Unassimilated White Minorities

GuessedWorker wrote:

No, sorry, [Jewish behaviour] is not normal. That’s not how the Irish minority behaves. . . . That’s not how the English behave in expat communities.

In his The Dispossessed Majority, Wilmot Robertson documents the special role played by unassimilated white minorities in the subversion and cultural degeneration of America. The Irish, the Italians, French Canadians, and the Jews are subjected to criticism, some of it merited. In my opinion, if one group must be singled out for especial criticism, it would be due to the decisiveness of its influence in the equalitarian subversion of the West. But no group has been especially decisive.

Joe wrote:

Jews are genetically middle eastern. If we can have Jewish White Nationalists, why not Arab white nationalists or Persian white nationalists or Kurdish white nationalists?

I don’t subscribe to the idea that all Caucaoids are ‘white’. But it should still be understood that Europeans and Near Easterners cannot be distinguished from one another as belonging to altogether different races; only a different distribution of subraces are represented in Europe and the Near East. Jews are derived from a subtype in the Near East which of all non-European populations most closely approximates the European type; Syrians and the Lebanese may be given as other examples, also originating in the same area. Moreover, the Jews, even before settling in Europe, were subjected to selective influences favouring intelligence, distinguishing them from neighbouring peoples. Subsequently they migrated to Europe where they were subjected to further selective pressures favouring intelligence. They also practiced a certain amount of outbreeding, low in frequency but significant in its accumulated genetic effects. The result is a group of a people racially indistinguishible from other Europeans.

A reader at Majority Rights queried:

"Can Jobling name any prominent member of [the Jewish community] who overtly supports a strict white ethnostate - even if by 'white' we explicitly include Jews?"

Unhappily, people with racialist sympathies, Jewish or Gentile, rarely ascend to positions of great prominence in our society, except for achievements made prior to enunciating their beliefs about race (e.g. William Shockley); the forces working against them in politics, the press, and the communications media being too powerful. But there are many Jews who have attained some prominence within their own narrow spheres, individuals with whom all advocates of a white ethnostate should have a sympathic regard. Rabbi Mayer Schiller, Michael Hart, Lawrence Auster, Michael Levin, and Robert Weissberg may be given as examples. In an enlightened community, liberated from the fetters of white guilt, these men would be nationally syndicated columnists, best selling authors, frequent guests on national news and public affairs programmes, and I know not what else; in a society dominated by liberals and equalitarians, such thinkers will remain relatively obscure. And then there are those, though not open advocates of a white ethnostate, whose scientific work, if well meditated and followed to its logical implications, provides a scientific justification for the same. I have in mind Arthur Jensen [a Jew on his maternal side; see page 8 of Frank Miele's Conversions with Arthur Jensen for confirmation], Richard Hernnstein [coauthor of The Bell Curve], Hans Eynseck [author of The Inequality of Man, among other works critical of race equality], and several others. But I say this parenthically because these writers are primarily interested in the scientific aspect of the race question, not its political implications.

The white ethnostate is something which is only politically feasible in the U.S., a nation in which whites of diverse origins have had to define themselves in contrast to the Amerindid and Negrid races. In Amerca I favour the establishment of a white ethnostate (though with an Anglo-Saxon cultural core), whereas in Europe I believe that smaller, less inclusive ethnostates are preferable.

A racialist comments on my views

A reader wrote:

"European nationalist are not racialist; they are culturalist. European nationalists are similar to the patriotards you find in the USA."

It is better to reach millions of people with a watered-down nationalism which seeks to halt non-European immigration, though only for 'cultural reasons', than to reach a few hundred people with the unadulterated version.

For the sake of argument, let’s grant that Jewish influence has been decisive in the promotion of multiculturalism, equalitarianism, and cultural degeneracy. What is the purpose of charging the Jews with instigating the Civil Rights movement when it is regarded as one of the great achievements of American history? What is the point of telling Howard Stern fans or Jerry Seinfeld fans that these individuals are Jews; something everyone knows? Why should white people care about the machinations of the Jews unless they already have an awareness of themselves as a race with its own distinct interests?

First whites must accept the fact that race is the foundation on which our social, cultural, and intellectual life is built. Any profound shift in the racial foundation of society will lead inevitably to the transformation of the immense sociocultural superstructure that we call Western civilisation. So long as whites accept the notion that culture may be divorced from its organic foundation, they have no reason to oppose anything that the Jews are allegedly plotting.

If antisemites truly cared about the white race, they would focus more on promoting race realism than inciting antisemitism. As it stand, they perform a great service to the liberal-minority coalition by lending credence to the false notion that pro-whites are a bunch of cranks and neo-Nazis.