the White network - Age of Treason Radio Archive

Who’s White? – Part 1

Published on October 2, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

This is something everyone knows. Yet many people, and especially Whites, pretend at least some of the time that they don’t know who’s White, or equivalently, what White means. Worse, some pretend they do know, but that it means nothing or isn’t important to them.

The meaning of White is significant. It has existential, transcendental value for Whites.

Based on the negative, adversarial attitudes towards Whites and Whiteness reviewed in previous podcasts we could say Whites are:

the people who aren’t supposed to identify as a group, because we’re responsible for oppressing every other group
the people who aren’t supposed to think about who we are, except to take the blame for everyone else’s problems
the people who are supposed to open our societies to everyone else, because we don’t want to be stupid/crazy/evil “racists”

Many Whites have internalized this negative view of Whiteness. But this is not satisfying. It’s not positive. It’s not healthy.

So who is White? The short answer is that White means European, people of European heritage. This begs the question: Who is European?

So a better understanding of Whiteness requires a deeper understanding of European history. But as we’ve seen, what is taught in government schools and corporate media is poisonously anti-White. What Whites need is a narrative and explanation which incorporates a racial understanding, recounted from a positive, sympathetic point of view.

I begin an exploration of this longer answer by reading a brief essay by Irmin Vinson, Racial Nationalism and the Aryans. The sub-title is, Who Were the Aryans?

The Aryans were semi-nomadic Nordic Whites, perhaps located originally on the steppes of southern Russia and Central Asia, who spoke the parent language of the various Indo-European languages.

Latin, Greek, Hittite, Sanskrit, French, German, Latvian, English, Spanish, Russian etc. are all Indo-European languages; Indo-European, or more properly Proto-Indo-European (PIE), is the lost ancestral language from which those languages ultimately derive. The “Proto” indicates that the grammar and vocabulary of this long extinct language, probably spoken up until 3000 BC, are a hypothetical reconstruction by modern philologists [philology = the study of literary texts and written records]. Just as Romance languages like Italian and Spanish derive from Latin, so Latin derives from PIE.

Indo-European philology traditionally used “Aryan” both to denote a people, understood racially or ethnically, and the language group itself (“Aryan speech”), irrespective of the race or ethnicity of the people speaking its various branches. In the wake of National Socialist Germany’s defeat, the term fell out of general scholarly use in both senses, and “Indo-European” (IE) became the preferred designation of the language group, “Indo-Europeans” of both the people who occupied the original Aryan homeland and their descendants, who gradually spread out across Europe, much of the Indian sub-continent, and parts of the Near East. Racial nationalists are not, of course, obliged to adopt the timid PC-lexicon of contemporary scholarship, but we should be aware of imprecision of “Aryan” as a racial or ethnic classification.

Arya, meaning “noble,” appears in various Indo-European languages. Its plural form (Aryas=”nobles”) was probably the name the Aryans used to describe themselves prior to their dispersal, and it may survive in Eire (Ireland) and certainly survives in Iran (Airyanam vaejo=”realm of the Aryans”). The discovery of thousands of such cognate words in widely separated languages, along with similar grammatical structures, led philologists to conclude, early in the nineteenth century, that most European languages had evolved from a common proto-language spoken millennia ago by a distinct people who gradually left their original homeland in a series of migrations, carrying their language with them.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

2 Comments

White Flight

Published on September 25, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

Whites are not simply forbidden to discriminate ourselves from others and exclude them – racial integration is imposed by genocidal anti-White governments under the disingenuous guise of increasing diversity and equality. Demonized and betrayed from above, the White masses vote with their feet. Despite the 24/7 propaganda telling us we should celebrate it, Whites are instead trying to escape the dystopia non-Whites bring.

Where Mexicans go, there is Mexico. Where Africans go, there is Africa. Likewise, where Whites go, there is Whitopia.

EEOC Home Page. What You Should Know about the EEOC and Religious and National Origin Discrimination Involving the Muslim, Sikh, Arab, Middle Eastern and South Asian Communities.

Age of Treason: The Unspeakable Blackness of Section 8 and Crime:

On the merged map, dense violent-crime areas are shaded dark blue, and Section8 addresses are represented by little red dots. All of the dark-blue areas are covered in little red dots, like bursts of gunfire. The rest of the city has almost no dots.

Betts’s office is filled with books about knocking down the projects, an effort considered by fellow housing experts to be their great contribution to the civil-rights movement. The work grew out of a long history of white resistance to blacks’ moving out of what used to be called the ghetto. During much of the 20th century, white people used bombs and mobs to keep black people out of their neighborhoods. In 1949 in Chicago, a rumor that a black family was moving onto a white block prompted a riot that grew to 10,000 people in four days. “Americans had been treating blacks seeking housing outside the ghetto not much better than … [the] cook treated the dog who sought a crust of bread,” wrote the ACLU lawyer and fair-housing advocate Alexander Polikoff in his book Waiting for Gautreaux.

Polikoff is a hero to Betts and many of her colleagues. In August 1966, he filed two related class-action suits against the Chicago Housing Authority and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, on behalf of a woman named Dorothy Gautreaux and other tenants. Gautreaux wanted to leave the ghetto, but the CHA offered housing only in neighborhoods just like hers. Polikoff became notorious in the Chicago suburbs; one community group, he wrote, awarded him a gold-plated pooper-scooper “to clean up all the shit” he wanted to bring into the neighborhood. A decade later, he argued the case before the Supreme Court and won. Legal scholars today often compare the case’s significance to that of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka.

PRRAC – Alexander Polikoff’s Gautreaux Proposal:

Some 170 years ago, Alexis de Toqueville [sic] called racial inequality “the most formidable evil threatening the future of the United States.” Toqueville went on to prophesy that the evil of racial inequality would not be resolved — indeed, that it would eventually bring America to disaster.

Ending black ghettos wouldn’t end anti-black attitudes any more than ending Jewish ghettos ended anti-semitism. But it is not easy to find anything in American society that matches the black ghetto for its poisoning effect on attitudes, values and conduct.

Sixty years ago, Gunnar Myrdal wrote: “White prejudice and discrimination keep the Negro low in standards of living, health, education, manners and morals. This, in its turn, gives support to white prejudice.”

Suppose 50,000 housing choice vouchers were made available annually, were earmarked for use by black families living in urban ghettos, and could be used only in non-ghetto locations — say, census tracts with less than 10% poverty and not minority impacted. Suppose that the vouchers were allocated to our 125 largest metropolitan areas. Suppose also that to avoid “threatening” any receiving community, no more than a specified number of families (an arbitrary number — say, ten, or a small fraction of occupied housing units) could move into any city, town or village in a year.

Polikoff and those to whom he is a hero care only to help blacks, no matter the harm done to Whites. Polikoff also misrepresents Tocqueville’s views. Tocqueville saw the racial inequality of black and White as unresolvable. He implied that the evil disaster, to use Polikoff’s terms, would be brought about by declaring blacks equal and setting them free among us.

Alexis de Tocqueville, Wikiquote, Democracy in America, Volume I (1835):

The most formidable of all the ills that threaten the future of the Union arises from the presence of a black population upon its territory; and in contemplating the cause of the present embarrassments, or the future dangers of the United States, the observer is invariably led to this as a primary fact. (Chapter XVIII)

You may set the Negro free, but you cannot make him otherwise than an alien to the European. Nor is this all we scarcely acknowledge the common features of humanity in this stranger whom slavery has brought among us. His physiognomy is to our eyes hideous, his understanding weak, his tastes low; and we are almost inclined to look upon him as a being intermediate between man and the brutes. (Chapter XVIII)

Brown v. Board of Education, Wikipedia:

The plaintiffs in Brown asserted that this system of racial separation, while masquerading as providing separate but equal treatment of both white and black Americans, instead perpetuated inferior accommodations, services, and treatment for black Americans.

Brown was influenced by UNESCO’s 1950 Statement, signed by a wide variety of internationally renowned scholars, titled The Race Question. Another work that the Supreme Court cited was Gunnar Myrdal’s An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (1944). Myrdal had been a signatory of the UNESCO declaration.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO. The Race Question, Wikipedia:

The Race Question[1] is the first of four UNESCO statements about issues of race. It was issued on 18 July 1950 following World War II and Nazi racism. The statement was an attempt to clarify what was scientifically known about race and a moral condemnation of racism.

Half of the authors are jews, including notorious jews Claude Lévi-Strauss, one of the founders of ethnology and leading theorist of cultural relativism, and anthropologist Ashley Montagu.

The constitution itself stated that “The great and terrible war that has now ended was a war made possible by the denial of the democratic principles of the dignity, equality and mutual respect of men, and by the propagation, in their place, through ignorance and prejudice, of the doctrine of the inequality of men and races.”

Massive resistance, Wikipedia:

Massive resistance was a policy declared by U.S. Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr. of Virginia on February 24, 1956, to unite other white politicians and leaders in Virginia in a campaign of new state laws and policies to prevent public school desegregation after the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision in 1954.[1] Although most of the laws created to implement Massive Resistance were negated by state and federal courts by January 1960, some policies and effects of the campaign against integrated public schools continued in Virginia for many more years; many schools, and even an entire school system, were shut down in preference to integration.

GUIDANCE ON THE VOLUNTARY USE OF RACE TO ACHIEVE DIVERSITY AND AVOID RACIAL ISOLATION IN ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS, U.S. Department of Justice – Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Education – Office for Civil Rights:

Conversely, where schools lack a diverse student body or are racially isolated (i.e., are composed overwhelmingly of students of one race), they may fail to provide the full panoply of benefits that K-12 schools can offer. The academic achievement of students at racially isolated schools often lags behind that of their peers at more diverse schools. Racially isolated schools often have fewer effective teachers, higher teacher turnover rates, less rigorous curricular resources (e.g., college preparatory courses), and inferior facilities and other educational resources. Reducing racial isolation in schools is also important because students who are not exposed to racial diversity in school often lack other opportunities to interact with students from different racial backgrounds.5

For all these reasons, the Departments recognize, as has a majority of Justices on the Supreme Court, the compelling interests that K-12 schools have in obtaining the benefits that flow from achieving a diverse student body and avoiding racial isolation.6 This guidance addresses the degree of flexibility that school districts have to take proactive steps, in a manner consistent with principles articulated in Supreme Court opinions, to meet these compelling interests.

White flight, Wikipedia:

White flight is a term that originated in the United States, starting in the mid-20th century, and applied to the large-scale migration of whites of various European ancestries from racially mixed urban regions to more racially homogeneous suburban or exurban regions. It was first seen as originating from fear and anxiety about increasing minority populations.

However, some historians have challenged the phrase “white flight” as a misnomer whose use should be reconsidered. In her study of Chicago’s West Side during the post-war era, historian Amanda Seligman argues that the phrase misleadingly suggests that whites immediately departed when blacks moved into the neighborhood, when in fact, many whites defended their space with violence, intimidation, or legal tactics.

America’s Booming White Enclaves, TIME, 12 Oct 2009:

Traveling some 27,000 miles, African-American journalist Rich Benjamin roamed the United States from 2007 to 2009 exploring a major demographic shift that’s attracting remarkably little attention — the flight of white residents from cities and integrated suburbs into cloistered, racially homogeneous enclaves. Tidy communities such as St. George, Utah and Coeur d’Alene, Idaho — places Benjamin calls Whitopias — have grown at triple the rate of America’s cities in recent years, raising troubling questions about the country’s multiracial cohesion. The Stanford literature Ph.D. chronicled his adventure in a new book, Searching for Whitopia: An Improbable Journey to the Heart of White America, and spoke with TIME about what he found.

Let’s start with the title of your book — what is a Whitopia, exactly? It seems to be more than just a place where a lot of white people live.

Absolutely. A Whitopia has three things. First, it has posted more than 6% population growth since 2000. The second thing is that the majority of that growth — upwards of 90% — comes from white migrants. The third thing a Whitopia has is an ineffable social charm — a pleasant look and feel.
(Read “A Brief History of the NAACP.”)

You say that many Whitopias offer a high quality of life and tend to perform well on those “Best Places to Live” lists that run in magazines. Do you think people are also drawn to these places specifically for their whiteness?

The major draw to Whitopia is that they’re safe communities with good public schools and beautiful natural resources. Those qualities are subconsciously inseparable from race in many Americans’ minds. For some people, race is a major role, and they said so to my face, but most of the Whitopians I encountered aren’t intentionally practicing racial discrimination or self-segregation.

What is the danger Whitopias pose to America as a whole?

You can call me old-fashioned, but I’m an integrationist. A democracy can’t function at its optimum unless all members are integrated as full members.

A community full of like-minded people tends to enforce their own view of the world and closes off opposing viewpoints. You can go to parties in New York City where the liberal smugness is intolerable, because they’re only hearing liberal viewpoints. On the Whitopian conservative side, it’s spinning out of control. Look at the tea-bagger movement, where people are concerned their taxes are going to be wasted on minorities and illegal immigrants. Same with the movement that says Obama is not a citizen.

You, a black man, sat in on a white separatist retreat. How did that go over?

They were curious and shocked they had found a black man on their premises. A lot of the members of the church took pains to explain to me the difference between white supremacy and white separatism. They said, “We don’t think we’re better than you, we just want to be separate from you.”

We see that tendency to divide ourselves into identity groups in places all over the world, it seems, whether it’s by race or religion or political view. Is it simply human nature, do you think?

I just reject that argument. People in Whitopia would say, “Hey Rich, birds of a feather flock together. What’s the big deal?” Our government and businesses across the country make decisions every day that perpetuate segregation. When you say homes need to be built on a one-acre lot, when you say apartment renters can’t live in your community — these concrete policies are what contribute to segregation. It’s not in our biology, and it’s not natural.

Benjamin repeats the same Big Lie put forth in The Race Question. Race is real. It’s in our biology. The urge to be around people like ourselves is perfectly natural and normal. In fact Whites act on those urges despite hostile attempts to compel us to behave otherwise. Non-Whites don’t want us to discriminate ourselves from them or exclude them because they don’t think it’s good for them. We should just reject their arguments and do what we need to do because it is best for us.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

19 Comments

Discrimination and Exclusion

Published on September 18, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

As important as guilt and pride are, discrimination and exclusion are even more critical to group indentity and integrity. Discrimination is “who is Us?” Exclusion is the act of separating Them from Us.

The original meanings of these two words represented perfectly normal and natural concepts. In recent decades cultural marxists have assigned them negative and distinctly anti-White meanings.

Discrimination (per Dictionary.com):

2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.

3. the power of making fine distinctions

Synonyms

3. discernment, taste, acumen, perception.

Discrimination (per Wikipedia):

Since the American Civil War the term “discrimination” generally evolved in American English usage as an understanding of prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their race, later generalized as membership in a certain socially undesirable group or social category.[2] “Discrimination” derives from Latin, where the verb discrimire’ means “to separate, to distinguish, to make a distinction”.

Within the criminal justice system in some Western countries, minorities are convicted and imprisoned disproportionately when compared with whites.[9][10] In 1998, nearly one out of three black men between the ages of 20-29 were in prison or jail, on probation or parole on any given day in the United States.[11] Native Americans make up about 2% of Canada’s population, but account for 18% of the federal prison population as of 2000.[12] According to the Australian government’s June 2006 publication of prison statistics, Aborigines make up 24% of the overall prison population in Australia.[13]

In 2004, Māori made up just 15% of the total population of New Zealand but 49.5% of prisoners. Māori were entering prison at 8 times the rate of non-Māori.[14] A quarter of the people in England’s prisons are from an ethnic minority. The Equality and Human Rights Commission found that five times more black people than white people per head of population in England and Wales are imprisoned. Experts and politicians said over-representation of black men was a result of decades of racial prejudice in the criminal justice system.

Exclude (per Dictionary.com):

1. to shut or keep out; prevent the entrance of.

2. to shut out from consideration, privilege, etc.

Social exclusion (per Wikipedia):

Social exclusion relates to the alienation or disenfranchisement of certain people within a society. It is often connected to a person’s social class, educational status, relationships in childhood[5] and living standards and how these might affect access to various opportunities. It also applies to some degree to people with a disability, to minority, of all sexual orientations and gender identities (the LGBT community), to the elderly, and to youth (Youth Exclusion). Anyone who deviates in any perceived way from the norm of a population may become subject to coarse or subtle forms of social exclusion.

Today various communities continue to be marginalized from society due to the development of practices, policies and programs that “met the needs of white people and not the needs of the marginalized groups themselves” (Yee, 2005, p. 93). Yee (2005) also connects marginalization to minority communities, when describing the concept of whiteness as maintaining and enforcing dominant norms and discourse.

From Towson University Student Proposes To Start A White Student Union On Campus, CBS Baltimore, 7 September 2012:

“We had to congregate together because we weren’t allowed to congregate with whites,” Julian Carroll, a junior at the university, said. “There is a difference between a White Student Union and a Black Student Union based on the history of America.”

Richard Vatz resigned as [faculty] adviser for that [Youth for Western Civilization] group. He says that just because the name changes, the principles don’t.

“When you have a group that calls themselves the White Student Union, their only purpose is generally hostility towards those who are non-white,” Vatz, a communications professor at Towson University, said.

Right now, no application is on file with the university to start the White Student Union. If it is discriminatory, it will not be approved.

“If inclusiveness is not the plan, then it will not be recognized by the Student Government Association,” Dr. Teri Hall, vice president of Student Affairs at Towson University, said.

Teri Hall (TowsonTeri) on Twitter.

Richard Vatz – Faculty & Staff – Department of Mass Communication and Communication Studies – Towson University. Down On Vatz, Baltimore Jewish Times, 27 July 2012.

From Letter to the Editor: Support white history, culture, by Matthew Heimbach, The Towerlight, 2 September 2012:

Kevin said:

Question: I am white… like really white. As in pretty much only from Western Europe, so naturally I’d be allowed to join right? However, I’m also Jewish, so does that nullify my entrance into the organization? You mention celebrating white culture, but do you deny the monotheistic religion from whence you came? Let me know Mattybear!

Sincerely,

Someone who already knows the answer.

From Interest for White Student Union grows, The Towerlight, 5 September 2012:

To say that “If blacks can have it, whites should have it too!” is a word trick. Do not fall for it. Blackness and whiteness are not symmetrical definitions. Blackness is defined by possession of black ancestry. Whiteness, on the other hand, is defined not by possession of white ancestry, but by NON-possession of non-white ancestry.

Someone like Barack Obama, for example, who has one black parent and one white parent, would be welcome in the Black Student Union but would be unwelcome in the White Student Union. This shows that a White Student Union is, BY THE VERY DEFINITION OF WHITENESS, more racist than a Black Student Union.

(Yes, I am “anti-white”, because “whiteness” is a racist construct.)

If these people really wanted fairness, they should form a student union that welcomes anyone with ANY QUANTITY of white ancestry, regardless of what other ancestry they may have. Only then would such a student union be equivalent to a Black Student Union that welcomes anyone with ANY QUANTITY of black ancestry. Think about it.

White pride (per Wikipedia):

Philosopher David Ingram argues that “affirming ‘black pride’ is not equivalent to affirming ‘white pride,’ since the former—unlike the latter—is a defensive strategy aimed at rectifying a negative stereotype”.[10] By contrast, then, “affirmations of white pride—however thinly cloaked as affirmations of ethnic pride—serve to mask and perpetuate white privilege”.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

4 Comments

Guilt and Pride

Published on September 11, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

George Carlin on national and ethnic pride:

I saw a slogan on a guy’s car that said “Proud to be an American” and I thought “What the fuck does that mean?”

I’ve never understood national pride. I’ve never understood ethnic pride.

I’m Irish. All four of my grandparents were Irish, and when I was a kid I would go to the St Patrick’s Day parade and they sold a button that said “Proud to be Irish”, but I knew that on Columbus day they sold the same button only it said “Proud to be Italian”, then came Black Pride, and Puerto Rican Pride. And I could never understand ethnic or national pride, because to me Pride should be reserved for something you achieve or attain on your own, not something that happens by accident of birth.

Being Irish isn’t a skill. It’s a fucking genetic accident.

You wouldn’t say I’m proud to be 5’11”. You wouldn’t be proud to have a pre-disposition for colon cancer.

. . .

If you’re happy, that’s fine. Happy to be an American. Be happy, don’t be proud. There’s too much pride as it is. Remember: Pride goeth before a fall.

Arthur Schopenhauer:

The cheapest form of pride however is national pride. For it reveals in the one thus afflicted the lack of individual qualities of which he could be proud, while he would not otherwise reach for what he shares with so many millions. He who possesses significant personal merits will rather recognise the defects of his own nation, as he has them constantly before his eyes, most clearly. But that poor blighter who has nothing in the world of which he can be proud, latches onto the last means of being proud, the nation to which he belongs to. Thus he recovers and is now in gratitude ready to defend with hands and feet all errors and follies which are its own.

Arthur Schopenhauer, from Wikipedia:

Schopenhauer believed that humans were motivated by only their own basic desires, or Wille zum Leben (“Will to Live”), which directed all of mankind.[25]

For Schopenhauer, human desire was futile, illogical, directionless, and, by extension, so was all human action in the world. He wrote “Man can indeed do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wants”.

Pride, from Wikipedia:

Pride is an inwardly directed emotion that carries two common meanings. With a negative connotation, pride refers to an inflated sense of one’s personal status or accomplishments, often used synonymously with hubris. With a positive connotation, pride refers to a satisfied sense of attachment toward one’s own or another’s choices and actions, or toward a whole group of people, and is a product of praise, independent self-reflection, or a fulfilled feeling of belonging.

Pride can also manifest itself as a high opinion of one’s nation (national pride) and ethnicity (ethnic pride).

Asian pride emerged prominently during European colonialism.[21] At one time, Europeans controlled 85% of the world’s land through colonialism, resulting in anti-Western feelings among Asian nations.[21] Today, some Asians still look upon European involvement in their affairs with suspicion.[21] In contrast, Asian empires are prominent and are proudly remembered by adherents to Asian Pride.

The slogan [Black Pride] has been used by African Americans (especially of sub-Saharan African origin) to denote a feeling of self-confidence, self-respect, celebrating one’s heritage, and being proud of one’s personal worth. Black pride as a national movement is closely linked with the developments of the American Civil Rights Movement

White pride is a slogan used primarily in the United States to agitate for a white race identity and is traditionally closely aligned with white supremacy, white separatism, and other extreme manifestations of white racism.

White pride, from Wikipedia:

White pride is a slogan indicating pride in being white. The slogan has been adopted by neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations.

White pride advocates claim that there is a cultural double standard in which only certain ethnic groups are permitted to openly express pride in their heritage, and that white pride is not inherently racist, being roughly analogous to racial positions such as Asian pride, black pride, or non-racial forms such as gay pride.

Criticism

Philosopher David Ingram argues that “affirming ‘black pride’ is not equivalent to affirming ‘white pride,’ since the former—unlike the latter—is a defensive strategy aimed at rectifying a negative stereotype”.[10] By contrast, then, “affirmations of white pride—however thinly cloaked as affirmations of ethnic pride—serve to mask and perpetuate white privilege”.

Letter to the Editor: Support white history, culture, by Matthew Heimbach, The Towerlight at Towson University, 2 September 2012. Heimbach’s conclusion:

We must protect the security of Europeans and a future for the next generation.

This was followed a few days later by Interest for White Student Union grows, at The Towerlight, 5 September 2012:

Sophomore music education major Liam Hurlbut said he believes it is unfair for white students to have their own union.

“White power movements are illegitimate,” he said. “In the history of this country, whites never lost their power. They have always run this country and oppressed all other races. Even today whites have unearned ‘privileges’ in our society. Whites must recognize and reject this privileges to atone for the evils of our ancestors.”

Guilt and pride are opposites. The more time and energy you expend feeling guilty, the less you can feel pride, and at the same time, the more pride you feel, the less inclined you will be to accept guilt. Attacking White pride, in effect, helps inflict White guilt.

Pride arising from a satisfied sense of attachment toward one’s own kind and fulfilled feeling of belonging is perfectly normal and natural, even for Whites.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

11 Comments

White Identity, Suppressed and Repressed

Published on September 4, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

Commentary on three examples of anti-Whites inveighing against Whiteness, giving substance to the identity even as they try to tear it down.

In New Book Decrying ‘Slow Death’ Of White America, Pat Buchanan Warns That Minorities Lower Test Scores, at ThinkProgress:

Shannon Corwin · Top Commenter

Whiteness as a culture and identity is a myth. It was brought about during the early days of the colonies when rich white males saw that workers were finding common struggles with minorities. They aimed to drive a wedge in order to control the population. They fed the european settlers a lie, telling them they could have some land and a voice if they helped to keep the POC population “in check”. Before all this, european nations that were predominantly white did not bond over their “whiteness”. They fought each other as Frenchman, British, Spaniards, etc. I welcome the decline of White as an identity. Be proud of your heritage. Be proud of being French, German, Irish, or whatever. But understand there is no pride in simply being “White”. The things that Buchanan are saying only serve to divide the people, not unite them. Down with the white supremacist culture of America.

Jackie Rawlings · Top Commenter

Shannon you are a smart well educated American and girl you know your history well. The Good news is people like Pat are dying out and the new generations only look at racism as history. I loved reading US history and every time I pick up a book I learn a little more. I read President Obama isn’t our first bi-racial President but the 6th one. I learned from leaders like JFK, Dr. King and first from my parents that I am an American who happens to be of color.

Susan Sontag (born Rosenblatt), Dictionary.com:

The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, and Balanchine [BAL-in-sheen] ballets don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history.

Fear of a Black President, by Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic:

It is often said that Obama’s presidency has given black parents the right to tell their kids with a straight face that they can do anything. This is a function not only of Obama’s election to the White House but of the way his presidency broadcasts an easy, almost mystic, blackness to the world. The Obama family represents our ideal imagining of ourselves—an ideal we so rarely see on any kind of national stage.

What black people are experiencing right now is a kind of privilege previously withheld—seeing our most sacred cultural practices and tropes validated in the world’s highest office. Throughout the whole of American history, this kind of cultural power was wielded solely by whites, and with such ubiquity that it was not even commented upon. The expansion of this cultural power beyond the private province of whites has been a tremendous advance for black America. Conversely, for those who’ve long treasured white exclusivity, the existence of a President Barack Obama is discombobulating, even terrifying. For as surely as the iconic picture of the young black boy reaching out to touch the president’s curly hair sends one message to black America, it sends another to those who have enjoyed the power of whiteness.

In such ways was the tie between citizenship and whiteness in America made plain from the very beginning. By the 19th century, there was, as Matthew Jacobson, a professor of history and American studies at Yale, has put it, “an unquestioned acceptance of whiteness as a prerequisite for naturalized citizenship.” Debating Abraham Lincoln during the race for a U.S. Senate seat in Illinois in 1858, Stephen Douglas asserted that “this government was made on the white basis” and that the Framers had made “no reference either to the Negro, the savage Indians, the Feejee, the Malay, or an other inferior and degraded race, when they spoke of the equality of men.”

After the Civil War, Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor as president and a unionist, scoffed at awarding the Negro the franchise:

The peculiar qualities which should characterize any people who are fit to decide upon the management of public affairs for a great state have seldom been combined. It is the glory of white men to know that they have had these qualities in sufficient measure to build upon this continent a great political fabric and to preserve its stability for more than ninety years, while in every other part of the world all similar experiments have failed. But if anything can be proved by known facts, if all reasoning upon evidence is not abandoned, it must be acknowledged that in the progress of nations Negroes have shown less capacity for government than any other race of people. No independent government of any form has ever been successful in their hands. On the contrary, wherever they have been left to their own devices they have shown a constant tendency to relapse into barbarism.

The notion of blacks as particularly unfit for political equality persisted well into the 20th century. As the nation began considering integrating its military, a young West Virginian wrote to a senator in 1944:

I am a typical American, a southerner, and 27 years of age … I am loyal to my country and know but reverence to her flag, BUT I shall never submit to fight beneath that banner with a negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throw back to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

The writer—who never joined the military, but did join the Ku Klux Klan—was Robert Byrd, who died in 2010 as the longest-serving U.S. senator in history. Byrd’s rejection of political equality was echoed in 1957 by William F. Buckley Jr., who addressed the moral disgrace of segregation by endorsing disenfranchisement strictly based on skin color:

The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.

Buckley, the founder of National Review, went on to assert, “The great majority of the Negroes of the South who do not vote do not care to vote and would not know for what to vote if they could.”

The idea that blacks should hold no place of consequence in the American political future has affected every sector of American society, transforming whiteness itself into a monopoly on American possibilities. White people like Byrd and Buckley were raised in a time when, by law, they were assured of never having to compete with black people for the best of anything. Blacks used inferior public pools and inferior washrooms, attended inferior schools. The nicest restaurants turned them away. In large swaths of the country, blacks paid taxes but could neither attend the best universities nor exercise the right to vote. The best jobs, the richest neighborhoods, were giant set-asides for whites—universal affirmative action, with no pretense of restitution.

That’s right. That’s how it used to be. Whites didn’t think Whiteness was stupid, crazy, or evil and instead openly and actively pursued their best interests as Whites.

Coates cites Naturalization Act of 1790, the first law regarding who could become a US citizen, The Naturalization Act of 1790, which begins:

Act of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat 103-104) (Excerpts) That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof

Coates’ article is an example of the niggerization of politcal discourse, whereby race-conscious blacks freely project their own racial fears and animosities onto hopelessly deracinated Whites.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

29 Comments

Anti-White Identity

Published on August 28, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

This installment addresses some feedback to the two previous installments, in the attempt to clarify and fill some gaps.

Also, I finish quoting and saying what I have to say about Identity Politics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy):

Liberalism and Identity Politics

. . .

Critics charged that the neutral citizen of liberal theory was in fact the bearer of an identity coded white, male, bourgeois, able-bodied, and heterosexual … This implicit ontology in part explained the persistent historical failure of liberal democracies to achieve anything more than token inclusion in power structures for members of marginalized groups.

A richer understanding of political subjects as constituted through and by their social location was required. In particular, the history and experience of oppression brought with it certain perspectives and needs that could not be assimilated through existing liberal structures. Individuals are oppressed by virtue of their membership in a particular social group—that is, a collective whose members have relatively little mobility into or out of the collective, who usually experience their membership as involuntary, who are generally identified as members by others [ie. biological identity, race], and whose opportunities are deeply shaped by the relation of their group to corollary groups through privilege and oppression (Cudd 2006).

Oppression, then, is the systematic limiting of opportunity or constraints on self-determination because of such membership: for example, Frantz Fanon eloquently describes the experience of being always constrained by the white gaze as a Black man: “I already knew that there were legends, stories, history, and above all historicity… I was responsible at the same time for my body, my race, for my ancestors” (Fanon 1968, 112). Conversely, members of dominant groups are privileged—systematically advantaged by the deprivations imposed on the oppressed. For example, in a widely cited article Peggy McIntosh identifies whiteness as a dominant identity, and lists 47 ways in which she is advantaged by being white compared with her colleagues of color. These range from being able to buy “flesh-colored” Band-Aids that will match her skin tone, to knowing that she can be rude without provoking negative judgments of her racial group, to being able to buy a house in a middle-class community without risking neighbors’ disapproval (1993).

Critics have also charged that assimilation (or, less provocatively, integration) is a guiding principle of liberalism. If the liberal subject is coded in the way Young (1990) suggests, then attempts to apply liberal norms of equality will risk demanding that the marginalized conform to the identities of their oppressors.

The take-away for Whites: “Identity politcs”, as such, is a jewish, cultural-marxist, anti-White construct. It is wrapped in dishonest universalist-sounding rhetoric, but is in fact defined and deployed solely in opposition to Whites. The essence of its notion of identity is victimization – with Whites portrayed, in a variety of ways, as oppressors, and non-Whites portrayed as oppressed.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

1 Comment

Identity Politics

Published on August 21, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

In a multi-racial society all politics is identity politics, and the marxist conception of identity politics is all about serving the best interests of everyone except Whites.

From Wikipedia’s article on Identity politics:

Identity politics are political arguments that focus upon the self interest and perspectives of self-identified social interest groups and ways in which people’s politics may be shaped by aspects of their identity through race, class, religion, gender, sexual orientation or traditional dominance.

The term identity politics has been applied retroactively to varying movements that long predate its coinage. Historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. discussed identity politics extensively in his book The Disuniting of America. Schlesinger, a strong supporter of liberal conceptions of civil rights, argues that a liberal democracy requires a common basis for culture and society to function.

In his view, basing politics on group marginalization fractures the civil polity, and therefore works against creating real opportunities for ending marginalization. Schlesinger believes that movements for civil rights should aim toward full acceptance and integration of marginalized groups into the mainstream culture, rather than perpetuating that marginalization through affirmations of difference.

Still other critics have argued that groups based on shared identity, other than class (e.g.: religious identity or neurological wiring) [ie. the ideologic half], can divert energy and attention from more fundamental issues, such as class conflict in capitalist societies. Even those who support gay rights, ending racism or freedom of religion, for instance, may consider these side issues at best.

[Eric] Hobsbawm, in particular, has criticized nationalisms, and the principle of national self-determination adopted internationally after World War I, since national governments are often merely an expression of a ruling class or power, and their proliferation was a source of the wars of the twentieth century. Hence Hobsbawm argues that identity politics, such as queer nationalism, Islamism, Cornish nationalism or Ulster Loyalism are just other versions of bourgeois nationalism.

Eric Hobsbawm – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hobsbawm was born in 1917 in Alexandria, Egypt, to Leopold Percy Obstbaum and Nelly Grün, both Jewish, and he grew up in Vienna, Austria and Berlin, Germany.

Bourgeois nationalism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bourgeois nationalism is a term from Marxist phraseology. It refers to the alleged practice by the ruling classes of deliberately dividing people by nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion, so as to distract them from possible class warfare. It is seen as a divide and conquer strategy used by the ruling classes to prevent the working class from uniting against them (hence the Marxist slogan, Workers of all countries, unite!).

Identity Politics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), from the section titled Liberalism and Identity Politics:

Critics charged that the neutral citizen of liberal theory was in fact the bearer of an identity coded white, male, bourgeois, able-bodied, and heterosexual … This implicit ontology in part explained the persistent historical failure of liberal democracies to achieve anything more than token inclusion in power structures for members of marginalized groups.

The central guiding principle behind today’s social and politcal zeitgeist is that White = bad, non-White = good. “Liberal democracies” are best characterized by the endless making of excuses for non-Whites and blaming Whites. The roots of this are in the emancipation of jews in Europe.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

2 Comments

Twisted Identity

Published on August 14, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

When you’ve gotten past the guilt-tripping, the pathologization, and the demonization, the next hurdle is the attack on White identity.

“Aw gee, who’s White anyway? What does White really mean?”

This installment continues the examination of ethny, nation, and race – what they are and how they are related. The terms “civic nationalism”, “cultural nationalism”, and “deracinated nationalism” demonstrate how the meaning of nation, specifically, has become so distorted and misunderstood.

I cite the Wikipedia article Ethnic nationalism:

Herodotus is the first who stated the main characteristics of ethnicity, with his famous account of what defines Greek identity, where he lists kinship (Greek: ὅμαιμον – homaimon, “of the same blood”[2]), language (Greek: ὁμόγλωσσον – homoglōsson, “speaking the same language”[3]), cults and customs (Greek: ὁμότροπον – homotropon, “of the same habits or life”)

On Identity

Published on August 7, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

Who is us?

A spectrum of emotional indicators of identity: empathy, sympathy, apathy, and antipathy.

The layers of the biological onion: self, family, clan, tribe, ethny/nation, race/species, animal/vegatable, life as a whole.

For White identity the focus is on mid-sized groupings (ethnic, national, racial) whose nature is ideological (memetic) as well as biological (genetic).

How and why jews pathologize and demonize these identities, specifically for Whites who express them.

Who determines who us is. How biology limits and shapes ideology, but ideological divides and shifts, driving long-term biological change. The United States of America is an example of this, with the identity shifting over time from European and Christian under White rule, to a multi-racial “nation of immigrants” under jewish rule.

I quote The Humpty-Dumpty Theory of Language, from Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, in preparation for subsequent examination of mainstream conceptions of group identity:

“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory’,” Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t- till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!'”

“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

1 Comment

Morality and Identity

Published on July 31, 2012 by Tanstaafl in Age of Treason Radio

More along the same lines as the previous installments, Morals, Morality and Moralizing, and Universalism and Particularism. Part 3 of 2.

The essence of morality, as described by “Ben Tillman”:

Morality exists to further self-interest, specifically the self-interest of groups. It furthers group interests by mediating the conflicting self-interests of group members to allow the group to function as a cooperative unit.

If we don’t put our interests first, who will? How can we hope to survive?

Ben also urges us to read David Sloan Wilson.

Alongside professional jews Adam Gregerman and Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks we note Hillary Clinton’s jew-centric moralizing. See The Anti-White/Pro-Jew Regime’s Position on Genocide.

Compare and contrast with the weak, deracinated position Ann Coulter voices in DEMOCRATS’ IDEAL VOTER: ILLEGAL ALIEN, SINGLE MOTHER, CONVICTED FELON:

While conservatives have been formulating carefully constructed arguments, liberals have been playing a long-term game to change the demographics of America to get an electorate more to their liking.

They will do incalculable damage to the nation and to individual citizens, but Democrats will have an unbeatable majority. Just like California, the United States is on its way to becoming a Third World, one-party state.

There’s a strange asymmetry in how this matter can be discussed. Liberals and ethnic activists boast about how America would be better if it were more Latino, but no one else is allowed to say, “We like the ethnic mix as it is.”

That would be racist. By now no one even tries to disagree.

Sure enough, the next day Coulter was condemned by the crypto-jewish SPLC. Ann Coulter: Loss of White Majority ‘Destroyed’ California:

That attack-dog author Ann Coulter is not too bright — and that she is perfectly happy to slime any and all people she doesn’t like — is well known.

What’s not such common knowledge is that she is a racist.

The podcast will be broadcast and available for download on Tuesday at 9PM ET.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

1 Comment

Page 9 of 10« First ‹ Previous 5 6 7 8910 Next ›

Who’s White? – Part 1

White Flight

Discrimination and Exclusion

Guilt and Pride

White Identity, Suppressed and Repressed

Anti-White Identity

Identity Politics

Twisted Identity

On Identity

Morality and Identity

Listen

Programs

Recent Broadcasts/Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Policy