Ivanka is working with the globalists to push more women into the workforce. It is unclear how more women in the work force is a good thing - but usually something about “empowerment” and “improving the economy” is muttered.

However, the data has shown that increase female participation in the economy has not grown the GDP or increased wages. Prior to women entering the workforce in mass, it was common for a man to be be able to provide for a household. Now it is frequently necessary for both the husband and the wife to work to make ends meet. The small children are typically raised in day care by strangers.

This is obviously just a simple case of supply and demand. And more people enter the workforce, the supply of labor increases which lowers the wages: http://www.ramzpaul.com/2017/10/ivanka-pushes-female-empowerment.html


How do civilizations commit suicide? By elevating women at the expense of men. It doesn’t have to be this way: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/how-do-civilizations-commit-suicide-by-elevating-women-at-the-expense-of-men-it-doesnt-have-to-be-this-way/


There is nothing more damaging to our folk than those within our fold who hold Semitic ideologies and push these ideologies upon us under the guise of being traditional. Today we apparently have many who are under the spell of the enemy, who are lapping up this poison like it is ice cream. They are not only attacking our women but also our men and this is something we can not stand for. 

What makes a man an “Alpha” is not how many women he can sleep with. Alpha males do not disrespect, degrade and use their female counterparts for sexual exploits. Where is the honor for the folk in that? And just exactly how does this promote traditional family values and/or edify our men and women? It does not. Instead of teaching honor, this guy is promoting moral degeneration. Disagree with him and you are a Feminist or a Beta male. Heartiste/Weidmann is a Nithing.

An excellent edifying website for men I came across is this one: 25 Characteristics of an Alpha Male

Quoting from his list:

The alpha male knows how to treat a lady. He respects women, often because he’s had some great one’s in his life. He’s chivalrous. He helps his lady at every chance. He helps her reach her dreams, all-the-while moving closer to attaining his own.

I also can’t ignore what is on the other side of the coin. Women who hate men. These women run around topless, screaming, getting arrested, and for what? What does showing your tits prove? These women saw an opportunity to parade around like uncontrolled brats and have corrupted (I believe intentionally) something valuable to our folk, which is the beginning of the restoration of our old and truly traditional attitudes, and twisted it into something vile and disgusting. These women have no moral fiber and are not only an embarrassment to our folk, but are being used as a tool against all good women.

The subjugation of women was not a part of our Ancient ways.

The Patriarchy we have been living under is not traditional to our people. We have literally hundreds of sources to which we can turn to prove this fact. What they want you to believe is not true. Our history was not completely destroyed via the book burning rituals that happened so frequently in our post Christian days. It is preserved in the Greek and Roman historical accounts of the barbarians (which means outsiders) and within our folk tales and lore, within the sagas and plays that have been preserved and that give us shining examples. Our history is also within our blood memory.

The fact is we had neither a Patriarchy nor a Matriarchy, but we did have a Meritocracy. One of the main aspects of our folk was the value we placed on being the best, also known as Merit. As Tacitus noted of the Germans:

The master is not distinguished from the slave by being brought up with greater delicacy. Both live amid the same flocks and lie on the same ground till the freeborn are distinguished by age and recognized by merit.

The real reason we are in such a pickle is not because our women are out of control.  It is because of the Semitic influence that took away the social status of the female and turned her gifts into sins. It also took away merit. In so doing Cultural Marxists of old destroyed our kindred’s legally protected rights. This is exactly what Christianity (the destruction of our true culture) continues to do today. Christianity is Cultural Marxism turned into religion.

The first Cultural Marxists, those who wished to destroy our Aryan culture, entered into our world and finished off our remaining barbarian cultures during Roman times. In fact, I do believe that at the end Rome was actually run by the Jews. Rome, and by extension, Christianity was not the beginning of our traditional ways, it was the end of them. Does the last Roman ruler look European to you?

Odinist Creed: (European aka White) Men and women are not enemies in our tradition as they are in the Semitic cults. We are beloved companions. We seek the best mates of our kind because we are a people who believe in friendly competition and striving for excellence in all things. A noble and great man should seek to win a virtuous woman who is beautiful in body, mind, spirit and character, while women should seek to be worthy of such regard, and to select the best possible man as a husband. We consider children a great gift from our Gods and where at all possible, seek to fully enjoy the blessings of a large family, as the Gods wish this happiness for us. As a tribe, we are all an extended family and bear great love for one another. We hold consideration of nationality and governments a distant second to the bond of blood. Read MORE, here: http://www.renegadetribune.com/nidings-among-us/

Why All White Women Are Feminists

Here are the top five reasons that all White women are feminists, no matter what they say.

5) They have emotions

In addition to boobs and vaginas, which are actually useful, women have yucky emotions and stuff.  They often will start crying when they are upset, and even sometimes raise their voices. It’s a disgusting quality, which men never show. White women need to get their emotions in check, and get back in the kitchen to make their men sandwiches.

4) They want to be respected

They want to be treated with respect. I know, it’s sickening. They expect men to treat them like they are actually human.  We all know that’s not the case, now don’t we? Men treating women like they are actually human is the reason this world is going to hell in a hand basket, fast! Thanks pagans.

3) They are attention whores

Whenever they create content for their people, they are simply doing it to be attention whores. Women aren’t intelligent enough to learn how to edit video, record music, create art, or radio programs, so they will pathetically try and “signal” to everyone that they are actually trying to fight against White genocide, which they are 100% responsible for in the first place.

2) They don’t like being property

They actually take issue with being treated as chattel. I mean, what the hell?  They say they are “traditionalists”, yet they actually want freedom, and rights? Ugh! Makes me sick.

1) They are rent-seeking

Previously these pesky women were trying to enter the work force, but now some actually want to be able to stay home with their children, and not work. Some will even try to find alternative ways to make an income, other than a slave job, and we absolutely CANNOT support that “rent seeking” behavior. Women need to stop being so lazy and go “rent seek” at their slave jobs, where they belong.


White women need to learn some obedience, realize their place in this world, and take an example from societies that really know how to correct the female problem, which is far more disastrous to us than the jewish problem. We would be in a much better state if this is what our women looked like..

These are some of the talking points that I see used against White women all over the internet.  Yes, some are trolls, but some are actually angry White men. http://www.renegadetribune.com/why-all-white-women-are-feminists/


How The Alt-Right has Promoted Eurasianism

Recently (((Russia Today))) released this ridiculous article, based on no evidence whatsoever, reporting that allegedly White women are not only having sex with men in the Calais jungle, but also are raping young brown boys. Do people seriously buy this garbage? Unfortunately I know a large amount of the alt right would lap this up like their lives depended on it. “See! See guys! White women are disgusting whores that essentially want to be raped by brown invaders so we should just hang back and continue to make excuses for our complete lack of action and failure as men to protect our people’s most important resource – our women!”

I am finally starting to see the real purpose of the alt right and its connections to Russia. I know what some of you are thinking. “That’s what Hillary said! See! Sinead is like the next Hitlery!” In my estimation the overall agenda of the alt right is to push Eurasianism onto our folk. Richard Spencer is married to a Eurasian woman who tries to silence the mass killings of Whites at the hands of Stalin and praises anti-Western Alexander Dugin, FOUNDER of the National Bolshevik Party. The Eurasian agenda appears to simply be the Kalergi plan of the East.

Nina is responsible for translating all of Dugin’s work for her beloved Dicky. Let’s read some heart warming quotes from this supposed “White ally” Alexander Dugin.

I am a supporter of blacks. White civilization; their cultural values, false, dehumanizing model of the world, built by them – did not pay off. Everything goes to the beginning of the anti-white pogroms on a planetary scale. Russia saved only by the fact that we are not pure white. Predatory multinational corporations, oppression and suppression of all others, MTV, gays and lesbians – this is the fruit of white civilization, from which it is necessary to get rid of. So I am for reds, yellows, greens, blacks – but not for whites. I wholeheartedly on the side of the people of Zimbabwe.

An important aspect of the Eurasian worldview is an absolute denial of Western civilization. In the opinion of the Eurasians, the West with its ideology of liberalism is an absolute evil. (source)

Dugin is embraced by outlets like The Traditionalist Workers Party, which uses the “chaos symbol”.  Sounds kind of communist, no?

Just being a pro White man here with my hammer and sickle!

He’s also been a guest on Red Ice Radio.

I have also noticed that the lovely Lana, has been pushing the idea that “Western women” have the highest standards in the world and that apparently Western women are embracing their own genocide because they are inherently flawed. Hmm. Interesting that she never seems to condemn the Eastern European or Russian women who are acting the same exact way as modern Western women. As a Russian woman, wouldn’t she be more inclined to advocate for what Eastern women should do?  The same goes for the pointless, counter productive and illogical argument for repealing the 19th amendment. This, once again diverts blame from organized jewry, convinces people that voting will actually make a difference and that women are incapable of logical thought, therefore they shouldn’t be able to have their own independent vote. 

Here Lana talks to a gay man, Greg Johnson, who promotes people like Jame’s O’Meara on his site. James O’Meara wrote The Homo and the Negro and runs a blog called “Where the Wild Boys Are” which reads:

“pitiless hordes of adolescent warriors in rainbow thongs”

Being tied up and spanked is a kind of last stand of implicit White identity.

He is a homosexual man pushing for pitiless hordes of adolescent warriors in rainbow thongs. Pederast much? Oh wait! That’s right, according to Milo Yiannapolous, grown men having sex with teenage boys is a normal, healthy,coming of age event! During the cringetastic show between Lana and Grindr Greggy, they mention how I am a feminist for calling out the fact that the alt right is pushing faggotry and having openly homosexual degenerates like Jack Donavon lecture young impressionable White males about “masculinity”.

Here they are pictured together at the last National Pozzing Institute conference.


Tila Tequila will be a guest speaker at the upcoming conference. No. I’m not joking. I wish I was.

Also, Lana will be having “Electre” whose real name is Catherine Zatulovsky, model for her clothing line soon. Interesting how Zatulovsky has a jewish surname.


From the jewish surname database.

Electre sure is one classy lady, isn’t she? A great role model for young White girls all around the world!

Lana’s family is also behind “Word To Russia”.


Apparently israel took in a bunch of “Christian” refugees and now Michael Lokteff and crew have dedicated their lives to spreading the gospel to those “Christians” in the jewish state. I also wonder why Ms. Lokteff, who advocates for a patriarchy and is vehemently anti-feminist, would not only not take her husband’s last name in marriage, as a real “traditionalist” would, but also used her rights as a woman in the West to sue for sexual harassment.  Among Lokteff’s ‘Prayer for Relief’, she asked for Non-Economic Damages of $300,000, and Punitive Damages in the amount of $1,000,000. It appears to have been settled out of court.

Maybe this is where Lokteff got the capitol to start her overpriced clothing line that neglects to even let the consumer know where her super duper organic fibers are sourced from or who is manufacturing these garments. I’m sure it’s White people, right Lana? Seems a bit hypocritical, no? She also is quoted as saying thatwomen who don’t have children should have no say in society, yet this childless woman who is almost 40 can have her own radio show, clothing line and TV show that tells Western people what to do. Hmmmm.

She also loves to talk about how awful the “West” is, but no mention of the East and how both are controlled by jews.  I’ve also noticed how it is no longer “White genocide” according to the leaders  shills of the alt right. It is apparently “White replacement” now. screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-8-25-57-am

Fed Lice, as they should be referred to from here on out, also love to bring on Matt Forney.

Forney is the untermensch who writes books encouraging White men to engage in sex tourism in the Philippines. If you’re a fat, bald, autistic loser with nothing to offer, you’ll be able to get laid three times in a day, according to Forney’s vlogs.  Can you imagine if I was writing books encouraging White women to engage in sex tourism in Africa? I’d be literally crucified and never asked to be on any pro White networks ever again. Why the double standard Fed Lice?

Fed Lice recently did a video condemning Milo for “infiltrating” the alt right, which to me just seems like damage control and a desperate attempt to remain relevant. The masses are slowly realizing the alt right is a joke. If one has a “big tent” with “no bouncers” then how can it be “infiltrated”?

Also, according to Lana, White women who are gang raped by invaders must have actually wanted it because they didn’t say, “No.” (As if they would magically stop raping this woman after she said no). I’m sure Lana was there so she knows exactly what went down. How can anyone support this vile cretin who spouts such nonsense? This woman is not on our side. In my estimation, she is a subversive mossad or Russian agent, along with her pathetically weak and spineless husband.

Some of us remember how Lokteff reacted to two Western women showing her proof of Roosh’s sexual exploits in White countries in which she responded to by calling us “creepy”.  A non White raping and taking advantage of White women isn’t creepy though, is it Lana?


The alt right and its leaders agents are nothing more than a jewish created, controlled and perpetuated controlled opposition movement, designed to destabilize the West, create tension between Western men and women, push faggotry and degeneracy, to deflect blame from the jew, justify mass rapes of Western women and rope Whites back into dead end, jewish controlled party politics. If you still can’t see the forest for the trees then good riddance because you are actively working against my people and you are traitors. http://www.renegadetribune.com/alt-right-promotes-hatred-white-women-eurasianism/

The Psychological Operation to Blame White Women

Just when we were really making some progress in exposing the jewish orchestrated genocide against Whites, a toxic narrative was injected. Instead of blaming jews for their obvious role in flooding all White countries with hordes of non-White invaders, while also condemning all the White traitors who let it happen, some of the biggest figures in our “movement” started pointing the finger at White women. Women are too horny and want to be ravaged by the savages, they are all feminists, they opened the borders because they are pathologically altruistic, and so on. After our women started getting raped and assault en masse, some men started saying these women were asking for it, that they deserved it, and that they actually liked it, since “scientific” studies show many women fantasize about rape and even orgasm while they are being brutally defiled. Many of our kinsmen, acting as “good goyim”, lapped up this poisonous narrative that has been spreading like the plague.

Recently a video was released titled “Why Women Destroy Civilization“, which has been shared by many within our ranks and gone viral. It puts almost all of the blame for our current situation on the unrestrained sexual desires of White women. The video says that women have no loyalty to their in-group, which is why they are always out chasing after foreigners. It never mentions the conquering armies of men (both White and brown) who have created many of the mixed people of this world through rape, the fact that women actually have more loyalty to their men than vice-versa, and the jewish culprits behind race-mixing propaganda. Even still, most women stay loyal to their men, despite all of this programming.

Although there are some White women out fornicating with non-White men, it is still not a large percentage of our population, and not a reason to throw all of our loyal women under the bus. Also, why is it that White men having sex with Asian women is never seen as a problem by many people in our “movement”? In fact, many promote it, since Asian women make the perfect “waifu”.

Apparently no one saw the hypocrisy of The Daily Stormer posting this video about how women lack in-group loyalty, as Andrew Anglin did a video a few years ago with his “jail-bait” Asian girlfriend and was on radio program in 2012 saying that does not date White girls and that Whites should be bred out of existence. There have even been discussions on that site about how it’s perfectly righteous for White armies to rape the non-Whites they conquer. Real Aryan.

The video also blames “feminism” and basically states that all White women are feminists, without ever going into any details about some of the merits to first-wave feminist arguments, and who was behind the plague of second-wave feminism.

The video shows images of absurd feminist stereotypes, a photoshopped image of a woman holding a sign saying that she will trade racists for rapists, and Femen protesters, implying that this is the way all White women think and act. Of course the video does not make any mention of how Femen is funded by jewish billionaire George Soros.

The solution given by the video is for men to severely control the sexuality and thinking of their women. It is a little vague as to how this exactly should be done, but I imagine when they speak of a return of “patriarchy”, they mean a return to the traditional Christian mindset, where women are basically confined to household chores and bearing children, covered head to toe in clothing. This is just swinging from one extreme to another, without ever realizing there is a happy medium between slutwalks and the nunnery.

In National Socialist Germany, women were not feminist whores, and although they were encouraged to be mothers with large families, women were not simply powerless possessions. Some women, such as Leni Riefenstahl and Hanna Reitsch, even surpassed male counterparts in their fields. National Socialists, who had been mired in a jewish pornographic culture for decades, did not seek to cover up all nudity and sexuality, but instead elevated the human form to new heights of beauty and spirituality, as is evidenced by their high art. This was also the way of many of our pre-Christian ancestors.

This desire to control women and view them as essentially worthless comes directly from jewish brains, going all the way back to blaming evil Eve for taking the apple in the garden of Eden. Observant jews thank YHVH every morning “that He didn’t make me a gentile, that He didn’t make me a woman, that He didn’t make me an ignoramus.” The Tractate Shabbat, sums up the attitude of jewish religious law toward women: they are “a sack full of excrement” with a bleeding hole. Jewish men essentially enslave their women and treat them worse than dogs. Haaretz even admits Orthodox Judaism Treats Women Like Filthy Little Things:

If a man and a woman are drowning in a river, first they’ll save the man, ‘who is obligated to perform more commandments,’ whereas a woman’s ‘wisdom is only in the spindle.’ In fact, ‘words of Torah should be burned rather than being given to women.’

This poison was passed onto the other two Abrahamic religions, Christianity and Islam. They all treat their women in a similar fashion.

I understand that generalizations can be useful sometimes, but this is poison being pushed here! Many, many women are vehemently opposed to what is going on, while many men are all for letting these invaders overrun their countries. Also, the implication is that White women are in such a position of power that they can orchestrate the mass movements of millions of people and use government positions to provide the incentives and protections to the invaders. The people who espouse this line of thinking will use Angela Merkel as an example to prove how women are behind this, neglecting to mention that she is a Communist jew-lover (if not a jewess herself), who is the puppet head of a still-occupied country.

No, let’s just blame White women for everything. I bet those little girls in Rotherham (and all over the White world) actually invited the Pakistani rapists into their country and then begged to be sex slaves for them. They deserve what they get! It’s the same with all of those German women who were raped to death by Soviets in WW2, since “women like the idea of their country being destroyed by a rampage of virile men.” I’m sure they were orgasming all night before having their brains bashed in. They deserved it!

If I was on the air right now, instead of writing, I would be yelling! I cannot express the rage I feel when White men allow their women to be blamed, instead of seeing how they are being victimized. According to Kaminski, I am a male feminist for standing up for White women as they are being relentlessly assaulted from all angles. Others out there will say that I am “white knighting” for not going along with the toxic narrative of “Women Destroy Civilizations” and blaming our beloved mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters for everything that went wrong in our world.

Good, we need more White knights!!

White women hold the key to our future – through their words, willpower, and wombs. Do not be fooled by the multi-faceted psychological operations being run to divide us from each other. White men and women need to stop fighting against each other, realize the existential threat facing us and our offspring, and come together to battle those who seek our destruction. 

White women do not destroy civilization, jews do!

And real White men do not condemn their women, they defend them! http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-psychological-operation-to-blame-white-women/


You’ve heard the expression, “Boys will be boys.” But what happens when a brawny boy wants to be one of the girls – fiercely competing with females in weightlifting, brutally tackling girls on the football field or even dealing powerful knockout punches to ladies in a mixed martial-arts cage?

It’s now happening across America and around the world.

Biological males are joining women’s teams, smashing records and dominating in sports such as weightlifting, softball, cycling, track, wrestling, football, volleyball, dodgeball, handball, cricket, golf, basketball and mixed martial arts.

The movement for “equality” has apparently inspired transgender athletes to join teams of their preferred gender. And that often means biological males are competing against biological females on women’s teams. But in the world of sports, critics argue, equality between the sexes simply doesn’t exist. Physiologically speaking, there’s a gender gap between men and women that cannot be erased.

For example, when it comes to running, men are generally faster than women. As the 2015 edition of Runner’s World explained, “At every distance up to the marathon, the gap between men’s and women’s world record times is nine to 10 percent – and it’s a similar or even higher percentage among recreational runners.”

So why do men have some athletic advantages over women?

Ohio University biological sciences lecturer Chris Schwirian told Runner’s World: “Faster men’s times for 100 to 800 meters are mostly due to men, on average, having greater muscle mass – and a larger portion of it is fast-twitch, which allows them to generate greater force, speed and anaerobically produced energy. At all distances beyond 800 meters, the main reason for the gap is men’s higher aerobic capacity [VO2max], on average, which is due to their typically having less body fat, more hemoglobin and muscle mass, and larger hearts and lungs than women.”

On average, men have longer and larger bones, which gives them mechanical advantages over women, since they have greater leverage, increased height and larger frames to support muscle. Their bones are also more dense, and they have tougher ligaments, making them less prone to sports injury.

Since these physical and physiological factors give most men a clear competitive edge in sports, is it fair or even safe for biological males – with larger muscle mass, hearts and lungs and greater strength, acceleration and speed – to compete against girls and women?

“If men can claim to be women and invade a sport that only women are allowed to compete in, then it’s a safe bet men will win,” writes the Federalist’s Brandon Morse. “All the accolades, rewards, and recognition will be taken from the women who rightfully deserve them and given to a man who essentially cheated by putting on makeup, injecting himself with hormones, and saying he’s a woman.”

Why is all this happening? In his widely acclaimed new book, “The Snapping of the American Mind,” award-winning journalist David Kupelian stunningly documents – in a chapter titled “Gender Madness” – precisely what the transgender phenomenon is really all about. Prepare to be shocked.

Allowing biological males to compete against women is not only unfair and dangerous to women, it’s worse than that, according to David Kupelian, WND managing editor and author of “The Snapping of the American Mind.”

“The insanity of this affects not just the transgendered individual and the women athletes thus victimized,” he said. “It also contributes to a sort of mass delusion infecting our whole society in which, thanks to the influence of the powerful LGBT movement, everybody now has to either affirm the absurd and crazy – that a man who is essentially a female impersonator can fairly compete against women – or they have to suffer abuse and persecution as bigots just for speaking the truth.”

Kupelian said these “grotesquely unfair matchups” between female athletes and powerful men who identify as women is just one more unfortunate aspect of a revolutionary movement sweeping the nation.

Read more at: http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/female-athletes-crushed-by-women-who-were-once-men/


New Zealand-based family organisation, Family First NZ, was served a notice this week by the national Charities Registration Board that it intends to deregister the organisation in September because Family First’s promotion of its views about marriage and the traditional Family “cannot be determined to be for the public benefit in a way previously accepted as charitable”.

“The reasons given by the Board for Family First’s deregistration are a clear demonstration of the consequences of redefining Marriage. The Board itself has confirmed that advocating for strong, stable, mum and dad families is no longer acceptable as being in the public interest”, Coalition for Marriage spokesman Lyle Shelton said.

The notice from the Charities Registration Board is the culmination of a four-year saga, in which an initial deregistration of Family First was halted by the High Court, who asked the Charities Board to reconsider.

“It is disappointing that an organisation that understands the need for strong families and is countering the damaging impact on the community of family breakdown could now be penalised for believing in traditional marriage,” Mr Shelton said.

“What is occurring in New Zealand gives Australian charitable organisations a glimpse into what may happen in Australia should marriage be redefined in law.

“As we see in New Zealand and other countries where same-sex marriage has been introduced, it does not take long before it impacts on freedom of speech and religion,” Mr Shelton said: https://www.coalitionformarriage.com.au/nz_charities_can_now_be_deregistered_for_not_agreeing_with_same_sex_marriage


What do you think happens when a gay, like SUPER gay Crowder tries to get a super gay wedding cake baked at a Muslim bakery? I’m pretty sure you can guess, but you might as well watch this week’s adventure to find out! https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/


This is supposed to represent tolerance, diversity inclusiveness and acceptance of everyone. However this diversity can only really be maintained through intolerance, as inclusiveness destroys every single group that makes something diverse.

I called into a system radio show years ago when they were discussing multiculturalism, and tried to get across the important point that multiculturalism destroys every culture, and that this is the reason for its instigation, and that as it destroys all culture, it is not really multiculture, but no culture at all. Multiculturalism is forced extermination of culture.

True multiculturalism can only be maintained by autonomous groups having autonomy over themselves, not living and competing with one another in the same environment, and we had this before multiculturalism, when the world still accepted National Sovereignty and Self Determination of Peoples: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/nordicantisemite.com/2015/06/30/racial-and-cultural-autonomy/amp/


“We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, …wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us. All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our holy gods are handsome young men. …We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed…” Michael Swift – Boston Gay Community News – February 15-21, 1987 (From the Traditional Values Coalition Special Report, Vol. 18., No. 10)

Clearly not everyone in the homosexual movement is an extremist. Many are solid, law-abiding citizens who make important daily contributions to our society and do not believe in confrontation or hard-line rhetoric. However, many militant homosexuals and their supporters have different beliefs. They have adopted the following tactics with the goal of forcing their beliefs on society:

• eliminating free speech by harassing and attempting to silence anyone who disagrees with them;

• preying on children by indoctrinating and recruiting them into their lifestyle;

• imposing their beliefs on others through activist judges and lawmakers requiring that everyone actively promote homosexuality in every institution (schools, workplace, churches, etc.);

• destroying marriage and undermining the traditional family in order to annihilate any moral standard of behavior;

• intolerance toward anyone who does not willingly submit to their agenda;

• fighting for a discriminatory and unconstitutional double standard of justice by demanding that crimes against homosexuals be punished more severely than the same crimes against heterosexuals through ‘hate crimes’ legislation; and

• deceptively portraying homosexuality as a harmless and victimless behaviour.

The homosexual agenda is based on intolerance of anyone who disagrees with them and is a well-coordinated, well-financed, wide-ranging, intensive effort to infiltrate and influence organisations and society at large in order to spread misinformation with the goal of recruiting children.

Children are the prize to the winners of the cultural war. Those who control what young people are taught and what they experience will determine the future course for our nation. The predominant value system of an entire culture can be overhauled by those with unlimited access to children. Homosexual activists understand very clearly how important children are to their cause: http://www.smashculturalmarxism.com/the-real-homosexual-agenda/


What we have seen with Coopers is the same we see with other corporations and everyday Australians — the strangling of free speech by those advocates for changing the definition of marriage. It is simply not tolerable to disagree, to express a different view. Australian businesses are forced to ‘take the pledge’ and conform to the same sex marriage agenda with a reputation gun held to their heads. - Sophie York

The unfairness of the same-sex marriage debate is undeniable. Egregiously, it is fine if a member of the same-sex marriage brigade decides to have ties with external organisations, including those who vocally campaign on political issues, outside of their employment.

However, if a man-woman marriage supporter decides to engage with other organisations, they will be met with attacks and public pressure to step down from their main employment – or be fired.  

Nowhere is this more clearly exemplified than in the Mark Allaby - IBM debacle:

Marriage equality advocate IBM has refused to publicly back a senior executive in the face of attacks over his role with a Christian organisation. The IT group and its Sydney-based managing partner Mark Allaby have been hounded by social media activists, who have taken issue with Mr Allaby’s role on the board of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, an internship program for young Christians.

Not only did IBM refuse to support Allaby, they also refused to answer the more pressing question: are their employees granted the freedom to engage with external organisations outside of employment if those organisations do not hold the same political beliefs as espoused by IBM?

“IBM did not respond to questions about whether staff were free to engage with external organisations, including religious groups, outside of their employment with the company. “We will not be responding on this,” an IBM spokeswoman said.”

By their silence, IBM has spread fear amongst its employees who disagree with same-sex marriage, confirming their fear that IBM employees do not have the freedom to associate with groups that hold the opposing view, even if the employee themselves remain silent on the issue. In other words, employees of IBM are not allowed to act in their own capacity, even outside of work.

In contrast, individual members of the same-sex marriage campaign are not faced with the same restrictions to their freedom. As reported by The Australian, Australian #Marriage#Equality simply distanced itself from the actions of one of its senior employees who publicly advocated for the boycott of Coopers:

Australian Marriage Equality claimed to have no role in last week’s boycott of the brewer, however The Australian has learned that AME Victorian ­director Tim Peppard signed a Change.org petition condemning Coopers’ links to Bible Society Australia, which has been accused of being against same-sex marriage despite having no stated view on the subject.

Sparked by a Bible Society film called Keeping It Light, which featured Liberal MPs Tim Wilson and Andrew Hastie debating marriage laws while holding Coopers ales, the petition called on drinkers to boycott the company “until they support marriage equality”.

It also demanded the family-owned business make a generous donation to AME affiliate Australians for Equality. Mr Peppard, a director of AME since 2013, signed the petition a week ago, adding: “I object to Coopers’ ­homophobic and duplicitous add [sic] promoting the homophobic views of the Bible Society.”

His actions appear to be in conflict with AME’s policy of ­encouraging “positive, respectful and inclusive” debate about same-sex marriage.

Even though Peppard’s actions are in direct breach of AME’s policy, AME backed Peppard’s freedom to associate with external groups, as well as having the freedom to take action directly in conflict with AME’s methods:

Mr Peppard could not be contacted yesterday but AME ­co-chairman Alex Greenwich said the director acted in his personal capacity.

There is a marked difference in the public response to the private activity of an executive who sits on the board of a Christian organisation, versus the private activity of someone who supports same-sex marriage (Australian Marriage Equality) on other side of the debate. IBM was silent as the grave when it came to backing their executive employee’s rights. Compare that to Marriage Equality’s open backing of their executive. Peppard received no reprimand for acting out of accordance with AME’s policy, because there is no public pressure to punish him, whereas Allaby has been publicly pressured to quit his job.

Only one group is free to express personal opinions - and it’s not the pro-marriage supporters: http://www.marriagealliance.com.au/the_double_standards_of_the_same_sex_marriage_lobby 


The traditional markers of adulthood, such as independence, marriage, children, and home ownership, show that the millennial generation is greatly lagging behind baby boomers, according to a new study comparing statistical data over the past 35 years.

Researcher Lydia Anderson of the National Center for Family and Marriage Research at Bowling Green State Universitycompared U.S. Census data from 1980 with the most recent American Community Survey data from 2015.

Comparing 25- to 34-year-olds in 1980 with the same age group today, Anderson found that far fewer millennials are married, live away from their parents, have children of their own, or own their own houses than the baby boomers of the same age group the year Ronald Reagan was elected president.

In 1980, for example, more than two-thirds (68 percent) of 25- to 34-year-olds were already married, whereas in 2015, just two in five millennials (41 percent) in the same age group were married. Only 20 percent of baby boomers of these ages had never been married, while more than half (53 percent) of millennials have never married.

Read the rest here: https://redice.tv/news/study-millennials-delaying-entry-into-adulthood


We are experiencing catastrophe after catastrophe. This is the heritage of the moral cowardice of the group that calls itself the Greatest Generation.

That Greatest Generation backed down instantly at every movement that labeled itself civil rights or social progress or education. That Greatest Generation marched its children off to be indoctrinated by leftist faculties at public expense and did not raise a finger to stop it.

Why? Well, that leftist indoctrination called itself “Education” and the leftists shouted that you had better pay for a leftist indoctrination in the name of Education or you were against “academic freedom.” It would have taken moral courage to refuse to obey them, and the group that calls itself the Greatest Generation never had an ounce of moral courage.

The group that calls itself the Greatest Generation produced legions of leftist kids, but they also produced the dyspeptic old right wingers who whine, “All is lost!” They are moral cowards in the same tradition. They are the legitimate descendants of the Greatest Generation just like the legions of college-indoctrinated leftists are.

In any catastrophe, there are people who stand and deal with it and there are people who run around in circles screaming “All is lost!” Those who run around screaming are not just pathetic cry-babies, they are dangerous.

We have a catastrophe here. Do we run around in a circle screaming “All is lost!” or do we deal with it?

News Flash: Tomorrow is Coming Anyway

During a catastrophe, a sane man thinks: 1) What do we have left? and 2) What can we do in this new situation?

During a catastrophe, what does a sane man do about the people running around in circles screaming, “All is lost!”? Does he sympathize with them? Does he say they are good folks and try to persuade them there is hope? Or does he go ahead and deal with the problem in front of him while he waits for the panicky people to stop wetting their pants and follow his example?

The only thing a brave person has time for while the panickers are running around screaming is to do his job. When it comes to the people running around screaming, all he has time for is a quick slap in the face.

Whitaker Online is a constant slap in the face to the “All is lost!” crowd. In the meantime, us grown-ups have work to do.

If we stop shrieking and start thinking, we will realize that a lot of the “Oh, God, all is lost!” problems will solve themselves.

For example, right wingers whine, “What about the growing minority vote? We are being OVERWHELMED! Oh, all is lost, all is lost!”

Votes are critical in a democracy. But there has never been a multiracial democracy in all of history and there never will be. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein’s minority took the helm. In Yugoslavia, Tito’s Serb minority took over.

We are being overwhelmed by minorities. So our future will not be democratic.

The group that called itself the Greatest Generation said it Saved the World and lost it. The group that calls itself the Greatest Generation declared that it saved democracy and lost it. That is the tomorrow their moral cowardice left us, and that is the world we will have to live in. - Bob Whitaker


In Western nations male suicide rates are way up. Women’s proclaimed levels of happiness and contentment are way down, despite the fact that they have had wage equality for decades (yes, the wage gap is a perpetually pontificated Lochness monster-sized myth that was debunked years ago by economists like Thomas Sowell), despite the fact that they have surpassed men in educational participation and despite the fact that they have total control over family planning.

Marriage rates are at historic lows since the 1970s and the rise of social justice activism. Of course, the argument is often presented that economic decline has more to do with this than cultural Marxism. However, setting aside the rising tide of men who fear being bled dry through divorce settlements based on double standards, the West’s economic decline (and thus marriage decline) can be correlated to the increase in overt debt spending. And debt spending is driven directly by socialist legislation, entitlement programs and social welfare addiction, more so even than it can be correlated to military spending.

Therefore, cultural Marxism and its vicious attempts to forcefully “harmonize” wealth through taxation and welfare have indeed caused the very economic conditions by which marriage is made untenable and families are made unstable.

While women become more and more unhappy, men and masculinity are essentially demonized by cultural Marxists (mainly feminists) as “toxic.” This propaganda campaign has been so successful that men in many first world nations are beginning to pursue, for all intents and purposes, an asexual lifestyle safer from collectivist intrusions and judgments.

As if the psychological browbeating were not enough, the chemistry of the male body is also being warped by estrogen-imitating chemicals present in industrial products, plastics and soy-based foods. A decline in normal levels of male testosterone and an ever increasing hormonal feminization of younger generations of men and boys is becoming prevalent.

Indirect chemical influences aren’t the only threat. Direct drugging of boys (with far greater frequency than girls) with psychotropics in order to subdue their natural tendencies towards physicality and frenetic activity is epidemic in public schools, all with the goal of making boys behave more like girls.

Finally, the erasure of free speech and thought is always the holy grail of cultural Marxists; but this is not always done through government power — at least not right away. Social justice cultists rely more on collective pressure and public shaming tactics to engineer an environment in which people feel compelled to self-censor rather than deal with the hailstorm of witch hunters and wagging fingers.

Cultural Marxists do use government force to police what they consider thought crimes, but usually in an incremental manner. One day, it’s the use of government to demand associations, as with a Christian-owned cake business being forced to work for another party that feels entitled to a gay wedding cake. Another day, it might be a public school being forced to allow boys dressed as girls in the girls’ bathroom or locker room. Another day, it might be the implementation of lowered standards and quotas to force businesses to hire people with victim-group status, even if they are unqualified for the job.

All of these actions impede upon the individual freedoms and privacy rights of others, all under the guise of “equality.” And because cultural Marxists need to constantly observe ever greater modes of oppression and inequality in order to justify their existence, the impositions on individual liberty will never end. Today, people may argue that such violations are “minor” and not to be concerned over. It is happening to strangers or distant neighbors, not to them; so why should they care? Liberty movement champions know full well why this thinking is idiotic; the trampling of one person’s individual liberties is the trampling of ALL people’s individual liberties. Totalitarianism is a virus that feeds on one person to the next until everyone is on the menu. More here: http://osnetdaily.com/2015/10/how-to-stamp-out-cultural-marxism-in-a-single-generation/


Childhood of today is beyond messy and cluttered. It’s chaotic. Research shows us the way we are raising kids today causes stress and anxiety to overwhelm both children and parents alike: http://www.becomingminimalist.com/kids-need-minimalism/





Anti-Whites support worldwide White Genocide by massive immigration and forced assimilation in all White countries.

By 2050, whites will be a minority in both the U.S. (and all other countries settled by whites) and their indigenous homeland of Europe.

As Hillary Clinton’s VP nom Tim Kaine put it: “I think the burden is on those of us who are in the majority — Caucasians. We have to put ourselves in a place where we are the minority.” He doesn’t mean that metaphorically but quite literally. 

According to the US Census Bureau, the white population is contracting at an incredible rate in absolute terms, falling from 211,460,626 to 196,817,552 during the decade from 2000 to 2010. This is a loss of 14,643,074 people in that period alone; almost 15 million. Similar trends are taking place in Europe.

This is significant because whites will be the only ethnicity on Earth without a country of their own. Black people will still have the entire continent of Africa. Asians will still control the entire continent of Asia. Jews will have Israel: http://whitegenocideproject.com/13421-2/

Most Whites were under such hardship and oppression in Europe that they were willing to go to the far reaches of the globe and tame wild lands in their search for freedom. In the Americas, this put them into direct conflict with Amerindians, greatly reducing Amerindian numbers as detailed previously. In places like South Africa, the Black populations actually increased dramatically after the Whites introduced Western medicine and agricultural practices. Now that the Blacks have complete control and greatly outnumber the Whites, Whites are being killed en masse (as reported by Genocide Watch). Anti-Whites argue that this is just payback for colonization and “racism” by Whites, which is another disgusting way of justifying genocide.

We hear all about the evil White conquerors, but why don’t we ever hear about the invasion and domination of much of Western Europe by the North African Islamic Moors for 500 years? When they subjugated Spain and Portugal, the Moors actually demanded 100 White virgins every year for use in their harems. And what about the invasion and domination of Eastern Europe by the Jewish Khazars, the Asiatic Mongols, Huns, and Magyars, or the Muslim Turks of the Ottoman Empire? They all raped and pillaged the White Slavs (whence we get the word “slave”). For many centuries the Ottoman Turks took 1,000 White babies every year to be raised and enslaved as the Empire’s elite guard, known as the Janissaries.

It’s no wonder this history is left out of the mainstream narrative.

No I do not like the white man up in me,
He rape my people as he rape my country,
Everything I love and cherish, he try to take away,
We will be rid of him, soon come the day.
Oh yeah, kill all the white man..
~ NOFX – “Kill all the White Man”

We are constantly reminded of Whites whipping slaves, the lynchings of the KKK, whites oppressing blacks during segregation, or the current abuse of poor black “youths” at the hands of “racist” policemen and White citizens. The news media will extensively cover any White-on-Black crime (which is always a “hate” crime) while ignoring the massive amount of Black-on-Black crime and Black-on-White crime. They will even go so far as to call George Zimmerman a “White Hispanic” in order to drum up outrage from the Black community. We are rarely presented with the real color of crime.

“Black people kill more black people every six months than the KKK did in 86 years.” – Allen West, Black politician

The Color of Crime report (2005) was compiled from crime statistics in America, adjusted for the different population sizes of racial groups, showing that:

  • Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
  • The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black and Hispanic.
  • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a White than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
  • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are Black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When Whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are Black.
  • Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white.
  • Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are 9 times more likely.

“Perhaps the most shocking of all the crime data dealing with cross-race crime is the incredible rate of crime by Black males against White women. According to U.S. Justice Department figures over 34,460 White women are sexually assaulted or raped by Black men each year, and most authorities believe that the actual rape figures are at least twice the reported number. In perhaps the most shocking crime figure of all is the number of White rapes against Black women. Statistically, it is 0! Because they have fewer than 10 cases nationally.” – Dr. David Duke, The Racial Murder and Rape of White Women in America

This problem extends to European countries that have been flooded by non-White immigrants. 1 in 4 women in Sweden are expected to be raped in their lifetimes. Almost all of the rapes are committed by non-White immigrants against the White native women. The epidemic is so bad that many Nordic women are dying their hair from blonde to black to avoid being targeted. 

“I think there’s a resurgence of antisemitism because at this point in time Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural, and I think we’re going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place.. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into amulticultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.” ~ Barbara Lerner Spectre, Founder of Paideai, European Jewish Fund in Sweden

Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) defines “genocide” as ANY of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or IN PART, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group;
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

So let’s see how the current situation fits the definitions for genocide.

  1. Many Whites are killed every day at the hands of non-Whites (legal and illegal) who are propagandized by our media to hate Whites.
  2. Whites are receiving bodily harm through “the knockout game” and mental harm through required “White privilege” seminars and anti-White media, which constantly reinforces “White guilt”.
  3. Whites are being forced to accept massive immigration and forced assimilation, which inevitably leads to blending White people out of existence (or nearly so), especially when coupled with race mixing propaganda. These policies are considered genocide when done to Tibetans by the Chinese and it’s genocide when it’s done to Whites. Many American cities have been almost entirely ethnically cleansed of White people in the 20th century.
  4. Whites are discriminated against through Affirmative Action in the work force and academia, which reduces the amount of wealth Whites are able to accumulate, reducing birth rates. Whites are also expected to foot the bill for social welfare for non-Whites and illegal immigrants, while Whites often do not get the same kinds of benefits, which increases non-White demographics at the cost of the White population. White people are also being conditioned to think that if they have more children, they will be harming the environment.
  5. White children are currently the most highly valued sex slaves, exploited by some of the world’s biggest power players. Almost nothing is done to stop this.

Wesley Clark

Just because all White people are not gone from this planet (yet!), it does not mean there isn’t a genocide taking place. We have already been destroyed IN PART. These anti-White programs are not accidental; they are intentional. The implementation of “Diversity” in White lands constitutes GENOCIDE, regardless of whether or not that is the intention of the immigrants themselves.

More here: http://www.renegadetribune.com/destroying-the-anti-white-arguments/


How to counter leftist psycho-terrorism. Since the western marxists had abandoned the idea of violent revolution, a psycho-terrorism (psychological terrorism) became their main offensive weapon. The aim is to manipulate public opinion, change people’s behavior and influence their emotions and opinions, so the society become unable to defend itself against marxist “cultural revolution”. In fact, they intend to exert a systematic, destructive, long-lasting psychological pressure on the whole society, which dismantle all opposition - patriotism, traditionalism, nationalism, anti-globalism.

Leftwing activists are excellent emotional manipulators. They are successful at laying the blame on whites. They invent and construct various arguments and claims based on distorted facts and myths in order to accuse us of some ancient injustices, for which all white Europeans have to feel guilt. A combination of guilt and compassion is a strong weapon to manipulate others.

Initially, they force us to feel responsible for everything and evoke feelings of guilt. Then they appeal to compassion and empathy for immigrants / refugees. In this way they try to break us and make us to stop defending ourselves.

Be aware that manipulation focuses on your emotions and bypasses rational thinking. It aims to stimulate internal conflicts in you and to dominate you. Therefore, turn on your natural defense mechanisms and common sense. On the contrary, turn off empathy and similar emotions, which can be exploited by an enemy to manipulate you: http://www.white-media.info/how_to_counter_leftist_psycho_terrorism.html

In our experience, when you confront these people for being anti-White, almost all of them will deny it despite the fact that they support policies that will lead to us becoming minorities in our own countries (and that they can think of any number of reasons why that would be a good thing). It is not unusual to hear them utter the words “I’m not anti-White, but….”, “I’m not anti-White, I have many White friends…” or “I can’t be anti-White, I’m White myself!”, which is perhaps the most common form of objection when White anti-Whites are being confronted for being anti-White.

They seem to think that they are clever when they point this out to us (as if they have found some sort of contradiction or some magic shield that will protect them from any bad labels no matter how hateful or insane the politics they want to promote are).

In our article, “the anti-White mindset”, the first thing we explained was that some people are mistakably interpreting anti-White as being non-White, and that this is not the case as anyone can be anti-White, as it is a state of mind. In the case of the White anti-White however, the confusion seems to revolve around the fact that they themselves are White and they therefore cannot possibly be anti-White themselves. But we all know it is actions and ideas that dictate whether or not a person is anti-White; nothing else. If you support anti-White policies then you are anti-White. It does not matter whether you hide behind other labels such as “liberal”, “socialist” or even “conservative”.

So with this is mind, let us return to the question: “How can they possibly be anti-White when they themselves are White?“

The answer is simple. It is called treachery. And it happens all the time: https://thisiseuropa.net/the-white-antiwhite-contradiction/   





Anyone who asks “Why should I care about my race‘s survival?” is proving they are a sociopath with no loyalties. You can’t explain loyalty.

A sociopath has no loyalties, as a psychopath is incapable of guilt. You can’t explain to a sociopath WHY he should care about his own kind.

Anti-Whites say they are offended by being accused of advocating White genocide, but they then go on to describe White people as a pure evil.

Every word anti-Whites say in response to the charge of White genocide is a justification for that exact policy.

Pro Whites accuse anti Whites of White genocide They say 1) Whites are evil & deserve it 2) They dont want to end the White race 3) No White race

Anti-Whites who say there is no such thing as White pick the countries that must allow immigration and assimilation by that exact criterion.

Anti-Whites say there is no White race or White country, but Whites stole America and Australia from the natives. 

A pro-White is told there is no such thing as the White race, and then he is told that the White race owes the rest of the world reparations.

If there is no such thing as race, how can we have “diversity?”

When someone asks what a White country is, you tell them it’s a country they insist has an obligation to import huge numbers of 3rdWorlders.

MORE, here: http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/2017/07/31/collection-of-tweets-from-bobs-twitter-account/


One of the more offensive duties of being an investigative journalist is taking out the trash -- exposing liars, fraudsters, con artists and scammers for the people they truly are. Each time we investigate a sociopath, we find that they always have a little cult group following of spellbound worshippers who consider that particular sociopath to be a “guru” or “prophet.” Sociopaths are masters at influence and deception.

Why cover this subject? I’ve seen a lot of people get hoodwinked, scammed or even harmed by sociopaths, and it bewilders me that people are so easily sucked into their destructive influence. I want to share the warning signs of sociopaths so that you can spot them, avoid them, and save yourself the trouble of being unduly influenced by them.

Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths are more spontaneous and intense than other people. They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn’t do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky. Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others. This is why you will find many very “successful” sociopaths in high levels of government, in any nation.

Sociopaths tend to be highly intelligent, but they use their brainpower to deceive others rather than empower them. Their high IQs often makes them dangerous. This is why many of the best-known serial killers who successfully evaded law enforcement were sociopaths. Sociopaths are incapable of love and are entirely self-serving. They may feign love or compassion in order to get what they want, but they don’t actually FEEL love in the way that you or I do.

Sociopaths speak poetically. They are master wordsmiths, able to deliver a running “stream of consciousness” monologue that is both intriguing and hypnotic. They are expert storytellers and even poets. Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize.

Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it! Charles Manson, the sociopathic murderer, is famous for saying, “I’ve never killed anyone! I don’t need to kill anyone! I THINK it! I have it HERE! (Pointing to his temple.) I don’t need to live in this physical realm...”

Sociopaths are masters are presenting themselves as heroes with high morals and philosophy, yet underneath it they are the true criminal minds in society. Anyone who does not fall for the brainwashing of the sociopath is sooner or later kicked out of the circle.

As a survivor of the Jim Jones “Jonestown” mass suicide says in a PBS documentary video (see link below), “Everything was plausible [at the time], except in retrospect the whole thing seems bizarre.” That’s how sociopaths operate. As they’re speaking, they capture your imagination and sound reasonable, even authoritative.

No matter what fictions are presented by the sociopath, they always present him in the light of a hero -- sometimes even a saint -- who sacrifices his life for the good of others. It is common for sociopaths to strongly desire to be on television shows or to desperately seek out opportunities for short-term fame, often from engaging in bizarre acts or staging strange events. This is one of the ways in which they recruit followers to join their cult: http://www.naturalnews.com/036112_sociopaths_cults_influence.html


Radio 3Fourteen - Singh - A Sikh Perspective on the AltRight

Listen here: https://redice.tv/radio…/a-sikh-perspective-on-the-alt-right

Singh is an Indian Sikh who supports the Alt-Right.

To begin, Singh tells us a little about his ideological journey. He then recounts his experiences at the National Policy Institute conference, including the Roman salute controversy. Singh tells us his thoughts on the Alt-Right, explaining that Western civilization needs a revival of White racial consciousness to survive. We then switch gears to discuss India. Singh tells us about its caste system and racial dynamics, and how Brahmins are racially quite different from Dravidians. We also discuss the history of Sikhism, the Aryan invasions of India, Adolf Hitler, and much more.


After college, two developments resulted in a gradual shift in my politics and my understanding of the world: First, I lived abroad in a non-European country for many years, and later I attended graduate school back in the States. Living abroad had the paradoxical effect of both awaking in me a nationalist consciousness while further committing me to a race-blind and egalitarian view of the world. Living abroad in a country that was racially homogeneous, I learned that one could not define oneself for the world: One is inevitably defined by others. No matter how well one learns a foreign language or becomes familiar with a foreign culture, in a highly homogeneous country, you are always viewed as an outsider. I never considered myself particularly patriotic or nationalistic, but being relentlessly treated as an outsider sparked an awareness of, and pride in, being American.

At the same time, having mastered the local language and culture, I felt I should be treated as a local. After all, wasn’t that consistent with what I had been taught and believed my entire life? Moving to America, learning English and following local American customs turned everyone—from all races, ethnicities and cultures—into Americans, didn’t it? That was the basis of the Proposition Nation of which I was a part, and in which I wholeheartedly believed. Why was the opposite not true for an American abroad? On balance, however, I was convinced that we Americans had it right: Everyone should be able to become a member of any nation. Thus, my heightened sense of American identity was accompanied by a doubling down on my belief in the superiority of assimilation, race-blindness, and egalitarianism.

Graduate school back in the States was my first attempt at a somewhat systematic study of economics, and led me to rethink my previously left-leaning politics on questions of labor and class. As I suspect it is with many liberals, it was ignorance of economics that had enabled me to support left-wing policies. Reading and thinking about incentive structures, the morality of redistribution, systems that were more conducive to human freedom and flourishing, and the complexity of economic systems, I moved towards a free-market, free-trade, capitalist view of economics, although not, I should say, due to any such bias among my professors.

This shift in my economic thinking combined with a race-blind, individualistic view of cultural issues and my nascent patriotic bent resulting from my sojourn abroad to bring me mainstream, National Review-style conservatism. I immersed myself in the journals and magazines of the mainstream conservative and libertarian movement. While opening my mind to different points of view on cultural issues that I had never really thought through—abortion, guns, school choice—my encounter with mainstream conservatism did nothing to shake my egalitarian views on race or my belief in the Proposition Nation. And why would it have? No group is more steadfast in its faith in race-blindness, egalitarianism, and anti-racism than the mainstream conservative journals and think-tanks.

When 9/11 occurred, I initially supported the wars in Afghanistan and then Iraq, and agreed with the neo-conservative premise that the United States should be spreading democracy. Ultimately, the ideological battles and polemics over the Iraq War in the conservative journals made me aware that there was a radically different political point of view out there which was critical of the conservative movement, but from a position further to the right. It was an odd and disconcerting philosophy to me, because it didn’t fit in with the standard taxonomy of Right and Left. I did not initially seek out that strain of thinking, but I knew that it was out there, and that it was associated with shady and disreputable labels like “isolationist,” “populist,” “traditionalist,” “agrarian,” and “racist.” Given my politics, I had a hard time understanding how a group that was anti-war, anti-free trade, anti-free market, anti-egalitarian, and was vocal on certain issues traditionally associated (so I believed) with the Left—such as environmental protection—could be considered of the Right.

I ordered an issue of The American Conservative that included an in-depth article on environmentalism and animal welfare. This was in the early days of that publication, when it was still very much Pat Buchanan’s magazine. I eventually subscribed and, from there, immersed myself in paleo-conservatism. I encountered thinkers who were willing to question the Enlightenment, question egalitarianism, and essentially engage in a mode of thinking that was more open than anything on the mainstream Left or Right. They didn’t care about ideological labels or litmus tests, and would write about any issue—including race—with a fearless attitude, free of platitudes.

Eventually, my faith in racial equality became untenable. I associate this shift in my thinking with a particular passage in Pat Buchanan’s The Death of the West or State of Emergency (I no longer recall which) in which he critiqued the concept of the Proposition Nation. He argued that America was no different than any other nation. Merely holding certain political tenets did not make one an American. If that were sufficient, why did anyone need to come here at all? America, Buchanan wrote, was created by a particular people, in a particular place, under particular circumstances. No other people could have created it, and no other people would be able to sustain it. I stopped reading, looked up from the page, and said to myself: “He’s right.”

Mr. Buchanan is far less racially explicit in his thinking than many people on the alternative, dissident right, and it may be that the passage was not as starkly laid out as I remember. Nevertheless, I mark that moment as the exact point at which I abandoned racial egalitarian beliefs. Around the same time that I was reading Mr. Buchanan’s books, unsurprisingly, I found my way to VDare and American Renaissance, and to writers such as Steve Sailer, Peter Brimelow, Jared Taylor, Lawrence Auster, and other dissident thinkers.

Once I became willing to look at the evidence and science concerning race, to then analyze nearly any issue through the lens of race and biology exposed the wrongheadedness of the mainstream explanations, both Left and Right. If racial differences were a matter of biological nature, was it not morally wrong—even evil—to teach people that disparate outcomes in crime, education, test scores, even in such innocuous things as hobbies and cultural activities, were the result of racism and intentional exclusion? Such teachings incited hatred, despair, and misguided resentment in people on the basis of falsehoods. Only honesty about racial differences can result in effective policies and peace among peoples.

If there is any lesson I would draw from my own experience, it is that all mainstream American politics are essentially liberal in their values: classical liberal ideas are so pervasive in American culture that it is difficult to see beyond them, even for people who consider themselves conservative. People of all political views are fundamentally informed by liberal ideology. What mainstream conservatism conserves is simply an older form of liberalism. This is unsurprising. The American project traces its ideological sources to Locke, Smith, Montesquieu and other classical liberal thinkers. Almost all American political ideologies derived from that starting point. American “conservatism” was, in its assumptions and basic tenets, a species of liberalism. Its economics is classical liberal economics. Egalitarianism, which is a cornerstone of mainstream conservatism, derives from classical liberalism. Siding with race realism and the alternative right requires escaping from the liberal assumptions underlying almost all American political thought.

My gradual—then sudden—journey to the alternative right is likely a familiar one, particularly to those of a certain generation. Today, the younger generation can reach an accurate understanding on race without the convoluted path I followed. More here: https://www.amren.com/features/2017/03/how-i-saw-the-light-race-red-pill/


Most Americans take for granted that democracy is an absolute good. If it can be said of an idea or a program that it promotes equality, Americans, whatever their political affiliations, will be loath to speak ill of the idea or to protest the program.  “Of course,” they will think to themselves, “anything that fosters fairness and equal treatment must be good for society. Should we not strive to treat everyone the same?  Is that not what America is all about?”

Well, no; at least not exactly. America strives to be the land of opportunity, a country where citizens are afforded equal dignity and are granted a say in their government. But the people do not control their government directly. They elect—or elect people to appoint—leaders who will represent their needs, values, and interests. We do so, not just for practical procedural reasons, but because we understand that there are certain people in our community whose skills for governing surpass those of their fellow citizens. In the same way, there are individual musicians, artists, and physicians whose skills in their respective areas are superior to the skills of others who share their aspirations for music, art, or medicine.

Imagine someone whose ruling ethic was that of egalitarian sameness trying to form a ballet troupe, an academic faculty, or a football team. I can’t say that many of us would be willing to pay to see such a troupe, to enroll in such a university, or to place a bet on such a team. Although the popularity of “reality TV,” the persistence of quota-driven affirmative action initiatives, and the lowering and/or mainstreaming of educational standards suggest, alarmingly, that many in our country would like to see the elimination of any kind of ranking, distinction, or hierarchy, the common-sense pragmatism of our citizenry has thus far prevented us from falling into the black hole of egalitarian mediocrity. We all recognize, in our best, noblest, and least envious moments, that just as we excel our neighbors in certain areas, they excel us in others.

Which is not to say that Americans would prefer a kind of rigid aristocracy in which only a very small number of upper-crust folk could engage, say, in drama or higher education or athletics. One of the strengths of our country is its widespread promotion of amateur theaters, community colleges, and local sports teams that involve people who may not have the skill to be the absolute best in their field, but whose significant gifts and talents allow them to make strong and meaningful contributions to their communities. The fact that there is only one Pope and a relatively small number of Cardinals has not prevented countless priests across the world from serving and enriching their local parishes.

In our American democracy, rulers hold power on the basis of popular election rather than hereditary right, politicians and soldiers swear allegiance to a code of laws rather than to a monarch, and average citizens have the right to appeal to and be protected by those laws. None of these political mandates necessitates a rejection of all hierarchy, rank, and distinction, though they do allow for more fluid movement within and between various social, political, and cultural classes. Still, democracy’s empowerment of the people does set in motion the potential for a kind of mob rule in which the people—drunk with their own power and sense of entitlement—demand that their whims be catered to by politicians and other leaders, while unscrupulous and flamboyant demagogues—drunk with their own delusions of grandeur—pander to the crowd and make promises that can only be met by draining and destabilizing the state:



There are two types of countries – countries that are for their people, and countries that are for ideas.

The latter could be described as “wordism” – loyalty to an idea; for example, religion, monarchy, Communism, Fascism, are all forms of “wordism”.

A “wordism” can never allow REAL Freedom of Speech because words made it, and words can destroy it. So the “wordism” declares that “You have Free Speech, but not HATE Speech”.

Sound familiar? “Diversity” (Multiracial-ism), is also a “wordism”. The idea behind “Diversity” is that there can be no ethnic states. US General Wesley Clark said “there can be no ethnically pure states in Europe”, there are lots of “non-diverse” areas in non-White areas . . . but Europe is White.

Europe is expected to be “progressive” in the mind of an anti-White, and non-Whites are expected to be “primitive”.

This means that “Diversity”, the one true religion will mercilessly target any White area that goes against “Diversity” (Multiracial-ism).

Multiracial-ism has no loyalty to WHO lives in a certain country, but multiracial-ism demands loyalty of them.

So to say again, there can never be a “wordism” that allows freedom. Diversity it just a codeword for White genocide. MORE here:http://whitegenocideproject.com/diversity-or-freedom/


The Chinese Government could say Tibetan’s genocide by the Chinese Government is a “Population Shift”. Meanwhile on planet Earth, it’s genocide. The anti-Whites say White people’s genocide by anti-Whites is a “Population Shift”. Meanwhile on planet Earth, it’s still genocide. “Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-White: http://whitegenocideproject.com/google-white-genocide/?cid=10658 


My stance for the protection and preservation of my ethno-cultural heritage is often misrepresented as racist. 

EVERY ethno-culture on the face of the Earth is worthy of protection and preservation. Globalization and multiculturalism is destroying diversity. 

If we love each other, if we value our unique differences, if we want to respect and promote diversity on this planet... then we must understand that multiculturalism is actively working to destroy diversity on the planet. 

As someone who has always been fascinated by world cultures, and who loves my own cultural heritage deeply but also respects and encourages other ethnic groups to love and value their own ethno-culture, I cannot sit idly by and watch homogenization destroy our diversity without speaking up. 

I cannot let Liberals and Socialists call everyone a racist. I cannot be silent while love of different races is misrepresented as some kind of false supremacy. 

Homogenization destroys diversity. THINK ABOUT THAT. www.carolynemerick.com


“Anti-racists” are not against hate. They are for hate against us whites.

The people who claim they love diversity are actually the people who show, through their actions, that they love diversity the least.

We already had diversity in the world, with different peoples and cultures all over the globe. Travelling actually meant experiencing new cultures and people. Now, every Western country is made indistinguishable with open borders and the degenerate “McDonald’s culture”. We are expected to consume the same things, we are told that we are “all the same” and that we had nothing unique or worthwhile to begin with. We are all “multicultural societies”, i.e. rootless consumer societies.

“Diversity” is not want they want. What they want is to mix everybody into a melting pot in all white countries.

People who call themselves “anti-racist” (i.e. anti-whites) like to say that gender and skin colour don’t matter. But in reality, they are just contradicting themselves as usual.

Let’s put aside the obvious irony about enforcing affirmative action laws where there are too many whites (you never hear of schools, neighbourhoods or workplaces being “too black” or “too Asian”), here is a blunt question that no one seems to highlight or be able to answer:

If skin colour does not matter, then why is racial diversity (in all and only white countries) so important?

And why does it have to be enforced?

Granted, I do believe that many ordinary people who happen to have an anti-white mindset have the intention of helping others, after all they have been persuaded to believe that what they are doing and supporting is good.

However, there are in fact many ways to help people without having open borders and without bringing everybody here at our expense (to the extent that we become a minority in our own countries) White already being a minority of the population world wide).

We COULD, for example, help people in the Third World rebuild their own countries by providing them with education and aid where it would be most needed. This is not necessarily our responsibility, but one can make the point that there are many ways we could help other peoples that would not lead to us becoming a minority in our own countries.

Besides, they are not helping anybody, not us or the Third Worlders, by bringing the best and brightest from less economically developed countries.

There are so many contradictions associated with the anti-white mindset it is so hard to pick particular ones to highlight.

In the end, anti-whites are always the opposite of what they claim to be: https://thisiseuropa.net/5-ways-how-anti-whites-always-contradict-themselves/


“Since they give us the recipes for crossbreeding their pale race, use it against her side. Let’s sexually overcome these stupid rightwing females, for the survival of a smiling humanity.

Refusing the advances of family planning, every pregnancy will result in a little half-breed or a mongrel, an artist that tomorrow she will eventually like.

Hail to a vast altruistic copulation. Provide multicolored descendants to the sinking country of France.“ More here: http://whitegenocideproject.com/what-anti-whites-say/


If there is a plan to target a group for destruction, that is genocide. In this article, you should see this “behind the scenes” plan come to light.

Susan Sontag, a film maker and professor, once remarked that “The white race is the cancer of human history.”

She did not say anything ground-breaking; she was merely summing up what a certain portion of the ruling class thinks of its White majority citizens.

They believe that White people are some kind of “cancer” which must be wiped out. Furthermore, they all agree that the solution to this “cancer” should be to get rid of all the White countries by allowing a massive scale of migration from non-White countries: http://whitegenocideproject.com/white-genocide-racist-conspiracy-theory-inconvenient-truth/


When I hear the mass media saying “White supremacist”, I just have to roll my eyes.

There is a very basic difference between a “supremacist” and a “separatist”. Supremacists want to rule over others because they believe their views are superior, and separatists want to be left alone because they want to separate.

The mass media love to say “supremacist” because it makes people think “Oh no, the evil White supremacists are going to come to my neighborhood and stomp on my face!

If they used “separatist” – the correct word in that context – it would be a silly article: “Oh no, these evil White separatists want to be left alone! How dare they?!?

Are they letting kids write their articles these days, or do they really not know the difference?



“Diversity is indeed a strength, not a threat.” That’s a line from the Queen’s Christmas message in 2004. “I love the diversity of London — I just feel comfortable.” That’s a line from the former immigration minister Barbara Roche in 2011. “Our priority as a government must always be to keep people safe.” That’s a line from the British Home Secretary Amber Rudd in 2017.

All three women are suicide-mommas promoting an insane and deadly liberalism. All of them bear some responsibility for the suicide-bombing in Manchester on 22nd May 2017. But give Barbara Roche her due: unlike the other two, she was speaking the truth. She does indeed love an atomized society, because it fulfils her deepest  political ambition: “to combat anti-semitism and xenophobia in general.” Roche is Jewish and feels paranoid in a homogeneous White society. That’s why she worked so hard to open Britain’s borders to the Third World under the traitorous Tony Blair.

And if the glorious project of racial and religious enrichment goes wrong, Barbara can always seek refuge in Israel, where her Jewish identity gives her an automatic right of citizenship. But let’s suppose that Salman Abedi, the British citizen responsible for the Manchester vibrancy, had wanted to take a short holiday in Israel to soak up some sun and enjoy some of that famous Israeli courtesy and charm.

Would he have been granted a tourist visa? No, not a chance. He was on  terrorist watch-lists maintained by both British and American intelligence, so we can be absolutely certain that Israel would have refused him entry. Israel would also have refused his Libyan parents entry if they’d tried to claim asylum as refugees when they escaped the Gaddafi regime. Israel’s government really does make it a “priority” “to keep people safe.” More here: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/05/27/manchester-malady-traitors-lie-children-die/


The attacks on Confederate monuments in New Orleans and Charlottesville are only the newest front in America’s longest war. For over 200 years, civil war has raged between “progressive” elites and the “reactionary” conservatives they love to hate; what we call the “Civil War” was only its most violent outbreak. Whether we are able to transcend this divide or whether it continues to define American politics may be a final test of whether white America will survive.

Here is a neoreactionary quip: No matter at what point in American history you look, Harvard always gets its way. This was true during the 1850s and 1860s of a crusading abolitionism that, as Southern historian Clyde Wilson put it, “postulates goals so self-evidently righteous that disagreement is sin.” Thaddeus Stevens, Congressman of Pennsylvania, said that if necessary, the South should be “laid waste and made a desert” and repopulated with new people. The poet James Russell Lowe demanded that Southerners be “made to understand something of the country which was too good for them.” When John Brown was hanged for trying to start a slave uprising to kill whites, Ralph Waldo Emerson said the execution made “the gallows glorious like the cross.”

Later liberal crusades—whether for desegregation, environmentalism, gay rights, or transgender bathrooms—have always been characterized by the same millenarian zeal, accompanied by contempt for anyone who resists compliance, which is usually enforced by federal power.

In the 19th century, this elite, liberal contempt was mainly regional, directed from such places as Cambridge, Massachusetts, and New York City against the South. The intervening years have universalized it. Though multicultural dogmas may have originated in Yankee institutions, they are promoted by liberals everywhere. When alt-right activists recently went to Charlottesville to support saving its Confederate monuments, locals—who had been celebrating a “multicultural” food festival—quickly came over to berate the group that wanted to defend the South. Leftist ideology now pervades all corners of the country.

Any white person who supports the South will be lectured about slavery even if he has no Southern ties at all. Your ancestors could have been Union soldiers who liberated slaves, but you will still be blamed for “the legacy of slavery.”

Leftists attack the South because it is the most extreme embodiment of what they hate most: “racism.” Since it is home to the country’s largest black population, it must confront the real issues that arise from two very different peoples living side-by-side, whereas these issues remain abstractions in anti-racist whiteopias such as Maine or Vermont. The South is also religious and conservative, valuing such things as two-parent families with normal sex roles.

However, attacks against the South and its monuments have little to do with history or regional rivalries. Most of the people who demand that Confederate monuments be dismantled know next to nothing about actual Civil War history. Instead, they tend to think only in terms of the grossest cliches, in which the Confederacy is some kind of forerunner to Nazi Germany. The perennial battle between “progressive” and “regressive” whites has therefore become a broader war against “racist” white culture itself. The South bears the brunt of the attacks because it is white culture’s most deplorable embodiment. More here: https://www.amren.com/commentary/2017/05/yankees-must-defend-confederate-heritage/