Getting Thrashed by the Thrasher

Biracial people tend to possess, ironically, a lot more ‘black anger’ than full-blooded blacks. Furthermore, it often seems that the angriest are gay biracial black men. Sociologists ought to look into this phenomena to see if there’s anything there, but I’m not holding my breath.

In The Guardian, a biracial-looking columnist named Thrasher (appropriate name) believes the Left is too nice (!), then begins his SJW sermon with Jesus:

He was a righteously furious Middle Eastern Jew, who’d been born while his mother was migrating and grew up to put the fear of God into capitalists, putting them on the run with a whip.

Now that’s some intersectionality! Where to begin. That Mary was a ‘migrant’ is probably the topper.

Similarly, James Baldwin accurately said that “To be a Negro in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a rage almost all the time,” a quote I keep on my desktop to remember that being aware comes with a predictable fury…

Repeat: He keeps that Baldwin quote… on his desktop.

Angry people get things done. But American patriarchy and white supremacy have tried to teach us that anger is the domain of white, cisgender, rich heterosexual men only – and that women, people of color, transgender people, immigrants, workers, the disabled, and others need to be nice and meek in the hope that we will get some crumbs of justice.

Is somebody keeping an eye on this Thrasher?

Is he on any psychiatric meds?

Does he own a gun?

Posted in Black, Left | Comments Off on Getting Thrashed by the Thrasher

How German-Jews Tried To Defuse Radical Eastern European Jewish Immigrants

In the annals of U.S. history, the tenuous relationship between highly-assimilated, establishment German-Jews and the huge, secondary wave of Eastern European Jews is quite an interesting one. Tablet has an article on “The Industrial Removal Office”:

German American Jewish leaders created the Industrial Removal Office (IRO) in 1901 to remove unemployed eastern European Jewish immigrants from New York City and relocate them throughout the United States to smaller cities where Jewish communities and jobs existed. From its inception to its liquidation in 1922, the IRO dispatched 79,000 Jews to more than 1,000 American towns and cities. The IRO enlisted the cooperation of the local Jewish communities to secure employment and housing for the men they sent and to ease their settlement into the communities. The central office in New York City was staffed primarily by German-American Jews, who exhibited the same ambivalent attitudes toward the newcomers as did other German-Jewish philanthropies.

A number of factors motivated the German-Jewish leaders to create this organization. By 1900, New York held more than 500,000 Jews, the largest Jewish population of any city in the world. The unending flow of Jewish immigrants into New York’s Lower East Side generated enormous problems for the immigrants and the city’s Jewish establishment. Packed together in the Jewish quarter, the newcomers endured filth, poor sanitation, disease, and soaring rates of delinquency and crime. Dispersing the immigrants would alleviate some of these problems. It would also ease the immense burden placed upon New York’s Jewish charities by hundreds of indigent and sick newcomers.

Umm… Aren’t we missing something here?

Another factor also influenced the IRO’s founders. They and other native-born American-Jewish leaders believed that New York’s huge eastern European Jewish enclave offered a prime breeding ground for radical movements such as socialism and anarchism.

Okay, that’s better.

Detaching the immigrants from this environment and shipping them to smaller Jewish communities in the Midwest, South, and West would forestall their subversion and facilitate their Americanization.

Or would it simply sprinkle radical political inclinations to other parts of the country?

IRO leaders, like others of their class, also worried that even the most admirable and assimilated American Jews would be judged as being no better than the worst of the immigrants. So they took measures that they believed would protect their own standing. They hoped that distributing the immigrants and thus aiding their Americanization would enhance the image of the Jew in the eyes of the general public and lessen anti-Semitism…

Although most immigrants remained in the cities where they were sent, some did not. The causes for their leaving varied. Loneliness, the fact that they had more relatives and friends in New York, and the lack of a Jewish environment or work seems to have been the chief motives for their departure.

But as for the Eastern European Jewish immigrants who remained concentrated in NYC… well, we know how that story goes.

The Tablet article also contains some letters from the day, from relocated Jews to the IRO, which are quite revealing:

It is five months since I have arrived to Meridian, and with pleasure will describe to you the condition in which the Jewish immigrants are around this neighborhood. The city of Meridian, where I am living, consists of about 75 Jewish families. They have been here for 8-10 years, and are all well-to-do. The most part of them are very rich, doing business in the millions. Three quarters of them are German Jews and the rest of them are Russian Jews, but every one of the Russian Jews is trying to get the title of a German Jew. Most of the business in the town is in the hands of the Jews and they are growing very rapidly in both power and riches.

The Christian population is very friendly to the Jews and the anti-Semitism is very low. This is because the Jews in this town are very honest and do business on business principles. Yet, there are some exceptions to this situation with the Russian Jews. That is because there were some crimes committed by Russian Jews against a few natives of this city. One misfortune was that a Jewish peddler stole a gold watch and chain from a farmer. Another case involved a clerk who ran away with hundreds of dollars from his employer. And what is done in New York every day is unexpected in a small town like this. 

The last sentence would today be labelled anti-Semitic… wouldn’t it?

From another complaint letter written at the time:

Mr. Kohn provided me with work in a certain factory, but after I stayed two weeks I was discharged, having been accused of organizing a strike.

I would imagine the full inventory of IRO letters would provide a treasure trove of information and insight into the full scope and true acknowledgement of Eastern European Jewish radicalism.

Posted in History, Jewish | Comments Off on How German-Jews Tried To Defuse Radical Eastern European Jewish Immigrants

Too Much Attention to White People

Such is the root cause of the internal rift & purging (i.e., the anti-white virtue-spiraling) at the progressive Wellstone Action:

David Wellstone and other Democrats close to his father began objecting last year to what he described as Wellstone Action’s abandonment of disaffected Democrats in the rural Midwest — the rural poor were an early focus of the late senator — with an increasingly narrow focus on gender politics and people of color.

“I said, ‘After Trump, we’ve got to figure out how we are going to go back after those Democrats that we lost,” David Wellstone said. “We can do all the stuff we do. We do great stuff on communities of color, we’re doing great stuff on gender identity politics. But we need to do some of these other trainings. … Nobody wanted to have a discussion about that.”

Things will be so much easier once white people just die already.

Posted in Anti-White, Left | Comments Off on Too Much Attention to White People

RIP: Tom Wolfe

Posted in Culture, Literature | Comments Off on RIP: Tom Wolfe

St. Lincoln

In a saccharine piece in First Things (“Nuanced Patriotism”), Allen C. Guelzo waxes romantic over Lincoln and how his mystical legacy magically argues against tribalism, ethnonationalism, etc:

American conservatives never adopted a blood-and-soil mentality the way German, Italian, and French nationalism did in their heydays. When Lincoln delivered the funeral eulogy for his “beau ideal of a statesman,” Henry Clay, in 1852, he described Clay’s patriotism as only partly a love of his country “because it was his own country.” That reflected the usual patriotism of the tribe or the nation. The real engine of Clay’s patriotism, Lincoln argued, was that America “was a free country; and he burned with a zeal for its advancement, prosperity and glory, because he saw in such, the advancement, prosperity and glory, of human liberty, human right and human nature.” Much as Clay “desired the prosperity of his countrymen . . . because they were his countrymen,” his fundamental desire was “to show to the world that freemen could be prosperous.” Clay was devoted to the ideals of America that are encoded into the founding documents that structure the American state. Eleven years later, Lincoln applied this kind of patriotism to himself when, at Gettysburg, he described the foundation of the American Republic resting “under God,” not on family or language or ethnicity, but on “the proposition, that all men are created equal.” This proposition animates a system of government, our system.

In this the same Lincoln who, in the fourth Lincoln-Douglas debate held on September 18, 1858, said:

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races — that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.

Is this also the same Lincoln who, in a letter dated August 22, 1862 to Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, wrote:

If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause.

Nothing drives me more crazy than cuckservatives who, in trying to flesh out their Civic Nationalism, project onto figures like Lincoln some imaginary, enlightened, racial blindness that he never, in fact, possessed.

Posted in History, National, White Identity | Comments Off on St. Lincoln

Russell’s Mind

Bertrand Russell

“Many years ago I visited Bertrand Russell in his rooms at Trinity College and he showed me a manuscript of his in which there was not a single correction for many pages. With the help of his pen, he had instructed the paper. This is very different indeed from what I do. My own manuscripts are full of corrections – so full that it is easy to see that I am working by something like trial and error; by more or less random fluctuations from which I select what appears to me fitting. We may pose the question whether Russell did not do something similar, though only in his mind, and perhaps not even consciously, and at any rate very rapidly…

“We may indeed conjecture that Bertrand Russell produced almost as many trial formulations as I do, but that his mind worked more quickly than mine in trying them out and rejecting the non-fitting verbal candidates.”

— Karl Popper, “Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind”, Dialectica, vol. 32, no. 3-4, 1978, p. 347.

Posted in Philosophy | Comments Off on Russell’s Mind

Racist Beatles Songs

Was “Hey Jude” written about the Jews, specifically the Jewish sense of self and history? (“Jude” means “Jew” in German.)

And anytime you feel the pain, hey Jude, refrain
Don’t carry the world upon your shoulders
For well you know that it’s a fool who plays it cool
By making his world a little colder…

Apocryphally, McCartney wrote the song, released as a single in 1968, to comfort a young Julian Lennon during his parents’ divorce, and this is still the most likely inspiration for the song. But, lyrically, a pop song need not have only one meaning to it.

The Wikipedia entry for “Hey Jude” notes two sources that, among the many different theories about whom the song is about, speculate “Hey Jude” was directed at Bob Dylan (Robert Zimmerman), who was in his post-motorcycle-accident, semi-retirement phase in Woodstock, NY. There’s also this interesting bit:

A failed early promotional attempt for the single took place after the Beatles’ all-night recording session on 7–8 August 1968.[101] With Apple Boutique having closed a week before, McCartney and his girlfriend, Francie Schwartz, painted Hey Jude/Revolution across its large, whitewashed shop windows.[102] The words were mistaken for anti-Semitic graffiti (since Jude means “Jew” in German),[102] leading to complaints from the local Jewish community,[81][103] and the windows being smashed by passers-by.[104] Discussing the episode in The Beatles Anthology, McCartney explained that he had been motivated by the location – “Great opportunity. Baker Street, millions of buses going around …” – and added: “I had no idea it meant ‘Jew’, but if you look at footage of Nazi Germany, ‘Juden Raus’ was written in whitewashed windows with a Star of David. I swear it never occurred to me.”[13] According to Barry Miles, McCartney caused further controversy in his comments to Alan Smith of the NME that month when he said: “Starvation in India doesn’t worry me one bit, not one iota … And it doesn’t worry you, if you’re honest. You just pose.”

It’s known that in those early, un-PC days, The Beatles could get cheeky in the studio. Some sources indicate that during recordings for the 1967 song “Baby You’re A Rich Man”, John vocally riffed with humorous lyrics about The Beatles’ manager Brian Epstein, singing: “Baby you’re a rich fag Jew.”

No Pakistanis” is a spontaneous studio jam from early 1969 and a precursor to what would eventually become “Get Back”:

Don’t want no black man!
Don’t dig no Pakistanis
Taking all the people’s jobs…

Meanwhile back at home too many Pakistanis
Living in a council flat
Candidate Macmillan, tell us what your plan is
Won’t you tell us where you’re at?…

Oh, get back, get back
Get back to where you once belonged!
Get back, get back,
Get back to where you once belonged!

Another line of the jam includes:

Don’t need no Puerto Ricans
Living in the USA.

In 1986, Paul (obviously aware of the bootleg circulations of these songs) would tell Rolling Stone:

When we were doing Let It Be, there were a couple of verses to “Get Back” which were actually not racist at all – they were anti-racist. There were a lot of stories in the newspapers then about Pakistanis crowding out flats – you know, living 16 to a room or whatever. So in one of the verses of “Get Back”, which we were making up on the set of Let It Be, one of the outtakes has something about ‘too many Pakistanis living in a council flat’ – that’s the line. Which to me was actually talking out against overcrowding for Pakistanis… If there was any group that was not racist, it was the Beatles. I mean, all our favourite people were always black. We were kind of the first people to open international eyes, in a way, to Motown.

I never harbored any racist sentiments! Some of my best friends are black!

Around this same time, Paul and John jammed in the studio on what is known as “The Commonwealth Song”. By today’s standards, the spontaneous jam is chock full of politically incorrect phrases, with the lyrics centering around Enoch Powell’s famous 1968 “River of Blood” speech and its political fallout. Some of the lyrics are difficult to decipher, but the gist comes through.

Tonight, Enoch Powell said, “Get out immigrants,
Immigrants had better go home.”
Tonight, Wilson said to the immigrants,
“You’d better get back to your Commonwealth homes.”
Yeah, yeah, yeah
He said “You’d better get back home!”…

I went to Pakistani
I went to India
I been to old Calcutta
And I’ve had enough of that
I’m coming back (yes?!)
To England town (Yes, welcome!)
And dirty Enoch Powell
And he’s had enough of colored men [or does he say “Parliament”?]

Commonwealth! (Yes!)
Commonwealth! (Yes!)
Commonwealth! (Yes!)
Well Enoch Powell, you gotta go back to home!

Well I checked off to Australia
And I said to New Zealand:
“You better go in with us
Because we’re gonna have some fun.
We’re going out to India
We’re going to Pakistan..
I hear that Enoch Powell… he’s fixing for that…

Commonwealth! (Yes!)
Commonwealth! (Yes!)
Can you hear me talking Commonwealth?
Yeah the Commonwealth
But it’s much too wealthy for me
(It’s much too common or me)
Much too common for me, oh yes…

Of the political incorrectness in these songs, the SJWs in Salon sure want to remind you of it. Alex Sayf Cummings, a history professor at Georgia State University, pens “No Pakistanis”: The racial satire the Beatles don’t want you to hear”:

Better known as a playful take on counterculture, starring the gender-bending Sweet Loretta Martin and the grass-smoking Jo-Jo, the song originally dealt with South Asian immigration to the United Kingdom…

An early version of the song, known to bootleggers as “No Pakistanis,” began with Paul McCartney muttering, “Don’t dig no Pakistanis taking all the people’s jobs.”…

In a recording known as “Back to the Commonwealth” or “The Commonwealth Song,” the band blasts the politician by name. “Dirty Enoch Powell said to the immigrants, immigrants you better get back to your commonwealth homes,” McCartney warbles over a skittering beat. Soon enough, however, we learn that “Heath said to Enoch Powell you better get out, or heads are gonna roll.” As the song slides into a rollicking boogie, McCartney recounts his travels around the old British empire, from the West Indies to India and Pakistan, as Lennon chimes in occasionally, in the voice of a prim old English woman, “The Commonwealth is much too common for me.”

For what it’s worth, it is not a “prim old English woman” that Lennon is imitating here, but a Peter Sellars-styled imitation of an Indian.

Cummings also addresses the Beatles quasi-blues studio jam often called “White Power”:

Then there is the matter of “White Power.” In this recording, Lennon and McCartney free-associated names of popular figures over a blues jam, drifting from Malcolm X and Cassius Clay to the likes of Judy Garland and British pop pianist Russ Conway. The juxtapositions are intriguing: Mary Whitehouse, a British crusader for morals and decency, comes up, as does Dusty Springfield, the legendary soul imitator. The Beatles were up to something when they coupled Richard Nixon and Malcolm X with the incessant refrains of “white power” and “can you dig it?” but it was not something they intended to share with the public. The recording has never seen release. A somewhat similar song, “Dig It,” made it onto the “Let It Be” album, but the racial dimension was missing. Instead, Lennon rambled about the BBC, B.B. King and soccer player Matt Busby.

Posted in Immigration, Music, White Identity | Comments Off on Racist Beatles Songs

A Conqueror’s Freedom

From “I’m Not Black, I’m Kanye” by Ta-Genius Coates:

[Kanye] West calls his struggle the right to be a “free thinker,” and he is, indeed, championing a kind of freedom—a white freedom, freedom without consequence, freedom without criticism, freedom to be proud and ignorant; freedom to profit off a people in one moment and abandon them in the next; a Stand Your Ground freedom, freedom without responsibility, without hard memory; a Monticello without slavery, a Confederate freedom, the freedom of John C. Calhoun, not the freedom of Harriet Tubman, which calls you to risk your own; not the freedom of Nat Turner, which calls you to give even more, but a conqueror’s freedom, freedom of the strong built on antipathy or indifference to the weak, the freedom of rape buttons, pussy grabbers, and fuck you anyway, bitch; freedom of oil and invisible wars, the freedom of suburbs drawn with red lines, the white freedom of Calabasas.

Digest this man’s hatred of whiteness.

In a few decades time, imagine what’s in store for our society’s remaining whites when this guy and his ilk hold the whip.

It’ll be ‘payback time’, with a vengeance unlike anything you’ve ever seen.

Posted in Anti-White, Black, Culture Wars | Comments Off on A Conqueror’s Freedom


“Children existed solely to inherit a man’s trade, his moral code and his property. This was taken for granted among the aristocracy, but merchants, craftsmen and peasants also bought into the idea, so it became the norm at every level of society. That’s all gone now: I work for someone else, I rent my apartment from someone else, there’s nothing for my son to inherit. I have no craft to teach him, I haven’t a clue what he might do when he’s older. By the time he grows up, the rules I lived by will have no value — he will live in another universe. If a man accepts the fact that everything must change, then he accepts that life is reduced to nothing more than the sum of his own experience; past and future generations mean nothing to him. That’s how we live now. For a man to bring a child into the world now is meaningless.”

—  From The Elementary Particles by Michel Houellebecq.

Posted in Culture, Death of the West, Literature | Comments Off on Children

Is Richard Spencer the Alt Right’s Timothy Leary?

In The Spectator, Sam Leith asks “Might LSD be good for you?” There is something of a parallel between the sociology of psychedelics research and promotion and the Alt Right as a research and social movement.

And there’s an uncanny parallel between the jester-like figure of Timothy Leary, who was a Harvard scholar before becoming the Pied Piper of Psychedelia, and Richard Spencer:

Ah, Leary. Publicity-crazed, perma-grinning Timothy Leary was the worst possible ambassador for psychedelics. Not only did his stunts contribute substantially to the atmosphere in which governments cracked down both on street use and clinical research, his fame occluded the serious work that has been done on them before and since.

Posted in Alt-Right, Culture, Psychology | Comments Off on Is Richard Spencer the Alt Right’s Timothy Leary?