Tuesday, 16 June 2009

Suicide or homicide? Genocide can come slowly

Yesterday evening I posted a link to a posting by Reconquista regarding what he perceived as the suicide of the white race. I think Reconquista is an interesting writer, and whether our not you agree with what he writes, he certainly argues his case well.

I note that some of you felt that he was blaming Christianity for the destruction of the white race, which is not how I read what he wrote, albeit some of the attitudes he described might have their roots in certain Christian philosophy. Given the influence which Christianity has had, and still has, on all areas of Western culture, mostly for the good, it is entirely possible to find means of holding it accountable for almost anything, both good and bad.

To give an alternative explanation for what is going on, lets put suicide to one side and consider whether what we are, in fact seeing is a gradual homicide.

I am not sure whether I subscribe to either view, but would draw your attention to the following interesting fact:

In 1943, a legal scholar by the name of Raphael Lemkin coined the term “genocide”. He said the following:

"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation.

It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.

The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of personal security, liberty, health, dignity and lives of the members of such groups. "

"Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization by the oppressor's own nationals."

He also outlined his various observed "techniques" on achieving genocide which included:

  • Political
  • Social
  • Cultural
  • Economic
  • Biological
  • Physical:
  • Endangering Health
  • Mass Killing
  • Religious
  • Moral


Hat Tim SA Sucks


Anonymous said...


I would very much like to thank you for your kind words and for your objectivity regarding this essay.

I am glad I popped over here - I didn't know you had a blog, doh! - and the response to the essay is enlightening.

What has captured my imagination is the similarity between how pious Liberal-Multiculturalists and Christians react to any criticism. That this essay was not about Christianity but one aspect - the pity it projects on the weak and how MARXISTS have knowingly deployed this - is ignored.

Do I really have to spell out that I support the BNP, a party dedicated to restoring the values of Christianity that made the West so strong? Lamentable indeed that it appears I do.

Better to put fingers in the ears "la la la la not listening". Is this what passes for debate with Christians now? If so, it is even clearer to me how the collapse of the west has occurred and I intend to elaborate on this in future essays.

I also note with interest the issue about "how we don't understand love". This is another anti-nature childish fantasy, very similar to the "we're all equal" nonsense spouted by pious liberals. They are both two sides of the same worthless coin and it is way past tea for whites to stop believing this lunacy and realised that other races and cultures hate them and will never ever love them no matter how much pity and love Christians show them. This is not a game of piety and righteousness be assured of that.

Nietzsche had many failings but his assessment of the pity of Christianity I believe is accurate and is being exploited to the max by Marxists. And overly-sensitive Christians had better wake up fast to it or there won't be a Christian religion which will be a tragedy IMVHO.

Your honoured and proud kinsman,


kerdasi amaq said...

Love your own, hate your enemies and don't forget race traitors.

The time for talking is over!

Dr.D said...

Recon, you said, "
I also note with interest the issue about "how we don't understand love". This is another anti-nature childish fantasy, very similar to the "we're all equal" nonsense spouted by pious liberals.:"

You seemed to have missed my point altogether. It is the Christian call to love that has been misinterpreted and has led to bringing large numbers of third world people into the West and other similar disasters. As Christians, we are definitely under the command to love, but we have to correctly understand what it means. There is nothing "anti-nature" or "childish" or "fantastic" about that at all. It is a fact of the Christian faith. You say that other races will not return that love, and you are probably correct, but that does not release us from the obligation, as Christians to love them. But we have to understand what loving them means, and that is what I was talking about, the point you did not bother to pick up on at all.

Jeff ( Va. Rebel ) said...

You can just delete this Sarah. Just wanted to point out, unless you had purposes not readily apparent to my thick head - the title of your post ... I thought it was gonna be something about something like - Death by prostitution
(hoicide) ... but then again, a case could be built in an analytical manner. If the shoe fits ...

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks Jeff

I have corrected the title!! I usually run a spell check before posting, but must have forgotten to do so this time.


Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Hi Reconquista

I was surprised by the reaction to your post, I linked to the article as I found it very impressive. However. I have a slightly different readership than the Green Arrow, and perspectives differ.

As you know I am a fan of your writing, which I find fascinating, and quite compelling, especially your writing on Islam.

Christianity is always a sensitive issue, however, as I said said I didn't view what you wrote as an attack on Christianity. I am sure that, even those who did, will have found your argument for the suicidal flaw in the modern white psyche extremely well made, as I did.


Anonymous said...

Dr D:

I understood your point fully.You say:

"but that does not release us from the obligation, as Christians to love them. But we have to understand what loving them means, and that is what I was talking about, the point you did not bother to pick up on at all."

I reject this absolutely, it is suicidal unnatural folly. The time for this nonsense to end is now. No Christian is under any obligation whatsoever to love those who hate them for being Christians just as no white is under any moral obligation to love blacks who hate them for being white and who want to destroy them. This is the pity for others I am describing and what you need to understand is that Christians just like you are doing exactly this in the Middle East and Africa and they are being slaughtered by pitiless and unloving beasts.
There is no virtue in loving your hate-filled enemies whatsoever, it is suicidal.

The white race, all of western civilisation, is in a desperate situation, it really is now us or them and it is going to get worse. You need to hate and fight your enemies or your precious Christianity will die. It's almost dead now as empty churches and churches that are now mosques prove and it doesn't help when Christian clergy call for sharia law in our lands either.

But the essay is not about Christianity and is not an attack on it, something you most certainly did not pick up on.

Kerdasi amaq: Nail on the head.

Sarah: You have understood the essay completely and sadly, there is much more to this flaw as I wll attempt to describe in the next 2-3 essays. My main concern is that time is not on our side. But thanks again for your support and I'm proud to stand alongside you.


Dr.D said...

Recon is anti-Christian. One cannot simply reject the command to love and still claim to be a Christian. It is that simple.

The fact that love is not the mushy, simple, feel-good, bring them all home with you sort of thing, is a distinction he is evidently unwilling to make. I'm not quite sure why, but it seems to be.

But to repeat, we cannot claim to be Christians and reject the command of Jesus Christ to love others. You can say you are being practical, you can say your are being realistic, you can say you are being all manner of things, but you cannot say you are being a Christian if you do that.

Anonymous said...

Dr D

Oh dear, looks like you're accusing me of a hate crime. Look, your religion is on its arse - yes, really - and all you want to do is split hairs about the definition of love. It's a bit like worrying if you've mowed the lawn while your house is ablaze with the wife and kiddies trapped in a 2nd floor bedroom. Fair enough, that's your choice.

But I think your last comment is descending into acrimonious territory I simply do not tread and it therefore signals the end of our debate. Thank you for your responses, very informative, very enlightening and they've fired my imagination and deepened my perspective greatly.

Whatever our differences, my very best wishes to you.


Jeff ( Va. Rebel ) said...

"Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee, and am I not grieved with those that rise up against thee :

I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies."

Psalm 139 : 19 - 20

Words of King David ... the only man I find in scripture where God said ... here is a man after mine own heart.

1 Samuel 13 : 13 - 14
Acts 13 : 22 - 23


Jesus spelled out in 2distinct places just how we were to show Him our love -

"If ye love me, keep my commandments."

John 14 : 15

"Feed my sheep"

John 21 : 15 - 17

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks to everyone you has contributed to this thread and to the earlier one on the same subject, including, Reconquista, Dr D, Jeff (V.A. Rebel)and Vanishing American, all of whom I respect and consider to be friends.

Religion can be a difficult subject, and, although I have a faith, it is not a subject I write about often, or focus on here, and this certainly could not be described as a "Religious blog"

I think that we have rather lost track of the point which Reconquista was making about what appears to be our race's lemming like rush to its own destruction.

That is the main issue, it is the reason this blog exists, and I think it is the issue which unites us all, for let us not forget that we are all on the same side.

When we fight amongst ourselves, we give comfort to those who seek to harm us.