More news from fascist Evergreen State College


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

The mob riots at Evergreen State College in Washington state have unveiled a number of new facts about that publicly funded leftwing indoctrination mill:

The source of the documents in the first link said this, “I feel compelled to come forward with evidence that the school has allowed student groups (at best) or domestic terrorists (at worse) to indoctrinate freshman into their extremist ideology,” The article also gives a sense about the distribution of these documents and the violent, fascist, leftwing, and anti-American philosophy they promote across many campuses.

From the second article is this tidbit: “Evergreen employees have not given a single dollar to a Republican congressional candidate since 2012.” Since the administration of Evergreen has also been very supportive of the leftist mob that threatened anyone who disagreed with them with violence, the political donations give a nice sense of where the Democratic Party is going.

Finally, one more story today about this fascist university: Evergreen State professor: ‘I have no way of knowing whether it’s safe for me to return’

Durning a recent appearance on Tucker Carlson’s Tonight on Fox News, Professor Bret Weinstien claims that “the college has never acknowledged the danger they put us in,” and that, as a result, “I have no way of knowing whether it’s safe for me to return.”

“Their assurances that it is safe don’t mean anything,” Weinstein said, adding: “Not that they’ve offered them.”

Weinstein noted that he had received “tremendous support” from outside Evergreen State, and “quite a bit of support, privately,” from within the school. Publicly, however, “only one other professor” at Evergreen has come forward to support Weinstein.

But other than that, it’s a great place to send your kids to be educated.

Update: One more story from Evergreen: Students accuse Weinstein of hiding behind Jewishness

What a cesspool of bigotry.

Share

49 comments

  • Alex

    I interpret all these present “fascist” activities as sign of decline and self-destruction. I think America’s best time is already gone. This is caused by fast cultural and ethnic changes, which can be observed all over the country and which transform the former mostly white, protestant (nevertheless) conservative country into a brown, multicultural, non-christian, leftist country. From my perspective: Nothing to identify. Something new is going to arise, more similar to Brazil as to Europe. It is sad to state this. This process is caused finally by (cultural-) Marxists influence, which last now many decades now. It seems that USA fought the fight in WW-II, because Communism/Marxism was not destroyed in 1945 to full extent, in moment as it was possible.

  • Cotour

    Alex:

    While I can to some degree agree with your general ominous predictions about America, but I remind you that the Constitution is the variable in your prognostication.

    As to the “destruction” of both Communism and Marxism, these are concepts that grow in the minds of men and are political tools of manipulation, they are not destroyable. There will never be a moment in time when they are vanquished from the face of the earth. The mind of man will always look for such schemes to control and manipulate the masses. These are ideas that will live for ever and the battle against them will also do the same.

    This is an eternal battle.

  • David J Nudelman

    This pretty well sums up the Greater Seattle area which now dominates politics in the Peoples Republic of Washington

  • Alex

    @Contour:

    Only the existence of a more or less homogenous (ethnic and cultural) nation can guarantee people’s liberty and existence as a distinct identity in time. Our today’s battle is the fight between Globalism and Nationalism. I hope for the victory of the last one. Globalism and its following worldwide free market destructs nations, families and cultures and has therefore to be considered as nation’s and people’s enemy.

    Globalism / free market results in rootless and homeless people, as can be found in USA en masses This terrible, antihuman rootlessness may the real cause for the exaltation of so many Americans for space.

    I identify with the Southerners, because the South tried to develop a nation which was rooted to the soil, very different to most of rest of USA. This wish was destroyed by the imperial, northern Union, which later put its fingers on total Globus and enforced Globalsim.

  • Cotour

    “I identify with the Southerners, because the South tried to develop a nation which was rooted to the soil, ”

    Utilizing HUMAN SLAVERY.

    Are you lamenting the South and their failure in winning the American Civil War to continue this practice? Because that is what your comment implies. And I really do not think you meant that.

  • Edward

    Alex wrote: “Only the existence of a more or less homogenous (ethnic and cultural) nation can guarantee people’s liberty and existence as a distinct identity in time.”

    Actually, the United States has done a good job of guaranteeing people’s liberty and existence despite the fact that the people in the US are from every ethnic and cultural region of the world. There are some communities that group together based upon ethnicity or culture (e.g. several cities have a “China Town”), but their liberties and their existences are still guaranteed and protected.

    There are regions of the world where this is most certainly not true (e.g. ISIS controlled areas). There is a lot of intolerance around the world, especially from societies that wish to be homogeneous, as in ethnically and culturally “pure” or wish to enforce one political system rather than allow debates over different systems.

  • Garry

    Alex wrote,

    “Only the existence of a more or less homogenous (ethnic and cultural) nation can guarantee people’s liberty and existence as a distinct identity in time.”

    I agree with the cultural homogeneity, but I don’t think ethnic homogeneity is a requirement, at least here in the United States.

    While I was growing up, everybody was obsessed over one’s “nationality,” meaning where one’s ancestors came from. I was identified as “that Polish kid,” even though I have as much Ukrainian and Irish in my bloodlines, along with several other nationalities.

    Once I lived overseas for several years, I realized that my nationality was American. To this day, I know a grand total of 3 words in Polish (aside from names of foods). To me, being Polish amounts to my last name, and eating certain foods once in a while. Put me in Warsaw or Kiev and I’m completely disconnected; put me in Tokyo or any Spanish or Portuguese speaking city and I’ll get by, even though I don’t have any of those cultures in my bloodlines.

    At its best, the US is a melting pot; we form our own culture, and the culture from the mother country fades over generations. Ethnic aspects either disappear over generations (such as language) or become trivial and accepted or even embraced by others (such as foods). The problem is not ethnic in nature, but the failure to maintain a cohesive American culture.

