Lawful Constitionalism or Blunt Nationalistic Force?


– 11 June 2016 –


Patulcius-sqVox Day succinctly and passionately sums up the Alt-Right position on Constitutionalism and “Conservatism”:

I think the old conservatives would do well to call themselves Constitutionalists, because it is obvious that the current batch don’t give a damn about it. And neither do we of the #AltRight, because it is obvious that the Constitution has not only failed, completely, by its own stated purpose, but is today being used as a means of hand-cuffing the Right. The #AltRight believes in three things:

  1. Nationalism.
  2. Western civilization.
  3. Winning.

Everything else is negotiable or a means to one of those three ends. We aren’t conservatives. We aren’t philosophers. And we don’t care about the Constitution, the Rights of Man, the Enlightenment, the Holocaust, or anything else with capital letters that is likely to get in the way.

A Constitutionalist can be our ally. A Zionist can be our ally. A National Socialist can be our ally. A Pan-Arabist can be our ally. We don’t care who you are or what you believe, as long as you’re aiming in the direction of the enemies of nationalism and Western civilization.

Not so many years ago, it still seemed feasible to fight the forces of social Marxism lawfully within the structures of our civil society and government. If only we could motivate and organize people, we believed, then we could win power and unravel the damage.

After almost eight years of Obama and his ilk, with their blatant disregard for the law, with the torrent of foreigners growing in our midst, is it now too late to thwart these enemies of civilization using legal, constitutional means?

There are some pipe dreamers who think that Ted Cruz or someone like him could still repair the damage. They decry the tactics of the Alt-Right and of Donald Trump as just as deplorable as those used by the Left. It’s just not the conservative way! We must follow decorum; we must respect the letter of the law!

As others have pointed out, we have already tried it the nice, civilized way. The polite, orderly, and noble ladies and geriatrics of the Tea Party, wonderful people that they are, have thwarted the Marxist advance about as effectively as the victim of a home invasion who threatens to call the police if the thieves and rapists don’t leave this very instant.

Nice guys finish last. We have seen with the Trump candidacy that the power of the Left depends on the meekness of the Right. When the Right refuses to submit, the Left crumples. The only concrete force that the egalitarians possess are their minorities, and the minorities have no loyalty to this country or even to those white liberals who fed and clothed them. Ultimately the white liberals will have to join our side against the angry tide of blacks and browns. And for the moment, whites still outnumber them.

“. . . it is obvious that the Constitution has not only failed, completely, by its own stated purpose, but is today being used as a means of hand-cuffing the Right. . . .  “

It’s sad to say, but the time of the Constitution has passed. Laws mean nothing when criminals run the courts. It’s time for the Right to flush out the criminals with blunt, brutal force.


Clusivius-sqHas it really come to this, Patulcius? Are you ready to throw away two-hundred years of American law, history, and tradition simply because the other side is bending the rules?

The problem with revolutionaries is that they want to blow up the entire house just to fight a fire in the kitchen.

What makes you think that the charred cinders of whatever survives the revolution will be preferable to the situation we have right now? Today’s crisis is not a hopeless situation. We can fix this country without scrapping our liberties.

The hope of a Donald Trump victory is that the people of the United States can unite against the insanity of the last eight years. Even many  liberals and minorities seem to support him.  This bodes well for uniting the country as a whole if Trump wins.

If the invasion of foreigners can be thwarted, then the Constitutionalists can work to restore the integrity of the people in government. Our nation has dealt with corruption before and we can do it again.


Patulcius-sqKeep dreaming, Pee Pee! That’s a lot of ‘ifs’ in your astral scenario! More hope and change!

You seem to forget the array of forces lined up against the restoration of our nation. Not only do we have the lunatic social Marxists and their brown hordes, we have the hostile media, we have the Established powers in government, and we have the international elites who run the world’s economic, banking, and political interests. None of them is going to sit idly by while their handiwork of the past two generations and more is overturned. On top of this, we have a morally perverted populace spoiled rotten through generations of peace and material wealth; how hard do you think they will fight for truth, justice, and the American way? They’d rather watch football and whack off to their iPads.

At best, the hope of a Donald Trump victory—or even his loss—is that the various factions fracture the country into racial and ideological sections, and do it soon enough that we have something viable left of our nation to salvage.


ConcorditasIt’s too early to write off the Constitution, or our country, entirely. We the people on the bottom have to see how events are playing out, prepare the best we can, and patiently but vocally wait. What other choice do we have?

As far as the Alt-Right, while some of them do exhibit a disturbing similarity to the Left, particularly when it comes to issues of social morality, their movement on the whole is a positive development, gaining cultural momentum against the long-uncontested worldview of the Left.

