Tuesday, August 28, 2007

MommySpace Knows Best, Children

Yesterday, in a Myspace bulletin, I attempted to post this link to a Yahoo article entitled YouTube criticized over Neo-Nazi clips, about the efforts by jewish groups in Germany to censor, via lawsuit, YouTube-Germany for posting some videos which the groups claim, as they usually do in the face of opposition, "incite hatred". I made the mistake of including that link as a clickable reference. I included some questions about the content of the article, the buzzwords used, and the utter lack of any substantive proof behind almost all of the claims listed. This is essentially what I wrote (with the Yahoo piece above added as a clickable link):

Video-sharing Web site YouTube has met with harsh criticism in Germany for hosting clips that incite racial hatred, according to a news report due to be broadcast on German public TV late on Monday.
Do these clips incite hatred, or are they expressions of anger by the people posting them? Who are the people "incited" to "hatred"? "Hatred" of whom?

More than 60 years after the Holocaust, Germany is grappling with a rise in support for Nazi ideas. Neo-Nazi violence in Germany has reached its highest level since reunification in 1990.
What are "Nazi ideas"? Do "Nazis" include only sieg-heiling, goose-stepping Hitlerites, or also people who, for instance, protest the unchecked invasion of Europe by non-White, non-European people, or are perhaps tired of their nations being ruled by aliens? Are "Nazis" only National Socialists, or are they really just White people who retain racial self-identity and refuse to be cowed? Who is measuring such violence, and how is it determined that it's "Neo-Nazi"?

And who is more dangerous? "Neo-Nazis" who may get into a few fights or even cause a few fatalities on an individual basis, or a group of fascistic zionists who place Israel at the center of the American foreign policy, start unprovoked wars with their neighbors which have killed over 4000 young Americans, routinely kill Palestinian children, and then hide behind anti-Semitism and the holocaust stories when called out? Who is more a threat to freedom, those who speak out against destructive politics, or those who censor them?

That's all. Nothing new or earth-shattering, just some questions about the content and phrasing of the article.

Myspace, or as I prefer to call it, "MommySpace", has implemented a system of link replacement called "MSPLinks", ostensibly to deter spammers. Whenever a web link is emplaced in a page, bulletin or blog entry, their system automatically replaces the link with an internal reference link. This does nothing at all to inhibit spam, which is everywhere prevalent on MommySpace. What it does do is give the MommySpace censors the ability to automatically restrict the links and prevent their distribution.

In my case, said bulletin was never posted for public view, and was internally deleted, and I got a familiar "YOUR ACCOUNT HAS BEEN PHISHED!" notice, requiring a password change. This is never a coincidence, because in my case it's almost never a real possibility. The only way an account can be "phished", or taken control of, is if a user logs into a phony shell site with an interface that LOOKS like the Myspace login page. Once the duped user enters login and password info, the phisher has access to their page and can post bulletins, etc. with links to the phisher's website and so on. Phished pages do happen, but they're rare. And in most cases, Myspace never notifies the truly phished users of anything.

Several people have had bulletins, blogs and posted links removed because they were anathema to MommySpace's ultra-Leftist, New World Order mindset. For instance, I had previously received the "PHISHED!" notice after attempting to post an article about Myspace's refusal to work with authorities in catching child predators who use the service. One guy even posted a video on YouTube about their practice of censoring Ron Paul supporters by the use of the phony phishing scheme:

MommySpace prefers its subjects to be dumb, happy and fascinated by Lindsay Lohan and the latest emo bands. Its primary purpose is to garner revenue for News Corp., and its principal, Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch, a megamillionaire of jewish descent who's based in Australia, despises anything that puts a stick in the spokes of the One World government schemers. He and his minions will do anything required to prevent the dissemination of information harmful to his aims, his companies' revenue streams, and his political and ethnic kindred. The MommySpace censors will delete profiles which contain no TOS violations, and leave untouched many which do, all on the basis of political content.

All I can say, in the most free speech I know, is...FUCK 'EM!

Monday, August 20, 2007

The 'W' Word

Imagine that you are an archaeologist. You work alone in a remote dig, and have found a new piece of pottery within a pile of debris. You are impressed by its unusual color and size. But mostly, you are puzzled. It has a handle of some sort, but too small and close to the object to be of much use. There's a small, oval, lipped opening on one side which could be a spout, but might be something else. It's not flat-bottomed, so it can't stand on its own. In short, you have no word available to describe your find.

Words are the only means which humans have to convert thoughts into interpersonal communication. They are based on shared human experience. Anyone who has seen the pet animal we call a "dog" knows what that word represents. But a "dog" might also mean a man without scruples, a physically unattractive woman, or a hold-down clamp on a machine. We further employ context to sort all this out, and this happens automatically in our minds.

So if, in the case of our pottery, we have no means to communicate what our item is, it is at least a physical item which we can photograph, make sketches of, or otherwise prove the existence of by some visual means. This is done all the time with newly discovered tangible items.

But how can we communicate an idea which is completely ethereal, if the word to describe that idea doesn't exist?

In today's world, political correctness has been gaining ground since perhaps the 1960's. Recently, in a media-saturated and rather juvenile display by some public persons, including the mayor of Chicago, Kwame Kilpatrick, the "N-Word" was "buried". The people involved symbolically ended the use of the word, although presumably excluding Black rappers, who would largely be unemployed were they so restricted in their speech. As we know, it's ok when Blacks call Blacks "nigga", but woe betide any non-Black person who does so.

In 21st Century AmeriKwa, the First Amendment only protects those whom the political elite says it does.

For non-White people in this land and elsewhere, taking pride in one's heritage and one's people, their accomplishments and achievements, is strongly encouraged. A film which expands upon this concept is "Whale Rider", about a Maori tribal group in New Zealand. The movie centers around the group's customs, traditions and history. The interconnectedness of the group with its ancestors is emphasized. It's a beautiful story, well produced and engaging. It's a story line which should be available to all people of all nations. But it's not.

White people face a new problem in the modern world, one not encountered before. The means for a White man to express pride in his origins, his people, his race, are being curtailed. This takes various forms, but the most insidious involve restrictions on speech.

Putting the words "White" and "pride" (or may the heavens forbid, "White" and "power") together in a sentence generally results in a rabidly negative reaction from the authorities and their supplicants among the sheeple. One may, in certain contexts, be "proud" to be Irish (on St. Patrick's Day), Italian (on Columbus Day, although Columbus is being rapidly denigrated), German (during Oktoberfest, but nowhere else) and so on. But on a racial level, one is completely forbidden to express any kind of positive feelings.

Because of this, young White people are faced with a quandary. If they are unable to freely and properly express a love of, pride in, or respect for their race under any circumstances, what will they do? If the very phrase "White pride" becomes synonymous with "hate", "prejudice", "racism" or some other buzzword, how can they express that emotional concept? If the positive is automatically deemed the negative, what then?

Again, if the words don't exist, how can the thought behind them be transmitted?

What we see instead is, a redirection of "pride" on the part of young Whites. They avoid "White" cultural and social outlets, and become enamored of such venues as rap, or salsa, or hip-hop. They can not express pride in their own people, so they "project" their feelings into areas which are socially and politically acceptable. They take on Black or "hispanic" culture, language and musical taste. They become proponents for non-Whites in general, often assuming direct hostility toward their own People. These are the so-called "whiggers", White youths who no longer relate to being White, and their numbers are increasing. There are even groups, such as "Good Night White Pride", whose often-White membership diligently work to erase any sense of White identity.

The bonds which exist between these young people and those who came before them are broken. They are our future. If they are lost to us, if there is no one to carry on the traditions, the values, the work ethic handed down to us, we are doomed.

We must teach our sons and daughters to be proud of their heritage, exactly as others are taught, and we must never let a small group of troublemakers define what we can or cannot say about ourselves. Those words must never be lost to us.

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Assembling Our Armor

Over the past week, the stock market has begun to show signs of cracking. Over the past few years, banks, in "cooperation" with the Feds, have tried desperately to overcome a problem. The real estate market across the country had cooled down, with the result that prudent banks would have to make changes in their lending policies. Among those changes a savvy money fund manager would emplace would be: lower debt-to-equity ratios, higher interest rates for less-qualified buyers, and so on.

One of the last things careful bankers would do is, drop interest rates and open the market to marginal borrowers. The default and foreclosure rates would skyrocket, and lenders would be left with depreciating paper in a long-term declining market. In the face of this logic, many banks, mortgage companies and other funding sources did exactly that. They did exactly the wrong thing.

So, recently, several have had thousands of mortgage notes fall into their laps, against homes in fringe neighborhoods with no chance of recouping even their basic costs. Lender defaults begin, and the repayment monies are nowhere to be seen. Long-term outlook for these institutions: perhaps near zero.

The Europeans invested in these lunatic ventures. So did the Aussies, Asians and Argentines. Federal and regional banks are pumping money into the system to keep it afloat, which is, as Robert Frenz said, like drilling a hole in your boat bottom to let the bilge water drain out.

Proper economics require a corrective "balancing". It's a zero-sum game: the lenders should, over time, be "allowed" to fail, in stages to lessen the overall impact. Instead, the Puppeteer Class is lulling the populace to sleep by covering the error. When the books are balanced, which they must be, the error must be repaid. That error is now, potentially, in the trillions of dollars.

While all this has been going on, China, which was "directed" into such investments, is more than upset. The Chinese are considering the "nuclear option". Not in terms of missiles, but in terms of currency valuation. If China begins to spend the $US it has accumulated, hundreds of billions will flood the markets. The buying power of each will begin to free-fall. It will be an induced version of the absolute collapse of 1923 Germany. Currency traders will move to Euros. The United Arab Emirates already have, and at least three other countries are thinking of joining them. The Bush administration destroyed Iraq, in part because Hussein rambled about pegging oil to the Euro. Boom.

So what's the outcome? No one can say with certainty. But if the rulers of this land do not change direction, we are going to land face-first on the pavement, and the truck that hit us isn't going to look back.

Because the national regime knows there shall be blood in the water, and don't want it to be theirs, King George has been spending a lot of time making new laws, declaring himself dictator in case of [anything he defines as] a "national emergency". Congress just voted itself a pay raise, and is continuing progress toward a North American Union with Canada and Mexico; more immigrants takes the country's mind off finances. The Supreme Court is mostly standing clear of voting about silly things like Constitutionality of the actions of the other branches.

And while this has been going on, dual Israeli-American citizen Comrade Director Chertoff's merry DHS band have been building detention centers within the U.S. We are told, with a straight face, that the potential residents thereof are illegal aliens. Yes, the ones the government is supporting through education, medical care and in many cases, incarceration for true criminal offenses. The same ones who have rallies with impunity, and seeming immunity from arrest from their violation of existing Federal laws. And oh yes, the ones the Feds haven't even bothered to count.

No, the prospective inmates will be the dissenters, the outspoken ones, the people who might influence others to think. This was the Commissars' policy in their last haunt: the 1930's Soviet Union. It is again arising as the policy of their blood heirs. The purges, pogroms and internments in the gulags gave warning to the general population: dissent equals death. And their immobilization lasted more than half a century.

Our Founders didn't put everything they owned in this world on the line for such a result. We have previously been a People which has resisted tyranny, overthrown oppression and sought personal freedoms. Will we hold fast to those principles before the gates close behind us?

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

It's Simple. Right?

I've been watching a certain video (which shall remain nameless), purporting to have The Answer to every desire of every upright ape on this chunk of rock we call "Earth". I had my doubts from the start, and they were confirmed within a few minutes of pressing "play".

All these self-realization videos, books and lectures have one thing in common. They all simply tell you what's possible. They leave out the percentage of achievement. Otherwise, someone would be missing a financial opportunity. It's an area I, at one time, thought about getting into: whip a crowd into a frenzy, get them to think they're discovering something previously untapped, and sign the book at the exit (with warm regards and a handshake for that new life). $100 a head for the crowd, figure another $40 milked in book and paraphernalia sales, averaging 500 per session, and paying out, say, $3000 for a hall for 2 hours...equals $67,000 in receipts, minus other expenses. Even if I had to get endorsements, my take-home would have been well over $50K for 120 minutes work.

That, my readers, is the real scoop on how to achieve your dreams, IF you have no conscience about the reality that the information, the uplift, the show that you're selling is all available for free. I chose not to take such a route for myself. But some of you might. Hey, the money's good.

Being successful is a combination of many things. Edison said, "Genius is 1% Inspiration, and 99% Perspiration". Persistence is the most common element of success. We have all seen people rise in their chosen field because they become the only one left standing. They don't change jobs much, they show up every day, and they work longer hours spent, not idly, but in practice of and further learning about one's skills.

As we see, another facet of success branches from Persistence, and that is Education. The more you know, the more you can know. True education isn't entirely of the classroom or the text. You have to use what you know as often as possible, to gain proficiency and become expert. To become a better programmer, I didn't just read about code, I wrote it. I learned what commands or compositions worked, and could change and test things. Likewise, you don't get to be a good mechanic by looking at diagrams, nor a good partner in bed by being asexual.

Two aspects of success that could be tied to some metaphysical system remain. The first is Luck. We can define luck as avoidance of obstacles. The higher the percentage, the more "luck" we can assess. Some think we make our own luck; I prefer the thought that synchronicity is tangible and event-driven. If the "event" is you stepping out of your car at the same moment that, directly above, a piano is hurtling from its prior residence on the eighth floor, well...it's not only tangible, it's fatal. Some have defined luck as the meeting of planning with opportunity. Sometimes, yes, but you can't plan for everything. Elsewise, there'd be no odds at Churchill Downs, nor statements about Iraqis tossing flowers at invasion forces.

The other other-worldly handle on success is Opportunity. Some philosophers divine that we create Opportunity through presence. Unfortunately, financial, spiritual or other Opportunities reside outside my cube for about 9 hours a day. Some we can make up for, so to speak. Others are permanently lost to us. If given the Opportunity to cash in the winning Mega-lotto ticket, I will; yet, I don't expect I'll be in the lottery office to pick up my check presently.

In the end, the only path that leads to success on any level is one that has a Beginning and and End. It's never a straight line, and the outcomes are never guaranteed. One must believe in the successful endgame, but must also be willing to sacrifice time, put forth honest effort, and never assume that it will pan out. The failures will begin to amass in the basement of your life. But if you have your house in order, those failures will never see the light of day again except as reminders of what not to do again.

In conclusion, for no particular reason, I leave you with an anecdotal short story about walking the path.

Many years back, a young man fresh out of school joined a large company with the aim of rising within as high as possible. He was given a minor position which he used as a springboard to achieve greater income and responsibility. Eventually, he had a hand in cost estimation. On one project, he made a mistake in calculation, which cost the company almost a million dollars.

Dejected, he typed up his letter of resignation, and walked to his boss' office to give notice in lieu of dismissal. His boss, seeing him step in, asked him to sit down.

He told him, "I've looked at the week's activities and saw the recent problem. We'll need to play some catch-up next year to even things out. What's next on your schedule?"

The young man was astonished. He thought he'd be forever banished from his dream job, but instead was being prepped to do another project. He said to his boss, "I don't understand...I'm not being fired?"

His boss replied, "Why in the world would I fire you? I just spent a million bucks training you."

The young man immediately regained his confidence. He was grateful for being excused for his error and humbled by the experience. His boss' transformation of the problem into a learning experience enriched him. He vowed to press on and improve everyday. In time, after years of careful work, he became the President of the company.

Persistence, education, opportunity and some luck got him there. And he never sat through anyone's theory on success; he was too busy actually succeeding.

Frith or Famine?

(Originally posted on 21 March 2007)

Yesterday I was asked a legitimate question as a part of an eMail response to another issue. It was, essentially, whether or not I understood the difference between "Folkish", as in the practice of the old Norse faiths, and "racist".

I discussed the Folkish perspective in previous writings, but to reiterate, it is the bond which exists between a people and their deities. It is tied to a land, and the people of that land, through the blood of that people.

In the case of Folkish Asatru, it is the bond between Thorr, Odhinn, Frey, Freyja, Tyr and the other holy ones and the indigenous peoples of northern (and central) Europe and their heirs. It is like the ties between us and our ancestors in the familial sense, stretching down from Ask and Embla to us. Our gods have been there along with us, with our People.

But for me, that wasn't the real issue. I think we're in agreement about folkishness in faith.

The question I need to ask is, do people completely understand the difference between "racism" and "racialism"? If not, please let me give you my point of view.

To be a "racist" means that you hold the blanket opinion that your own people are, in every way, superior to others. It implies domination and control of others, subjugation and inherent violence. I reject that. Each race and ethnicity has strengths and weaknesses. Some are unique, others overlap.

"Racialism" means placing one's own people at the center of one's life in the most positive sense. It is directly akin to feelings about our immediate family. We don't go to school sporting events to cheer for other peoples' kids. We don't love other families as much as we love our own. There is no implication of "hatred" in that. In loving our own families most, we do not disparage the families of others.

In like fashion, as I clearly state on my profile, loving my own Kindred doesn't mean "hating" anyone else's. Our racial group, like ALL racial groups, is a direct extension of our family. All native Europeans and their kin are one people, as are all native Africans, native Chinese and native Arabs.

It all works quite well when we have our own contained spaces in which to live. It works poorly when, as groups, we are forced to live among people whose group goals and survival methodologies are quite different, and often antagonistic (in the sociological sense) to our own. They too, rightfully, are looking out for their children, their families and their kindred.

Where our goals and theirs diverge and become diametric, there is conflict. In my opinion, there is only one peaceable remedy for that frictional interaction, and that is physical separation. Neutral corners, if you will. Good fences, as the poet Robert Frost said, make good neighbors.

I hold no malice toward most people, as individuals. However, in group dynamics, I must and will support the survival, advancement and security of my own People first. If we do not look after our own, surely we can not expect others to do it for us.

So, while I respect the spectrum of perspectives on racialist thought which those of our People may hold, a "folkish" faith, to me, requires a racialist foundation.