ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, July 22, 2019

We won that one

After the media collaborated with Richard Spencer to poison the term "Alternative Right", we simply began to describe ourselves, accurately, as nationalists. Specifically, as "Nationalist Right" to distinguish ourselves from the left-wing imperialists of the Fake Right. Since the media's many subsequent attempts to poison that term have absolutely failed despite their best efforts, both the Left and Right factions of the globocracy are now attempting to capture it.
Nationalism, by its nature, excludes people. Raising one’s nation above others begins with defining what that nation is — and who belongs in it.

It’s theoretically possible to have a liberal nationalism, even a socialist nationalism, that welcomes foreigners interested in joining the nation’s ranks. The last president’s rhetoric about what Americans have in common, and how immigration strengthens the country, strikes me as a species of liberal nationalism.

But conservative nationalism by its nature not like that. It holds that community arises from longstanding and deep connections between citizens, connections that come from their shared identity, history, and cultural values. This is what is “conservative” about it, and also what makes it inclined to view the entry of foreigners into the American polity skeptically.
So now instead of liberalism/socialism vs conservatism they're attempting to set up a false dichotomy of liberal/socialist nationalism vs conservative nationalism. Their problem is that despite their best efforts to redefine "nationalism", the word still actually means something substantial to most people.

And not, as the NatCucks, aka Neoclowns 2.0, would have it, in "a repudiation of racism, libertarianism, and identity politics."

Nationalism, in the American context, means America First. Not "we must defend our Greatest Ally" or "we must bomb X for the children" or "we must invade Y because weapons of mass destruction" or "the problem is ILLEGAL immigration" or "the Z is rotting in the fields!" or "they have the Magic Paper so they are just as American as you". Nationalism means rejecting the Proposition Nation, the Huddled Masses, the Melting Pot, and the 1965 Invasion Act. It means rejecting Judeo-Christianity, the Athens+Jerusalem equation, equality, desegregation, diversity, and every other historical falsehood that is being utilized to adulterate, devalue, degrade, and demoralize America.

And no amount of placing adjectives in front of the word nationalism in order to gatekeep the genuine nationalists is going to work. But the mere fact that they feel the need to do so now confirms that the long-term macrosocietal trends are finally flowing in our favor.

Labels: ,

153 Comments:

Blogger Nation-Deprived July 22, 2019 8:11 AM  

It is really quite astounding to see Vox (Day’s) predictions come to fruition. This really is becoming a thing now. Glad I heard it first on this blog instead of the neoclown facade.

Blogger W. P. Harrison July 22, 2019 8:12 AM  

God forbid we cultivate strong ties and cultural values within American communities.

Blogger Fargoth July 22, 2019 8:13 AM  

Proutfoots rising......Proudfeet? I forget

Blogger Joe Smith July 22, 2019 8:15 AM  

It's the end of Starship Troopers (the movie) where Carl puts his hand on the brain bug: "It's scared!"

Blogger Stilicho July 22, 2019 8:19 AM  

"But the mere fact that they feel the need to do so now confirms that the trends are now flowing in our favor"

Exactly. The enemy does not try to co-opt unsuccessful movements.

"It’s theoretically possible to have a liberal nationalism, even a socialist nationalism"

My favorite (rhetorical) response to that was some wag who tweeted "who's going to tell them?"

The left and cuckservatives (hi, Burke institute!) are desperately trying to define nationalism as a "racsit, bigot, homophobe" movement (to quote the big bear) while simultaneously defining their hyphenated-nationalism as "true" nationalism. There can no more be a hyphenated-nationalism than there can be a hyphenated-American. It is a time for choosing.

Blogger The Cooler July 22, 2019 8:20 AM  

I was waiting for this.

They have redefined everything else with relative success, why not go after what a nation actually is; openly, instead of the subtextually and subliminally?

We will see many instances of them flying too close to the sun over the next few years, I expect. Since they simply cannot stop escalating, they'll eventually fly right into it.

Blogger Glaivester July 22, 2019 8:22 AM  

Another sign of us winning; Yoram Hazony started this conference, at least in part, to gatekeep what nationalism should mean.

Amy Wax, on the other hand, basically said something to the effect of "civic nationalism and proposition nationalism are still going to wind up disparately favoring white people as immigrants over non-whites" (and she was fine with that). Hazony had to defend her.

That seems to be shifting the Overton Window.

Blogger New Creation July 22, 2019 8:22 AM  

Spot on. I chuckled at "even socialist nationalism." I seem to remember someone trying that...

Blogger ZhukovG July 22, 2019 8:24 AM  

Socialist Nationalism... hmmm, that rings a bell. Where have I heard that before?

Maybe if I hum a few bars of 'Das Lied der Deutschen', it will come to me.

Blogger billo July 22, 2019 8:28 AM  

Actually, this is glorious. I can't wait for the Progressives to start saying "You people are nationalist conservatives and thus Nazis. We, on the other hand, are national socialists!"

Blogger billo July 22, 2019 8:29 AM  

New Creation wrote:Spot on. I chuckled at "even socialist nationalism." I seem to remember someone trying that...

Sorry about duplicating your observation. Looks like a number of folk thought the same thing at the same time.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan July 22, 2019 8:33 AM  

Ok I have to ask who here actually could read that whole crappy article over at Vox? "Ism, ist and phobia, Orange Man Bad", there you go, just like a thousand other pieces that not even SJWtards read completely, all junk.

Hazony has a weak spot and that is he is trying to fuse Cultural Marxism to Nation or nationalism if you want to play the ism game. I'd pay a fiat dollar if Hazony tries to tag the term "Cultural Marxism" anti-semitic in nature. Well he does have a twitter acct. I'll have to work on that project.

Blogger wahr01 July 22, 2019 8:35 AM  

"It’s theoretically possible to have a liberal nationalism, even a socialist nationalism, that welcomes foreigners interested in joining the nation’s ranks"

Even this attempt to co-opt the nationalist frame still silently screams "if they share the nation's values", an implication they can never expunge.

In the end they are setting themselves up to be push-overs for the civ-nat line of "exactly: we as a tolerant society shouldn't import knuckle-dragging, bigoted barbarians who throw gays off rooftops"

Blogger Whitecloak July 22, 2019 8:44 AM  

Solid white pill. The broad social trends are in our favor, this is true. If things are trending this way in a 'good' economic environment I wager thing'll get even more heated when things go sour on that front.

Scarcity always has a way of showing us who really belongs. If there's only enough for 100 to eat but you've got 125, somebody's going to have to Go Back.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 9:01 AM  

t means rejecting Judeo-Christianity, the Athens+Jerusalem equation

The only "Athens + Jerusalem" connection I have ever seen is various Catholic leaders saying that Christianity is the result of fusing Jewish scripture and Jew-written scripture (ie the New Testament) with Greek philosophy. They are entirely correct that there is no Christian worldview without combining those two things together. The melding of the two lead to revelation reconciled with the natural world and an understanding of the natural world rooted in the spiritual realm.

Blogger Stilicho July 22, 2019 9:01 AM  

"Amy Wax, on the other hand, basically said something to the effect of "civic nationalism and proposition nationalism are still going to wind up disparately favoring white people as immigrants over non-whites" (and she was fine with that). Hazony had to defend her."

Interesting. This would show that civic-nationalism is simply virtue-signaling to disguise actual human nature. This virtue-signaling would describe the neo-clown "other" who uses it to define himself as American as well as the actual Americans who use it to avoid leftist criticism (racist bigot homophobe...n.b. You have to use Owen's pronunciation when reading those words...).

Blogger Garuna July 22, 2019 9:02 AM  

"Nationalism. Use that word."
-God Emperor Trump

Blogger RCR_Chris July 22, 2019 9:14 AM  

They do have ar least a tenuous foothold in trying to conflate "white nationalism" with "white supremacy".

I've run into many who have fallen for that falsehood.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 9:14 AM  

When it comes to segregation, there is no good principle because it's perfectly clear that blacks are divided into two camps: those that can and/or have integrated and those that can't or won't. There is no principle that allows some late 19th century immigrant's white children to claim full participation in our society and then deny the same to an integrated black person whose ancestors came over as slaves 5-7 generations before that European immigrant came here. Similarly, if we permit systematic segregation, then it stands to reason that we should likewise carry out a systematic ethnic cleansing by forced deportation of all ethnic enclaves in the North and Great Lakes states.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 9:16 AM  

The only "Athens + Jerusalem" connection I have ever seen is various Catholic leaders saying that Christianity is the result of fusing Jewish scripture and Jew-written scripture (ie the New Testament) with Greek philosophy.

That's because you've never read Leo Strauss and you're blissfully unfamiliar with Ben Shapiru's latest piece of work, The Right Side of History.

They swap out the metaphorical Jerusalem of St. Augustine for the Jewish people.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 9:17 AM  

They do have ar least a tenuous foothold in trying to conflate "white nationalism" with "white supremacy".

White nationalism is functionally an attempt to rebrand white supremacy because you can barely find any self-proclaimed white nationalists who don't openly and stridently hate non-whites and Jews.

That is why the sort of nationalism that Vox advocates scares the ever loving shit out of both them and the left. It is rooted primarily in love and defense of the true, good and beautiful, and love is a much more dangerous and powerful motivator than hate.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 9:18 AM  

There is no principle that allows some late 19th century immigrant's white children to claim full participation in our society and then deny the same to an integrated black person whose ancestors came over as slaves 5-7 generations before that European immigrant came here.

Of course there is. It's called "DNA". And your logic is idiotically binary. Gradations eliminate your false conclusion.

Blogger Shimshon July 22, 2019 9:18 AM  

@20 Ben Shapiru

And here I thought the correct spelling was Shapiroo. Shows what I know.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 9:18 AM  

That's because you've never read Leo Strauss and you're blissfully unfamiliar with Ben Shapiru's latest piece of work, The Right Side of History.

I was referring to what you were talking about, not what an ignorant and dishonest shitbag like Shapiro meant.

Blogger Brett baker July 22, 2019 9:19 AM  

That would be an abomination to Judeo-Christ, I understand.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 9:27 AM  

And here I thought the correct spelling was Shapiroo. Shows what I know.

Hmmmm... Do you books say "BERENSTANE BEARS" too?

Blogger Avraham July 22, 2019 9:28 AM  

I thought the USA was doing well when it was basically WASP. There is a principle --a guest can not invite a guest. So WASPs graciously allowed people in need to come. But that does not mean they the guests ought to invite others. The change in the USA is such that a swamp of people in the USA are hostile to America. Also the Socialist Left made the USA seem a lot different than the period that I recall.

Blogger D E K July 22, 2019 9:32 AM  

Reading it being in Poland. The people here are beginning to hear all the bad things happening in Germany, but they are still oblivious too the good thing they have here. Haven't seen one muslim woman yet and I am feeling at ease being White under Whites.

Blogger ZhukovG July 22, 2019 9:36 AM  

@Winston Smith: Just as Boers are a unique European Nation that developed in Africa. I believe that African-Americans are a unique African Nation(possibly more than one) that has developed in North America.

We will either cause their eradication or we will find some way to accommodate them.

We can accommodate them by either assigning them their own territory or allowing them to coexist in some condition as a minority population.

My personal vote is accommodation through grant of territory, not that what I want will matter.

Blogger Lucas July 22, 2019 9:37 AM  

I throw in "Christian Nationalist", which, as far as I have seen, totally divides the waters.

Bonus if you say "I believe mostly what the Poles and the Hungarians believe about politics, religion and immigration". That pretty much makes you the New General Franco, or our own Prof Antonio Salazar, the Legend.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 9:40 AM  

Christian Nationalist is good too, and is my preferred self-description in a political context. Although Nationalist Christian would be more dialectically precise.

Blogger Lucas July 22, 2019 9:41 AM  

"They swap out the metaphorical Jerusalem of St. Augustine for the Jewish people."

I see.

So Shapeeroo thinks that the people who cried out "Crucify Him" are the ones who built the civilization based on the morals of the Crucified One?

What a weasel.

Blogger sammibandit July 22, 2019 9:46 AM  

Nationalism, by its nature, excludes people. Raising one’s nation above others begins with defining what that nation is — and who belongs in it.

This line of thought always struck me as painfully out-of-touch with reality. Firstly, the idea that nationalism is principally exclusionary is facile. It is inclusive of ethnicities within a nation. It cannot be principally exclusionary because there was never room for those outside the nation to be included. The German national hymn, despite over a century of protestations displays that well: Germany the nation over the various ethnicities making the Fatherland. They still use a verse from that so-hated hymn in the current version. Heck, you can even go as far back as summer 9 AD to see that play out in the Battle of Teutoborg Forest when various tribes united. Clearly, the writer is making ish up.

No nation on the face of the earth doesn't define itself as set above and apart from whence it came. Simple Sausserian (sp?) logic dictates that something is defined by what it is not. This is neither critical or hypocritical, it is axiomatic. A tree is not a fern. Poles have the White Forest, Germans have the Black Forest. This isn't simply "you're exclusive". Those that are "excluded" aren't left in an empty middle because they have their own nations to include them.

This idiot shouldn't have used the word "nature" to describe nation because everything that followed from that makes no sense. It just shows he is out of his depth and concealing willingly or unwillingly that which is true. I suspect the latter.

Blogger ZhukovG July 22, 2019 9:52 AM  

Would 'Nationalist Christian' be understood as 'The Nation(American, French etc.)' that is 'Christian(Laws, Customs and so on)'?

For example, 'Nationalist Islam' = Persian + Shia Islam = Islamic Republic of Iran.

Blogger Unknown July 22, 2019 9:59 AM  

Jerusalem: "Thus sayeth the Lord "

Athens: "Man is the measure of all things"

These propositions are mutually exclusive.

Propositional revelation is fundamental to epistemology.

Athens is a man made of water, in the water, trying to climb out of the water on a rope made of water. Athens reduces to absurdity.

Only God may speak with full and final authority.

Blogger Nobody of Consequence July 22, 2019 10:06 AM  

The Constitution left immigration and actual naturalization up to each individual state. The single grant of power about naturalization grants the feds ONLY the power to make the process of naturalization 'uniform' in every jurisdiction hence 'To make an uniform rule of naturalization' in article I Section 8. Why uniform if only the feds were naturalizing folks? Where is the grant to control immigration and naturalization? None written.

Some time around the beginning of the 20th century the feds simply stole the powers and took over making the States less autonomous.

Those who have been allowed entrance to any of the United States and have been naturalized by the feds are NOT citizens of these United States because the feds hold no authority to make anyone a citizen through naturalization. the facts are simple. No grant of power, no authority. Grants must be explicit not bs plenary or implied or inherent. Simple review of the granted powers proves that even the simplest power must be granted and that one grant does not attach to a separate power regardless of need or one's incredulity.

Blogger Astrosmith July 22, 2019 10:08 AM  

LCH continues to have popular conservative Christian figures on his Sunday interview podcast. It's like they all have to go kiss his little ring in order to continue to be included in official "conservative" circles. It's really sad.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 22, 2019 10:09 AM  

Winston Smith wrote:There is no principle that allows some late 19th century immigrant's white children to claim full participation in our society and then deny the same to an integrated black person whose ancestors came over as slaves 5-7 generations before that European immigrant came here.
What have principles to do with it? By and large, Blacks don't want to be a part of our nation, they have their own. That's the only principle involved, they are a separate people with their own history, genetics, philosophy, family structure, language, literature and customs. They have never been willing to give them up, and it's time idiots like you stopped demanding we give up our own culture to make them feel better.

The sooner you stop looking for principles by which to direct other people's actions, the sooner you will wee people for what they actually are.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 22, 2019 10:14 AM  

Lucas wrote:That pretty much makes you the New General Franco, or our own Prof Antonio Salazar, the Legend.
Can I be Franco? I love Franco. Libertarians who grow up get to be Agosto Pinochet instead?

Blogger Warunicorn July 22, 2019 10:20 AM  

"socialist nationalism"

L to the O to the L

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 10:26 AM  

Winston Smith wrote:The only "Athens + Jerusalem" connection I have ever seen is various Catholic leaders saying that Christianity is the result of fusing Jewish scripture and Jew-written scripture (ie the New Testament) with Greek philosophy.

The fusion has little to do with ancient Greeks, and nothing at all to do with modern Judaism.

Shimshon wrote:And here I thought the correct spelling was Shapiroo.

Shapiroos - like Underoos!

Lucas wrote:So Shapeeroo thinks that the people who cried out "Crucify Him" are the ones who built the civilization based on the morals of the Crucified One?

Some of those same people became Christians on the day of Pentecost, and in the years after. Again, that has nothing to do with modern Judaism. Judeo-anything is a repudiation of Christ and a rejection of the God who sent Him.

Nobody of Consequence wrote:Some time around the beginning of the 20th century the feds simply stole the powers and took over making the States less autonomous.

See the 17th amendment.

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 10:30 AM  

“the 1965 Invasion Act”

Awesome. "The 1965 Invasion, uh, Immigration Act" for the less astute (the "OMG, Becky isn't even hot" crowd).

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 10:31 AM  

LCH continues to have popular conservative Christian figures on his Sunday interview podcast.

I don't even know what an LCH is. I can only conclude that I'll never be included in their little club.

Blogger Gettimothy July 22, 2019 10:37 AM  

Bravo Vox!

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 10:43 AM  

“Jewish scripture […] natural world rooted in the spiritual realm”

“perfectly clear that blacks are divided into two camps: those that can and/or have integrated and those that can't or won't”

“White nationalism is functionally an attempt to rebrand white supremacy”


The Christian worldview exists as a core. Other things, such as Greek philosophy, Jews (general, physical) taking a pen (implement) in their hand and moving it around on a page, may touch upon this core, but as Christianity comes from Christ, and Christ is not a product of the Greeks or Jews, the Christian worldview is Christ and antichrist. In that which pertains to Christianity.

Integration implies becoming a whole. This is false. It is acquiesce, and inclined entropy.

Aside from an incorrect term, white nationalism as a rebrand of white supremacy, in its current state, is failed, and so is not a functional rebranding.

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 10:45 AM  

“The Constitution left immigration and actual naturalization up to each individual state”

So, this allows California to allow Mexico to invade. For California to bestow State citizenship upon those people who so do. And for the free movement of those citizens throughout the several states, and voting rights. The short answer is no. And the comparatively very old repealed defining on naturalization shows this was not the intent.

Blogger dienw July 22, 2019 10:45 AM  

After Rome, the West had no unique word to define the Other: Rome had the word gentile to define the non-Roman (i.e. St. Paul was not a gentile while the remaining apostles were); the Greeks had the words ethnos and barbarian; the ancient Hebrews had the word goy which simply meant nation, not an infidel beast: an Israelite was a goy to a Judahite and a Judahite was a goy to the Israelite.

We need to turn the tables on the ZOG and use goy to refer to any non-Americans and Jews: when viewed from the United States, Jews are goyim.

Blogger Avalanche July 22, 2019 10:50 AM  

@19 " there is no good principle because it's perfectly clear that blacks are divided into two camps: those that can and/or have integrated and those that can't or won't."

I believe this is a misconception:

This commenter gets it when he wrote the following. http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2015/05/will-last-white-person-to-leave.html

(Note: "IKAGO" = "I know a good one." the all-too-often excuse from the unawakened.)
=====================
I don't mourn the loss of Baltimore. Or Detroit, Chicago, Gary, Atlanta, etc etc etc.

It is ultimately a huge benefit to have Negroes concentrated in these huge teeming Petri dishes.

As always I advocate the complete White withdrawal from these horrible urban shitholes, and as always I advocate that since Negroes do not want to be policed, to immediately stop policing them.

And to anyone who might be naive enough to say "hey, there are good people in those neighborhoods, who try to work and raise their kids, who obey the law and who abhor the lawlessness and rioting as much as anyone".... my response is that these same IKAGO's voted for a Negro president, for Negro mayors, Negro city council members, Negro police chiefs and Negro school superintendents, and now they are getting exactly what they deserve, good and effing hard.

I have ZERO sympathy for blacks.
=====================

"can and/or have integrated"? No, clearly no such thing.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 10:54 AM  

@29

I have a similar view of it, but the fact is that our ancestors chose the worst of all possible combinations:

1. Deny them their own territory and sovereignty over it.
2. Force them to live in our communities.
3. Deny them any chance of equality and full citizenship merely on account of DNA and no personal choices.

Desegregation was natural under that regime. It was inevitable because our ancestors were unwilling to do something radical like uproot the entire white population of 2-3 southern states and Trail of Tears march them out so the freed slaves could have a contiguous homeland not dependent on white America for things like ports to do regional and global trade.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 11:08 AM  

The race and slavery issues were a consequence of our ancestors whoring themselves to Mammon and defying established, binding dogma on treatment and compensation of workers. The last 140 years were a warning shot with us being flooded by millions of poor and primitive Africans. Now we have the trans-Pacific pipeline that is bring in large numbers of middle and upper class Indians, and history will not be as kind to us if we don't repent of this whoring and bring down the culture that idolizes acquisitiveness and greed over a godly understanding of the economy and humanity.

Blogger Astrosmith July 22, 2019 11:10 AM  

Heh... LCH = Littlest Chicken Hawk

Blogger DonReynolds July 22, 2019 11:11 AM  

The more confusion the Leftist Liberals and Progressives create in this country, the more men and women will thirst for clarity and order.

But no amount of confusion can ever make an orange into a watermellon or a carrot. A Patriot must be a Nationalist, even if no one else is a Nationalist. So there will never be a Patriot who would destroy his own country to benefit foreign citizens. No Patriot would ever want his own children to starve, so foreign masses can eat. No Patriot would rob his own country to offer tribute to a foreign potentate. And no Patriot would ever support or encourage the invasion of his own country by a foreign people or the displacement of his own countrymen.

Blogger Crew July 22, 2019 11:28 AM  

A comment on Steve Sailor's article about the disgusting WaPo obit for John H. Tanton says:

Conservativism Inc. is pretending Trump supporters don’t actually want to see Ilhan Omar repatriated to Somalia.

Not true. Send them all back! They don't belong here!

Blogger Crew July 22, 2019 11:32 AM  

The race and slavery issues were a consequence of our ancestors whoring themselves to Mammon and defying established, binding dogma on treatment and compensation of workers.

Not my ancestors, and, not the ancestors of the majority of Americans.

That was mainly done by (((them))) and a small coterie of fellow travelers!

Blogger Tobias July 22, 2019 11:33 AM  

I am a bit more cautious about the term nationalism becoming more "salonfähig". As a German I obviously see the collapse of the EU in the not too distant future, and another financial crisis, that will be used to further expropriate wealth and resources from the ever shrinking middle class. Then you have the narrative of the EU as a "peace project" which is of course factually wrong (see Yugoslavia). But the narrative is strong, and a decent amount of people buy into it. So, I suspect, that the oligarchs allow (and perhaps even push) the rise of nationalism/populism (and other terms that essentially describe the same thing), and when the nationalist takeover of Europe is complete, then, boom, the oligarchs will let the next big economic crash happen, and blame nationalism for all of it.

Blogger anorganicbear July 22, 2019 11:36 AM  

I have to say, some of Owen's rhetorical assertions really strengthen Vox's dialectic arguments rather nicely. "They have the magic paper squares so they are just as American as you" is a great way to get past the programming for people still stuck on "the problem is ILLEGAL immigration."

Blogger P Glenrothes July 22, 2019 11:39 AM  

I'm very pleased to recently discover I'm a "posterity" American. Going back 9 generations, a family tree has 512 branches. I was surprised because it's German lineage, rather than British. They were Pennsylvania colonists since prior to 1732, and likely fought for the Revolution. I have Vox to thank for motivating my search.

Blogger Crew July 22, 2019 11:42 AM  

@57: http://www.europeanamericansunited.org/school1/Fiction/kipling/awakened.htm

Blogger Jack Amok July 22, 2019 11:43 AM  

Raising one’s nation above others...

Nice little lie there. We're not trying to raise our nation above others, we just want to be left alone. There are plenty of other nations full of fine people we would be happy to exchange tourist visas with.

but the fact is that our ancestors chose the worst of all possible combinations

WTF is the point of your incoherent ramblings? Are you claiming we today don't deserve our own nation and land because of some sin in our ancestral past? If so, to hell with you, and the sooner the better.

Blogger Crew July 22, 2019 11:53 AM  

It was inevitable because our ancestors were unwilling to do something radical like uproot the entire white population of 2-3 southern states and Trail of Tears march them out so the freed slaves could have a contiguous homeland not dependent on white America for things like ports to do regional and global trade.

This is just nonsense. The freed slaves belong back in their ancestral countries, which means Africa for most of them.

Blogger DangerSemiconductor July 22, 2019 11:53 AM  

I have been using the documentary film Apollo 11 as a teachable moment to the clueless normies around me.

Something like Project Apollo was only possible with nationalism.

It generally takes a moment for that to sink in.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 12:17 PM  

This is just nonsense. The freed slaves belong back in their ancestral countries, which means Africa for most of them.

An idea only slightly more easily implemented in 1865 than a Japanese invasion of the West Coast in 1941.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 12:19 PM  

I mean FFS, dude. You do realize there were about 4-5M freed slaves that would have to have been uprooted and taken safely across the Atlantic with pre-steam engine technology. And there is no way those people would voluntarily get into a holding pen like their ancestors were forced into after all of the stories of how many people died in them on their way to the Americas.

Blogger sammibandit July 22, 2019 12:35 PM  

There's a town in my province founded by freed slaves called Amber Valley. They were given land in one state, did not like it and then moved to Northern Alberta. They're doing pretty well.

Blogger Sam July 22, 2019 12:41 PM  

Avraham wrote:I thought the USA was doing well when it was basically WASP. There is a principle --a guest can not invite a guest. So WASPs graciously allowed people in need to come. But that does not mean they the guests ought to invite others. The change in the USA is such that a swamp of people in the USA are hostile to America. Also the Socialist Left made the USA seem a lot different than the period that I recall.

Nah, it was the same as today- immigrants were let in for votes and cheap labor and it was unpopular.

Winston Smith wrote:I mean FFS, dude. You do realize there were about 4-5M freed slaves that would have to have been uprooted and taken safely across the Atlantic with pre-steam engine technology. And there is no way those people would voluntarily get into a holding pen like their ancestors were forced into after all of the stories of how many people died in them on their way to the Americas.

We shall call it Haiti.

Blogger Crew July 22, 2019 12:43 PM  

@63: You are a moron. It was done after WWII. The difference between 12M and 60M is not much!

Between 12 and 14 million civilians, the overwhelming majority of them women, children and the elderly, were driven out of their homes or, if they had already fled the advancing Red Army in the last days of the war, forcibly prevented from returning to them.

The Expulsion Of The Germans: The Largest Forced Migration In History

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 12:50 PM  

I suspect, that the oligarchs allow (and perhaps even push) the rise of nationalism/populism (and other terms that essentially describe the same thing), and when the nationalist takeover of Europe is complete, then, boom, the oligarchs will let the next big economic crash happen, and blame nationalism for all of it.

Winning doesn't frighten Americans. FFS, stop worrying about what will happen if the enemy's plans work.

Blogger Duh-ave July 22, 2019 1:08 PM  

"And there is no way those people would voluntarily get into a holding pen like their ancestors were forced into after all of the stories of how many people died in them on their way to the Americas."

I'm sure they were all Django clones with full knowledge of their history.

Blogger Winston Smith July 22, 2019 1:13 PM  

@66,

@63: You are a moron. It was done after WWII. The difference between 12M and 60M is not much!

Between 12 and 14 million civilians, the overwhelming majority of them women, children and the elderly, were driven out of their homes or, if they had already fled the advancing Red Army in the last days of the war, forcibly prevented from returning to them.


Citing anything the Red Army did in Eastern Europe as an inspiration is certainly one way to lead yourself and anyone stupid enough to follow you to the Lake of Fire.

The ship has sailed on repatriating blacks to Africa and there is no moral way to uproot the whites and other non-blacks of any states to carve out a homeland for them here. There will quite possibly be war because our choices have lead us to that point. And trying to forcefully send 37M+ blacks to Africa is a surefire way to start a race war with us as the unjust aggressor.

Blogger Beardy Bear July 22, 2019 1:17 PM  

Judas-Christian values won't stop the coming tide. We have no King but Christ! Deus vult.

Blogger anorganicbear July 22, 2019 1:25 PM  

"The ship has sailed on repatriating blacks to Africa and there is no moral way to uproot the whites and other non-blacks of any states to carve out a homeland for them here. There will quite possibly be war because our choices have lead us to that point. And trying to forcefully send 37M+ blacks to Africa is a surefire way to start a race war with us as the unjust aggressor."

I'm not convinced this is the case anymore, given that they are sending caravans of 35,000+ Africans to America. If the majority of people don't see that movement as unjust then why would they see it as unjust to send them the other way, once the smoke and mirrors of "racism" no longer works?

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 1:35 PM  

xevious2030 wrote:So, this allows California to allow Mexico to invade.

You need to reread the Constitution. ``Congress shall establish a uniform rule ...'' means that Congress can rule that out. It specifically does not allow one state to allow an invasion.

Blogger John Best. July 22, 2019 1:40 PM  

Spend 70 years attacking nationalism, then claim all not-nationalist ideologies you created were secretly nationalist all along. Damn statists.

Blogger sammibandit July 22, 2019 1:41 PM  

I'd call that a low ball since several million were immigrated to the grave.

Blogger Tobias July 22, 2019 1:55 PM  

VD wrote:

Winning doesn't frighten Americans. FFS, stop worrying about what will happen if the enemy's plans work.


Fair enough. I don´t want to be a despair salesman, but isn´t it prudent to be mindful and take the enemy´s plan into account?

Blogger Mark Stoval July 22, 2019 2:00 PM  

"Scarcity always has a way of showing us who really belongs. If there's only enough for 100 to eat but you've got 125, somebody's going to have to Go Back."

In the end, no one is going back. Many will die instead.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 2:01 PM  

I don´t want to be a despair salesman, but isn´t it prudent to be mindful and take the enemy´s plan into account?

Certainly. But your fears of what the enemy's plan might be and the enemy's actual plan are almost certainly two entirely different things.

Blogger Whitecloak July 22, 2019 2:01 PM  

@76 Meeting your maker is one way to Go Back. Suitcase or coffin, after all.

Blogger ZhukovG July 22, 2019 2:05 PM  

It is interesting to me that European descended Americans could likely repatriate to their ancestral homelands far easier than an African-American could. Most African-Americans have no idea what nation/tribe they are descended from. They have no national identity outside of North America.

With the coming break up of the American Union, I doubt mass deportment of any national group across an ocean is going to be feasible anyway. Depending on how chaotic things become, there may be a great deal of internal migration in North America. Some groups will be literally fleeing for their lives. The cities and many suburbs will burn.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 2:16 PM  

The ship has sailed on repatriating blacks to Africa and there is no moral way to uproot the whites and other non-blacks of any states to carve out a homeland for them here.

The ship has never sailed on the movement of peoples. It was once unthinkable that Africans would ever invade the Americas too.

Blogger P Glenrothes July 22, 2019 2:25 PM  

As R.F.Brown says in her excellent history series on Unauthorized TV,"History is never objective". History is complicated, layered, dynamic, multi-dimensional. Southern California history and Mexico history have always been intertwined. In a sense, Southern California never completely stopped being Mexico. It's a shades of grey area. The struggle is over which shade of grey predominates. By all means, send the illegals back.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 2:44 PM  

P Glenrothes wrote:By all means, send the illegals back.

What do you call 60 million illegals going back? A good start.

Blogger Nobody of Consequence July 22, 2019 2:59 PM  

@xevious2030

You misread. Yes CA can decide who immigrates to CA BUT there is no such thing as a "state" citizen. The Constitution provided for naturalizing such immigrants and the Congress sets forth the requirements, which states have to follow, of converting an immigrant to a citizen. And each State has the choice to NOT allow immigrants that another state allows to come on over until such time as the admitting state follows the naturalization RULE, there is no naturalization law under the Constitution, and naturalizes the immigrant. Any serious genealogical student knows that the states performed naturalizations in the 19th century.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 3:09 PM  

Tobias wrote:and when the nationalist takeover of Europe is complete, then, boom, the oligarchs will let the next big economic crash happen, and blame nationalism for all of it.

Since you can see it coming, you will be ready to counter it.

Winston Smith wrote:The ship has sailed on repatriating blacks to Africa ...

As Vox said, that ship hasn't sailed yet. If it does, it will be bound for Africa, laden with obsolete agricultural equipment.

Winston Smith wrote:.. and there is no moral way to uproot the whites and other non-blacks of any states to carve out a homeland for them here.

There is no moral way, because that is simply an insane idea.

This is our land, not theirs. God made an entire continent for the Africans, and they are welcome to it. They aren't welcome here, except as well behaved visitors.

Winston Smith wrote:And trying to forcefully send 37M+ blacks to Africa is a surefire way to start a race war with us as the unjust aggressor.

The race war has started, and we didn't start it. You are foolishly repeating enemy propaganda.

If blacks want to stay among the Whites, they need to learn to act White. If they want their own culture, they can have it - on their own continent.

Blogger Mr. Roshi July 22, 2019 3:11 PM  

nationalism, I'd say, is about establishing the best possible future for that nation's children. if one cares not for future prosperity of its own, it will fail.

people don't invite lazy neighbors to live in their house who would freeload and corrupt their children. sure, be charitable to the poor neighbor, but the family is generally a self serving entity.

of course the enemies attack family values too.

Blogger Noah B. July 22, 2019 3:12 PM  

"...the oligarchs will let the next big economic crash happen, and blame nationalism for all of it."

That's nothing to fear. In response, we can correctly point out that the oligarchs have manipulated markets to enrich themselves at the expense of the middle class. Then we confiscate the oligarchs' wealth, not as a form of socialism but as the just recovery of proceeds from criminal activity.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 22, 2019 3:14 PM  

Winston Smith wrote:there is no moral way

And this is where you fail.

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 3:15 PM  

"You need to reread the Constitution"

You need to reread my statements. The ending of them shows my lack of support for them. It starts with false assumption, throws in conclusions that run contrary to the argument I was responding to, and ends with the understanding that a State has no authority to allow invasion. This is before even mentioning the requirement that the United States (not the whim of one state) "shall protect each of them against invasion." In short, we're in agreement.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 22, 2019 3:20 PM  

Nobody of Consequence wrote:BUT there is no such thing as a "state" citizen. The Constitution provided for naturalizing such immigrants and the Congress sets forth the requirements, which states have to follow, of converting an immigrant to a citizen. And each State has the choice to NOT allow immigrants that another state allows to come on over until such time as the admitting state follows the naturalization RULE, there is no naturalization law under the Constitution, and naturalizes the immigrant.

Nobody cares. Nobody.The idea that California can let in people from other countries, but other states don't have to let them in, that's just an unworkable non-starter.

The Constitution is dead. The Left started ignoring the Constitution a hundred years ago, and the Right is coming to the realization that sticking with the Constitution is a sure way to lose our country.

Any argument that starts with "The Constitution says..." is an Onanistic exercise.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 3:37 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Any argument that starts with "The Constitution says..." is an Onanistic exercise.

You have to admit, Snidely, it was a nice constitution while it lasted, and it lasted almost 70 years, if we ignore the innumerable encroachments during those first 70 years.

The idea of a constitution is not a terrible one, but nothing is going to prevent every human institution from going terribly wrong. Constitutions set up human institutions, so they will never work in the long run. Neither will any alternative.

The best we can do is set up a government which has insufficient power, and be willing to shed blood to keep it that way. A couple of peaceful generations separated the US Constitution from the Civil War. A couple of peaceful generations is all it takes to let anything go wrong.

Being ungovernable is necessary to being free. Being governed by Christ is also necessary.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 3:39 PM  

@88, xevious, I find your stream of consciousness word salads confusing. I'm not surprised that I misread one. Sorry.

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 3:45 PM  

Amendment XIV “[…] are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside […]”

“The Constitution left immigration and actual naturalization up to each individual state. The single grant of power about naturalization grants the feds ONLY the power to make the process of naturalization 'uniform' in every jurisdiction hence”

Ok, California takes the invaders in, puts them all through the uniform naturalization process, and does not deny citizenship to any of them.

Blogger xevious2030 July 22, 2019 4:06 PM  

“I find your stream of consciousness word salads confusing. I'm not surprised that I misread one. Sorry”

Please, no need to apologize, though it is well taken and appreciated the same. I have a long history of being misunderstood, a number of times very much my fault, you are in good company. Thank you for your consideration.

Blogger Gettimothy July 22, 2019 4:17 PM  

"By your own argument, the American nation should be violently liquidated and sent back to Europe in pieces because God did not create the Americas for white peoples since they had been colonized for a few thousand years by the time our ancestors arrived."

The Conquistodors genocided a satanic people in South America. God has, can and will use peoples against each other. By your logic, the Spaniards are worthy of the Lake of Fire, while by God's standards they did well. Clearly your standards are not God's.



Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 4:22 PM  

Winston Smith wrote:By your own argument, the American nation should be violently liquidated and sent back to Europe in pieces because God did not create the Americas for white peoples since they had been colonized for a few thousand years by the time our ancestors arrived.

The injuns gave up on that a while back. I'm not interested in your fake outrage.

Gettimothy wrote:The Conquistodors genocided a satanic people in South America.

The North American savages weren't a Godly bunch, either.

God has used our conquest of North America to bless the descendants of the survivors of the savage aborigines. They have the Gospel available, which matters, and flush toilets, which matter less, but still matter.

Blogger tublecane July 22, 2019 4:25 PM  

"It's theoretically possible to have a liberal nationalism, even a socialist nationalism"

Hey, Mr. Beauchamp, there's this thing called history. You have the ability to look up such ideas as "nationalism" and see what mankind has done with it. Heck, why not try Wikipedia before handing in your little essay?

"Theoretically possible." Really. Is it at all possible he doesn't know there were actual historical examples of liberal and socialist regimes? Or that some of them might accurately be described as having been nationalist? Do your homework!

Blogger Gettimothy July 22, 2019 4:31 PM  

@96 Smith's outlook is worse.

Assume, as I do that Christendom is not done, that it is growing. A good case can be made that since God made the Nations, then as Christendom spreads victoriously, that the various Nations that make her up will see it as a positive good that they live as themselves amongst themselves.

If this assumption of grace on my part is correct, then I have the hope--dare I say I have a dream--that the people's of the world will graciously ship themselves back out of a sense of Christian duty and that other Christians will graciously help them.

Notice, that this vision of grace in nowhere in Smith's legalistic, pacifist, defeatist world view. It is a lack of moral imagination, a lack of awareness of the reality of sanctification.

Blogger Noah B. July 22, 2019 4:33 PM  

Like a lot of people, you will no doubt be very surprised when you stand before your maker and find out that the Natural Law is not only coequal with scripture in moral authority, but your gleeful rejection of it absolutely merits eternal damnation.

Appealing to human constructions of natural law "rights" as a basis of morality coequal with scripture is a proto-atheistic argument, not a Christian one. In the absence of God, human construction of moral codes has varied widely and it requires someone almost entirely ignorant of history to be unaware of this. And in pronouncing God's judgment against those you disagree with, you have left Christ's love and mercy completely out of the picture. So who is God going to punish, again, and why?

Also, it's always easy to spot the guy with divided loyalties.

Blogger Argus Bacchus July 22, 2019 4:57 PM  

"...because God did not create the Americas for white peoples since they had been colonized for a few thousand years by the time our ancestors arrived."

Your point is clear, but it's a rather odd usage of the word "colony."

One wonders for which political entity back in Northeast Asia these so-called "colonies" were established.

A minor point perhaps...but words and their meanings matter.

Blogger sammibandit July 22, 2019 5:06 PM  

By your own argument, the American nation should be violently liquidated and sent back to Europe in pieces because God did not create the Americas for white peoples since they had been colonized for a few thousand years by the time our ancestors arrived.

You must have missed the battle at Fort Henry when America won their flag from God. It's commemorated in the national hymn. But I know you're looking for ways to hobble the nation even if it means ignoring the most basic things about the nation, like God's grace.

Blogger White Rationalism July 22, 2019 5:17 PM  

Blacks are their own nation. Blacks do not belong on the North American Continent. Those who advocate for giving Blacks their own nation on the continental U.S in the wake up of break up appear to forget nations are forged by blood. Blacks played no role in the founding of the American Nation. Blacks would have to carve it out with their own blood. The idea that it would be bequeathed to them is unlikely. Let's say Blacks allied with Whites in CW 2.0 scenerio with the promise of their own nation...

Any African Ethnostate on the North American is going to result in a failed state. No matter what state(s) or land the Blacks get they would complain how they got 'screwed. How few states they received, or how they got the worst ones. Is the black ethnostate landmass going to be landlocked? If so they will cry foul. If the nation is coastal like Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and it gets hits by a Major Hurricane they will cry foul. Anyone who wants to know what is going to happen in a Black Ethnostate go to Youtube and search Detroit Timeline. That is the Wakanda that awaits Blacks. Even their outliers can't pull them out of their own demise.

Are the whites surrounding ethnostates going to continue to prop up a black ethnostate and support it financially..like permanantly adopting a child. Additionally, a black ethnostate opens up the eventual intervention on the North American Continent by the Chinese/Russians. What if the black ethnostate begins allowing mass immigration from their brothers in Africa which is on pace to hit 4 Billion by 2100. What if new diseases pop up in the Black Ethnostate that threaten to wipe out the surrounding nations on the North American Continent?

Blacks have their ancestral homeland, and while many think 200 years is an eternity in the big scheme of thing it's not. They have and always will have their African Identity.

Better to send them back with a commitment to help build Wakanda much like the great reconstruction, or was done with Japan after WWII. Then Whites can wash their hands once and for all. Which African Nation? Whichever ones could be enticed by whatever means to support the repatriation process.

And for those that say they can't go back...that the logistics aren't there... The logistics are in place to get here to North America...just not to go back? Yeah right.

Yes..Blacks may never go back..that may be the way things shake out...but until they do it is going to be nothing but problems for Whites in North America. Quarantine is short sighted, and not a permanent solution.

An African Nation on the North American Continent will be a disaster.

Blogger HouellebecqGurl July 22, 2019 5:21 PM  

A Jew defending another Jew???

Well, I'm shocked.

Blogger HouellebecqGurl July 22, 2019 5:30 PM  

Integrated blacks. Lol. You've never lived in the South, have you? You're more likely to find "integrated" beans that forded the Rio Grande 2 yrs ago.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 6:06 PM  

HouellebecqGurl wrote:Integrated blacks. Lol.

Jim Crow and Judge Lynch helped them live peaceably among us. It could happen again. The ones who don't like that idea have an entire other continent at their disposal.

Blogger tublecane July 22, 2019 6:10 PM  

@106- They're not really integrated under Jim Crow. At least, not in the sense we commonly use that word.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 6:30 PM  

tublecane wrote:@106- They're not really integrated under Jim Crow. At least, not in the sense we commonly use that word.

They were tolerable. That's enough for a start. American Blacks are mostly half White, or more, and some of them do fit in well with White culture. Many more can fit in if they don't have a choice.

Don't want to go back? Act White. Behave.

Blogger Vlad Z. July 22, 2019 7:04 PM  

@19 Winston YOU SAY: "There is no principle that allows some late 19th century immigrant's white children to claim full participation in our society and then deny the same to an integrated black person whose ancestors came over as slaves 5-7 generations before that European immigrant came here."

This comes back to something Z-man wrote about today, which is part of our weakness is that we need permission to do anything. We need some higher moral justification for making out country the way we want it. We must justify (to whom?) why we think all African derived people should leave, but Europeans who arrived later don't need to leave.

Why? Israel permits and denies citizenship based only on their own preferences and ideology. Why does our enclave need to have rules that are "fair" or, to be blunt, colorblind?

In fact, whether one agrees with it or not, Greg Johnson has written an entire book explaining the morality of the White Nationalist positon, which posits that race should be a significant requirement for citizenship.

So when you say "there is not principle" it really means either you are not aware of that entire school of thinking, or you disagree with it. But it assuredly does exist.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 22, 2019 7:20 PM  

Vlad Z. wrote:So when you say "there is not principle" it really means either you are not aware of that entire school of thinking, or you disagree with it. But it assuredly does exist.

He's a Fake American, if American at all. His principles are are not ours, if he has any.

Blogger Garuna July 22, 2019 7:53 PM  

when the nationalist takeover of Europe is complete, then, boom, the oligarchs will let the next big economic crash happen, and blame nationalism for all of it.

An economic crash will only accelerate nationalism. Wealth is an anesthetic.

Blogger ZhukovG July 22, 2019 7:54 PM  

There is nothing inherently immoral about resettling/repatriating/deporting a troublesome minority population. It is only the manner in which it is performed that can make it so. I believe the Turks give us some good examples for ways a Christian Nation should NOT do it.

Allowing a troublesome minority to live among your nation IS immoral. It represents one of the more heinous sins in the context of taking care of your people and family.

1st Timothy 5:8(KJV)
'But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.'

What is uncertain, is what the North American continent is going to look like in 50 years? What degree of Balkanization will occur? What resources will be available to the Nation-States that form from the Balkanization?

Like it or not, the resources for mass forced resettlement outside North America may not be available. Of course the conditions during the break up of the American Union may well solve most of the problem. Famine and disease are colorblind, but fortune favors the capable and prepared.

Blogger VFM #7634 July 22, 2019 8:37 PM  

Like a lot of people, you will no doubt be very surprised when you stand before your maker and find out that the Natural Law is not only coequal with scripture in moral authority, but your gleeful rejection of it absolutely merits eternal damnation.

Like Vox, I do think the future is bleak on these fronts. However, I think it is even bleaker because many nationalists fighting it will be shocked to find that they committed many war crimes that fully merit the Lake of Fire when they stand before God.


@93 Winston Smith
Y'know, you sound kinda like Rod Dreher...

Blogger VFM #7634 July 22, 2019 8:41 PM  

Better to send them back with a commitment to help build Wakanda much like the great reconstruction, or was done with Japan after WWII. Then Whites can wash their hands once and for all. Which African Nation? Whichever ones could be enticed by whatever means to support the repatriation process.

@102 White Rationalism
I've thought for some time that we should make some special deal with Ghana, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Liberia that they will provide free immigration rights to American blacks a la Israel with Jews. Those four countries specifically because their colonial language is English and appear to be genetically similar to American blacks.

Blogger VFM #7634 July 22, 2019 8:58 PM  

I've thought for some time that we should make some special deal with Ghana, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Liberia

In other words, Ayanna Presley can go there.

Blogger VD July 22, 2019 9:16 PM  

Like a lot of people, you will no doubt be very surprised when you stand before your maker and find out that the Natural Law is not only coequal with scripture in moral authority, but your gleeful rejection of it absolutely merits eternal damnation.

You're banned, Winston Smith. No more commenting here. It is not for you to say what does or does not merit eternal damnation.

I can't speak for God, but I do speak for here and I am casting you out. Don't try to comment here again.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 2:37 AM  

If using the word "nation" is going to be so problematic, we should drop it and start to refer to the USA as a political order, instead. After all, the USA was intended to be and has always been a republic, and a republic is a political order.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 3:43 AM  

Ken Younos wrote:After all, the USA was intended to be and has always been a republic, and a republic is a political order.
The USA is only tangentially related to the American nation. The American nation has existed as a monarchy, a confederation, a republic, and an empire. At one point it was self-ruled as two separate governments.
A nation is a people, it's very simple.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 4:12 AM  

@116: Wrong. The USA is a political order which came into being after the war for independence and with the ratification of the US Constitution. The USA has always been a republic. It has never been a monarchy or a confederation. Even with its "imperialism" abroad, it has never been anything other than a republic.

Blogger VD July 23, 2019 6:21 AM  

A nation is not a political entity, Ken. You're confusing "nation" with "state".

Blogger tublecane July 23, 2019 6:27 AM  

@117- "It has never been a monarchy or a confederation."

The constitutional United States was supposed to be a continuation of the Articles of Confederation. So yes, it was a confederation at one point.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 6:46 AM  

@118: The USA is a political entity. So if using the word "nation" makes things confusing, we should stop using the word.

@119: No, a confederation is not a republic. The US Constitution was written to accommodate a federal government, to balance the powers in the new Union, and to serve as a contract between the States, the people and the federal government. Prior to our US Constitution, there was no USA. Nice try, though.

Blogger The Cooler July 23, 2019 7:21 AM  

Do y'all see? Trying to get even people of above average intelligence to not conflate Nation with State (or Country), Citizenship with Nationality, is like trying to teach a monkey long division.

American = the "posterity" specifically referenced in the Constitution and those brought into the national fold by these people; a product of said people. American-ness is primarily dictated by blood, birth, descent -- an inheritance that can be solidified or diluted over time.

America = the metaphysics and manifest of the above People: their worldview, mores, folkways, impetus, etc. (America! America! God shed His grace on thee!, etc). Contextually, colloquially: The land possessed by the above People. Unless one is speaking with a monkey. In which case, one is talking at cross-purposes. With a monkey.

USA = Country/State(s) owned and operated by the above People; a practical structure and application of American-ness; geography and that which occurs within the boundaries thereof.

Nation = One IS their nation. Literally. One takes it them wherever they go. One does not take the State(s) with them. One does not take their country with them, either. One does not take the Republic with them, nor the political order operating within the USA.

Citizenship = a piece of paper. One purported to have magical powers. It slices, it dices, it juliennes! Not all citizens of the United States of America are American.

Citizen = Possessor of said magical paper.

Blogger New Atlantis Lost July 23, 2019 7:22 AM  

It all jumped right out at me by their choice of name for NeoCon 2.0. National Conservative Party? What, so it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy when their supreme leader arises and mirrors that of the National Socialist Party? All the SJWs will scree with glee at being right all along and the dupes who go along will continue to not understand.

Blogger Gettimothy July 23, 2019 7:31 AM  

@120 the point of these discussions is that "the usa" the political entity can and will be discarded by the people if it becomes harmful to the nation; we the people(s).

When in the course of human events it becomrs necessary for a people (a nation) to loose the ties that formerly bound it (The USA)...


The nation precedes the state.

Blogger The Cooler July 23, 2019 7:34 AM  

Yes, very good, Timothy. And my point is that Ken is a monkey.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 10:14 AM  

Ken Younos wrote:The USA is a political entity. So if using the word "nation" makes things confusing, we should stop using the word.
No, the problem is not the word "nation". The only one confusing it here is you. You insist on misusing it, presumably because using it correctly makes you feel bad. The problem here is you.

You have to go back.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd July 23, 2019 1:23 PM  

The Cooler wrote:And my point is that Ken is a monkey.

A lying, slimy, stupid, goat humping monkey, going by his brief record here.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 2:14 PM  

@125: //No, the problem is not the word "nation". The only one confusing it here is you. You insist on misusing it//

I said we should stop using the word. If I say stop using the word, that is not an insistence on its misuse. Stop using the world means don't use the word. Logic, it's a great thing. Something of which you are obviously incapable.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 2:21 PM  

@121: //American = the "posterity" specifically referenced in the Constitution and those brought into the national fold by these people; a product of said people. American-ness is primarily dictated by blood, birth, descent -- an inheritance that can be solidified or diluted over time.//

Posterity in the preamble to the Constitution refers to posterity of the 13 English colonies. Again I ask you: Are Americans of German descent, or of Irish descent, or of Italian descent, Not Americans?

"Time and changes in the condition and constitution of society may require occasional and corresponding modifications." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Livingston, 1825.

"I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self-evident: 'That the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;' that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it... We seem not to have perceived that by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independent nation to another." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 3:07 PM  

Ken Younos wrote:I said we should stop using the word. If I say stop using the word, that is not an insistence on its misuse. Stop using the world means don't use the word. Logic, it's a great thing. Something of which you are obviously incapable.
Jesus H. Christ you're stupid.
Ken Younos wrote:Again I ask you: Are Americans of German descent, or of Irish descent, or of Italian descent, Not Americans?
It's not about you.
You have to go back.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 3:17 PM  

@129: //Jesus H. Christ you're stupid.//

You're the one who is incapable of logic. "Stop using the word" =/= "misuse the word".

//It's not about you.
You have to go back.//

More evidence that you are, indeed, incapable of logic. I bet you're of German and/or of Irish descent. You have to go back (Jesus H. Christ you're stupid).

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 3:35 PM  

Look, you prissy little soyboy, nobody but you thinks you're clever. Actual Ilk know who I am. I've discussed my ethnicity a few times here. But just like your parents came into my country and started pretending to be Americans, you came in here and tried to pretend to be smart enough, or non-gamma enough to fit in here. You don't fit here, and you're not an American.

Blogger Gettimothy July 23, 2019 3:43 PM  

"Stop using the word 'nation'"

O,k. (((Nation))) its not a word; it is a meme!

Blogger OneWingedShark July 23, 2019 4:04 PM  

Ken Younos wrote:@118: The USA is a political entity. So if using the word "nation" makes things confusing, we should stop using the word.

@119: No, a confederation is not a republic. The US Constitution was written to accommodate a federal government, to balance the powers in the new Union, and to serve as a contract between the States, the people and the federal government. Prior to our US Constitution, there was no USA. Nice try, though.

Objectively false:
Article I. The Stile of this confederacy shall be, “The United States of America.”

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 4:15 PM  

@131: You are not American enough and you don't deserve to be in my country. You have to go back.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 4:20 PM  

@133: //Article I. The Stile of this confederacy shall be, “The United States of America.”//

The Confederacy wasn't united under a federal government. The USA did not come into being until after the ratification of the new Constitution. The USA is what it is because we have a federal government, three branches of federal government (a system of checks and balances), and a definition of the limits of its power as well as where State rights end and the federal powers begin; and because we have the Bill of Rights. The new Constitution created a new political order.

Blogger SirHamster July 23, 2019 4:21 PM  

dienw wrote:We need to turn the tables on the ZOG and use goy to refer to any non-Americans and Jews: when viewed from the United States, Jews are goyim.
How does it make any sense for Americans do adopt a foreign language to describe foreigners?

Speak English.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 4:38 PM  

Ken Younos wrote:You are not American enough and you don't deserve to be in my country. You have to go back.
Honk honk!
Ken Younos wrote:The USA did not come into being until after the ratification of the new Constitution.
No matter how many times you assert the equivalency of America and the USA, it will never be true. We have something you will never have, and it just wrankles, doesn't it?

Blogger OneWingedShark July 23, 2019 4:49 PM  

Ken Younos wrote:@133: //Article I. The Stile of this confederacy shall be, “The United States of America.”//

The Confederacy wasn't united under a federal government. The USA did not come into being until after the ratification of the new Constitution. The USA is what it is because we have a federal government, three branches of federal government (a system of checks and balances), and a definition of the limits of its power as well as where State rights end and the federal powers begin; and because we have the Bill of Rights. The new Constitution created a new political order.

Can you read?
It clearly says the Confederacy formalized by the Articles of Confederation is called "The United States of America" -- what does USA stand for? United States of America.
Yes, the Constitution established a federal government, but the USA already existed; as I showed upthread, established [at least formally] by the Articles of Confederation.

Geo. Washington wasn't the First President of the United States of America; he was the first president of the Constitutional United States of America. (see this article on Constitution.org)

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 4:54 PM  

@137: //No matter how many times you assert the equivalency of America and the USA, it will never be true.//

Truth is independent of what I say or wish, and the same goes for what you say or wish. I've provided some arguments as to why America IS in fact equivalent to the USA. Now let's hear your argument to the contrary.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 5:04 PM  

Ken Younos wrote:Truth is independent of what I say or wish, and the same goes for what you say or wish. I've provided some arguments as to why America IS in fact equivalent to the USA. Now let's hear your argument to the contrary.
No you have not. You have merely asserted it and then based your moronic, self-serving arguments on the assertion. My argument is the common and primary definitions of commonly used words.

Blogger The Cooler July 23, 2019 5:04 PM  

Ken can haz banana.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 6:52 PM  

The Cooler wrote:Ken can haz banana.
He'd rather have an opium field and a goat.

Blogger tublecane July 23, 2019 7:42 PM  

@120- I am unaware of whatever distinction you draw between republics and confederacies.

A union of states with a central government in common. Yeah, that's the Constitution. And that's a decent definition of a confederacy as well.

"Prior to our US Constitution, there was no USA"

What do you call the country that existed with the same states as the constitutional U.S. from 1781-1789? If not "USA," hey, what's in a name? It was still that country's articles that the constitutional convention convened to amend (allegedly).

There was also a government amongst American states between their status as colonies and the Articles of Confederation, called the Continental Congress. What do you call this country? If not "USA," hey, what's in a name?

Blogger tublecane July 23, 2019 7:53 PM  

@138- It's strange to be arguing about the difference (if any) between a government with a federal structure and a confederacy. A word which all but has "federal" inside it.

What the Articles of Confederation lacked was not federal government but a strong central government. It had a central government, only a weak one.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 8:19 PM  

tublecane wrote:It's strange to be arguing about the difference (if any) between a government with a federal structure and a confederacy. A word which all but has "federal" inside it.
The difference is who/whom. Who gives commands and to whom. In a confederacy, the constituent governments are of equal or greater stature with the central government. The central government can do the bidding of the constituents, like the the Articles of Confederation. In a Federal System, the constituent governments are subordinate to the central government. The Executive commands under powers granted by the Legislature, and approved by the Judiciary, and the constituent governments obey. Like under the Lincolnian Constitution.

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 9:12 PM  

@140: //No you have not. You have merely asserted it and then based your moronic, self-serving arguments on the assertion. My argument is the common and primary definitions of commonly used words.//

Oh yes I have, little dimwit. I've pointed out that your primary definition of the word "nation" was no longer appropriate a description of the USA shortly after independence. The demography became more complex, so it would have been more appropriate to describe the USA simply as a "political order". Moreover that complexity has continued to evolve. Immigrants have come here from different places at different points in time, have settled here, and eventually they became a permanent part of the American demographic landscape. There are also blacks and Indians who were here from the beginning. They are Americans, too. Based on all of this, America cannot be called a "nation" if we want to stick to strict definition of terms - but it is, and it has always been, a political order.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 23, 2019 9:49 PM  

You have indeed pointed out that you don't like the word "nation, and refuse to accept it because it makes you feel bad. Tough shit, Nancy. We are here, we are not you, and you are not us.
Once again you sneering little bacha bazi boy, nobody here is talking about the USA but you. We are talking about America, the American nation, consisting of Americans. Whom you can never join, because you're not one of us.You are again, even in this comment, conflating two separate concepts, American and USA.

Look, you sub-normal, maybe if we take this out of the context of your own inability to claim to be an American, perhaps you will understand.

After defeating Napoleon, the British set up a fake country out of Wallonia in northern France and Flanders in southern Nederlanden. They called it Belgium, a dishonest callback to an ancient tribe, the Belgae, that lived nearby in Roman times.
The political state of Belgium is much more complex demographically than just "French or Flemish". Does the existence of Belgium mean that there is no longer a Flemish nation. No longer a Wallonian nation?

Does the fact that Jews had no geographical base or ability to govern themselves or their own territories mean that they were no longer a nation? Did the Jewish nation suddenly appear in 1948 at the command of the UN?
Do Tibetans exist?
If I move to Montreal, am I Quebecois?
If Jesus was born in a stable, does that make Him a horse?

Blogger Ken Younos July 23, 2019 11:57 PM  

@147: //We are here, we are not you, and you are not us.//

You're damn right I am not you. I'm a true American, you are an "American" in name only. You don't belong here, and you should be driven off American soil by force. Go back to Germany.

//The political state of Belgium is much more complex demographically than just "French or Flemish". Does the existence of Belgium mean that there is no longer a Flemish nation. No longer a Wallonian nation? Did the Jewish nation suddenly appear in 1948 at the command of the UN?//

There is no "American" nation. There is only the English nation. If you're not pure English, you have no nation, no definable ethnicity. You are a mishmash monkey beating your chest about an imaginary ethnic identity. Pathetic but hilarious. Comic relief is good in these dark times, we'll be sad to see you go when you're forcibly driven off American soil with all the lefties, illegals and Muslims. You don't belong here, monkey.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 24, 2019 1:38 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 24, 2019 1:39 AM  

Ken Younos wrote:There is no "American" nation. There is only the English nation.
Of what does your asserted "English" nationality consist?
Anglo-Saxon? West Saxon or East Saxon?
Norman?
Scots?
Viking?
Mercian?
Cornish?
Devon?
Roman?
Welsh?
Pictish?
Pretanni?
Manx?
Jerriais?
Guernsais?
Scillian?
Northumbrian?
Ulsterman?
Scots-Irish?
Noman-Irish?
Tudor-Irish?
Hanoverian?

You're a fucking idiot. You have no idea of what the hell you're talking about, self-assuredly making unbelievably stupid assertions in violation of every observable reality.
Stop lying to yourself. Stop lying to us.

I'm done with you.

Blogger OneWingedShark July 24, 2019 10:50 AM  

tublecane wrote:@138- It's strange to be arguing about the difference (if any) between a government with a federal structure and a confederacy. A word which all but has "federal" inside it.

What the Articles of Confederation lacked was not federal government but a strong central government. It had a central government, only a weak one.

You're right about the central government existing; the Constitution was essentially a "remanufacturing" of that government, delegating certain limited powers from the States to that entity.

Snidely Whiplash wrote:tublecane wrote:It's strange to be arguing about the difference (if any) between a government with a federal structure and a confederacy. A word which all but has "federal" inside it.

The difference is who/whom. Who gives commands and to whom. In a confederacy, the constituent governments are of equal or greater stature with the central government. The central government can do the bidding of the constituents, like the the Articles of Confederation. In a Federal System, the constituent governments are subordinate to the central government. The Executive commands under powers granted by the Legislature, and approved by the Judiciary, and the constituent governments obey. Like under the Lincolnian Constitution.

Well, then the Constitution didn't establish a federal system, except perhaps in a very limited manner. The whole idea that "the federal trumps the state" is a twisting of the Constitution's supremacy clause designed to usurp power from the states by federal agents/officers/judges: the full clause limits the supremacy of the legislative acts to those made in pursuance to the Constitution.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

But, yes, you're absolutely correct that Lincoln changed a lot of the relationship between the federal government and the States, and the interpretation of the Constitution — I believe this is the reason that none of the Confederacy was charged with Treason: if the States were not free to leave, as asserted by Lincoln, then they were still members of the United States and therefore the Constitutional definition for Treason of either waging of war against the States or giving air and comfort to their enemies clearly makes the Treason Lincoln's… and if the States were free to leave, then the war was one of conquest.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 24, 2019 11:55 AM  

The original Constitutional regime fell in between these two categories, depending on the particular subject matter, it could be Federal Supremacy (tariffs, coinage) or it could be State Supremacy (criminal law, agriculture).
Lincoln, of course, changed that.

Blogger Dole July 24, 2019 4:43 PM  

Richard Spencer must be one of the greatest morons ever. He lost the little credibility he had with this stunt. Not sure why JFG keeps listening to the fraud.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts