EXTREME POLITICS

More from the surly but well-informed The Unpopular Truth:

I think we should focus on two groups: the demographic majority, and those who want the power now held by the demographic majority (this second group is comprised of members of different ethnicities, including the majority of it, which is of the same group as the demographic majority).

Multiculturalism cannot work because it destroys consensus. It is a form of pluralism, or the idea that we can agree to disagree — on fundamental issues and values, including their means of transmission, “culture” — and still be OK as a nation. We destroy consensus, but we keep the benefits of society, so everyone thinks this is a good idea.

History shows us that it’s a path to destruction, because without consensus, it’s impossible to measure actions against an abstract yardstick. As a result, politics becomes balkanized and the question of the day becomes: “what are you gonna do for me?” and how to increase personal wealth, personal convenience, etc. at the expense of the collective.

The ethnic issue merely complicates this: those within the demographic majority who oppose consensus, generally because they are afraid of reality, use the pitied, minority ethnicity as moral justification for destroying the demographic majority.

The minority ethnicity then does what any group would do: destroys what the demographic majority created, and replaces it with something more appropriate for the demographic minority.

It’s simple math when you look at it outside of black and white. It would happen with Swedes and Russians mixed in a nation; Chinese and Vietnamese; Christians and Muslims. Any two or more groups in a pluralism are in competition. The focus should not be on ethnicity, but on the instability of pluralism as a mathematical model for civilization.

The Unpopular Truth

More heresy from those who believe our society is falling apart slowly (with a whimper and not a bang, with apologies to T.S. Eliot).

It makes sense that any group who collaborate need an abstract and ongoing goal, which is a values system in itself, to unite them. Any group larger than either 12 or 150 people, which are the number of people who can collaborate without a command structure and the number of people any one person can keep in mind with their daily actions, respectively.

The United States of America (USA) claims to unite itself by ideals like liberty and justice for all, but ideologies such as nationalism erode that by asking who “all” really is. Even more, some question whether that “all” should apply to those with controversial opinions, or to the group of unproductive: criminals, perverts, the retarded, the insane.

It will be interesting to watch this civilization contort as it declines, because if it follows the historical model — and it’s on the nose so far — it will first make it taboo to notice the decline, or to read Plato out loud too seriously. Second, it will begin playing with the definitions of “all” and what our ideals are or have mutated to be.

As nations collapse, those who uphold their traditions become increasingly reactionary, which leads to the Stalinist practice of picking those who have dogma over those who are competent. As we see the Klan and other European nationalist groups implode over the next few years — part of which is the FBI trying to “keep the peace” after an Obama election — most of what we will see is moribund groups held together by extreme dogmatism, populated by incompetent drunks who make a living selling trinkets to those who still haven’t figured out these groups just “look” militant and ready, but have no unifying political philosophy and are basically race-hate profiteers.

By 2004, the Southern White Knights had chapters in Savannah, Georgia; Homosassa Springs, Florida; and Marion, Ohio. Its founding chapter relocated to Denham Springs, Louisiana. The group disbanded in early 2005, the center said.

{ snip }

An argument began, and the group’s leader, Foster, allegedly pushed her to the ground and shot her to death without warning.

{ snip }

Sheriff’s investigators said they received the initial tip from a convenience store clerk. Two of the group members went into the store and asked the clerk whether he knew how to get bloodstains out of their clothes, Strain said. The clerk told them no and called the sheriff after they left.

CNN

This pattern has occurred repeatedly among the far right and far left. The people who are rewarded with public attention are those who speak the loudest dogma, but they are also the people least likely to be competent. Why: competent activists with controversial ideas tend to soften them so others can stomach them long enough to understand them and possibly adopt them, while dogmatists feel self-reinforced from the hatred of others to match what their own dogma-over-reality attitude has whittled down to simple hatred.

A jury awarded $2.5 million in damages on Friday to a Kentucky teenager who was severely beaten by members of a Ku Klux Klan group because they mistakenly thought he was an illegal Latino immigrant, the Southern Poverty Law Center said.

{ snip }

“We look forward to collecting every dime that we can for our client and to putting the Imperial Klans of America out of business,” said SPLC founder and chief trial attorney Morris Dees, who tried the case.

{ snip }

According to testimony, three members of the Klan group confronted Gruver in July 2006 during a recruiting mission at the Meade County Fair in Brandenberg, Kentucky. They taunted him with ethnic slurs — inaccurate ones — spat on him and doused him with alcohol .Two of the men, including Hensley, knocked Gruver to the ground and repeatedly struck and kicked him.

{ snip }

Former Klansman Kale Kelly, once a member of Edwards’ inner circle, testified he was told to kill Dees because of the center’s lawsuit in Idaho against the Aryan Nations, a neo-Nazi supremacist organization.

CNN

The incompetence would be shocking if you took the media at their word when they described the far right as dangerous, but a more apt description is that the far right is a drunken old man with a shotgun. Unable to achieve the revolution they want, they will occasionally open fire on likely victims — people too stupid to avoid the stupid and angry — and self-destruct, because people like Morris Dees are smarter and more competent than they are.

Part of the process of a nation decomposing before death is that its traditions get destroyed by irrelevance; when consensus is gone, trying to uphold “tradition” is like demanding the same effects from different causes, or like trying to step into the same river twice. There is no longer the underlying consensus that enabled those traditions. Smart activists work to get together small secessionist groups who can, by the nature of being under the radar, ride out the next two decades to two centuries of delusional instability; dumb activists open fire.

This commentary floored me:

As we face a new — but old, following the path of other failed civilizations — era, we are going to face the rising anger of the far right: neo-Nazis, white supremacists, white nationalists, and so on.

When I think of this group, what makes me dislike their existence is that they’re so negative. Instead of affirming racial differences through the positive, like pointing out the traits that make us different and how they point to proud histories, they’re constantly negative. Instead of pointing out the obvious, which is that multiculturalism and pluralism destroy societies, they blame black people — and pretend that our failing civilization would be just peachy keen if it weren’t for the presence of African genetics among us.

That’s negativity, not logic, and it’s highly destructive. It’s not constructing a future, it’s whining. It’s not looking toward something better; it’s affirming what’s worse. In short, even if it weren’t an ideology I disagreed with, I’d say it’s a dumb implementation.

{ snip }

Keep negative thinking in all forms out of politics. It’s fine to say multiculturalism and pluralism don’t work; it’s stupid to veer off into bigotry, racism, hatred and negativity.

The Unpopular Truth

The Mormon Church is not the only group being singled out for criticism. African-Americans, 70% of whom voted yes on Proposition 8, according to a CNN exit poll, have become a target. According to eyewitness reports published on the Internet, racial epithets have been used against African-Americans at protests in California, directed even at blacks who are fighting to repeal Proposition 8. Said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, “In any fight, there will be people who say things they shouldn’t say, but that shouldn’t divert attention from what the vast majority are saying against this, that it’s a terrible injustice.”

In addition to protests, gay activists have begun publishing lists online exposing individuals and organizations who have donated money in support of Proposition 8. On AntiGayBlacklist.com, individuals who gave money toward Proposition 8 are publicized, with readers urged not to patronize their businesses or services. The list of donors was culled from data on ElectionTrack.com, which follows all contributions of over $1,000 and all contributions of over $100 given before October 17. Dentists, accountants, veterinarians and the like who gave a few thousand dollars to the cause are listed alongside major donors like the Container Supply Co., Inc. of Garden Grove, Calif., which gave $250,000. “Anyone who steps into a political fight aimed at taking away fundamental rights from fellow citizens opens themselves up to criticism,” said Wolfson. “The First Amendment gives them the right of freedom of speech and to support political views, but people also have the right to criticize them.”

Time

Except that the federal government is doing its best to prevent people from publishing names next to calls for action, this is a very effective strategy: identify others and shame them as being anti-social, or not supporting altruistic and egalitarian policies that equalize the privileges available to all.

What we’re seeing now is the natural process of the fragmentation of a civilization. The main means of the fragmentation, which is the demand for individual rights and divisions of the pie on an equal level, leads to different groups finding their values increasingly in conflict. For example, the strong pro-gay lobby may clash with the Christian values of some minority groups.

This is one major reason why nations in fact come apart. Once the original consensus is broken, there is no place to move on from there — except further subdividing consensus. Once we agreed we all agreed; then we agree to disagree; finally, we become truly Balkanized and start fighting for our right to become literally separate communities in the midst of a nation that, like a shopping mall, is there to provide services not unity or purpose.

It’s fascinating to watch this develop. Apparently, the gay lobby is going to find out like the European nationalist lobby that the voting public will take direct action against a minority group as a sign of aggression, but will not at all be offended by the idea of a secessionist gay community.

We’ve covered Bill White before, as well as how our government is suppressing (not “oppressing”) radicals from far left to far right as a means of maintaining order. Here’s more information about Bill White:

Neo-Nazi William “Bill” White pleaded not guilty this morning to soliciting harm against a juror who presided in the trial of white supremacist Matt Hale.

The FBI shut down the Web site shortly before arresting White in late October. White, 31, of Roanoke, Va. is accused of using the Web site to solicit another person to injure the foreperson of the jury that convicted Hale in 2004.

White posted the home address and phone numbers for the juror on Sept. 11.

“This case is going to be the United States versus the First Amendment,” White’s lawyer Nishay Shanan said today. “This case is all about this First Amendment rights” and the government’s efforts to quiet White.

Sun Times

It will be interesting to see what happens to Bill White, Sherman Austin and Pamely Ferdin shake out. Is the government acknowledging our civilization’s decline by sitting down hard on dissenters who might enact change, instead of the usual moonbats and boneheads?

There’s been a lot of interest in secession since this election. After 2004, liberal places like Vermont and New Hampshire wanted to pull away. After 2008, conservative places are wanting to secede. It’s as if the recognition that liberal and conservative are incompatible has come home to roost, and the result is a desire for states to have autonomy under a confederacy that provides for their defense.

Texas was placed into dormancy not lawfully annexed. The Nation has always been there and has ?never ceded to any foreign Nation. Therefore since it never ceded itself it cannot un-secede. It does not need to because anything after 1845 was fraud anyway. “Texan” is a
Corporate State Citizen without any rights they only have privileges. “Texians,” however, are citizens with full rights and are citizens of a Nation. See attached article explaining the difference. For example a Canadian is a citizen of Canada a foreign Nation. When you add the “i” in the word it is signifying an international individual of a certain Nation.

We need to get the word out to as many Texians as possible. The republic of Texas Congress has already served our Charter to the Texas Secretary of State in Austin and are in the process of serving other documents, effectively taking control of our Nation of Texas again. As the article explains, we do not have to go through the process of secession because we were never legally annexed.

Our next Congressional Meeting will be held on December 13th. We always announce the date, time and place on our website. All Texian citizens are welcome to attend our meetings.

Texas Republic

The following documents were included:

What is a Texian?

Annexation of Texas

Self-Responsibility

As reported here about Bill White and Pamelyn Ferdin, we’ve seen an increase in government shutting down loud voices publishing useful information that can be employed against people responsible for certain decisions.

This is interesting to us at Extreme Politics because it’s both smart politics and potentially a sign of instability. It’s good politics because power waits for no one; if you do not act against troublemakers, they will get bolder with each generation and soon present a real threat. On the other hand, if your nation has too many people pulling in too many directions, all of those directions will manifest as extreme movements at some point.

Though only a teenager, Sherman Austin was still quite capable of communicating his politically progressive ideas. After all, he was raised in Los Angeles by his mother, Jennifer, to feel free to speak his mind about any issues of the day. In January 2002, about 25 heavily armed FBI agents raided the Austin home, ransacking it while interrogating the terrified teenager for over five hours. The FBI seized the whiz kid’s network of computers in order to take down his rabble-rousing website, accusing him of disseminating bomb-making information.

{ snip }

Austin was prosecuted under a 1997 law sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein that makes it illegal to distribute information related to explosives with the intent to use that information in a “federal crime of violence.”

{ snip }

And when he gets out of prison next year, he will be banned from associating with anyone who wants to “change the government in any way.” Sherman Austin was arrested over 18 months ago. Federal officials charged that Austin had illegally distributed information about how to build Molotov cocktails and “Drano bombs” on his web site.

InfoShop

You might also want to visit Sherman’s Website, Raise the Fist

We’re mostly posting about Sherman Austin to show that indeed, the federal government appears to be applying this dictum uniformly: if you post information about decision-makers, especially in conjunction with exhorts to act and/or information about means to do so, they’re going to come down on you hard, because they don’t want dissidents of any stripe to think the ground is soft enough to plant those seeds.

It will be interesting to watch as government increasingly tries to restrict these types of extremists, since as pluralism increases, so does a tendency toward extremism.

A judge Thursday found that Pamelyn Ferdin violated an injunction barring the harassment of University of California, Los Angeles faculty members who do research on animals.

She demonstrated outside the researchers’ homes and distributed fliers that included their photographs, home addresses and phone numbers.

Ferdin faces up to five days in jail and a $1,000 fine. She says she has “every right to hand out the leaflets” and plans to appeal.

AP

Reminds me of what happened to a far-right activist.

Could it be a crackdown on dissent in general? More likely, it’s a fear of dissenters who publish personal information. There’s too many citizens for law enforcement to keep up, and they’re terrified of people they aren’t watching who might do something.

The recent passage of California’s Proposition 8 has exposed some of the latent racism of many within the LGBT community—instigated in part by many in the e-telligentsia such as revisionist Andrew Sullivan and sex advisor turned sociologist Dan Savage. Unfortunately the “blame the blacks” meme is being commonly accepted by some so-called “progressive” gay activists. A number of Rod 2.0 and Jasmyne Cannick readers report being subjected to taunts, threats and racist abuse at last night’s marriage equality rally in Los Angeles.

Geoffrey, a student at UCLA and regular Rod 2.0 reader, joined the massive protest outside the Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood. Geoffrey was called the n-word at least twice.

It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple…me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.

{ snip }

A young lesbian couple with mohawks and Obama buttons joined the shouting and said there were “very disappointed with black people” and “how could we” after the Obama victory. This was stupid for them to single us out because we were carrying those blue NO ON PROP 8 signs! I pointed that out and the one of the older men said it didn’t matter because “most black people hated gays” and he was “wrong” to think we had compassion.

Rod 2.0 via Pam’s House Blend via Gateway Pundit

Pam’s comment sticks with me:

You could see this coming, and this is what I’m talking about when you ignore the elephant in the room.

No nation in history has been able to ignore ethnicity, and we haven’t yet come across a case of successful pluralism/multiculturalism/multiethnicism.

Americans want to vote this problem away, which contributes to the successes of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama in the polls. It will be interesting to see how this develops.

As an observer, I hope that politics does not decline into racial epithets, because that obscures discussion of the real issues.

Trade unions want the right under UK law to expel British National Party activists – and deny them membership – as part of Labour plans to check the electoral advance of the far right.

Labour backbenchers, supported by all the biggest unions, will unveil the plan on Tuesday when they put forward an amendment to the Employment Bill that would allow them to ban racists. The proposal – labelled ‘Stalinist’ by the BNP – comes amid concern that it could win as many as three seats in next year’s European Parliament elections and make strong gains in council elections.

Labour MPs, many of whom feel threatened by the BNP’s advances in their constituencies, are concerned that the party is encouraging activists to infiltrate unions in order to spread subversive, racist messages in the workplace.

The Guardian

Looks like the far right is stirring up the UK, which wouldn’t happen unless there was some appeal to the electorate.

Japan was “snared in a trap that was very carefully laid by the United States in order to draw Japan into a war,” he writes. “Roosevelt had become president on his public pledge not to go to war, so in order to start a war between the United States and Japan, it had to appear that Japan took the first shot. Japan was caught in Roosevelt’s trap and carried out the attack on Pearl Harbor.”

Japan has struggled to convince Asian critics – and victims – of its contrition because of a strong nationalist presence in the Japanese government. Last year, a group of nationalist lawmakers from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party angered China by saying the death toll in the Rape of Nanking was grossly inflated.

Gen. Tamogami’s essay won a writing competition organized by a hotel and condominium developer, Apa Group, which published the article.

Globe and Mail

I did a little research and found that it’s not just far-right Japanese generals who think this:

In the late nineteenth century, Japan’s economy began to grow and to industrialize rapidly. Because Japan has few natural resources, many of the burgeoning industries had to rely on imported raw materials, such as coal, iron ore or steel scrap, tin, copper, bauxite, rubber, and petroleum. Without access to such imports, many of which came from the United States or from European colonies in southeast Asia, Japan’s industrial economy would have ground to a halt. By engaging in international trade, however, the Japanese had built a moderately advanced industrial economy by 1941.

{ snip }

When Franklin D. Roosevelt became president in 1933, the U.S. government fell under the control of a man who disliked the Japanese and harbored a romantic affection for the Chinese because, some writers have speculated, Roosevelt’s ancestors had made money in the China trade.[1] Roosevelt also disliked the Germans (and of course Adolf Hitler), and he tended to favor the British in his personal relations and in world affairs. He did not pay much attention to foreign policy, however, until his New Deal began to peter out in 1937.

{ snip }

When Germany began to rearm and to seek Lebensraum aggressively in the late 1930s, the Roosevelt administration cooperated closely with the British and the French in measures to oppose German expansion. After World War II commenced in 1939, this U.S. assistance grew ever greater and included such measures as the so-called destroyer deal and the deceptively named Lend-Lease program. In anticipation of U.S. entry into the war, British and U.S. military staffs secretly formulated plans for joint operations. U.S. forces sought to create a war-justifying incident by cooperating with the British navy in attacks on German U-boats in the north Atlantic, but Hitler refused to take the bait, thus denying Roosevelt the pretext he craved for making the United States a full-fledged, declared belligerent—an end that the great majority of Americans opposed.

{ snip }

Accordingly, the Roosevelt administration, while curtly dismissing Japanese diplomatic overtures to harmonize relations, imposed a series of increasingly stringent economic sanctions on Japan. In 1939 the United States terminated the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan. “On July 2, 1940, Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials.” Under this authority, “[o]n July 31, exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and No. 1 heavy melting iron and steel scrap were restricted.” Next, in a move aimed at Japan, Roosevelt slapped an embargo, effective October 16, “on all exports of scrap iron and steel to destinations other than Britain and the nations of the Western Hemisphere.” Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt “froze Japanese assets in the United States, thus bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end. One week later Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan.”[2] The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan from their colonies in southeast Asia.

{ snip }

Because American cryptographers had also broken the Japanese naval code, the leaders in Washington knew as well that Japan’s “measures” would include an attack on Pearl Harbor.[4] Yet they withheld this critical information from the commanders in Hawaii, who might have headed off the attack or prepared themselves to defend against it. That Roosevelt and his chieftains did not ring the tocsin makes perfect sense: after all, the impending attack constituted precisely what they had been seeking for a long time.

The Freeman

Economic warfare was used to provoke outright warfare, which allowed the USA to appear as the injured party even though its passive aggression had provoked the crisis.