I do have a notion that the political system is now so rigged that the only way to win is to untie one’s hands, keeping the forms of the Constitution as much as possible for the sake of stability, like the transition of the corrupt later Roman Republic to the relative sanity and traditionalism of Augustus’ Empire. The people are now too corrupt and divided to govern otherwise.

The history of the world is driven by one set of elites steering their peoples against those of another elite, or of one shadowy group vying for power against another. They rise and they fall, just like nations as a whole. They are fallible. The corrupt elites of today, powerful as they seem to be, can and do regularly fail. And it’s very possible that they are overplaying their hands with these foreign invasions and tranny obsessions.


Concerning the Jews


– 29 October 2015 –


Patulcius-sqThe best way to destroy one’s credibility in a political argument with the typical man-on-the-street pundit is to speak negatively against the Jews. In the minds of most people, the anti-Jewish argument is then not just lost, but obliterated. It’s likely that the opponent will actually feel a little sick to his stomach at the shock of hearing this verbal attack on God’s chosen people, and he will feel afraid that he is standing in the very presence of evil incarnated. Then the programming from some 70’s sitcom might kick in, and he will self-righteously proclaim, from the depths of his guts, that Nazis like me ought to be thrown in jail.

Well, this article is written as a criticism of Jews. The squeamish should flee.

I don’t intend to present an in-depth analysis here, but I will touch on some general points that persuaded me to accept the fact that Jews, as a group, end up becoming harmful to the nations that harbor them. I will also cover some of the common Jewish themes that have become politicized in the West, such as Zionism and the Holocaust. And I will propose a solution to the problems that Jews have caused.

The Nice Things About Jews

Jews, all 15 or 16 million of them worldwide, form perhaps the most intelligent, cleverest nation of people on Earth. Many anti-Semites dispute this fact, but the evidence seems clear enough to me. In just about every field that Jews have entered in the last 200 years, they have quickly risen to become the top practitioners.

Disproportionate to their numbers, they have excelled as doctors, lawyers, scientists, businessmen, financiers, administrators, educators, and entertainers. This has occurred in every society that has allowed Jews to rise without restriction, and while there must be some force of internal favoritism, there seems little doubt that the Jews advance because they are the cleverest in these fields. And this isn’t some contemporary anomaly; Jews have risen in these fields again and again throughout history and within a variety of civilizations.

Jews are well known for their philanthropy. They have helped the poor and hungry, established hospitals and schools, and contributed countless amounts of money to various worthy causes.

Jews are clever speakers, which is what makes them such excellent lawyers and entertainers.

When Jews act in the interests of their host nation, the nation benefits. Certainly the inventiveness, management, and honest business of Jews have benefited the West tremendously throughout our history, particularly in the past century.

The Not So Nice Things About Jews

Jews tend to simultaneously believe in their own superiority as a people while believing that they are an oppressed minority whose rights are always threatened. From this superiority we see their in-group promotion and their outright hubris in the demands they make to the majority nations in which they live. For instance, Jews account for about 25% of the students at Harvard and Yale when they make up 2% of the general population of the United States, and they complain when that number declines; Jews may be more intelligent, but they’re not that much more intelligent.

Jews feel a cultural responsibility to improve the societies in which they live. While this can take the form of charity and other humane activities, often they strive to culturally engineer society itself in order to meet their ideas of ‘improvement’. By working for these changes, they believe they are achieving some form of moral good.

Jews have an instinctive paranoia about the threat of persecution. They feel most comfortable where no single social entity can dominate (save their own). This manifests itself in their near constant desire to undermine or corrupt the cultures and values of their host peoples. Jewish entertainers make fun of or rebel against the most fundamental institutions of society—namely race, religion, nation, family, and gender—while their political activists demand the ‘reform’ or destruction of these institutions in order to protect an ever-growing list of socio-ethnic minorities. In practice, Jews would create a society composed of tiny social fandoms.


Jews promote open immigration in the countries they influence because they feel more comfortable where no single group can threaten them.

The Jewish facility of speech has greatly aided in their ability to persuade the public to embrace their demands, however much these demands might undermine the society of the majority whom they have persuaded. For example, Congressman Emanuel Celler introduced the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act in the United States in Congress, also known as the Hart-Celler Act.  More than probably any other law that the U.S. has passed in its history, the Immigration Act has endangered the culture of the White majority.

Jews seem to possess, more than other peoples, neurotic and obsessive-compulsive characteristics. On conjecture, this might stem from thousands of years of strict and tedious dietary and religious restrictions.  There is also evidence that they have higher rates of schizophrenia and bipolar disorders.

Jews, especially when they are disconnected from their religious roots, seem particularly vulgar and twisted in their habits and interests. Jews form a disproportionate number of homosexuals, pornographers, and degenerate artists.

Jews seem to be averse to hard manual labor or fighting in wars.  The exception to this, at least the military part, might be found in the state of Israel.

Jewish rapaciousness with money is their most stereotypical trait, and there is great truth to it, the crimes of Bernie Madoff being one of the more notorious recent examples, or even the whole 2008 sub-prime mortgage crisis. And it’s nothing new.  For instance, U.S. Grant, during the Civil War, actually ordered the removal of Jews from the occupied South in response to the swarms of Jewish carpetbaggers that followed the Northern armies in order to pick from the remains of the enemy.  This was perhaps the last of many mass Jewish deportation that were ordered throughout history, most of them made for the same reasons as Grant.


Two thousand years ago the Romans, in response to a revolt against their rule, destroyed the Jewish temple and dispersed the Jews throughout their Empire. Since that time, Jews have lived as a parasitic people, working to exploit their hosts to the benefit of their own people.

Jews, keeping themselves deliberately separate from the peoples around them, combined their natural talents with in-group cohesion. Their host nations, in turn, usually forced the Jews into separation while they exploited the Jews’ financial talents. The aristocracy had to limit the Jewish tendency to outperform and exploit the natives. They also sometimes used the Jews as scapegoats, such as tax collectors, in order to divert the anger of the people from them to the Jews. As the Jews frequently gained the upper hand in their host countries, causing commoners to despise them and the aristocracy to resent them, the host nations expelled the Jews into other lands where the process was repeated.


In modern times, Enlightenment ideals led to the removal of restrictions against the Jews starting with the French Revolution and accelerated by Napoleon, and the Jews excelled, particularly in business and finance. For instance, the powerful Rothschild banking family made enormous gains during this time, as did the Goldman-Sachs and Schiff families in the United States, and the Warburgs of Germany. Today these families essentially own the majority of shares in the largest banks in the world, including central banks.  Their ability to influence world events through these banks is incalculably enormous.

Jews didn’t have a monopoly on the moral corruption and the rise of destructive “-ism’s” during the 19th and 20th centuries, but they did hold key positions in several of them, particularly the ones that sought to transform or overthrow the structures and morals of White, Christian civilization.

  • Karl Marx was a Jew who, along with the non-Jew Friedrich Engels, developed Communism. Jews were very attracted to this philosophy, one that promised their political equality with the non-Jew.
  • Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis blamed human problems on repressed sexuality, and he helped open the doors to loosened sexual morals.
  • Jews comprised much of the leadership of the NAACP for its first decades, with Joel and Arthur Spingarn and Kivie Kaplan serving as presidents for 45 years. (The first black president of the NAACP didn’t serve until 1975).
  • Betty Friedan was instrumental in bringing about the second (and much nastier, Marxist) wave of feminism in the 1960’s.

Critics might say that the Jewish presence, even prominence, in these revolutionary movements only proves once again the superior talents of these people, not an unusual tendency to undermine society. Jews didn’t invent eugenics, feminism, Darwinism, anarchism, pornography, environmentalism, libertarianism, anti-colonialism, atheism, or revolutionary art forms like abstract painting and rock ‘n’ roll.

These critics are correct. Without Jews, the West would still face much of the degeneration that we see now. The decline of Western values cannot be blamed squarely on the Jews. Jews have simply played a disproportionate role in these corrosive forces.  They disproportionately want to revolutionize the Gentile cultures in which they live.

Examples of Jewish Domination of Non-Jewish Societies

There are four modern examples that I know of where Jews actually dominated a non-Jewish society: Soviet Russia from 1917 to about 1927, Weimar Germany from 1919 to 1933, and the United States from the 1950’s to the present day.

In Soviet Russia, Jews dominated the country politically but not so much culturally. They lost political power to the seemingly non-Jewish (though he sure looked it) Joseph Stalin before they could affect much change in the culture.

In Weimar Germany, however, Jews dominated the culture but not so much the government. They used this newfound dominance of the German culture to promote pornography and sexual deviancy, economic socialism, social individualism, and rebellion against tradition and the Prussian order. The changes occurred so rapidly that they generated a tidal wave of reaction that brought Hitler to power.

In the United States, Jews rose to dominance more gradually but now possess total control of the culture and overwhelming influence of the government. Jews began their influence in the 1910’s and 20’s with the establishment of Hollywood. Jews ran the largest Hollywood studios: Paramount, Warner Brothers, Columbia, MGM, and the now-defunct RKO. Very gradually they bought up newspapers. Adolph Ochs bought the New York Times in 1896; Eugene Meyer bought the Washington Post in 1933, but it wasn’t until the 2000’s that Jews owned just about every major newspaper in the United States. Controlling Hollywood all along, Jews extended their control into radio and the record industry, and then television. For a brief period in the 2000’s, every single major media company in the United States was run by Jews, but recently non-Jews have taken some positions while advancing the same themes as their Jewish predecessors.

Who Owns the Media 2015

A chart that shows the Jewish domination of the media. Jews frequently own or run the major media outlets in the United States.

The influence of this media power cannot be understated. It has transformed society from Leave it to Beaver to I am Jazz in a mere 50 years. Think of all the non-Jews who say “Yadda Yadda Yadda” without even knowing that the phrase is Jewish. This cultural shift has arisen from heavy Jewish cultural saturation.

Political dominance of the United States took longer. It began with the Frankfurt School in the 1930’s, the establishment of Israel in 1948, and the influence of Jews on the Federal Reserve, and has culminated in the 1960’s social revolution and the power of the ACLU, the SPLC, the ADL, and AIPAC. The Neo-Conservatives that have taken over the Republican establishment are mostly Jews: Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle, William Kristol, and Charles Krauthammer, to name some of the most well-known.  The billionare George Soros infamously funds progressive-liberal causes in the U.S. and throughout the world. Today the interests of Israel dominate America’s foreign policy and the interests of the ACLU dominate the domestic.

And Jews have extended their power and influence from the United States to much of the rest of the world.

God’s Chosen People

For three thousand years the Jews have managed to survive as a distinct people despite the total disappearance of other neighboring ancient peoples, such as the Phoenicians or the Babylonians. That such a small nation could survive so long would seem to be, in itself, a miracle from God.

Not only have the Jews survived as a distinct nation, they have directly influenced the rise of the two largest world religions: Christianity and Islam. Once again their influence has been disproportionate to their numbers.

Since at least the 1970’s, unwitting Christian Zionists such as John Hagee and Hal Lindsey play into Jewish hands, giving them a pass as God’s chosen people.  They believe that many of the Old Testament prophesies for the Jews remain to be fulfilled, and they consider modern-day Israel to be the fulfillment of some of them. As the fulfillment of prophesy, they say that Christians must protect and uphold the nation of Israel at all costs.

Christian Zionists like to cite a verse that says “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” (Genesis 12:3). This refers to the descendants of Abraham but is interpreted more specifically to refer to Israel.  Christian Zionists point to various kingdoms and empires throughout history as examples, such as Spain, Germany, and Russia. However, they forget about the rise of England between expelling the Jews in 1290 and readmitting them in 1655.  They also forget that the Spanish Empire remained the preeminent power in Europe for over a hundred years after it expelled or converted the Jews in 1492 in the Alhambra Decree. History doesn’t support the Christian Zionists here.


According to this Chick tract, the British Empire fell because Britain crossed the Jews after World War I, failing to give them Palestine. Christian Zionists believe that the present-day Israel must be supported at all costs.

I support the right of the Jews to have a home in Israel and to protect their nation as they see fit (with the exception of the holy sites), and I certainly believe that the United States should retain friendly ties to the states of Israel, but it isn’t the job of our country to supplant our foreign policy for that of any other country. And taken with the manipulative actions that Israel’s leaders have used against us, such as the attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 Americans in 1967, presumably to draw the United States into the Six-Day War, or several spying incidents, Israel isn’t much of an ally anyhow.

It is very possible that God miraculously re-established Israel after nearly 2,000 years of diaspora. But surely if God is behind them, the Jews of Israel can take care of themselves.  The United States can maintain good relations with Israel, and we can even support them, without lying at their feet.

The Holocaust

The Jews have endlessly hammered and berated White nations about the Holocaust with a capital ‘H’, as compared to the Armenian holocaust or the Ukrainian holocaust that only deserve lower-case “h’s”. They have used their holocaust to extort money, privileges, and to push white nations’ passage of self-destructive immigration laws.

I don’t know how many thousands of Jews died in that crime against humanity, but I do have some doubts about the official “6 million” figure. The fact that it is a crime in many countries to even question that figure should lead one to harbor suspicions of its veracity. And the large number of Holocaust survivors, with thousands of them still alive today seventy years later, suggests something less than a determined plot to exterminate them. It seems that if the meticulous Germans really wanted to systematically kill off this people, they would have done a better job of it.  Nevertheless, there can be little question that millions of Jews died in the “Shoah”, as they sometimes call it.

War is a nasty business, and humanity is a nasty beast. If millions of Jews were deliberately killed in World War II, so were millions of Chinese by the Japanese, so were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Germans killed by the Russians as the war concluded. I know that Jews are the most special people on Earth, but how many decades do we have to hang our heads in shame over the Jewish Holocaust?

Position of Jews as a Sub-Nation of the United States

Of course, Jews have had a small presence in the British North American colonies almost since their inception, nearly all of them Sephardic. And while they influenced the country, mostly as businessmen, they didn’t affect society drastically until enormous numbers of them began to arrive in the 1880’s. By 1929, when most immigration to the United States was banned, 2.8 million Ashkenazi Jews arrived from Eastern Europe.

Having lived and bred in the United States for almost 150 years, these people can justifiably claim to be a legitimate sub-nation of the United States. They share much of our history. They have largely assimilated and have often intermarried with the earlier population groups that compose the historically dominant white, Christian nation that has formed in the United States. Personally I lean heavily towards accepting them as a sub-nation that belongs in the United States.

But when even an established, legitimate sub-nation acts against the best interests of the dominant American white nation, which yet remains the majority of people here, it is the right of the ruling majority to limit the influence of the destructive minority on the rest of society.

What to Do About the Jews in the United States

There is no question that Jewish influence in the United States has led to the drastic weakening of the foundations and fabric of our society, perhaps beyond the point of recovery. Jewish dominance of the media especially has caused almost entirely pernicious results.

If the Jews weren’t a nation that belonged here, I would recommend, even demand, their complete expulsion from the country.

But they have lived here long enough to possess certain rights to this land.

Therefore, I recommend barring Jews from holding national political office or donating money to political campaigns, or from voting, from practicing law, from owning stock in media companies, and from having duel citizenship (as many of them possess joint Israeli citizenship). They should only live in certain areas, similar to the Pales of Settlement that the Russian Empire imposed, which might include the lower part of the state of New York and the entirety of New Jersey, plus the Miami metropolitan area in Florida, and the Los Angeles metropolitan area.


Jews in the United States mostly live in a few major metropolitan areas, such as the Boston to Washington corridor, Los Angeles, and Miami.

So that we can undo the damage caused by the Jewish media, we should restore and strengthen the Motion Picture Production Code that the United States enacted from 1930 to 1968 largely in response to the increasingly vulgar Jewish film industry of the 1920’s. And similar Codes should be implemented for the other forms of media.

And we should crack down on the parasites who make their fortunes in the financial speculation markets. My knowledge is pretty weak on the complexities of high finance, but I’m certain that something can be done to retain the benefits that this segment of the economy creates while reining in its excesses.

Likewise, usury in all of its forms should be banned. This is one of the few things that the Muslims have right.

Of course, some government entity would have to identify who is a Jew. Personally I think this should be applied leniently, with those who have at least one Jewish parent considered Jewish, along with those who actively practice the Jewish faith regardless of their ancestry. This would require much judgment and discretion on the part of the government, admittedly a difficulty.

The idea behind such laws is to not only prevent Jewish corruption in our nation, but also to encourage Jews to leave the United States to emigrate to Israel.

Obviously such laws would violate our present constitution. In my proposal, I am presuming that it is impossible to repair the damage of Jewish influence until after the U.S. collapses or otherwise transforms radically.  The house is infested with termites and must be rebuilt after its destruction.

This will sound like Naziism to most people, and that is understandable. But the Nazis were despicable secularists, criminals, and murderers, answering to no higher divine authority. I prefer to compare the system that I’ve proposed to the Spanish Inquisition, which to a liberal won’t sound any better than Naziism.  But liberals are also part of the problem.


I like and admire Jews in many respects. Their accomplishments in medicine, science, and invention are enormous and beneficial. Culturally, I have enjoyed their contributions to film, television, and music, often admiring their wit (while sometimes recognizing that what I am watching or listening to is harmful, such as the sociopathic characters on Seinfeld). I regularly listen to and usually enjoy Michael Savage‘s radio show, considering Savage’s work to run counter to the agenda of his fellow Jews while disagreeing with him on several fundamental issues, such as religion.

I also know that the vast majority of Jews are simply trying to live their lives like other Americans do. They aren’t consciously trying to subvert the country. Many of them aren’t even consciously Jewish anymore.

I wouldn’t even oppose the hegemony of Jews in society if they didn’t try to undermine and destroy the fabric of the nations within it. This enormously talented people could really act as a force for good if they simply respected the rights of the nations that they exploit. I even expect that when Christ directly rules the earth that the Jews will act in this beneficial capacity.

But it is clear that today’s Jews, taken as a whole, consciously or unconsciously, corrode our society and cannot help but act otherwise.

The Jews in the United States are like a smart and talented cousin who is living in a family’s house rent free, a live-in who dominates the entire household according to his wishes (while corrupting the children).  The husband and father of the family must make his cousin accept sane house rules or he must force him to move out for the good of the family.

Likewise, the power and influence of the Jews must be limited by law if any White, Christian nation is to have any hope of recovery.


Clusivius-sqIf our enemies in the culture wars are not exclusively—or even mostly—Jewish, then why make laws that specifically oppress all Jews when only a fraction of the Jews are causing problems in our society?  Wouldn’t this throw out the proverbial baby with the bath water?

The situation with Jews in a White society is comparable to that of Whites in a Black society.  According to a variety of sources, American Whites, on average, have an IQ of 100 to 103. American Blacks have an IQ of 85, a fifteen to eighteen point difference.  The average IQ of an American Ashkenazi Jew is about 110 to 115, about one-half to equal the difference between Blacks and Whites in the United States.

What might seem like a concerted effort by Jews to rule the world might in fact simply result from Jewish superior intellect and achievement. Even when the Jews are corrupt they achieve greater depths of corruption and debauchery than most of their Gentile counterparts.  When the Jews are intelligent, they are very intelligent; when they work, they work exceedingly hard; when they are generous, they are generous to a fault; and when they become wicked, they are the most wicked of all.

Often we Whites are incredulous when Blacks blame all of society’s problems on White people, saying that we are holding them back through discrimination because they fail to perform at the same level. We look at Black society and cringe.  We grow nervous when large groups of Blacks congregate near us, particularly if they are armed. When Whites are in charge of the Blacks, we imagine that we influence them for their own good, even if the Blacks don’t always see it that way.  This is very similar to the way that Jews view White society.

If the society of Blacks in the United States would decline without Whites to help them, then would not our White society, without Jews, miss the benefits that Jews bring?

As you said earlier, the Jews have shared enough of our history that they belong in this country.  As such, they are entitled to certain rights as a people. The restrictions that you suggest are too harsh and would require too much tyranny on the part of the government to enforce.  At the same time these laws would fail to address the other left-wing problems that we face, and the government would have to impose additional restrictions on the rest of the population.

While two-thirds of Jews vote Democrat, so do almost half of other Whites.  Left-wing activists are disproportionately, but not mostly, Jewish.  Most Jews are interested in working, living out their day-to-day lives, and raising their families. Most of them aren’t political activists. Restrictions on the Jews, even if they could be imposed, would not solve the problems of moral decay and elite corruption.

In order to remove the forces of decay, the majority nation of White America should reassert our power as the majority, demanding the recognition of our status as a White, Christian nation that tolerates others who don’t disrupt this status.

  • Decent community standards should have the power of law behind them, with social deviants pushed back into the closets and the red-light districts from which they came.
  • We should break up the monopolies in the media, banking, and other business sectors; they have grown unaccountable to the people.
  • We should cut off most immigration, legal as well as illegal, in order to assimilate those who have come here as much as possible.
  • We must restore the freedom of people to associate—or to not associate—with whomever they wish.
  • We should restore states’ rights while restricting the power of the federal government. Centralized government power and monopoly business power are equally harmful.
  • Campaign finance must be radically reformed, with these billion-dollar 18-month election cycles eliminated.
  • Single-term limits should be established for elected officials; all government officials, elected and non-elected, should be subject to popular recall.
  • And I’ll agree with you, Patulcius, about the elimination of dual citizenship.  A citizen can’t have equal allegiance to two independent states.

The trouble is, White America refuses to recognize our right to rule to act as a unified, majority nation.  White nations everywhere must re-recognize our mandate to rule and dominate.

We don’t need to target the Jews, we just need to assert our own rights as a nation.


ConcorditasThe plan of Clusivius is a good one for the United States, but it can only work when there is a strong enough core of people to work together as a nation.  But most White nations these days have fractured in their values to such an extent that they cannot coalesce as a political unit.  Russia is a noteworthy exception, as the Russians are operating as a unified nation.

This situation may change in the event of international crisis, which does seem to be fast approaching along various fronts.  The trouble is, the world elites—which seem to be a combination of super-rich factions that include both Jews and non-Jews—appear to be orchestrating the crisis.  We can only pray that God will foil their plans for global, anti-human tyranny.

Should White nations have the opportunity to restore their mandates to rule their people and their lands, they should limit the abilities of Jews in particular to influence their laws and their societies.

The trouble with the Jews arises from their superior abilities to achieve and influence compared to other nations of people.  Jews can’t help but rise to the top and exploit the societies in which they live.  They cannot help who they are and how they operate any more than Whites can help but rise to the top, as a group, in a Black society.

For the sake of all nations, peaceful separation (not necessarily geographical) and non-exploitation should be the rule.

While Jews, like other minorities, should be treated humanely by the dominant nations around them, they should be restricted in their ability to influence the laws and culture of the dominant society.  Possibly some combination of the laws that Patulcius suggested along with those of Clusivius would achieve this result without unduly oppressing the Jews (though likely Jews will consider any limits to their current freedoms to be a gross violation of their rights).

If Jews do not want to live under these restrictions, then they should move to their own nation-state of Israel and be thankful that such a nation-state exists.

Is Russia on the Verge of a Christian Awakening: The Rise of Radical Orthodoxy and Dmitry Enteo’s “God’s Will”


– 25 August 2015 –


Patulcius-sqIncreasingly energetic actions and protests by Orthodox Christian groups in Russia such as the Union for Orthodox Citizens, the Movement in Support of 200 Churches, the Movement of 40 by 40, and God’s Will suggest the beginnings of a new spiritual awakening in that country:

An article in the current issue of Sovershenno Sekretno asks whether there is a line between Russian Orthodox Church activists and those who engage in pogrom-like violence. It concludes sadly that there is not — and that church activists and those engaged in attacks on other groups are increasingly one and the same people.

The monthly’s Dmitry Rudnyev writes that he decided to focus on this issue after the fights between those who want to build more Orthodox churches in Moscow and those who oppose these being put in what are now public parks and Father Dmitry Smirnov’s shutting down of a concert that he said was disturbing prayer.

Such incidents, he continues, “are taking place ever more frequently, and the causes which generate among Orthodox [activists] such an incommensurately stormy reaction are becoming ever more varied.” That raises the question as to why Russian Orthodoxy has “suddenly acquired hysterical aspects” and seems to be trying to find occasions to be upset.

“Five to ten years ago, the phrase ‘Orthodox radicalism’ would have elicited a condescending smile,” Rudnyev says. “Today however, this has become one of the realities of Russian religious life.” So far, “thank God,” it hasn’t claimed human victims in the way that nationalist or Islamic radicalisms have,” he said.

“But the problem of radicalism in the church exists,” he continues, “and today people talk about it in a serious way.”


Orthodox militias such as United Fatherland are active in the Ukrainian civil war.

Spiritual Awakenings

I am convinced of the overall accuracy of the generational theories of Strauss and Howe, in which world events affect different generations in different ways based on their respective ages at the time of those events.

In the case of Russia, the time is arriving when a new generation of youth are starting to come of age who have no memory of the collapse of the USSR and Russia’s subsequent miserable economic strife.

Spiritual awakenings are often messy affairs as compared to the previous “high”, a high being the time that society has restored order after a great war or crisis.  From Strauss and Howe’s The Fourth Turning:

An Awak­en­ing ar­rives with a dra­matic chal­lenge against the High’s as­sump­tions about benev­o­lent rea­son and con­ge­nial in­sti­tu­tions. The outer world now feels triv­ial com­pared to the inner world.

New spir­i­tual agen­das and so­cial ideals burst forth—along with Utopian ex­per­i­ments seek­ing to rec­on­cile total fel­low­ship with total au­ton­omy. The pros­per­ity and se­cu­rity of a High are overtly dis­dained though covertly taken for granted. A so­ci­ety searches for soul over sci­ence, mean­ings over things. Youth-fired at­tacks break out against the es­tab­lished in­sti­tu­tional order. As these at­tacks take their toll, so­ci­ety has dif­fi­culty co­a­lesc­ing around com­mon goals. Peo­ple stop be­liev­ing that so­cial progress re­quires so­cial dis­ci­pline. Any pub­lic ef­fort that re­quires col­lec­tive dis­ci­pline en­coun­ters with­er­ing con­tro­versy. Wars are awk­wardly fought and badly re­mem­bered af­ter­ward. A eu­phoric en­thu­si­asm over spir­i­tual needs eclipses con­cern over sec­u­lar prob­lems, con­tribut­ing to a high tol­er­ance for risk-prone lifestyles. Peo­ple begin feel­ing guilt about what they ear­lier did to avoid shame. Pub­lic order de­te­ri­o­rates, and crime and sub­stance abuse rise. Gen­der dis­tinc­tions nar­row, and child rear­ing reaches the point of min­i­mum pro­tec­tion and struc­ture.

Other awakenings from the past include the Revolutions of 1848 in Europe, the Progressive Era in the United States from about 1880 to 1910, and the 1960’s Consciousness Revolution.  Now perhaps Russia is beginning their own new spiritual awakening.


1960’s radicals wanted to overturn the spiritually sterile white, Christian establishment of the 1950’s. Why wouldn’t the radicals of today’s Russia want to overthrow the sterile social Marxism of today just as their fathers overthrew political Marxism?

A Rising Generation in Russia

Most people in Russia support Vladimir Putin because he restored order and relative prosperity to Russia after the chaos and exploitation of that country in the 1990’s. Now we have a generation who is reaching college age who have little or no memory of the difficult times that their parents endured. Many of these young people see their society being constantly attacked by foreign forces that would undermine their spirits with “madness and abomination”. They might see the secular order of Putin’s Russia as lacking enough spiritual enlightenment to stop these evil forces for the sake of peace, order, and prosperity. If a large portion of this generation embraces the fundamental teachings of Orthodox Christianity and desires to restore the religious foundations of Russia, then they might well try to put an end to the cultural and spiritual filth gushing into Russia from the West, and they might also threaten the balance of order carefully established during the 2000’s and 2010’s.

Russia has little history of individual liberty and democratic government, but they do have a history of spiritual mysticism and of following strong leaders, be they religious or civil.

From Culture Smart! Russia:

“Bez tsarya v golove”—“with­out a tsar in his head”—is a Russ­ian say­ing about some­body who does not know what he is doing. Or, rather, who does not lis­ten to the tsar telling him what to do.

In the nine­teenth cen­tury even Russ­ian lib­er­als cited au­toc­racy as one of three foun­da­tion stones of the Russ­ian state, to­gether with spir­i­tu­al­ity and a com­mu­nal spirit. The tra­di­tion of a pow­er­ful leader, be it a tsar or a pres­i­dent, is still strong in Rus­sia today.

Al­though the Russ­ian pres­i­dent often re­peats that he would like the pub­lic to see him as a per­son they have hired for the job, opin­ion polls show that he is pri­mar­ily re­garded as a fa­ther fig­ure, as some­body who pro­vides ma­te­r­ial ben­e­fits and who dis­ci­plines or pun­ishes cor­rupt civil ser­vants and thiev­ing oli­garchs.

Un­for­tu­nately, the Russ­ian au­to­cratic tra­di­tion was often based on the rule of fear, as in the reigns of Ivan the Ter­ri­ble or Peter the Great. The per­va­sive­ness and in­ten­sity of fear reached its nadir dur­ing the bloody regime of Joseph Stalin, and this fear and the ne­ces­sity to obey or­ders cre­ated a fun­da­men­tal con­tra­dic­tion in the Russ­ian at­ti­tude to au­thor­ity.

“A peas­ant will lis­ten to what the mas­ter has to say, but will do it his own way,” says a Russ­ian proverb.

“The po­lit­i­cal regimes change, lead­ers with dif­fer­ent tem­pera­ments and in­ten­tions come to power, po­lit­i­cal sys­tems get re­placed, and yet there is one thing, that re­mains con­stant in Rus­sia: the power is al­ways “them,” and the peo­ple are al­ways “us,” writes the Russ­ian philoso­pher Shapo­valov.

These con­trast­ing at­ti­tudes, re­spect for and sup­port of the top “fa­ther fig­ure” and total dis­re­spect for law and au­thor­ity, are yet an­other Russ­ian con­tra­dic­tion.


The Russian President is “pri­mar­ily re­garded as a fa­ther fig­ure, as some­body who pro­vides ma­te­r­ial ben­e­fits and who dis­ci­plines or pun­ishes cor­rupt civil ser­vants and thiev­ing oli­garchs.”

Dmitry Enteo and “God’s Will”

One strange leader called Dmitry Enteo has been making headlines in Russia since 2012 through his public stunts against anti-Christian art, anti-Christian laws, and pro-abortion, pro-homosexual activists. He is the leader of the Orthodox activist group “God’s Will“. (Here is Google’s English translation.)

Enteo’s followers, about 500 in all in twelve Russian cities, are mostly young men and women in their twenties, like Enteo himself.  This is contrary to most current religious movements in the United States, which seem to have a high representation of older people, particularly Baby Boomers.  A Christian movement full of young people is one that points the way towards a spiritual awakening.

Most recently, Enteo has made Russian headlines for his attack on a museum that displayed anti-Christian art.  On August 14, Enteo and eight or nine followers visited a museum exhibit of underground art from Soviet times, including several that mocked or blasphemed Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and John the Baptist. Enteo and his followers smashed up some of the particularly blasphemous pieces, refusing to leave until the end of the exhibit. Police, however, arrested them and ultimately charged Enteo a token fine of 500 rubles (about $7 US), a fine that Enteo vows he will not pay.

This is one of the interesting aspects of these God’s Will protests, the fact that the ruling authorities are either letting them go or giving them token punishments. Good for Russia!


Dmitry Enteo and his supporters praying at the walls of the Moscow City Court while it heard appeals against the sentence of Pussy Riot.

I had a difficult time learning about Enteo, as almost all of the articles about him and his movement are in Russian. