Pat Buchanan – Low Fertility, Migrant Invasions, and Sub-National Independence Movements are Fracturing Europe


[. . .]

Anti-immigrant, right-wing parties are making strides all across Europe, as the EU is bedeviled by a host of crises.

Europe’s open borders that facilitate free trade also assure freedom of travel to homegrown terrorists.

Mass migration into the EU is causing member nations to put up checkpoints and close borders. The Schengen Agreement on the free movement of goods and people is being ignored or openly violated.

The economic and cultural clash between a rich northern Europe and a less affluent south — Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal — manifest in the bad blood between Athens and Berlin, endures.

Northern Europeans grow weary of repeated bailouts of a south that chafes at constant northern demands for greater austerity.

Then there is the surge of sub-nationalism, as in Scotland, Catalonia, Flanders, and Veneto, where peoples seek to disconnect from distant capitals that no longer speak for them, and reconnect with languages, traditions and cultures that give more meaning to their lives than the economics-uber-alles ideology of Frau Angela Merkel.

Moreover, the migrants entering Europe, predominantly Islamic and Third World, are not assimilating as did the European and largely Christian immigrants to America of a century ago.

The enclaves of Asians in Britain, Africans and Arabs around Paris, and Turks in and around Berlin seem to be British, French and German in name only. And some of their children are now heeding the call to jihad against the Crusaders invading Muslim lands.

The movement toward deeper European integration appears to have halted, and gone into reverse, as the EU seems to be unraveling along ideological, national, tribal and historic lines.

If these trends continue, and they seem to have accelerated in 2015, the idea of a United States of Europe dies, and with it the EU.

And this raises a question about the most successful economic and political union in history — the USA.

How does an increasingly multiracial, multiethnic, multilingual, multicultural United States avoid the fate to which Europe appears to be headed, when there is no identifiable racial or ethnic majority here in 2042?

Are our own political and racial divisions disappearing, or do they, too, seem to be deepening?

Read more at . . .


Liberals Disgusted: Putin Stands Up For Russia Against Globalists, Gives Domestic Court Power to Overturn International Human Rights Rulings


How dare Putin stand up for Russian law against global liberalism when it takes the guise of “human rights”!

via International Business Times:

Russia’s Constitutional Court will be allowed to overturn European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) rulings if it deems them to be in violation of the country’s constitution. The law signed by president Vladimir Putin will enable the court to decide whether or not to implement the decisions.

The move was designed to “thwart the ability of victims of human rights violations to find justice through international bodies when the Russian court system doesn’t deliver it,” according to Human Rights Watch (HRW). It gathered momentum after a ECHR ruling in 2014 which ordered Moscow to pay ‎€1.9bn (£1.38bn $2.09bn) in compensation to shareholders of defunct oil company, Yukos. Following the decision, Russia’s Constitutional Court was asked to clarify how ECHR decisions could be implemented if they do not adhere to the constitution.

The new bill was approved by the Russian parliament last week and signed into law by Putin on 14 December. Its aim was to “safeguard Russian legal sovereignty”, bill co-sponsor and Communist party lawmaker Vasily Likhachev said last month.

[. . .]

Corsican Nationalists Win Historic Victory in French Elections

via The Guardian:

Corsican nationalists have won a historic and unexpected victory in France’s regional elections, gaining two seats short of an outright majority on the island.

The Pè a Corsica (For Corsica) list won more than 35% of the votes in the second round of polls on Sunday, giving it 24 of the 51 seats in the local authority council.

Nationalists, who joined forces with those seeking independence from French control for the runoff vote, are now the Mediterranean island’s main political force.

[. . .]

“It’s a victory for Corsica and all the Corsicans,” Simeoni said in his victory speech. Supporters waving the Corsican flag – known as the Moor’s head, showing a head wrapped in a bandana on a white background – cheered.

“My first thoughts go to all those early campaigners who have battled for our cause for half a century – among them the youngsters, some of whom are in prison. It’s a victory for an alternative policy to that which has failed Corsicans for decades.”

Corsicans, he added, had a “thirst for democracy, economic development and social justice”.

Jean-Guy Talamoni, leader of the independence group, added: “It’s been a 40-year-long march to arrive here. Corsica is not just a French administrative constituency – it’s a country, a nation, a people.”

Corsica’s increasingly powerful nationalist and independence movements are opposed to France’s cultural and political dominance over the island, which it annexed in 1768. Nearly two and a half centuries have not strengthened the bond between the island and Paris.

Corsican voters also elected a candidate from the far-right Front National for the first time in 17 years.

There are at least two branches of nationalism on Corsica: nationalists who seek reform aimed at promoting Corsican identity, and hardline independence seekers who want the island to break free of France.

The nationalists will have two years to prove themselves in power. Local authority reorganisation means Corsicans will be called on to vote again in two years.

If Corsicans want to protect their identity, they had better act quickly and decisively. They are on the verge of becoming a minority in their own land.  Somehow, based on their appeals to “democracy, economic development, and social justice”, I suspect that the Corsicans will fail to stem the tide.

Place of birth of residents of Corsica
(at the 1982, 1990, 1999, and 2011 censuses)
Census Born in 


Born in


Born in


Born in 


with French

at birth¹

2011 56.3% 28.6% 0.3% 5.0% 9.8%
from the Maghreb3 from Southern Europe4 from the rest of the world
4.3% 3.8% 1.7%
1999 59.5% 24.8% 0.3% 5.5% 10.0%
from the Maghreb3 from Southern Europe4 from the rest of the world
5.3% 3.3% 1.4%
1990 62.0% 21.3% 0.2% 6.0% 10.5%
1982 61.6% 20.4% 0.2% 6.0% 11.8%
¹Essentially Pieds-Noirs who resettled in Corsica after the independence of Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, many of whom had Corsican ancestry.
2An immigrant is by French definition a person born in a foreign country and who didn’t have French citizenship at birth. Note that an immigrant may have acquired French citizenship since moving to France, but is still listed as an immigrant in French statistics. On the other hand, persons born in France with foreign citizenship (the children of immigrants) are not listed as immigrants.
3Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria
4Portugal, Italy, Spain, Andorra, Gibraltar, Monaco
Source: INSEE[3][5][6]

Guillaume Durocher – “A Europe of Nations”: Marine Le Pen’s Plan for the Old Continent


[. . .]

The FN’s anti-EU reasoning and position has been relatively consistent since 1992. The party opposes the EU on democratic grounds, deeming the organization to be elitist and unresponsive in its day-to-day existence (the so-called “democratic deficit”) and to have been constructed in violation of the French referendum of 2005 rejecting the so-called “Constitutional Treaty.” More seriously still, the FN considers the EU to be a “Trojan horse of globalization”[5] which, through liberal-egalitarian norms and economic/migratory borderlessness, is destroying both French sovereignty and ultimately the French nation itself.

Marine Le Pen then demands a series of measures to restore French sovereignty:

  • The superiority of French law over EU law.
  • The organized dissolution of the Eurozone and the return of the French franc.
  • The abolition of the Schengen Area of free movement of people and the restoration of French border controls.
  • A nil net contribution to the EU budget (France currently pays in about 7 billion euros per year more than she receives back) and the replacement of the Common Agricultural Policy with a purely French one.
  • A few symbolic measures, such as the removal of EU flags from all public buildings.

Florian Philippot, Le Pen’s media-savvy spin doctor and right-hand man, has said an FN government would explicitly emulate British Prime Minister David Cameron in demanding renegotiation of EU membership terms and then allowing the French people to decide whether to stay in via referendum. In the unlikely event that the EU would accept the above terms, the FN would actually campaign to stay in the Union. In practice, the FN’s terms are such that these measures could only mean the de facto abolition of the EU anyway and its reduction from an already weak confederation to an empty shell.[6]

The FN program however is not silent on the kind of “Europe of Nations”[7] it would like to see emerge. On the contrary, it proposes:

  • strengthened European multilateral cooperation on aerospace and military-industrial “great projects” (some of which already exist: Airbus, Ariane, Galileo . . .), with expanded participation to include Russia;
  • the creation of “a free association of European States who have the same vision and the same interests in areas such as immigration or the rules on external trade and capital flows,” again including Russia, but explicitly rejecting Turkey;[8]
  • the reorientation of French foreign policy in general away from the United States of America and towards a non-aligned approach based on “a trilateral Paris-Berlin Moscow alliance.”[9]

Le Pen then proposes a simple program for European cooperation: No more dismal Brussels bureaucrats and Afro-Muslim colonizers, and more border fences and rocket ships. Europe’s future would then be one of continuing European Man’s long march towards the Space Age rather than regressing back to the Sub-Saharan Age[10] . . .

[. . .]

Read more at the Occidental Observer.

Matt Parrott – Stuck on Crazy: The Necessity of Leaving Paleoconservatism Behind

More reasons to abandon political libertarianism and conservatism.

The paleocon heritage of White identitarians in America is unmistakable and unshakable. While a rapidly emergent generation of Millennials is arriving which is largely divorced from that political tradition, the leadership and money remain firmly planted in 20th Century practices and patterns of thinking. These sorts of things take time, and plenty of prominent figures from a paleocon background are either keeping up with the paradigm shifts or allowing space for them.

The root problem with paleoconservatism lies in a parallax between their motives and their ideologies. They were largely motivated by the same instinctive and visceral forces that we are; faith, family, and folk. Their ideological framework was; however, a mercantile/masonic toolkit. They strove to justify their identitarian objectives in the language and logic of finance, liberty, and equality, ….with mixed results. Eventually, the unprincipled exceptions to the Enlightenment principles get ironed out and you have yourself an enemy of the tribe in the service of global finance, decadent license, and steamrolling egalitarianism.

The devolution of the Ron Paul movement into the Rand Paul sideshow is the most recent and simple example of this phenomenon playing out. It’s ideological cuckoldry and it will keep happening as long as the root of our ideology is intrinsically liberal. We cry out for state’s rights to defend segregation, and they rely on that state sovereignty to spearhead gay marriage. We cry out for smaller government in order to choke off interracial wealth redistribution, and they empty out the prisons and cut out the pensions to shrink the government. We cry out against the police state, so they stop policing minority gang activity.

Heads, liberals win; tails, paleocons lose.

[. . .]

Americans are “stuck on stupid” because they’ve had it beaten into their heads that they must not under any circumstances think racially and tribally. Whites (and only Whites) are told that they must only think in universal political abstractions. A large and growing subset of American are starting to wake up, but you’re still…stuck on stupid.

You’re a smart guy, and you hate neocons and globalists. So you’re cool in my book, Sartre. But you’re still following some of the rules imposed by the mega-elites. You can’t defeat them as long as you can’t name who they are. You can’t defeat them as long as you argue and operate within their anti-tribal and anti-traditional ideologies. Break those rules you’ve imposed on yourself. Ditch all this classical liberalism garbage. Then join us in the simple and direct struggle for our faiths, families, and folks.

Read more at TradYouth.

Far-Right Party Skyrockets To Top 3 In German Polls Amid Refugee Crisis

Supporters of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) demonstrate against the German government's new policy for migrants in Berlin, Germany, November 7, 2015 © Hannibal Hanschke

The only thing that is remarkable to me is that these far-right parties still have so little support. Perhaps Western countries deserve their fate.
Anti-refugee rhetoric has propelled the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party to third place in the country, a fresh poll has revealed.

According to a weekly survey by INSA, AfD would have received 10.5 percent of the vote if an election was held Wednesday.

This means that the ultranationalist party has surged ahead of left-leaning parties the Greens and Die Linke (Left Party), which both registered 10 percent support.

Support for AfD appears to have skyrocketed in recent months, as they had only 3 percent in the polls as recently as August.

It is also the best result for the party, which was established in 2013 as a Eurosceptic group, but then switched to criticizing Chancellor Angela Merkel’s immigration policies.

One of the party’s key figures, Björn Höcke, has made headlines with hardline nationalist rhetoric. Some of its slogans, such as: “Germans! Three thousand years of Europe, 1,000 years of Germany,” have been compared to Nazi propaganda.

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ruling alliance, comprising the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria (CSU) remains top of the polls with 35 percent, followed by the Social Democrats (SPD) on 23.5 percent, the poll showed.

The left has blamed the CSU for creating the conditions for the growth of the AfD, saying that the conservative Bavarian party made “xenophobic slogans socially acceptable.”

The Christian Social Union has recently called for the building of border fences in response to hundreds of thousands of refugees coming to Germany from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.


Fred Reed – Missouri: Taking the National Temperature

a katz /

To solve America’s racial problem, Fred Reed recommends de facto, mutally accepted segregation.

But the antics at Missouri are only one instance of a far larger disease. Daily the country ties itself in knots to keep blacks happy, which is impossible—to placate them, to soothe their disturbances, give them everything they want but can’t or won’t earn. Nothing satisfies them. They shut down political meetings, loot shoe stores, burn cities. We back away. Always we back away.

We give and give and give—Head Start, Section Eight housing, AFDC, Obamaphones, medical care, free rides at university. If they can’t pass a test, we abolish the test and apologize, apologize, apologize. Do they want to burn Baltimore? We back away, give them space, for they are troubled youth. And we apologize. It never stops.

Nobody ever, ever, tells them “No.” Might this be called Black Privilege?

As I read on Drudge, the national thermometer, the unending daily demands by blacks for this, for that, for the other thing, I would say, if I were rude–I emphatically am not rude–“Try contributing instead of demanding. I mean, beyond blues, basketball, and arson. Remember, we the white privileged invented both cities and matches. And virtually everything else that allows you to complain in comfort.”

One day—one day, maybe—we will have to admit that the racial thing isn’t working, and that it isn’t going to work. Hostility worsens. It will continue to worsen. As the white middle class loses economic ground and standards of living fall, anger will grow among the newly impoverished. The constant racial attacks on whites will continue. Why would they stop? As automation advances, jobs will become scarcer than they are now, which is too scarce, and for every job a black might do there will be better qualified whites and, increasingly, Latinos. And—this is the killer—blacks are not improving academically, because, as has become obvious, they cannot. If they can, why don’t they?

Read more at The Unz Review

Matt Heimbach – A Thought Criminal In Airstrip One: My Ban from England

The Community Security Trust was one of the primary groups which petitioned the British government to ban me on the basis of my supposed antisemitism. The CST is a Jewish group whose mission is to “To work at all times for the physical protection and defense of British Jews… To promote good relations between British Jews and the rest of British society by working towards the elimination of racism, and antisemitism in particular” and to “To facilitate Jewish life.” Anyone who has actually read my writings or listened to my speeches rather than copy-pasting snippets and soundbites knows that I have no hatred for the Jewish people as a whole.

What I hate and work against is International Zionism and the Jewish elites who use usury, the mass media, and control of our university system and political life to work against the best interests of Christians and Europeans around the world. Anne Frank is not my enemy. Jewish billionaire elites like Sheldon Adelson are. For the CST to think I am a threat to their mission statement of “facilitating Jewish life,” one must necessarily conclude that their view of “Jewish life” is economically, politically, and socially destroying Europeans in our own Homelands.

The CST trains a paramilitary force of security contractors to always be on the lookout for antisemitism and to protect Jews against non-Jews. I think we all know that if a British nationalist organization began training paramilitaries to provide security for British people against the hordes of immigrant criminals, the project would be actively attacked by the English government. Jewish communities in England have also launched Shomrim organizations, quasi-police units made up of Jews to patrol English streets. Jewish groups get to abide by a special set of rules that Goyim are not allowed to have.

Read more at TradYouth

White Nationalist Matthew Heimbach Banned from the United Kingdom

Matthew Heimbach received a letter from the United Kingdom’s Home Office banning him from entering the country because of his extremist rhetoric and views.

Matthew Heimbach, an American white nationalist, has been banned from the United Kingdom on the grounds that his presence may “foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.” [. . .]

[. . .] Heimbach was planning to travel to England to speak at a private event before he received notice that he was not welcome and would be “refused admission on arrival” if he were to try to travel to the UK. The ban will be reviewed in 3 to 5 years.

“I am now banned from England for being a nationalist while 10ks of radical Muslims are welcomed. ‪#EnglandYoureDrunk”, Heimbach complained on his Twitter page yesterday.

Read more at the SPLC

Yes, Ethnonationalism Is Biblical: A Response to Kevin Craig, Part 2


[. . .] I believe that Craig’s commitment to libertarianism is a major stumbling block in his understanding of biblical morality. Craig’s commitment to libertarian ideas causes him to read this position into the Bible. Of course all of us need to be on guard against reading our own presuppositions into the Bible, so this problem is by no means unique to Craig. However, Craig’s commitment is very evident in his writings, and this causes him in many cases to ignore straightforward biblical teachings because they do not cohere with his own libertarian worldview. [. . .]

[. . .] There is no biblical warrant for this categorical rejection of national boundaries, because, the Bible does not establish a “right” to immigrate anywhere and establish permanent residence. Still less does the Bible insist that everyone has a “right” to naturalized citizenship in any particular country. I agree entirely with R.L. Dabney when he writes, “The diversity of tongues, characters, races and interests among mankind forbids their union in one universal commonwealth. The aggregation of men into separate nations is therefore necessary; and the authority of the governments instituted over them, to maintain internal order and external defence against aggression, is of divine appointment. Hence, to sustain our government with heart and hand is not only made by God our privilege, but our duty.4

During my discussion on empires and propositional nationhood I stated, “Empires are a cheap imitation of Christ’s spiritual kingdom which will grow to encompass all physical nations and people.” Craig objects and triumphantly declares, “This sentence refutes the entire article. Christ’s Kingdom is in fact an empire which ‘extends over several different tribes, nations, and peoples.’ It is a propositional nation, or a doctrinal nation, or a nation based on faith, not genetics.” This demonstrates the heart of Craig’s misunderstanding of category differences. Empires are international states which attempt to unnaturally unite people from multiple nations, peoples, and tribes into one body politic. This is opposed to the character of Christ’s kingdom which is not of this world (John 18:36). In Craig’s worldview, Christ’s kingdom is simply the empire that ultimately trumps all empires.

This contrasts with the traditional Christian worldview in which the Gospel succeeds in converting the nations and reconciling them to God and to each other. The result of this conversion and reconciliation is that unity is achieved without dispensing with national particularity. Christ’s kingdom is not a mere propositional nation as Craig suggests, but a nation united by a common new birth in Christ (John 3:5), which is analogous to physical nations being united by common physical birth. Craig’s denial of nationhood united by physical birth actually denudes the spiritual nation of 1 Peter 2:9 of its meaning by robbing it of its proper correspondence to physical nationhood. Kinism understands that spiritual unity based upon faith in Christ and national particularity based in ethnicity, tribe, and clan are not in conflict. Thus we have no either/or dilemma posed by Craig since we understand that the two concepts work in harmony. This is the orthodox Trinitarian solution to the age-old problem of the one and the many. [. . .]

[. . .] Kinism does not teach that we ought to support certain politicians simply because they are of our race. Rather, we seek a homogeneous society in which people will be governed by their own so that race will not be a factor in what policies are enacted, since they can be weighed on their own merits. It is today’s multiracial and multicultural America in which ethnic and racial minorities simply vote the party line of their race, leaving the white majority to split over policy disagreements. In an ethno-state, which is what America was traditionally, this would not be an issue. [. . .]

Read more at Faith and Heritage

#OpKKK Strikes Matt Parrott

My phone started ringing about once per hour yesterday. It’s still ringing about once per hour. I have anonymous (no pun intended) calls blocked, so I’m probably just catching the tip of the prank phone call iceberg. It turns out that the antifa decided to masquerade as “Anonymous” and declare that they’ve “hacked” the “klan” and are going to “dox” all sorts of famous and important people.

In lieu of famous or important people affiliated with any klans, they’ve evidently settled on doxing me, Matt Parrott. I’m not sure if it counts as doxing when the correct information is my public phone number and the private information about my address and family is incorrect. I haven’t lived at Golfview Drive in Carmel for nearly five years, but somebody ordered $333 worth of Papa John’s pizza to the address yesterday evening. Ironically, the rank strangers living at that address, the owner of that pizza parlor, the pizza parlor employees, and the hapless delivery driver, are all non-White, so Anonymous managed to harass and harm more minorities in one single night than I’ve done in my life.

My entry has a rather mean-spirited inclusion of my alleged mother, Sandra. Sandra is some random lady in North Carolina who is emphatically not my mother, and most likely not a right-wing political dissident. For that matter, my actual mother isn’t a political dissident, either. You can’t pick your family, after all. Aside from buying me my first computer and subscribing to dial-up Internet, she played no role whatsoever in my political awakening and wishes I would find a hobby that doesn’t involve being habitually harassed by Internet heroes.

Read more at TradYouth

Yes, Ethnonationalism Is Biblical: A Response to Kevin Craig, Part 1

A Christian ethno-nationalist argues with a Christian anti-nationalist.

Just as one God exists in three distinct Persons, orthodox Trinitarian Christians understand that Christian unity is not in conflict with racial and ethnic plurality. I would like to examine the specific statements that Craig makes in regards to the illegitimacy of physical nations:

  • The nation as ‘state’ is an arbitrary political fiction created by humanists. It is the law of man, not the Law of God.
  • There is today only one legitimate ‘nation’: that is the nation described in 1 Peter 2:9. . . . If you are not part of this ‘race of the redeemed,’ then you are still a rebel in the fallen race of the First Adam. The Second Adam is the ruler of a new nation. If you want to start a baseball team and call it a ‘nation,’ that’s OK, but irrelevant. The Bible has no ethical or moral mandates concerning your ‘nation’ or any other human-created ‘nation.’ The only nation that matters is the ‘holy nation’ of 1 Peter 2:9, and whether you are a citizen of that holy nation, or a rebel against it.
  • [I]t wouldn’t surprise me to discover that the Bible also uses the word ‘ethnos’ to describe an arbitrary humanistic contrivance known as the political ‘nation-state,’ or ‘empire.’
  • Nations “aren’t ‘meaningless,’ they are just irrelevant.
  • There is no Biblical mandate to prefer heredity and lineage over the Church (the Body of Christ, the ‘Household of Faith,’ the ‘holy nation.’). Any family or business or school is free to prefer a genealogically un-related Christian over a brother, sister, father, or mother who is in rebellion against Christ and His Family/Nation.
  • Against my contention that “[e]mpires are a cheap imitation of Christ’s spiritual kingdom which will grow to encompass all physical nations and people,” Craig argues, “This sentence refutes the entire article. Christ’s Kingdom is in fact an empire which ‘extends over several different tribes, nations, and peoples.’ It is a propositional nation, or a doctrinal nation, or a nation based on faith, not genetics.
  • All ‘nationalism’ – ‘ethno-’ or otherwise — is a failure and a rebellion against Christ’s ‘holy nation.’

Read more at Faith & Heritage

  • July 2018
    S M T W T F S
    « Dec    
%d bloggers like this: