Huddled Masses

By Roger Cohen, Feb. 4 2016 (LINK to article)

"Xenophobic rightist parties thrive at the margins from Sweden to Greece."

Xenophobia is just one side of single coin, on the other side of which is "familophilia", love of the familiar, so why is it demonised as some form of evil?

It's the same with "prejudice". Human beings are inherently prejudiced about everyone and everything, especially race, given our inherent and intense tribal nature, and yet it is demonised as some terrible evil. Why?

It seems to me that both xenophobia and racial prejudice have taken the place of "original sin" (disobedience of divine, i.e. priestly/state authority and thus also a perfectly healthy aspect of human nature) as part of the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, whereby society is divided into a morally superior, supposedly neither xenophobic nor prejudiced, i.e. "color-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

This new form of original sin is embedded in the ideology of DIVERSITY and post-racial multiculturalism, which now serves the state and statists as an instrument of socio-political intimidation, rewards, punishments, manipulation and control, just as medieval church ideology once did.

Of course, our xenophobia and prejudices must be controlled in a civilised fashion, just as our sexuality or disobedience of authority must be - but not demonised.

It is surely no coincidence that we are brought up to trivialise, ridicule or demonise our inherent tribal nature, rather than give it the serious attention and study it deserves.

 I elaborate further in this BLOG.

The Limits of Diversity

The Oscars and Hollywood’s Race Problem

By Roxane Gay, Jan. 22, 2016 (LINK to article)

" . . people of color want to see their lives reflected in the movies they watch"

You mean, they want to see themselves, including their race, reflected in the mirror of film and TV.

Of course they do. But then they need to make their OWN films with their own directors and actors. Just do it, instead of always blaming white people for being so - errr, white, and preferring white actors.

You prefer to see people of your race on the screen, I prefer to see people of mine. Of course we do. It's natural.

We need to stop pretending that race doesn't matter, when clearly it does.

However, before we can stop pretending, we need to understand WHY we pretend.

It's ideological, an OVERREACTION to Jim Crow, Apartheid and, of course Nazism and the Holocaust. Because they made such an ugly issue of race, with their racial supremacism, we overreacted by denying the importance of race altogether, embodying it in an ideology which now serves the age-old strategy of “divide and rule”, dividing society into a morally superior, now supposedly "colour-blind", elite and the morally inferior, naturally (human nature being what it is) less colour-blind, masses, who must submit to the authority of and domination by their "moral superiors".

We need to get a handle on this madness, before it drags us even further into the Orwellian world it has already taken us far enough into: http://unapprovedcomments.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-wests-overreaction-to-nazism.html

My Response to George Yancy's Dear White America

Dear White America

By George Yancy, Dember 24 2015  (LINK to article)

I love, i.e. identify with, my own, white, race, just as you, George, clearly identify with your own, black, race, which is natural and healthy human nature.

The only people I have ever hated have been other white people, and when I look at history I see far more evidence of racial SELF-hatred (white people doing terrible things to other white people, including WW1, the Holocaust and the blanket bombing of German cities) than I do for white hatred of other races.

For more than half a century we have been taught to equate "racial prejudice", which was wrongly made responsible for the Holocaust, with racial hated. This was an understandable, but misconceived overreaction to the evil of Nazism, which was quickly incorporated into an ideology of white racial self-denial and self-contempt and ever since has served as an instrument of socio-political intimidation, rewards, punishments, manipulation and control (mainly of whites over whites), just as medieval church ideology once did.

It is the age-old strategy of divide and rule, which I elaborate on in this BLOG:

I want racial harmony as much as you do, but it has to be based on truthfulness. And the truth is that race matters; not in the way that racial supremacists believe it does, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group identity.

Race matters because identity matters, which is what we need to be clear about, instead of allowing the state and capital to keep us in a state of confusion, which they exploit to their own power-political and commercial advantage.

What Began as Overreaction to Nazism

Teacher Evaluations Could Be Hurting Faculty Diversity at Universities

By Carla D. Pratt (LINK to article)

It is inherent to human nature to be biased in favour of one's own tribe, race or ethnic group, but the American state, i.e. its academic elite (in collaboration with their European colleagues), whose example other elites are bound to follow, has embraced an ideology which demonises such prejudice as "racist", equating it with the evils of Jim Crow, Apartheid and, of course, Nazism.

What began as an understandable overreaction* to the madness and horrors of especially Nazi racial ideology, was quickly transformed into an instrument of socio-political intimidation, rewards, punishments, manipulation and control, a secular replacement, effectively, for the power-political role of medieval church ideology, with racial prejudice taking the place of original sin.

* The Editorial Board itself warns of the dangers of such overreaction in a recent editorial, The Price of Fear: "In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism comes the risk that society will lose its way."

The state's claim to moral authority on the basis of this grotesque overreaction to Nazism has indeed caused society to lose its way - very badly indeed.

If we are to deal with our social, political, economic and environmental problems in a rational and civilised fashion, we need to understand and work WITH evolved human nature, rather than demonising and suppressing certain aspects of it for the purpose of state control (see BLOG in which I elaborate).

Black Identity Fine, White Identity Racist!

Race, College and Safe Space

By Charles Blow, Nov. 15 2015 (LINK to article)

  ". . safe spaces, for racial sanctuart, . . not by black design, but as a byproduct of white racism. .  [Black] schools, born of hate, [i.e.] white people’s deep desire to resist racial commingling."  

Here we have it: white people's desire to preserve their own racial identity by avoiding "commingling" is assumed to be an expression of racial hatred.

What is so terrible about white people wanting to preserve their own racial identity? Just because America's "progressive" white elites have embraced an ideology of racial self-denial and self-contempt, doesn't mean that all white Americans must do the same.

Race is NOT the "social construct", these political and academic elites would have us - and themselves - believe (except when you try dividing closely related peoples from the same subcontinent into different races, as the Nazis insanely did), but real and important. Not in the way that racial supremacists believe it is, but because central to any deep and meaningful sense of both personal and group identity, which the state clearly doesn't want its citizens to have, least they challenge its claim to "multi-ethnic nationhood".

We are an inherently and intensely tribal animal, which state and capital seek to define, control and exploit for their own power-political and commercial purposes, just as the state once sought to define and control our sexuality.

We urgently need to become aware what is going on, and why. See BLOG in which I elaborate.

Islamophobia and Human Tribalism

With Anti-Muslim Campaign, Canada Has Its Trump Moment

By Martin Patriquin Oct. 16, 2015  (LINK to article) 


The first time I saw a Muslim woman completely covered in my local supermarket I was surprised and shocked at how angry it made me feel. Feelings I was careful not to show, of course.  In the meantime, I've got used to it, living in "post-racial multicultural" London, but it is interesting to consider WHY it made me - and clearly, makes many others - so angry.  

Man is an inherently and intensely tribal animal, although our original tribes have long disappeared, to be replaced in no small measure by the state, which claims to represent our tribe or nation, in order to command its citizens' sense of tribal belonging and loyalty, thereby legitimising itself, its ruling elites and the immense power they wield and abuse.

A woman in a burka is an affront and insult to my sense of tribal belonging, as is, in fact, although not so acutely, the whole notion of "multi-ethnic nationhood", which is an oxymoronic absurdity on a par with George Orwell's Ministries of Peace and Truth.

I have learned to deal with it by ceasing to identify with the British state as my nation, aided by the realisation that it was never a genuine nation anyway, but just a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation.  

I also finally recognised the method to the madness of not just the British state's creation of and commitment to post-racial multicultural society and ideology: see BLOG.