  • Alex

    @Garry:

    I am sorry, but you are arguing like a typical leftist (100-times heard), who believes all people are principally same and exchangeable. That is not true!!! Your white (cultural) identity is more as speaking just some words of your ancestor’s language. You heritage a wide range of European type of manners, conventions, morals, ethics, customs and other characteristic behavior, even if you not aware of it. Ethnicity (or at higher level race) and culture are connected. I think there is even a genetic relationship between both to some degree.

    The founder fathers of USA did not object to create a mixed race American people. They never meant whole mankind. They were interested to build a white nation and now are betrayed by the “melting pot” approach, which is driven by media and other US institutions, which are ruled by cultural Marxist ideology. The “melting pot” ideology is only another word for replacing whites. It is war! Neocons and others try now to install this dangerous US ideology in the whole world by their globalist activities.

    The western cultural Marxists ideology practiced in USA and Europe, with its open border policy, is even more dangerous to some degrees as the older installed Communism, because last one did not threaten the pure existence of nations and ethnicities, because human work-force was not exchanged across borders, in order to maximize profit.

  • Alex: Your understanding of what our Founding Fathers wanted is simply wrong. Moreover, your racist approach to the concept of liberty and freedom I find incredibly offensive. Skin color has nothing to do with these concepts, and if you think they do, you are simply bigoted.

    I grew up in New York. Practically no one I knew could have been called a white anglo-saxon protestant. There were Jews, blacks, Poles, Catholics, Germans, Italians, and a host of other non-British ethnicities. Yet, the culture of that time understood and honored the American Constitution and the concept of freedom quite successfully.

    That you think race has something to do with this, coming as I think you do from Russia, might help explain why Russia has failed so far in establishing a prosperous and free nation. You are focused on the wrong things, and thus miss the mark time after time.

  • Alex

    @Edward:

    You wrote. ” … good job of guaranteeing people’s liberty and existence despite the fact that the people in the US are from every ethnic and cultural region of the world.”

    What you describe applies only to status before 1965, as US nation was made of 90% white people. Yes, European people in USA “integrated” themselves successfully. That was possible, because they are from same race and basic culture. You gave also example which was not successful, China town. I learned that there was even a kind of race war in California in 19th century during Chinese “invasion” of California.

    The present reality is different. There are increasingly race conflicts and USA is disintegrating ideology-wise, which is pre-step for real disintegration.

  • Garry

    Alex, the “melting pot” means that people mix and form a more or less homogeneous culture (in chemistry terms, think of a compound) as they assimilate.

    Multiculturalism, where people don’t learn the language and don’t integrate into society, is not a melting pot, it’s more of a mosaic (in chemistry terms, think of a mixture).

    I have much more to write on this topic, but no time today.

    Since my wife is of a different race, then you probably consider our mixed-race children (who are as American as any of their friends) to be a scourge on America and the reason for its eventual downfall.

    That makes you as ignorant and bigoted as the old World War 2 vets in Japan who, when seeing me with any girl who looked Japanese (even if she grew up in rural Canada), would give both of us dirty looks for trying to poison their race.

    The Soviet Union failed in part because it never built a common culture out of people of different ethnic groups. The idea of the United States is of a completely different nature, although there has been some deviation from the idea.

  • wayne

    Garry– good stuff

    “Who Are The People of America
    1953
    https://youtu.be/KvZiO5YQiZo
    (10:12)

  • Alex

    @Gary:

    I consider it as evil to enforce people of different race and ethnicity to “mix up” by govermental force. What happens in USA is a huge experiment with no guarantee for positive outcome. It was only relative successful up to now, because one (white) race has dominated and because there is America is huge in its geographical dimensions, which limits interaction between people.

    I shocked to read that you regret that Soviet Union or Communism was not successful in enforcing “mixing up” all different people and folks to one blend. I assume you like to see a one-word government and homogenized man. That is a hazardous view. I have no problem if you have a woman from another race, but please do not enforce it as a societal standard for everyone. All races have the right to exists also in hundreds or thousands of years.

  • Alex: You reveal yourself at last. I suspected you were a bigot, but now you show it to us all.

    None of the races or ethnic groups in the U.S. were ever “forced” to “mix up.” They, except for the blacks prior to 1808, all came here of their own free will. They came by the millions and millions, leaving the Old World with its bigotry and race hatred and its royalty and its caste systems to a place where, no matter what your status or race or ethnicity at birth, you had the right and the freedom to build your own life, and become as important to society as you could.

    The Jews, always oppressed in Europe, and subjected to apartheid and pogroms in Russia, mostly started out here in poor crowded slums in New York. Many became very wealthy. Many became leaders in the many industries, including the movie industry and the arts. Though they faced obstacles (bigots who put race above individual achievement unfortunately exist everywhere), American culture and law rejected such ideas, and allowed them the freedom to succeed.

    Note too that in the U.S., we fought a war to end slavery, and to free the blacks so that they too could follow their dreams, wherever they might lead.

    That you consider these ideas “white” is totally repugnant to me. That you do so also shows an incredible ignorance, since many of these concepts were born in the Hebrew bible and in Greek culture, both of which came from peoples that are hardly European and among many bigots would never be considered “white.” Even now, the world rises in hate against the Israelis, not because of anything they have done, but simply because they happen to be Jews.

  • Garry

    Alex, I don’t advocate making mixing of races mandatory for anybody; the concept of America is that people who come here, of whatever race or from whatever country, assimilate into the culture. America is an idea, not a race.

    The Soviet Union failed not because it failed to force people to assimilate, but because it took over countries with different cultures and failed to have an attractive culture in which to assimilate. It should have left them alone.

    I don’t advocate a one-world government or homogenized man. I only advocate for assimilating in America if you choose to immigrate here.

    I lived in Japan for 4 years, but at no time did I have plans to stay there permanently, so I didn’t assimilate. I learned enough of the language to get by, and enough of the culture to be able to get along with people. But mostly I lived in a building with people from all over the world, most of whom also had no plans to stay long term. I thoroughly enjoyed my time with them, and my hope for them is that they found a place to live (I would assume their home countries) that they feel is their permanent home. It’s up to people themselves to decide where to live and under which system.

    I married my wife because of who she is; her race had nothing to do with it. She’s simply my wife, and I’m simply her husband; she only calls me “my white husband” when she’s making fun of people who advocate forceful mixing of races (not just in marriage but on any context). We all have freedom of association, and who we choose to associate with should be based their behavior and personality, not their race.

    By the way, apparently you’re conflating “liberal” in the modern sense of US politics and “classic liberal,” which is what the founding fathers were. I will gladly wear the label of classic liberal.

  • Alex

    @Gary:

    Communism (and Soviet Union), which was also “only” an idea, has failed because it worked in all aspect against human nature. It is also part of man’s nature that he prefers other men, which are related and similar to him in appearance, behavior (and finally gens). Best example are the Jewish people, which managed to exist even after more than as 2,000 years of “distribution”.

    In traditional societies, women’s reproduction and sex were controlled by tribe’s men.
    Women are psychology dedicated to victors/winners of fights between men of different groups and tribes, because they were overtaken by the winning tribe’s men and have to adjust to them in order to survive, whereas enemy’s men were killed by the winner. Therefore, women are becoming less loyal to the tribe (or nation) as men during evolution.

    This fact and the observation that women tend to be more (dangerous, in context with a country, which consist of millions) altruistic as men, could support strongly the need to exclude women from the political process, because under their influences socialism in increased significantly; and nations and culture are endangered. The exception (as Margret Thatcher) proves the rule.

  • Edward

    Alex,
    You wrote: “What you describe applies only to status before 1965, as US nation was made of 90% white people.

    You are very wrong. What I describe applies to today as well as the past. In the US, people of all ethnicities and cultures are still guaranteed their liberty and existence.

    In searching for a Chinese race war in the US, I found none, but I did find examples of Chinese race wars in other parts of the world, including China. Meanwhile, the Chinese and other Asians, the Latin Americans, and the South Americans in the US have integrated themselves very nicely, thank you. Half a century ago, the US went to a great deal of trouble trying to get leftists and Democrats to accept the integration of blacks into their culture, which worked very well, as they joined the Democratic Party in large numbers. However, the previous president undid all that hard work, and now blacks are becoming dissatisfied with the Party.

    The present reality is different. There are increasingly race conflicts and USA is disintegrating ideology-wise, which is pre-step for real disintegration.

    Yes. It turned out that having a black president was not the panacea that some people thought that it would be for blacks in America. It is a political move, not an ethnic or cultural one. Rather than celebrate the end of racism in America, that president lit the political flame of racism and spread it among as many cities as he could — even to the point of declaring that whites are genetically racist. That president failed to bring the expected prosperity to blacks. However, that does not mean that blacks are denied liberty and existence. It just means that the left is a hateful, divisive, bigoted, racist clan that is desperately attempting to convince certain groups that they are downtrodden in order to get them to accept central political control over their lives as the solution to a non-problem. The Democratic Party is falling apart all around its leadership.

    Things in the Democratic Party have disintegrated so badly that Democrats have switched from portraying the deaths of Republican lawmakers to taking up arms against Republican lawmakers. But what else would we expect from those who have a culture of tyranny, not the guarantee of liberty and existence? This does not mean that we do not guarantee liberty and existence, it means that — as always — the traditional tyranny is attacking that guarantee.

    In traditional societies, women’s reproduction and sex were controlled by tribe’s men.

    You are showing us that America is not a traditional society, which likely explains why we are so well able to guarantee liberty and existence. Everyone has positive incentive to be loyal to their town, state, and the country, unlike those who live under tyranny.

    Communism (and Soviet Union), which was also ‘only’ an idea, has failed because it worked in all aspect against human nature. It is also part of man’s nature that he prefers other men, which are related and similar to him in appearance, behavior (and finally gens).

    Socialism, Communism, and tyranny fail because they require selfless actions (as in hive insects), but the liberty of free markets works because enlightened self interest is more powerful among humans. The liberty of free markets allows individuals to excel and provide for their families; the tyranny of central control requires individuals to be downtrodden to the point of depending entirely upon the central controllers, who control everyone’s liberty and existence.

    The “similar appearance” argument is hogwash. I have never heard of anyone who preferred to do business with other blondes or only green-eyed people. Bigotry is learned, not inherited. We have known this for a long time; in the musical “South Pacific,” there is a song about being carefully taught to be bigoted.

  • wayne

    Edward–
    I’m still working on appreciating Musical’s, clue me in on the South Pacific tune.

    Can’t really add anything that hasn’t been said.

    It’s not a race ‘thing. It’s a cultural-assimilation ‘thing, combined with our (so called) Elite’s inability and unwillingness to explain, defend, and advocate for our Judeo/Christian, Post Enlightenment, Western Heritage, American Experience.

  • Wayne: The song is from South Pacific. I should include it as an evening pause.

  • Alex

    @ Mr. Zimmerman:

    I find you over-the-top comment above quite disgusting, not only because your preferred word seems to be “bigot”. I did not say any negative word to or about Jews, just the opposite, because I support the Jewish politics of gropu identity and nationalism as such (Israel is one part of it) and the Jewish will to survive as an identifiable group, nation, race or tribe (or as you would like to call it) under all circumstances and obstacles. I claim only same rights for European based, white people. Is this a problem for you? I hope not, otherwise you work by help of double-standards.

  • Alex: The irony here is that I don’t support “the Jewish politics of group identity.” I support the right of families and people to live where they wish, in peace, no matter what their race, religion, or ethnicity. See for example this essay by me from a previous trip to Israel: Building a real Peace Forest in Israel where I said the following:

    In general, I have never been enthused by the partition of Palestine as imposed by the United Nations in 1948. Driven by good intentions (Oh that phrase!) after the Holocaust in World War II, the members of the U.N. tried to give the Jewish people a home that they could call their own.

    The problem is that they divided Palestine along ethnic and religious lines. They literally created an apartheid state, right from the beginning, with one state devoted to those who were Jewish and the second state devoted to those who were Muslim.

    Such a division — nowadays dubbed by naive politicians the “two-state solution” — is always a problem, as it almost guarantees that at some point in the future each state is going to forced to treat those not of their particular sect as second class citizens. For if the population of Israel becomes dominated by Muslims, how then can one still call that a Jewish state?

    Though I do not believe for an instant that the PLO was sincere in its demand for a single Palestinian state where both Jews and Arabs live peaceably, this really is the only true solution to the Israeli conflict. Palestine should be a single state, and the question of whether you are a Jew, Muslim, or Christian should be irrelevant to its existence.

    In fact, all you need to do is read any of my posts from Israel and you would realize that what offends me most is defining people not by what they do, but by their race, religion, or ethnicity.

    You however wish to define people by their race. That is bigotry. I’m sorry if my telling you this upsets you, but it is the plain unvarnished truth. You are taking a bigoted position, which makes you a bigot.

  • Alex

    @Zimmerman:

    Thank you for detailing out your position to Jewish identity politics. I am going to read your essays later. Meanwhile, I have to express that I feel that you may not a real conservative, because you share many views of leftist. For example, you said above: ”I support the right of families and people to live where they wish, in peace, no matter what their race, religion, or ethnicity.” I reject this approach.

    No, Mr. Zimmerman, my country and also Israel is not a country for everyone. Israel is the country of the Jews, and my country is the home of my special people. I am fighting that is also true in future. Furthermore, belonging to a specific race is not “bigot”, is natural, it is a very important of my identity. Preferring my own people (race, ethnicity and so forth) is a natural, human desire, developed during the process of evolution in ten thousands of years. It is the same as preferring your own family against other families, which is very normal. I fight against any political ideology, which would like to suppress natural human desires as those.

    You talked about Jewish immigrants to US in wake of WW II. That is an interesting point. It is known that cultural Marxism, developed afterwards WWI in Europe/Germany, guided and propagated by so-called institution Frankfurt School, is major ideological source for present failure of Western societies, with results as often present by yourself here in this blog. However, major figures of Frankfurt School were Jews (as Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno or Erich Fromm), which immigrated to USA and brought their ideas and the destructive Frankfurt School ideology with them. Just a coincidence?
    Do you see their contribution as positve?

    Present dominance of US media, by this group, recognized and highlighted by involved Jews themselves, whereas Jews are less as 2% of US population, is another topic worth to be discussed. You may think different think, as I learned above, but I think group identity, stays a decisive factor at the end of day, also for US-Jews.

  • wayne

    Alex:
    Say what?

  • Steve Earle

    wayne said:
    “…..I’m still working on appreciating Musical’s, clue me in on the South Pacific tune.

    Can’t really add anything that hasn’t been said.

    It’s not a race ‘thing. It’s a cultural-assimilation ‘thing, combined with our (so called) Elite’s inability and unwillingness to explain, defend, and advocate for our Judeo/Christian, Post Enlightenment, Western Heritage, American Experience….”

    ********************************

    Here’s the intro to the song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAZ8yOFFbAc
    Not sure why they don’t have the whole number posted, just the intro.
    The 1958 movie of South Pacific is a true classic. Every song is memorable. The remakes are just not as good IMHO

    And….. as usual Wayne you have struck the the heart of the matter: Cultural Assimilation.

    We are experiencing the result of decades of being told that it’s racist to want immigrants to assimilate to our culture.

    The leftists have followed through on their promise to “March through our Institutions” starting with the schools and the media.

    America is portrayed as deeply flawed, in need of vast changes and/or has no culture of its own. Multiculturism and it’s weapon Political Correctness are the means by which the Left will destroy our American experiment. And they are well on their way to that end :-(

  • Cotour

    I would like to make a distinction if I may:

    ” You may think different think, as I learned above, but I think group identity, stays a decisive factor at the end of day, also for US-Jews.”

    The difference, even “special difference” here is that there is a fundamental difference between being an American and being, say a Russian, or an Italian or a Frenchman. Being American, and I think this is where this conversation goes off the rails because of a difference in definition, is not determined by race or ethnicity it is based in a concept, the Constitution.

    You come to America to become an American and after you are sworn in you are fully an American. This is not true of other country’s.

    So Alex does have a valid point of view here based on where he comes from, he is not an American. His “bigotry” is just his choice of association based on his origin. Being and becoming American is unique in the world.

  • Edward

    Robert wrote: “I support the right of families and people to live where they wish, in peace, no matter what their race, religion, or ethnicity.
    Alex replied: “I reject this approach.

    From an American point of view, we have accepted people from everywhere and allow them to live wherever they wish. This is a conservative value. We have found that most people from anywhere fit in somewhere nicely, and we have valued portions of their cultures, integrating them into our own.

    In America, it is acceptable for people to live their own cultures, as long as they conform to US laws, but it is preferable that they also live within US culture — which has differences in different parts of the country.

    In America, it has been the progressives (Democrats) who have advocated for segregation, superiority, and intolerance. American history is full of terrible events that have resulted from such thinking — from the American Indians being sent to reservations; to the Americans of Japanese descent being sent to internment camps; to the Americans of African descent being sent to separate schools, sitting in the back of the bus, using separate drinking fountains, and cetera. World history has even more examples.

    We Americans like to think that we have learned from our past poor judgments and learned from the world’s past poor judgments.

    If those from China wish to live segregated in a city’s Chinatown, that is OK with us, just so long as they obey American laws. If they wish to live integrated among the rest of us, that is also OK. It is their choice to make, not a choice for the rest of us. We Americans believe that everyone should be free to choose, so long as the choice is legal. This means that we believe that our laws must be carefully crafted in order to avoid limiting choice, justice, and liberty for anyone. These are concepts so valuable to us that they are our pledge of allegiance’s last words: “with liberty and justice for all.” For all.

    Those who feel superior often grow intolerant of those who they believe are not. World history has shown that feelings of superiority often result in tragedy as those who feel superior try to enslave or rid themselves of those that they believe are not.

    People come from everywhere in order to become Americans. Americans are not superior to everyone else, because we are everyone else.

    Alex wrote: “I fight against any political ideology, which would like to suppress natural human desires as those.

    The problem is that the purpose of all laws is to suppress harmful natural human desires, specifically because those desires tend to result in bigoted suppression of those who are not part of one’s family or race. To think one’s own people are superior to others is not a conservative value but is a progressive or socialist value.

    Belonging to a race is not bigoted, but the intolerance of others is.
    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/bigot
    Keeping people separated by race, religion, etc. is bigoted.

    Alex,
    You wrote: “Present dominance of US media, by this group, recognized and highlighted by involved Jews themselves, whereas Jews are less as 2% of US population, is another topic worth to be discussed. You may think different think, as I learned above, but I think group identity, stays a decisive factor at the end of day, also for US-Jews.

    Your arguments sound like you are not tolerant of Jews. You may be allowing your perspective to confuse Jewish presence in certain professions as Jewish dominance of those professions.

  • Alex

    @ Edward:

    I am sorry, but you missed the point several times. Being conservative is the wish to conserve what exists, including ethnicity, people, race, culture, state and so forth. This is not possible, if everybody can come into the country or live where he wants. This can be very easy understood. Do what you want in USA, but let the world outside alone and do not try to press your political ideas on over centuries grown nations and people in order to destroy and deconstruct them.

    You think and talk like a typical Antifa-man or an extreme leftist (!), if you say that the wish to conserve and sustain the own (race, ethnicity, culture, border, whatever in this context) equals to supporting superiority. That is a lie and dishonest! BTW, you can use the word “bigot” often as you want, it does not affect me and the things we talk about. I think there is principal problem with you, because my natural thinking is outside your ideology.

    It seems to me that (most of the) Jews have strong sense of identity and for preservation of the own, otherwise they would not exist anymore after 2000 years of diaspora. I hope, they allow other people same objective.

  • Garry

    Alex, “Conservative” and “Liberal” used in different ways in different countries, to the point where I’m always careful using these terms in political contexts; what is considered conservative in the US is considered liberal in other countries.

    Not only are there vast differences in usage between countries, but the terms are often confused within our country. To me the key is “liberty”; when our country was founded, “liberal” referred to “liberty,” but it no longer does in the political sense (it often means the opposite). Nowadays, in the US, I take “conservative” to mean “conserving liberties (as outlined in our Constitution).” Others have their own definitions.

    In reality it’s all muddled, but too many people use the terms Conservative and Liberal like we would use black and white, ignoring the gray; we are all guilty of using these terms to vilify others. I like to avoid these terms, unless I’m very confident that the listener knows what I mean. It’s not that important to me that other people see me as whatever their definition is of Conservative; I’d rather they think of me as supporting liberty. And one aspect of liberty is that race has nothing to do with one’s rights.

  • wayne

    Alex–
    I would put forth the proposition:
    your definition of “Conservative,” is incomplete and does not represent the type of American conservatism expoused by myself or Edward.

    Victor Hanson:
    Western Ideology Eroding, Multiculturalism, Pacifism, Morals
    6-3-08
    https://youtu.be/TqRN5ZifdM0
    (54:15)

  • wayne

    Garry–
    (crossing in the Ether)

    Good stuff.

    I prefer the term “Statist,” as applied to the radical egalitarian utopianism, of the Left.

    -I’m a Classical Liberal, and that does not include any elements whatsoever, of the either the old or new-left. The left co-opted the term “liberal,” as-if there was anything “liberal” about all their imported, foreign, alien, oppressive ideologies.
    (I suspect, there are no seating-arrangement’s in any European parliament, that would accommodate me, and there-in lies the problem in Europe.)

    It occurs to me— we had a lengthy discussion with our friend in NZ awhile back, over the definitions of these terms, and I was wholly unsatisfied we couldn’t even agree on basic terminology.

  • Cotour

    The distinction here must be made between what America is, a concept, and what “race” or “ethnicity” means in the general population outside of America.

    In America we are all Americans based in words and codified laws and identified rights, that is not so in other places in the world. There are thousands of years of success in survival based in the same or similar race, ethnicity or tribe. America, while we do have our race issues we are all still Americans based in concept and not racial similarity.

    If Alex came to America to live he might tend to stay in places where people are more like him than not and there would be nothing wrong with that, but he would still be an American. And in time his off spring would have shed much of Alex’s biases and would see people / Americans more for who they are rather than where they came from or what they look like.

  • Alex

    @Wayne:

    I say your definition of conservatism must be huge failure, if it does not include the most important thing, the conservation of the people themselves. What is more important the people or political ideology? Clearly, it is more important to conserve my unique people, races and blood and genetic line, because once mixed up or destroyed they are a lost! Ideas (=certain mind set) can be easily produced and changed without any limit. I fight for whites, because they are my people and their pure existence is endangered. Point!

    BTW, the success of different political depends also from the people, races and ethnicity, at which it is implemented. Not all political system fit to all races, cultures and ethnicities.

    You follow the leftist/communist doctrine of making all men and people equal. That is totalitarism. I would like to sustain diversity in people’ races, cultures and ethnicities, world-wide seen. This is only possible if I try to conserve aces, cultures and ethnicities. You would like to reach the opposite. Therefore, we are enemies.

    Liberalism is a failed ideology from the start, because it missed to devide between “them” and “us”. Only white race produced this wrong idea and is therefore endangered to be wiped out. The others, the “them” are not liberal, they know their identity, they will destroy your liberal society and with it, the white people, by force and by replacement breeding.

    @Garry:
    Thank you. It seems that your one of the few here, who seems to understand what I am talking about. Edward, for example, has no idea.

  • wayne

    Cotour–
    I find myself agreeing in large part with your sentiment.

  • Cotour

    “You follow the leftist/communist doctrine of making all men and people equal.”

    Americans are equal under the law, they are not equal in potential or capability as determined by themselves and their personal / intellectual limitations and or course luck. And luck can be defined as (Need X’s Determination) in most cases.

    Our American Liberals / Leftists are attempting to install this communist “everyone is equal” type of thinking as they attempt to take over our legal and education systems. These are two different things.

  • Cotour

    Thank you Wayne, this kind of conversation can become very segmented and set in stone if, like in most complex conversations, we do not start at the same point regarding definitions and base concepts being discussed.

    America is very different in many ways, how did that happen? The Founders understood the racial and ethnic differences and the nature of power that created the abuses of power dynamic from where they came. Their genius is that they were able to boil it all down, codify it and lay out the basic rights of free born men and women. Totally off the wall thinking for their time. We see it as normal today because we grew up immersed in it, then it was the different think of their day.

    Pure brilliance, and they did not have any computers or word programs, they did it old school, literally. It amazes me every time I step back and see it all for what it is, pure brilliance.

  • wayne

    Alex–
    “all men are created equal” and “they are equal before the Law.” (as Cotour noted)

    We can be your BFF, or we can become your worst existential nightmare.
    The choice, is purely yours.

  • Alex

    @Wayne:

    No, the reality shows (if you try to open your eyes): Men are different, therefore they cannot be “created” equal. The only way is to try to make them equal by force, the way of communism.

    BTW, are you a creationist? I hope not. Men are an output of natural evolution. Evolution worked differently at men at different places, we see the results: Different races and ethnicities.

    BFF? What does it mean?

  • wayne

    Alex–
    excuse– “BFF,” – “best friend forever.”

    Personally, I’m an atheist/agnostic, conservative, small “r” republican, libertarian, capitalist, evolutionist, American.
    The only religion I fear however, is radical jihad, and for that I advocate going Medieval all over them, by whatever mechanical means necessary & sufficient to render the threat useless, forever.

    “Over here,” original-equipment specification’s state, “all men are created equal and are equal before the Law.”
    What they do after that, is entirely on them.
    Outcomes are not guaranteed.
    Life is unfair.

    How did all that Master-Race crap-o-la, work out for you European’s?
    A: It ended in a bunker under Berlin, May 1945, with a bullet to the head.

  • Cotour

    Created equal UNDER THE LAW.

    Men (and women) are not equal in potential and intelligence, but are equal UNDER THE LAW. (look this up to better understand it)

    Your natural potential in America is what it is, you can rise to your potential and intelligence (and luck, even luck to being born “correctly”) or you can live under a bridge down by the river if you like. Our Leftists / Liberals endeavor to sell the idea that you are identifying where communism is telling everyone that they are “equal”. That is something else entirely.

    This politically correct driven offensive on America by Leftists and Liberals seeks to 1. Confiscate the wealth of those who have risen more to their natural potential within our capitalism and have been successful and 2. To redistribute that wealth with the receivers of this wealth to identify them (Democrats in this case) as being their Patrons and saviors.

    This perversion is focused on creating eternally obligated voters in order to keep them in power in perpetuity. As is flooding our borders with “immigrants”, who will these “Immigrants” be politically aligned with? Pure, cold political strategy focused on acquiring power and retaining power.

    Obama care is is a perfect example of this transfer of wealth. I pay for me and I pay for someone else through ridiculous “insurance” models, and these someone else’s have become a parasite that hangs on the teat of the government for the life style the government has created for them in order that they have a permanent voting class in place. For example the black vote in America votes 90% plus for Democrat. Democrats / Liberals / leftists are the new modern slave masters. The line where helping a particular segment of citizens who might be oppressed or disadvantaged as defined by whom ever defines them is blurred in order to create political capital at the expense of the rest of the citizens. And its all done under the label of “compassion” or “helping”, its nothing of the sort.

    You need to think about this Alex, I know it is a foreign concept to you.

    (BFF: Best Friends Forever)

  • Garry

    Alex wrote,

    “@Garry:
    Thank you. It seems that your one of the few here, who seems to understand what I am talking about. Edward, for example, has no idea.”

    This (along with other posts) makes me believe that you don’t understand what I am talking about.

    You seem to be fixated on conserving people. But what is the nature of people? Skin color? Other physical characteristics? Language? Other elements of culture? Beliefs? Behavioral patterns?

    I submit that skin color and other physical characteristics are largely superficial, and what defines a people is its culture, beliefs, behavioral patterns, and other non-physical characteristics. After all, what differentiates man from other animals is his brain, not so much his physical characteristics. And the brain is a very malleable organ.

    Are blacks faster runners than whites? On average, perhaps, but there are many whites who are faster than most blacks.

    Are Asians better at mathematics than Hispanics? According to test scores, on average, they are (at least in the United States), but many Hispanics are better at math than most Asians, and the differences are largely due to cultural factors rather than Asians having superior brains.

    I know many ethnic Japanese who grew up in South America, and I think of them as belonging to Hispanic culture rather than Japanese culture. I know full-blooded Europeans who grew up in the United States, and I consider them to belong to American culture rather than European. Once a few generations pass, descendants of immigrants tend to adopt the culture of where they grew up. Children adapt to exposure to one culture at home and another in school.

    I also know people who grew up in the United States whose mother came from one culture and whose father came from another; the example that comes to mind is a girl I knew whose father was from Russia and whose mother was from Japan. Some of these people have more trouble figuring out who they are, as they are exposed to 3 cultures simultaneously.

    And culture changes continually, influenced by technology, exposure to other cultures, etc. For example, there is no real American cuisine; we borrow food from around the world.

    This is very different from Old World countries that have a lot of pride in their older cultures. Several old Polish women have gotten visible upset when they found that I don’t speak Polish, despite my last name. Telling them that my ancestors came from at least 7 countries doesn’t calm them down.

    As an aside, my great grandfather, who was from Poland, was forcibly conscripted into the Czar’s army. He didn’t like that, so he deserted and came to America.

    I understand your concerns about foreign cultures displacing yours, but what happens if people from your culture wish to leave it? For example, what happens if your neighbor moves to Brazil and marries a local woman and has children? What would happen if they moved back to Russia and tried to retain some of their Brazilian culture?

    Would your society be justified in excluding somebody like that? In other words, are people free to adopt elements of other cultures that they prefer over some of their own, or even start families with people from other cultures?

    In my opinion, this issue relates to why radical Islam has become active in recent decades: because of technology, their people are exposed to outside cultures in ways that they hadn’t been before. The so-called leaders are concerned that their people will choose to adopt elements of the outside (infidel) cultures, ruining the Islam culture. I think that ruining is perhaps already underway, and what’s happening now is a battle to keep it from happening, but putting the cat back in the bag is very difficult and problematic. They are worried more about their own people leaving their culture than about outside cultures taking over.

    I’m not equating Russian culture with Islam culture, but want to point out the natural extension of a strong attitude of protecting one’s race, culture, etc.

  • wayne

    Garry–
    Good stuff.

    -My g-g-grandfather, escaped from Ukraine to Canada, under similar circumstances. Found a nice Polish girl in Manitoba, then emigrated to the USA, Americanized his last-name, and became a Citizen.
    The other g-g-grandfather, went from Holland to Ellis Island, to Pennsylvania. Something like 1/3 of all the resident’s in his entire tiny Village, emigrated to Pennsylvania. (Through the front-door.)

  • Alex

    @Wayne:

    You are not a conservative, also not in American terms, maybe Pat Buchanan, but not you. I am sorry, but I think, the new term “cuckservative” fits quite well. Conservative painted leftists. Which value has a conservatism, which does not object to preserve and conserve its people? I say it to you: None!

    http://voxday.blogspot.de/2015/12/cuckservative-how-conservatives.html

    A while I liked also libertarian ideas. However, also libertarism is a failed artificial ideology, because it does not consider must important influences as biology, human nature and culture. Nevertheless, I think, Hans Hermann Hoppe is right, if he say by his book: “Democracy. The God that Failed “.

    Wow, why to hell must you also come to Hitler? Nobody talked a “master-race”, but about preservation of own people. I have to say, I meanwhile I feel sorry for you Americans with Nazi paranoia/obsession and your cultural Marxist based ideology.

    @Garry:
    Here are some facts about racial differences, you may like to study it:

    Race, Genetics and Intelligence | Helmuth Nyborg
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTdMY9RI-7E

    The Bell Curve: IQ, Race and Gender | Charles Murray
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lsa_97KIlc

    Race, Evolution and Intelligence | Linda Gottfredson
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZPsXYo7gpc

    Genetics, Race and Human History | Nicholas Wade
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW_AZafEJ4A

    An Honest Conversation About Race | Jared Taylor
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2RVIi6M7oM

  • wayne

    Alex-
    I would put forth the proposition, you are fundamentally misunderstanding, any number of things, and especially America politics.

    I’ll rephrase the question:
    “How’d all that New Communist Man, crap-o-la, work out for ya’ all?”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

  • Cotour

    Alex:

    You are not making a distinction between how Americans think and how people in Europe or anywhere else thinks. Your brand of “Conservatism” is seen as bigotry in America. It is too narrow and exclusionary and your bias is based in race and ethnicity “Your People”. Which is not to say that anyone or everyone in America is forced to associate with people that they would rather not associate with in their private lives. And that personal segregation can be based on their race or ethnicity preference if that is what they personally prefer.

    America and Americans as per how our country was founded is based in equality under the law, that is based in an intellectual choice / scheme and not in race or ethnicity.

  • wayne

    Cotour–
    That’s pretty good.

  • Cotour

    Now their just has to be objective recognition of the differences in how different people think immersed within their own cultures and the intellectual choices that have been made in America and then we can make some progress.

  • Edward

    Alex,
    You wrote: “It seems to me that (most of the) Jews have strong sense of identity and for preservation of the own, otherwise they would not exist anymore after 2000 years of diaspora. I hope, they allow other people same objective.

    How do you explain all the other religions? The youngest being a millennium and a half old. Why is it OK with you that the other religions exist, but not the Jewish religion? For it is only that one religion that you complain about, what with your griping that it dominates so many professions. Once again, your argument sounds like you are not tolerant of the Jewish religion.

    You wrote: “Being conservative is the wish to conserve what exists

    Maybe in your country, but in America conservatism is far, far more encompassing. Conservatism is about freedom, liberty, and justice. In America, progressivism is not the wish to make change, it is the desire for central control, uniformity of opinion, and eugenics. Eugenics is not advocated, much, these days as it has gone out of favor, but it is still quietly part of the progressive agenda.

    You wrote: “This is not possible, if everybody can come into the country or live where he wants.

    Which is why you, Alex, misunderstand conservatism, at least in America. It is not everybody at their own will, it is everybody who obeys the laws, especially when entering the country. It is the progressives who insist that we abrogate our duty to secure borders and let everyone in willy nilly. One of the values of conservatism is the rule of law.

    You wrote: “I take ‘conservative’ to mean ‘conserving liberties (as outlined in our Constitution).’

    And yet you would deny people the liberty to live where they wish. What part of not being able to choose, such as where to live, do you think is having liberty?

    You wrote: “You think and talk like a typical Antifa-man or an extreme leftist (!), if you say that the wish to conserve and sustain the own (race, ethnicity, culture, border, whatever in this context) equals to supporting superiority. That is a lie and dishonest!

    So, how do you explain the National Socialists? For them, the wish to conserve and sustain the own (race, ethnicity, culture, border, whatever in this context) equaled supporting superiority. For conservative, America is a melting pot, not a bean salad where people can be labeled as one race, ethnicity, etc. or another. Where you live, conservatism may be a bigoted philosophy, but not here. Andrew_W had a similar misconception of what conservatism means in America, where it seems to have the same definition in New Zealand and in your country.

    Talk about Antifa, NAZI Germany and every other socialist, communist, and Marxist country was and is definitely against the values of America’s First Amendment.

    Cotour wrote: “In America we are all Americans based in words and codified laws and identified rights

    It is the progressives, not the American conservatives, who “hyphenate” people in order to separate them from being wholly American. American conservatives think of America as much more homogeneous than progressives do or, it seems, that people of other countries do.

    Cotour is correct. In America, conservatives see everyone as an American, not as a hyphenated American.

    “Alex,
    You wrote: “I say your definition of conservatism must be huge failure, if it does not include the most important thing, the conservation of the people themselves. What is more important the people or political ideology? Clearly, it is more important to conserve my unique people, races and blood and genetic line, because once mixed up or destroyed they are a lost!

    Which explains why American conservatism is so different from the attitude of the NAZIs against all non-Aryans. We accept other people; we are not xenophobic. Indeed, if there are peoples who want to be bigoted against those who are not part of a unique people, then America is not for them. We embrace, not reject, people of all races, blood, and genetic lines.

    You, Alex, may think that American conservatism is a huge failure, but it is what turned America, in a mere three centuries, from a backwoods village — that literally couldn’t feed itself — to a peaceful world power leading the free world. What other philosophies or ideologies have done that? It was such a powerful idea that Alexis de Tocqueville wrote a two volume book advocating it to France.

    You wrote: “I fight for whites, because they are my people and their pure existence is endangered. Point!

    That kind of bigotry is not America. Your point is lost, at least for we tolerant, conservative Americans.

    You wrote: “Nobody talked a “master-race”, but about preservation of own people.

    But to preserve your own people, you have to separate yourselves from the others. Throughout history this often led to genocide, in order to assure purity.

    You wrote: “Liberalism is a failed ideology from the start, because it missed to devide between ‘them’ and ‘us’.

    Liberalism is a failed ideology because it believes in central control over the country and its individuals. It uses a division between people — ‘them’ and ‘us’ — in order to facilitate that control.

    Alex, you may want to review your own country, because it may be more socialist and liberal (American definition) than you think that it is. Further, I know exactly what you are talking about, because it is the same thing that the National Socialist German Worker’s Party preached.

    In America, everyone has equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Although Cotour explains this well, I have a little more to add:

    The progressives, socialists, communists, and Marxists advocate for equality of outcome, and that is why they are failed philosophies. In America, we learned that in the first year of William Bradford’s socialist experiment. When that colony changed from equality of outcome to equality of opportunity, more people worked hard and smart, and more people succeeded, bringing so much prosperity to the colony that they were able to invite their Indian neighbors to a three day feast to celebrate their new, successful free market capitalist economy.

    Every complaint about America is a result of progressive policies, advocated or created by the Democratic Party. The Trail of Tears, the KKK, and Jim Crow laws for example. Democrats even violently resisted the abolition of slavery, in America. Conservatism has brought about far more good, in America, than progressivism has.

    You wrote: “I meanwhile I feel sorry for you Americans with Nazi paranoia/obsession and your cultural Marxist based ideology.

    You, Alex, may not bother to learn from history, which explains your attitude and philosophy, but we Americans do. We have the entire world’s history behind us, as those who come here bring their own lessons from their own countries, including NAZI Germany. My neighbor lived under them. As for Marxism, that is what you have been preaching, not the rest of us.

    You wrote: “@Wayne:You are not a conservative, also not in American terms, maybe Pat Buchanan, but not you.

    You have absolutely no idea at all what conservatism is, in America. Your ignorance shows throughout this thread. The following should help explain to you what conservatism means in America:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD6VChcWCE&list=PL5_z6DAA07VQz_5GECnD3Ep0L_Bp0mxy3
    (Bill Whittle, “What We Believe” series, more than an hour of 10-minute videos; part 6 focuses on immigration)

    It is a terrible thing when hate, bigotry, and superiority replaces American conservatism, because — as in so many other countries — it leads to violence and murder.

  • Cotour

    “You, Alex, may think that American conservatism is a huge failure, but it is what turned America, in a mere three centuries, from a backwoods village — that literally couldn’t feed itself — to a peaceful world power leading the free world. What other philosophies or ideologies have done that? ”

    I think this truth stated above shuts all other conversation down regarding which system is superior and free and which is truly racist. You can not argue with results, facts is facts. And that does not say that America does not have its race issues, but to me a lot of that is manufactured for political manipulation purposes.

  • Garry

    Alex, apparently you don’t understand me; nobody is going to convince me that there are significant differences between races, other than increased/decreased incidence of certain medical conditions. The last thing I want to do it add clicks to youtube videos claiming that race determines all.

    There is some alignment between culture and race, and I argue that culture often has a strong influence on test scores, athletic performance, etc.

    I was hoping you would give an answer to my questions about what would happen if someone from your race and culture decided to enter a different culture, and perhaps bring it back to Mother Russia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *