Tag Archives: patriotards

Should we be concerned about overpopulation?

I’m somewhere in-between the hardcore Malthusian misanthropists, who’d like to see 90+ per cent of the world’s population be exterminated, and the humanists who dismiss concerns over overpopulation as alarmist. I feel strongly that everyone should be living on a diet that is organically or biodynamically grown, raised, or produced on small family farms, or is hunted or fished in the wild. The problem is, the world’s population can’t be fed in this manner at the size it is right now.

We currently have a system that seeks to maximize yields at the expense of quality, and that system is going to continue to exist as long as there are so many hungry mouths to feed.

When Alex Jones and his ilk claim the New World Order elites have an agenda to exterminate the bulk of the world’s population, they are precisely inverting the truth; all one has to do is look at population statistics for a continent like Africa to see that the numbers there over the last hundred years have been steadily rising, not dropping. The New World Order wants more hungry mouths to feed, not less, since more mouths represent greater profits.

The only slice of the world’s population which is slated for extermination is the white race, as is made abundantly clear by our declining birth rates, the immigration policies our elites have imposed on us, the campaign to promote race-mixing, casual sex, homosexuality, and feminism, and the introduction of feminizing substances into our food supply, such as soy in baby formula.

Conservatives are pathetic

“Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.” –attributed to Aristotle

More evidence of how gelded conservatives are:
http://www.cassyfiano.com/2009/03/abc-shocked-to-find-that-americans-are-actually-tolerant

Instead of bemoaning the fact that no one had the cojones to throw those obnoxious fudgepackers out on their disease-ridden keesters, she takes pride in how “tolerant” (tolerant meaning cowardly) the middle-American patrons of the bar were. Is it any wonder conservatives have been unable to stop the disintegration of white societies when they accept all the tacit ground rules laid down by their supposed adversaries, in this case the assumption that public displays of homosexuality should be tolerated?

The only thing she gets halfway right is that, yes, the mainstream media does have an agenda to normalize and promote homosexuality, though she avoids going into exactly why the media has been pursuing this agenda for the last few decades.

But hey, at least she’s cute and fills out a bikini real nice…

Conservawhore Cassy Fiano in a swimsuit

A photo of Cassy Fiano in a bikini which is prominently displayed on her blog

You have to wonder if conservatism isn’t so washed-up at this point that it’s resorting to sex appeal (bikinis, former beauty queens) to keep men on board.

Individualism versus Collectivism

I just read Edgar J. Steele’s latest “Nickel Rant,” titled Anarchy With Honor, in which he tries to reduce politics to being a conflict between “collectivists” and “individualists.” This is a concept that’s been heavily promoted over the years by the John Birch Society (a jewish false front, sometimes humorously referred to as the B’nai Birch), especially ex-JBS member G. Edward Griffin (of Creature from Jekyll Island fame).

I’m wary of people who try to divide the world between “collectivists” and “individualists” for the following reasons:

1. Because it is impossible to live in a society — any society — without giving up at least some of one’s individual freedom, and without society, one cannot survive. That’s why societies exist in the first place — to ensure our survival. If anyone wants to dispute that, then try this — get yourself airdropped naked in the middle of a wild terrain, and see how long you last. Not even Unabomber Ted Kaczynski was able to live in the wild by himself without occasionally going into town to pick up supplies.

Most people find giving up some of their individual liberties in exchange for roads, clean tap water, cheap electricity, national security, public decency, etc., to be an acceptable trade-off. So it’s not really a question of “collectivism” versus “individualism”; it’s more a matter of what degree of “collectivism” you’re willing to accept in exchange for the perceived benefits.

2. Because the collectivist/individualist paradigm is constantly used to attack white nationalism. The people who embrace this dichotomy view any sort of white racial consciousness as a form of “collectivism” (which it is). If you view people strictly as individuals, then it is not possible to view them as members of racial or ethnic groups. Case in point — I had a white lady, a lesbian, who fanatically believed in all this JBS “collectivist vs individualist” baloney, stubbornly refuse to accept that blacks commit more violent crimes than whites, or that society even has a right to look at whether or not they do. After all, we’re only supposed to judge people as individuals, not according to which race they belong to, right? I’m sorry, but any world-view that requires its adherents to deny reality cannot be good. The “collectivist vs individualist” paradigm almost seems like a secular version of Christianity’s universalism — that every human has a soul and that every individual should only be judged by whether or not he is a good Christian.

Going back to point #1, I maintain that racial collectivism is necessary for our survival, and that anyone who attacks it while promoting “individualism” is either consciously or unconsciously a tool of the New World Order, whose primary goal is the creation of a global plantation filled with rootless, uniformly brown people (ironically, the people who are pushing for this New World Order say they are in favor of “diversity,” when what they are actually trying to do is destroy it).

What those who are concerned about personal freedom (including many so-called “fascists” and “nazis”) ought to oppose is tyranny and despotism, not “collectivism” per se. Collectivism is unavoidable and necessary, and fighting against it is as futile as fighting against the air we breathe.

Patriotard talk radio host Jason Bermas defends La Raza

“Determined conspiracy-hunters will accept practically any crackpot theory on which to base their futile speculations but the real conspiracy, which is staring them in the face, is taboo.” —Simon Sheppard

“For the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing.” –Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA)

Gringos Go Home

Patriotard radio talk show host Jason Bermas, filling in for Alex Jones today, responded to a caller’s suggestion that La Raza might be a racist organization* by stating that in his opinion, it wouldn’t be fair to classify most of La Raza‘s membership as racist. These were his exact words:

“What La Raza stands for at the upper echelons … is absurd. But at the lower levels, people don’t understand what it is. […] They don’t understand that it’s all corrupt at the top. They don’t understand what the real message is. I don’t want to say every member of La Raza is automatically a racist. I would say every member of La Raza that doesn’t realize that there’s race implications and race bias is ignorant. And there are some at the top that are openly racist.”

Race “implications”? Only “some” are openly racist? The Spanish phrase La Raza literally means “the race” and refers to Chicanos (mestizos of Mexican origin living in the United States). La Raza is an explicitly racialist organization and movement. Every member at every level fully understands this; I mean, their movement is called “the race,” fer crying out loud! How much more obvious can it get? Stop lying to your listeners, you gutless patriotard snake oil salesman.

Watch a video of La Raza in action.

He who pays the piper calls the tune. Find out who pays Alex Jones’s bills.

Support real alternative media, like October Sun Films [link now dead] (who produced the documentary from which the video clip above was taken), New Century Productions, or the websites in my blogroll. Don’t give your money to hucksters like Alex Jones and Jason Bermas. Contrary to one of their slogans, patriotard broadcasters don’t think you’re intelligent enough to “handle the truth,” as evidenced by Jason Bermas’s whitewash of La Raza.

* La Raza can refer to the National Council de La Raza, but it also refers more generally to the La Raza movement to take over the Southwestern United States (or Reconquista, as its adherents call it).