Showing posts with label White America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label White America. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Proud Racist??

TLP| 2.27.13 @ 10:04AM

"This is all so stupid.

Everyone's a Racist. Everyone.

I'm White, and I think that Whites are the Best.

Blacks think that Blacks are the best. Hispanics think that Hispanics are the best. Asians think that Asians are the best. And, anyone who says they don't? Is a Liar.

The only difference that I can see, is that, out of the group I just mentioned? Only I would be labeled a Racist. The others were just emoting Racial Pride.

And, therein lies the problem.

It's why - in the words of Eric Holder - My People are on their way to Minority Status, and the Country that I grew up in is fast becoming a Third World Banana Republic Hellhole, unrecognizable to anyone over 50.

If saying that makes me a Racist?

Then I gladly Accept that Title, and will wear it as a Badge of Honour."

I am not TLP. Although you'd think so by the sentiment expressed here.


*TLP's comment on this article.

Monday, October 10, 2011

I don't care.

Here's the real deal:

I'm white. Very white. White for generations. Probably for centuries and maybe even millenia. My DNA is, like, 94% White European. I have been led to believe that being that much of any one thing is a little unusual in this day and age. So, cool. I'm officially, inextricably, undeniably, unarguably, White.

Why am I making such a big deal of this? Because I want to establish my bona fides of Whitedom. Of White-ness.

Because I want to talk about Blacks and "racism".

Note the scare-quotes. I'm not talking about the real thing. There's precious little of that from Whitey today. I'm talking about the crap that black race-baiters call "racism" today. Which is entirely bullshit.

This won't take central argument that Whites are not racist can really be stated in a single idea:


Black people—particularly you annoying, self-important, inflated ego, narcissist race-baiters and affirmative action cry-babies, it is to you that  I speak:

We really don't give a shit about you... in terms of a group of strangers lumped together by skin color.

I really don't care about what you do, if you succeed or fail, win or lose, suffer or experience joy. I don't think about you. I don't have feelings for or against you. As a group, as a race you don't exist on my personal radar. I'm not interested in your race. I'm not interested in your skin color.  The subject bores me.

I don't care.

I don't hate you. I don't feel sorry for you. I don't like or dislike you.

I don't care.

I don't think about you. Ever. You are not important enough to me to spend any time thinking about.

I don't care.

I don't hate you.

I don't care about you.

In order to hate you, I would have to care a lot. Hate takes a lot of energy, and a lot of focus, and a lot of attention and a lot of obsession. And I just ain't got that for you, black folks. I just don't care enough.

I don't wish evil for you.

I just don't care.

I am not racist because I don't care enough about you to hate you, or despise you, or discriminate against you, or wish you ill.

I don't care.

I don't think you are inferior, or stupid, or lazy.

I don't think of you at all.

When you accuse me of being racist, you are only being laughingly, naively, embarrassingly, self-delusional; you are demonstrating an unhealthy, psychotically raging ego. You are imagining that you are so important to me that I would bother obsessing about you, bother hating you.

But you are wrong. I don't even notice you, particularly. You are as insignificant to me and my life as any other stranger. I don't care.

You are not important enough to me to hate.

Get the fuck over yourselves.

The Gunslinger

Monday, August 31, 2009

Lucky to be in America

This Buchanan column just came to my was written over a year ago, but given the current political environment, I think it's still timely.

After all, "we're all racists now".

Of course, I not sure the Left is aware how little that charge fazes most of us anymore. Persistent overuse has desensitized us. I don't know about any other white folks, but for me, that particular guilt nerve-ending is no longer operational.

Them: "Racist!" 

Me: "Whatever..."

The (White) Gunslinger
Enemy of the Imperial State (EOTIS)

Thursday, August 20, 2009


I received this from the Patriot Post, as an email. Here is the current link, but since it is not a dedicated page, it will disappear from the front page of the site in time.

Since I don't want anyone to miss this, I post it in its entirety:


Equal and exact justice to all men..." --Thomas Jefferson

In 1775, John Adams wrote, "There is in human nature a resentment of injury, and indignation against wrong, a love of truth and a veneration of virtue ... if the people are capable of understanding, seeing and feeling the differences between true and false, right and wrong, virtue and vice..."

Adams understood that a shared penchant for justice and virtue is essential to liberty, and depends upon the ability of people to discern between right and wrong.

Today, it is evident to every astute social scientist (and most anyone with common sense) that among definable American subcultures the capacity for distinguishing between right and wrong is severely diminished.

The origin of these deteriorating standards for justice and virtue is rooted in the dissolution of the family, and the failure of our places of worship and our schools to instill those values necessary for self-government -- self-government being the foundation of family-government and that being the foundation of social responsibility.

U.S. urban centers, and to a lesser extent suburban and rural areas, are now home to generations of sociopaths who do not value your life, simply because they do not value their own.

Making matters worse, the MSM perpetuates a virtual blackout of news regarding select sociopaths, while trumpeting allegations and speculations of others. This results in a distorted popular understanding of the extent of the social degradation around us.

Three years ago (March 2006), the Leftmedia spent a year relentlessly convicting in the court of public opinion three white Duke University lacrosse players for a "hate crime" -- the alleged gang rape of a black woman named Crystal Gail Mangum. Millions of dollars in defense-lawyer fees later, it turns out that there was no evidence and that Mangum was a liar. The real victims were, in fact, the accused men: David Evans, Reade Seligmann and Colin Finnerty. (All charges were dropped, but there has been no apology yet from 88 Duke professors who jumped on the bandwagon, condemning Evans, Seligmann and Finnerty in an open letter before the first day of their trial.)

Four weeks ago, Barack Hussein Obama interrupted a live media propaganda confab promoting his administration's most critical national initiative (nationalizing health care) in order to accuse a white Cambridge, MA, police officer, James Crowley, of "acting stupidly" for arresting Obama's black friend, Henry Gates. That accusation was followed by similar knee-jerk pronouncements of racism by the black governor of Massachusetts and the black mayor of Cambridge. Under such heavy-handed political and media pressure, all charges against Gates were dropped.

The Gates' story dominated the national media headlines for a couple weeks, until it was determined that the officer's actions were, in fact, justified. Obama attempted to make amends by tossing back a few beers with the Gates and Crowley in the Rose Garden, but BO offered no public apology. (Narcissists do not apologize, they just reinterpret the facts.)

This week, there is a trial underway which is racially charged, but, unless you were reading The Patriot back in 2007, chances are you have not heard of this one since it involves a savage black-on-white crime, rather than MSM feeding frenzy accusations of white-on-black crimes.

I am referring to the brutal torture, mutilation and murder of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom by four black men in Knoxville, Tennessee.

In the event you were not a reader in '07, allow me to recount this horrendous incident ... because you won't see or hear it from any MSM news outlets.

On 6 January 2007, Channon (age 21) and Christopher (age 23) were out for a Saturday dinner date, after which Channon called her mom to report that they were on the way to visit friends. But Channon and Christopher never arrived at their friends' house -- nor returned home.

The next day, the mutilated and burned remains of Chris Newsom were found along a railroad track. Two days later, Channon's mutilated body was recovered from a trash bin.
Channon and Chris were in Channon's Toyota 4-Runner when they were carjacked. They were taken to a nearby house, brutally gang-raped, mutilated and then murdered. They were subjected to lengthy torture in each other's presence.

Newsom was raped, his genitals were cut off, and then he was taken to the railroad tracks where he was shot execution-style. The perpetrators soaked his body with an accelerant and burned his body.

Christian was kept alive for a while longer, repeatedly raped, mutilated, had cleaning solution poured down her throat in an attempt to destroy DNA evidence, and then stuffed inside a trash can where she suffocated to death.

This appalling attack is more than a case study in sociopathic evil. It is a case study about which stories the MSM headlines and which they do not. Yes, there are some 17,000 murders committed in the U.S. each year, but this double murder was clearly far more barbaric, far more monstrous, than most.

Regrettably, there is nothing new about the racial aspect of this story, which may explain why it was not national news. Although blacks represent just 12 percent of the U.S. population, black perpetrators are convicted by a jury of their peers in more than half of all murder and manslaughter cases. Additionally, per-capita black-on-white crime is far more prevalent than the inverse.

The underlying social factors contributing to such racially unbalanced crime statistics have been delineated by many conservative black leaders and academicians. However, their solutions -- most notably promoting family unity, faith-based programs, better schools and individual responsibility and accountability, contradict leftist political objectives, which seek to maintain black folks' status as wards of the state. (The modern Democrat implementation of a plantation system.)

Charged in the torture/murder of Chanon and Christopher were Eric Boyd, Letalvis Cobbins, Lemaricus Davidson, George Thomas and Vanessa Coleman.

In April 2008, Boyd was convicted in federal court of being an accessory after the fact, but the MSM was too busy fawning over the candidacy of Barack Obama to report that conviction. (Boyd's case is on appeal.)

"One down. Four to go," said Channon's father, Gary Christian.

He and Channon's mother, Deena have been present at all the proceedings. "We do this for Channon," said Deena. "We've been through the worst. We and the Newsoms have lost our children. We can endure anything."

This week, the trial of a second defendant, Letalvis Cobbins, is underway, but it's safe to say that the prosecution of this defendant will pass without a satellite news-link truck anywhere in sight.

I draw your attention to this case not only to mourn the murder of this young couple, but also to call attention to a despicable political double standard which includes the MSM's complicity in advancing that standard.

In 1998, three white men in Jasper, Texas, beat a black man, James Byrd, then chained him to the back of a pickup truck and dragged him three miles to his death. Not surprisingly, Byrd's murder received national media attention -- as it should.

Clearly, hate was a motivating factor in the Jasper case, but it was also a motivating factor in Knoxville, though not a "hate crime" as defined by federal law. So, why do white-on-black hate crimes invariably result in a media feeding frenzy, while black-on-white hate crimes receive nary a mention?

What about the double standard when it comes to race-hustling poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (who fabricated the Tawana Brawley rape hoax)? The only difference in racists such as Jackson and Sharpton and those in the KKK is that the latter are not Leftmedia celebs.

To that end, my colleague Walter Williams posited this query: "What have we heard from the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and others who rushed to judgment and outrage as they condemned whites in the cases of the 'Jena 6' and Don Imus when he referred to the Rutgers ladies basketball team as 'nappy-headed ho's'? Where were the national news media and public officials? You can bet the rent money that, were the victims black and the perpetrators white, Knoxville would have been inundated with TV crews, with Jackson, Sharpton and other civil rights spokesmen and politicians from both parties condemning racism, possibly blaming it all on George Bush..."

As for the defendants in this case, Knox County has already paid in excess of $350 thousand to prosecute and defend these monsters. Based on the eyewitness account of defendant Vanessa Coleman, the question before Cobbins' jury, and those yet to be empanelled for the other defendants, is not one of guilt or innocence, but guilty of what charges.

Those found guilty will be treated to either life imprisonment, with all entitlements, or life on death row for maybe a couple decades -- all at a cost to taxpayers of more than $100 thousand per year per convict.

Martin Luther King, in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail, proclaimed, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

The MSM blackout of this crime is a grave injustice.

To the families and friends of Channon and Christopher, we share your grief and will continue this vigil with you until justice is served.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Is it outrageous to suggest that there is a war against White people? Or at the least a conspiracy to ignore and minimize violence and injustice perpetrated against us?

This is not an accident or an isolated incident of malfeasance by the Marxist Media or the Imperial State. It is clearly the practice and policy of them both.

How, exactly should we Whites feel about this? And what should we do?  After all, only White Supremacists would notice or mention such a thing....right?

The (White) Gunslinger 
Enemy of the Imperial State (EOTIS)
Enemy of the Marxist Media

Thursday, July 31, 2008

A Letter

Dear Professional Black Radical Racists,

I've been listening to your tantrums for about 45 years now. I've been accused of racism simply because of my white skin for at least as long—no matter what "my people" do for money, housing, medical care, education, affirmative action. It's never enough. Mostly we all put up with it because it's easier than arguing.

But now you are on the verge of doing something that will set back race relations 100 years: Demanding Reparations.

I would have thought the collective worth of all the money, goods and services would have been considered a fair recompense...but you want more.

You always want more.

This is not wise.This will not get you what you want, but the opposite. It will support the narrative that Blacks are indeed inferior..that you can't do for yourselves...that you need to be given everything by Whites because you are incapable of providing for yourselves. Equality cannot be given, any more than respect can be demanded. It must be earned.

And frankly, you're not doing a very good job of it. The more I give you, the less respect I have for you, don't you understand that? That is an immutable law of human will never change. For as long as you require support from Whites to survive, you will never, ever gain our respect. You may garner a certain affection, like dependent children, but never respect, or acknowledgment of equality. How would that be possible?

Of course I'm not talking to Blacks who are providing for themselves, improving their lot through their own effort. No. I mean you, the Black Racist Malcontents who persist in wallowing in self-pity and would rather fail in order to blame Whitey than succeed to the benefit of yourselves, your children, your families, your communities and your future.

Shame on you. Shame on you for abandoning human dignity for a few bucks and a phony, flashy pretense of "moral authority" which nobody but the stupidest Moonbat takes seriously. Most of us just go-along to get along because it's easier than fighting about it. We have more important things to do. Lives to live. Money to make. Families to raise. Jobs to do.

Make no mistake, we don't see you as exotic virtuous victims. We know you're just race hustlers. We get it. And we disrespect you more than you can possibly imagine. We don't make an issue of it because, frankly, it's not worth it. You bore us and we really don't want to hear it. It's worth a few bucks just to shut you up.

But we do have our limits. And we do have our flash point. Don't go there. It's not in your best interests to engage us. Remain the petty annoyances that we can ignore, and thereby keep the peace. If you imagine that we fear you, you make a great mistake...a tactical as well as a strategic one.

You get what you get—we give what we give—because the hassle of not giving just isn't worth it. But if you make the hassle—or the cost— of giving worse than the hassle of refusing, by demanding too much, too often, too rudely and too flagrantly will find us a suddenly and surprisingly immovable object.

And in spite of your delusions, fed by our generosity, you are not an irresistible force.

Yes, it's true, we have allowed you to define the situation—out of compassion—in ways that saved you from humiliation. That saved your pride. That spared your feelings. And made us look like the bad guys. But we don't actually believe that crap.

We're clear on the truth: You are charity cases, living off the pity of strangers.

You haven't shown much gratitude, but we understand how hard it is to be beholden to others for your very existence. It's hard on the ego. So we've given you a pass.

But there is a limit. And you are about to test it. Push us too far and we will push back.

Heed the warning: Don't wake the sleeping demon.

The Gunslinger

Saturday, March 15, 2008

The Wrath of Western Tribalism

[It seemed a good idea to post this again. It's been too long. I first posted it in 2006]

I have been saying for some time that Muslims are unclear on the concept of "Western Tribalism". By which I mean, when the shit comes down, and white westerners decide enough is enough and go "tribal", Islam may very well be finished.

For the moment, everyone in the West is still trying hard to believe that their are millions of innocent and moderate Muslims that do not want to kill us all. But the Jihadists get more bold, continue their attacks, push and probe and propagandize and force "conversions" and the elusive "moderate Muslims" are nowhere to be found. Like any insane, divorced-from-reallity fanatic, the Jihadists will go too far, and when they do, the worm will turn, and they will be faced with an enraged West: a monster of fury and power and determination and mercilessness and weapons the likes of which they have never imagined in their worst nightmares. Their little neighborhood gangland tactics will be pinpricks to the Leviathan they will have spawned.

They think that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the total of our resolve and ability, apparently. They seem not to be aware that because of our decency, we are fighting those wars with hands tied behind our backs, carefully avoiding hurting the innocent or giving too much offense to the Muslims. They are fighting those wars with everything they have, they are pouring all their manpower, propaganda, disease and psychosis into them, and we are easily matching them with a politically correct, managed, moderate, sensitive, merciful, carefully "nuanced", restrained prosecution.

They continue to imagine that this is our most terrible face. But they have seriously mistaken our nature because they mistake the modern West's enlightened kindness, tolerance and restraint for weakness. They have forgotten history and it's critical lessons.

Western people can be really efficient killers of nations, peoples and races. When enemies push too hard or go too far we "go Medieval" on 'em. And that is exactly what is going to happen to the Muslims if they continue on the road they are travelling. They imagine victory--because they are too small minded, to limited in their vision, too handicapped by cultural ignorance to understand the enemy they are making and the potential for their own doom that resides in the dark heart of the sleeping giant they taunt and awaken at their peril.

Islam, beware of the Western Tribalism that you are provoking.

I hope that it does not come down to this. It will be another world war bloodbath in which millions may die. But in the end, Islam will be obliterated. As practiced by the Jihadists, it is incompatible with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...and we simply, in the end, won't stand for it.

There is no possibility of an Islamic victory. Islam cannot "win" the war for world domination. The best Islam can hope for from this day forward is to be allowed to survive. And that can only happen before the great confrontation begins. Because once the War for Civilization is actually and true engaged by the West, it will be too late for promises, negotiations, pacts, treaties or peace. Islam's only hope of survival is reformation because the only alternative to reformation is obliteration.

Here is another article, at Big Lizards with pretty much the same message. I am comforted that I am not the only one who sees this coming...because if I'm not alone in my analysis, maybe enough other people will see it so that this terrible calamity can be avoided.

The Gunslinger

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Is It Just Me?

White Doom forecast at American Thinker. I don't like it. And I don't mind saying so.

Why is it that to Liberals a White President of South Africa was so evil, but a Black President of America is not only OK, but "devoutly to be wished"?

What conclusion is it possible to reach except that they hate Whites? How sick is it that Liberal Whites are so consumed by such self-loathing.

The builders of the modern world, from which they all benefit, are to be scorned and excoriated...and removed from power, because......?

What, exactly, do they expect to take place when Whites are gone, or at least overwhelmed by numbers, without a Nation of their own, and impotent in national and world affairs?

Where is the model they admire? Where is the successful program they intend to follow? What culture do they intend to mimic? Where is the superior nation they seek to emulate?

Sudan? Somalia? Zimbabwe? Syria? Russia? China? Cuba? Mexico?

"Let's dump American culture, and institute Mexican culture instead, look how much better it is to live in Mexico, how much happier, healthier, more prosperous everyone is in Mexico than in the United States."
In what cosmic dimension is this true? In what inner plane reality is this possible? In what degree of mental illness could this be contemplated?

And I'm not picking on Mexico. Substitute any other nation in the above sentence, and it is equally absurd. It makes no sense, it flies in the face of logic, reason, experience.

These people are truly and surely and absolutely insane.

"How did it come to this?"

I was clearly born too late, into an "interesting" time where over half the world has gone berserk, and seems to be incapable of self-control, self-direction, self-discipline or self-respect.

I'm starting to get the Road Warrior post-apocalyptic nightmare vibe. But I'm surrounded by lunatics who can't see it. Who believe that destroying everything and everyone that created and advanced civilization will somehow improve it.


The Gunslinger

Friday, December 07, 2007

The Mask Will Fall

Do certain races have sovereignty over certain geographical areas?

Does Africa rightfully belong to Africans? Does the Middle East righfully belong to Arabs (and Persians)? Does China rightfully belong to the Chinese? Does the Philippines rightfully belong to the Filipinos?

If so, does Europe rightfully belong to Europeans?

In order to be philosophically and morally consistent, surely any rights accorded to Africans with regard to Africa and Chinese with regard to China, must be accorded to Europeans with regard to Europe.

If the idea of keeping China Chinese and Africa African is not morally offensive, why should the idea of keeping Europe European be morally offensive?

Assuming that races have staked out different parts of the world, do they have a right to do what is necessary to ensure continued existence?

Is a race morally justified in defending itself and assuring it's survival?

If one race's survival depends on the removal of another race, can it be morally justified? If the only options are ethnic cleansing or racial extinction, what is the moral choice?

Once a race has allowed a situation to become out of control, to its detriment, what is it morally justified in doing to reverse the situation?

Does morality require passive racial suicide, or allow aggressive racial defense?

Does the imminent death of one's race provide the same justification as the imminent death of one's self for lethal defensive measures?

Watching the changing demographics in Europe and America, these questions are urgent and practical, not theoretical and abstract.

If things keep going as they are, I believe that serious racial strife in America and Europe is inevitable. We'd better pre-determine what is moral and justified before we find ourselves in a pitched battle for survival, in which "final solutions" that appeal to hot blood and rage are again loosed on the world.

If we don't stop the flood of non-white Third Worlders into America and Europe...Tribal White Man will be awakened. And he is a very scary dude.

Skinheads and Nazis and the Klan are not aberrations. They are manifestations of latent potential in civilized White Man. For many decades, the West has been so tolerant, guilt-ridden, politically correct, self-limiting, and appeasing, that others may imagine that we are actually weak, impotent, ineffectual, and incapable of defending ourselves.

This is a dangerous error. Our gentleness, humility and compassion are the result of our clear, if unacknowledged, sense of cultural, economic, and military superiority. Like any blessed elite, we can afford to be gracious; and we see it as our duty to be.

But pushed too far, threatened with extinction or ruin or conquest, such trappings will fall away revealing the Beast Within.

The world has seen glimpses of it in the French Terror, German Nazism, and the Spanish Inquisition.

We are smart, organized, cooperative, disciplined, rich, inventive, brave, cruel and terrible. Please, please, don't piss us off.

The Gunslinger

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

A Journey into Darkness?

Does anyone know what this symbol means, exactly?
I see it on "White Pride" websites, but no one explains it.

Is it a stylized version of the Iron Cross?
Has it been traditionally associated with the KKK or Neo-Nazis? It is a "tainted" symbol?

Or is it a newer rune, harking back to the "Northern Tribes" and really means "pride", not "supremacy".

And further, is "White Supremacy" a media-invented concept, designed to malign White portray it as "racist"?

I am investigating the "Dark Side of the 'Net". I've learned that so much I think I know—that I've been brainwashed to believe—is lies, that I no longer trust my assumptions about certain things. And I'm determined to find out if "traditional wisdom" about dirty, lowdown white supremacists is as false as so much else.

Being weak and poor and few and voiceless and probably ignorant and emotional and least in the main...I wonder how much they've been defined and defamed by their enemies with their bully pulpits, media empires, money, style, finesse, power and global agendas.

I wonder how many whites, impotently furious about what they saw as the destruction of their culture, the invasion of and offenses against their country and heritage, but without nuanced, sophisticated and erudite communication skills, used unfortunate, insensitive language from the heart...and got hoist by their own petard, with the help of smug and gloating enemies educated at the schools of the elite.

I wonder who owns the truth...the brash and foolish, heartbroken and angry voices in the wilderness...or the comfortable, pampered, approved purveyors of political correctness.

Let's see, shall we? Ready for the journey?

The Gunslinger

Monday, December 03, 2007

A Dilemma with Horns

...and I'm on them.

I'm having a Moral that I can't decide the moral course to take. Here's my problem:

Is White Separatism morally obligatory, morally justifiable, morally neutral, or morally repugnant? Is it necessary? Is it desirable?

There seem to be reasonable arguments for all positions. And I am unable at present, to determine which arguments trump the others.

I have certain feelings about the subject. But I can't trust those. Feeling good about a position is not sufficient. It must Be Good. But how can I determine which of these positions is the right one?

The idea of White Separatism is a relatively new one for me. I grew up in a White World, and was taught that all people are equal, and that no race was superior to another. Racism, whether in the form of hostility or condescension was not tolerated. I believed it.

I believed it all my life. I might still decide to believe it. But I'm not so sure anymore. Evidence and experience argues against it.

In my personal life, I still live in a White World. All my friends are White, my place of employment is almost entirely White. The town I live in is still marginally majority White. I engage in activities that largely attract Whites.

But the landscape of my environment is vastly changed. "Press One for English" is the norm. Spanish and Mexicans are everywhere. Chinese and Filipinos have literally taken over several towns in the San Francisco Bay Area. Areas that were once White neighborhoods are now peopled with foreigners who speak foreign languages, celebrate foreign cultures.

Where did my country go? I don't like this. I don't like this at all.

Where are the German, Italian, Polish, Swiss, Swedish, Norwegian, French, English, Australian, Irish, Scottish immigrants? Why are they all brown and yellow with alien cultures that don't share the basic fundamental assumptions of mine?

Why is my country importing people that aren't White to the point that White people will be a minority soon? Why is my government giving my land, my country, my inheritance, my homeland away? Why is my government going out of its way to be sure that White people are outnumbered in "their own country" that soon, and obviously, it will no longer be "their own country"?

On the other hand, does "Whiteness" matter? Is it just an accident or surface diversity of pigment? Is there a fundamental difference in races? If there is, should we acknowledge it? Does is matter? Is it wiser and more moral to notice differences and act on them, or to pretend they don't exist, for the happiness and comfort of all?

People ARE people, after all. And their human dignity, no matter their color, must be respected. But is pretense required to accomplish that? Or is pretense the destroyer of dignity? If there is a fundamental difference among races, is it kindness or cruelty to pretend otherwise? Is it kindness or cruelty to acknowledge it, and deal with it?

If races do differ in innate characteristics, talents, intelligence and potential, is it fair or moral to those races who cannot meet the standards or accomplishments of others to demand or expect it of them? Is it fair to those whose cultures are high, to be swamped and degraded by those whose cultures are not?

Culture is not at issue here, really. I am clear that different culture cannot co-exist in the same nation. That has been demonstrated without serious argument, as a recipe for disaster.

It is as clear everywhere that culturally unassimilated immigrants create conflict, anger, resentment, even violence within countries; that order and community and freedom and human dignity and justice and even the economy are weakened.

For the United States to survive, foreign immigrants MUST assimilate into our culture. The Multiculturalists are wrong...deadly wrong...dangerously wrong. And we must resist them at every turn. Of this there is no doubt.

The question is no longer whether can cultures co-exist, but rather: Is race a determinate of culture?

Christianity and other high Spiritual systems tell us that all men are the same, equally beloved by God or emanations of the same Divine Spirit. These are powerful arguments against the idea that race should separate us. If we are all equally the Children of God, or essentially the same Spirit beneath our material forms, how can we distinguish between races? Why does race matter? Why should one seek to perpetuate one's own?

Assuming that we rate cultures, and that we determine Western Culture is the best...does it matter who perpetuates it? If all Whites disappeared, but all the resulting Cafe-au-Lait colored people cherished and advanced Western Civilization, would race matter?

On the other hand, is it possible for Western Civilization to survive White People's demise?

We are the inventors and builders of it. No other race developed anything like it. Africans and Arabs persist in primitive tribal collectives to this day. Asians seem to naturally develop totalitarian regimes with submissive, obedient, compliant, conformist subjects. Even after the profound influence of America in Japan after WWII, the Japanese culture remains highly conformist and non-individualistic. Western hemisphere "indian" populations are all still awash in poverty, ignorance and corruption.

Who among them can keep the light of Western Civilization shining in the world? Who among the races that did not naturally develop anything like it, can undertake to preserve it faithfully and truly and advance it appropriately?

In my head I see the children of Road Warrior...repeating snippets of the Great Civilization, in mangled words, without understanding, among its ruins.

So, what is the answer? Is preserving the White Race an important mission? Is it false pride, parochial interest, arrogance? Is it really just "tribal" too?

Or is it almost a sacred duty, not only for the survival of the Race...but literally for the hope and advancement of the entire World?

If that is so, perhaps the way to "frame" the mission is just that: The preservation of the White Race and its nations is a MUST for the advancement and improvement of all the other races.

Though others will find that argument painfully arrogant, it follows this If/Then logic:

IF races are fundamentally different, and culture is determined by race...

IF Western Civilization is the highest, best culture yet evolved by Man...

IF only the White Race developed, or COULD develop Western Civilization with its freedom, dignity and justice for all...

IF no race but the White Race could maintain and advance Western Civilization to ensure the preservation of these principles for all time, and eventually for all men...

THEN, it is a Sacred Duty for the hope of Mankind to see that the White Race and its superior civilization do not perish from the earth.

This is perfectly logical if all the IF's are true. And I suppose, finally, my question is: ARE ALL THE IF'S TRUE?

The Gunslinger

Thursday, June 07, 2007

White America

Unbelievable. A "mainstream" writer actually addresses the notion that making Whites a minority in America is a bad thing.'s Ann Coulter. Maybe "mainstream" doesn't apply, technically. But still, she is a major media voice. And it's nice to see someone beyond the blogs willing to risk being called a racist in order to mention the fact that White people have a right to survival as a race.

Refreshing and delightful as always, our Ann.

The Gunslinger