The Age of White Masochism



The Fjordman Report

The Age of White Masochism

Imagine if you planned a country's economic future using calculations
exclusively based on even numbers. For ideological reasons you
excluded odd numbers because you declared that they represent bigotry
and have divisive nature since they cannot be divided equally in half.
Absolutely all calculations for the future would then end up being
wrong. This sounds insane and improbable, but what we're doing now in
the Western world is exactly this naïve. In the name of
Multiculturalism we completely ignore all ethnic, religious, cultural
and, yes, racial differences, because we have decided that these
things don't matter. But in real life, ethnicity, culture, religion
and race do matter. Doesn't that mean that all our projections for the
future by necessity will end up being wrong, since they fail to take
important factors into account?

Policy needs to be rooted in a realistic assessment of human nature,
not in wishful thinking. Good intentions are far from sufficient to
ensure good results. History is full of well-intended policies gone
horrible wrong. We know from past experience that basing an
ideological world view on a fundamentally flawed understanding of
human nature is bound to end in disaster. Society will become more and
more totalitarian in order to suppress all the information that
doesn't conform to the official ideology. Isn't this what is happening
in the West now?

I used to believe until quite recently that skin color was irrelevant.
I was brought up that way. I still don't think ethnicity or race does
or should mean everything. In fact, I would say it is patently
uncivilized to claim that it means everything. But I can no longer say
with a straight face that it means absolutely nothing, and if it means
more than nothing, it needs to be taken into account. Whether we like
this or not is immaterial.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that people tend to prefer their
own ethnic group above others. An international poll in 2007 showed
that 90 percent of the inhabitants in Egypt, Indonesia and India
believed that each country should guard their innate culture and
lifestyle. Immigration concerned people in 44 out of the 47 countries.

Guarding your identity is thus a universal human trait, not a white
trait. In fact, it is less pronounced among whites today than among
anybody else. Only whites cling onto the idea of universalism,
everybody else sticks with their own ethnic group. In white majority
Western nations it has become a state-sponsored ideology to "celebrate
diversity," despite the fact that all available evidence indicates
that more diversity leads to more conflict.

Ayman al-ZawahriIn May 2007, Osama bin Laden's deputy terrorist leader
Ayman al-Zawahri stated that "Al-Qaida is not merely for the benefit
of Muslims. That's why I want blacks in America, people of color,
American Indians, Hispanics, and all the weak and oppressed in North
and South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world."

Read that statement closely. This Jihadist organization is calling for
a global war against whites. Not Christians or Jews. Whites. I have
been told all of my life that skin color is irrelevant, but this
balancing act gets a lot more difficult when somebody declares war
against you because of your race.

According to the columnist Leo McKinstry, the British government has
declared war on white English people:

In the name of cultural diversity, Labour attacks anything that
smacks of Englishness. The mainstream public are treated with
contempt, their rights ignored, their history trashed. In their own
land, the English are being turned into second-class citizens.


Keith Best, head of the Immigration Advisory Service, stated that
immigrants are "better citizens" than native Britons. Matthew Elliott
of the Taxpayers' Alliance pressure group was shocked and replied that
"Taxpayers shouldn't be funding an outfit that describes them as being
second-rate citizens." But apparently, now they do.

DNA studies have proved that a significant majority of those who live
in the British Isles today are descended directly from the Ice Age
hunters, despite the Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Norman invasions.
This accounts for 88% of the Irish, 81% of the Welsh, 70% of the Scots
and 68% of the English.

Kill those who insult the prophetThe UK Commission for Racial Equality
in 1996 claimed that "everyone who lives in Britain today is either an
immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant." But if everybody is an
immigrant, how come people of European stock in the Americas and
Australia are still viewed as alien elements by some, even though many
of them have lived there for centuries? As Professor David Conway
demonstrates in his book A Nation Of Immigrants?, after the invasion
led by William the Conqueror in 1066, the total number of Norman
settlers in Britain was never more than five per cent of the
population. The inflow now is 25 times any previous level and
frequently from totally alien cultures, not from neighboring
territories and cultural cousins as previously.

I'm sure the English are told that this is a result of colonialism,
but there are no Britons left in Pakistan, so why should there be
Pakistanis in Britain? The Germans had a colony in Namibia. Why should
they accept millions of Turks, who have a thousand years of extremely
brutal colonial history of their own, because of this? There are not
many Dutch people left in Indonesia, so why should the Dutch be
rendered a minority in their major cities by Moroccans and others? And
why should European countries such as Portugal, Spain and Greece,
which have all suffered from centuries of Islamic colonization, have
to accept Muslims into their lands? Switzerland, Sweden, Finland and
Norway hardly have any colonial history at all, yet are still subject
to mass immigration. The truth is that immigration policies bear
little correlation to past colonialist history, population density or
size. Ireland, Denmark, Britain, France, Sweden, Italy, Germany and
the Netherlands have one, and only one, thing in common: The natives
are white, and thereby have no legitimate claim to their own
countries.

Ida Magli: Omaggio agli italianiAs Professor Ida Magli writes in an
Italian essay entitled A Nation for Sale: "Why can't we protest? Why
aren't we allowed what every people has always had the right to say,
that is that no ruler, whatever the system of government - monarchy,
dictatorship, democracy - has either the power or the right to sell
off the homeland of their own subjects?"

The columnist Kevin Myers in Ireland thinks that no country has ever
accepted, never mind assimilated, the volumes of immigrants now
present in his country:
- - - - - - - - -

Why the presumption that an Asian Muslim who lives in Ireland is
in any way Irish? My mother lived most of her life in England, but
never for a second thought of herself as English. The media should be
asking the big question, 'Why are we still admitting hundreds of
thousands of immigrants?' Instead, we are obsessing with the
relatively trivial question of: Are the Irish people, who after all
have admitted vast armies of strangers to their national home, racist?
This is self-hatred at its most pathetic, and its most self-defeating.


Rune GerhardsenRune Gerhardsen of the Labor Party in Oslo, the son of
Norway's longest-serving Prime Minister in history, states that "When
I went to school we were taught about the Great Migrations. Today's
migrations are just as big. This is part of an international trend we
neither can nor want to stop. I think this development is first and
foremost exciting and positive." He likes to say that we have lived
for 10,000 years without anybody visiting us. Now we've had a massive
change within an extremely brief historical period of time.

I will give Gerhardsen credit for frankly admitting that this is by
far the greatest demographic change in our nation's history since the
end of the last Ice Age. The problem is, this change, which has
already made the country a lot less safe than it was only a generation
ago, has been conducted without real debate, solely with propaganda
and censorship. And I'm not so sure all of these groups have come
merely to "visit" us. Some of them are here to colonize and subdue us,
and readily admit this if you care to listen to them.

According to the writer Kent Andersen, the greatest social experiment
the population has ever been subject to was never decided
democratically. The native majority were never allowed to have a say
about whether they wanted to change the country forever. In his view,
you don't get mass immigration for decades unless somebody with power
allows this and desires it.

During the Multicultural craze of the 1990s, novelist Torgrim Eggen in
an essay entitled "The psychotic racism" warned against "race wars in
the streets" as a result of mass immigration. The solution to this was
not to limit immigration, but to limit criticism of immigration.
According to Eggen, xenophobia and opposition to mass immigration
should be viewed as a mental illness, and hence "the solution to this
xenophobia is that you should distribute medication to those who are
seriously affected. I have discussed this with professor of community
medicine, Dr. Per Fugelli, and he liked the idea." Mr Fugelli
suggested putting anti psychotic drugs in the city's drinking water.

This may sound too extreme to be meant seriously, but Mr. Fugelli has
continued to publicly chastise those who are critical of national
immigration policies. Eggen warned that arguments about how ordinary
people are concerned over mass immigration shouldn't be accepted
because this could lead to Fascism: "One should be on one's guard
against people, especially politicians, who invoke xenophobia on
behalf of others. And if certain people start their reasoning with
phrases such as 'ordinary people feel that,' one shouldn't argue at
all, one should hit [them]."

RinkebyRepeated violence committed by non-white immigrants against
whites is dismissed because they come from "weak groups." But whites
are a weak group. We are a rapidly shrinking global minority, and
Nordic-looking Scandinavians are a minority of a minority. Ethnologist
Maria Bäckman in her study "Whiteness and gender" followed a group of
Swedish girls in the immigrant-dominated suburb of Rinkeby outside
Stockholm. Several of the native girls stated that they had dyed their
hair to avoid harassment and being called "whore." We thus already now
have a situation where being blond in certain areas of Sweden, not
just in Pakistan or Egypt, makes you a target of harassment and
aggression.

In my country, the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud from 2006
made Multiculturalism and total non-discrimination into an official
state ideology. If a Muslim immigrant claims that a native has somehow
discriminated against him, the native non-Muslim has to mount proof of
his own innocence. I have later discovered that similar laws have been
passed across much of Western Europe, encouraged by the European
Union.

Native Europeans are being told that we don't have a history and a
culture, and that we thus "gain" a culture when others move to our
countries. This is an insult to thousands of years of European
history, to the Celtic, Germanic, Slavic and cultures and the Greco-
Roman and Judeo-Christian heritage all Westerners share in. The funny
part is, the next second we are told that we do have a culture, but it
consists of nothing but a long line of crimes and is thus nothing to
preserve, anyway.

My nation doesn't even have a colonial history. It gained its
independence as late as the twentieth century, at which point it was a
poor country, yet because I am white, I am to be held personally
responsible for every bad act, perceived or real, committed by every
person who happens to have roughly similar skin color throughout
history. American novelist Susan Sontag even stated that "The white
race is the cancer of human history." I am told that I am evil
specifically because of my race, and five minutes later I'm told that
race doesn't matter.

I do not hold Abdullah who sells kebab down on the corner personally
responsible for sacking Constantinople, abducting millions of
Europeans to slavery, colonizing the Iberian Peninsula, ruining the
Balkans or threatening Vienna several times. I criticize Islam because
Muslims have never admitted their past and will continue to commit
atrocities as long as the institution of Jihad is alive. I do not
believe in collective responsibility, and I do not think a person
should be held responsible for actions made by his ancestors centuries
ago.

On the other hand, if I am to take the blame, personally, for every
bad act, perceived or real, committed by any white person in the past,
it is only fair that I, personally, should also take credit for their
achievements. It was peoples of European stock who created the modern
world, not anybody else. If I am to be held personally responsible for
colonialism, I want personal credit for being a part of the one
civilization that has taken the greatest strides for mankind of any
civilization that has ever existed on this planet. I'm done with
apologizing for my existence for the nameless crime of being born
white.

As African-American writer Elizabeth Wright says:

After decades of inundation about the evils of 'white racism'
coming from all directions, and most especially from the media and
education establishments, the average white is programmed to avoid
anything that smacks of conscious endorsement of his own race. In the
current social climate, to display favorable regard towards that which
is white, not only is forbidden, but is viewed as an automatic
disparagement of non-whites. A 'White Pride' T-shirt is deemed a
threatening symbol, whereas a 'Black Supremacy' slogan on a button or
garment is viewed as an understandable, albeit angry response to
undeserved past abuses. Any public effort to promote a white theme is
doomed to failure, even if the proper bows to racial diversity are
adhered to. Whites learn early to censor themselves.


I've been told by Americans that they have moved beyond race, but
judging from examples such as this, it looks more as if they have
established a culture of institutionalized white masochism. It's not
that Americans have moved beyond race, it's just that the whites have
unilaterally surrendered. The United States was almost 90% white as
late as 1965, and will be minority white within a couple of
generations. I don't know of any example where the formerly dominant
group has become a minority and this has not resulted in a complete
change of the nature of that country, or to its dissolution, but in
the USA, this entire subject is taboo because it is "racist." That's
not rational.

Highway into the heart of EuropeI have listened to claims regarding
the supposed benefits of mass immigration, why it is inevitable and
why those who resist are bad people. The propaganda is remarkably
similar from the Netherlands via Britain to Sweden and Italy, and
that's not a coincidence. This is all happening as a coordinated and
well-planned assault on established national cultures, organized by
the European Union and supported by the national political and media
elites.

It has happened many times that a people move into an area and subdue
those living there, but the natives have at least been allowed to
defend themselves. It is unprecedented in the annals of history that a
people is banned by their own leaders from defending their lands from
foreign colonization and are even expected to fund this colonization.
It is one of the greatest crimes of our age that the indigenous people
of an entire continent, at least the Western half of it, are
systematically deprived of their heritage, their history, their land
and ultimately perhaps their entire physical existence, all with the
active aid of the very individuals who are supposed to protect their
interests. The only reason why this is considered positive, or even
remotely acceptable, is because the natives in this case are white.
There is no other reason for this.

Mohammad SarwarIn Glasgow, Scotland, Kriss Donald, a 15-year-old
totally innocent white schoolboy was abducted, stabbed repeatedly and
then doused in petrol and burned to death by a group of Pakistani
immigrants. Labour politician Mohammad Sarwar, who helped in bringing
some of the men to justice, later became the first elected
representative in Britain to step down due to threats against his
family.

The established historical pattern is that people who are conquered by
others are harassed by the newcomers. I don't see any reason to expect
this to be different just because the natives happen to be white. On
the contrary. We will be attacked even more viciously because we are a
formerly dominant group. When we are told that mass immigration is
"inevitable," we are actually being told that verbal and physical
abuse of out children is inevitable and that we should "get used to
it." I see no reason to accept that. If mass immigration leads to
harassment of my children, it is my duty to resist it.

Jews were once told to "get back to Palestine." When they did, they
were told to "get out of Palestine." The people who said this didn't
object to where Jews lived, they objected to the fact that they
existed at all. I sometimes wonder whether whites of European descent,
a global minority, are the Jews of the 21st century. I also notice
that while people of European descent are told to "get back to Europe"
in North America or Australia, whites in Europe are demonized if they
resist being turned into a minority in their own countries. The
problem then, apparently, isn't where whites live, it's that we exist
at all.

Observer Ole Kulterstad notes that Europeans who are against free
migration are labeled as "right-wing extremists." But common sense
indicates that giving away your country to alien cultures is more
extreme than merely wanting to preserve it as it once was. I agree
with him. I'm sick of hearing how Islamic organizations that want to
destroy my civilization are called "moderates," whereas Westerners are
extremists if we resist, yet that is exactly what our media and our
authorities do. We are not extremists; we are subject to policies that
are extreme. Is gradually reducing a people to a minority in their own
land, without proper debate about future consequences, not to be
regarded as extreme?

I hear some writers fear an extremist backlash in Europe, but if
people are so concerned about white extremism then they should cease
creating the foundations for such extremism to grow. Native Europeans
increasingly get the feeling that they are pushed into a corner and
have an entirely justifiable fear of being overwhelmed. Fear leads to
desperation, and desperation sometimes leads to aggression. If we do
get an outbreak of political movements in Europe that really are
extremist - and I sometimes fear this outcome, too - this will not
come about because white Europeans are born evil, it will come about
because white Europeans will be pushed into extremism, feel that their
continued existence is at stake and that they have been abandoned by
their own authorities. The solution to this is simply to recognize
that Western nations have accepted more immigration from alien
cultures in a shorter period of time than any other civilization has
done peacefully in history. We have reached our limits and we need a
break from mass immigration before our entire political and economic
system breaks down.

The idea that every white person who desires self-determination and
self-preservation is a racist, a white supremacist and a Nazi is
nonsense and should flatly be rejected. The vast majority of racist
violence in Western nations is by non-whites attacking whites.
Consequently, if we limit immigration this is anti-racism, since we
are protecting our children against racist violence. It is not about
white supremacy, either, it is about equality. Whites are currently
the only racial group specifically denied the opportunity to defend
their countries and heritage. If we assert our right to do so we are
thus fighting for equality, not supremacy.

The "Nazi" accusations so carelessly thrown out these days are
completely baseless in this context. The Nazis believed that whites,
and blondes in particular, had the right to colonize or eradicate
others. But the policy we follow today could be dubbed reversed Nazism
since it is based on the assumption that whites should have fewer
rights than others and can be colonized or culturally eradicated with
impunity. I don't see why I should either be a "Nazi" or embrace and
celebrate my extinction. It's a false choice.

I suspect future historians will call this era the Age of White
Masochism. The white man conquered the world and then suffered a
nervous breakdown, a kind of collective neurosis shared by an entire
civilization. However, I sense that this era is slowly coming to an
end.

I would use two arguments as to why the current mass immigration the
West should be halted:

1. Whites, too, have a right to exist. The primary duty you have as
a human being is to preserve the heritage of your ancestors and pass
on to your children a country they can call their own and where they
can live in dignity.

2. The ongoing immigration is population dumping where less
successful cultures dump their population in more successful ones.
This is a form of global Communism and will generate the same effects
by destroying successful communities and centers of excellence.

I believe whites in the 21st century should desire a room of our own
where we can prosper, live in a major Western city without having to
fear violence because of our race, and without being stripped of our
heritage in order to placate people who moved to our countries out of
their own free will. We have the right to preserve our heritage and
are under no obligation to commit collective suicide or serve as a
dumping ground for other countries. It has nothing to do with
animosity towards others. For my part, I am being entirely honest if I
say that I still love visiting other cultures, but I will love this
even more if I know I can also return to my own.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/10/age-of-white-masochism.html

.

Loading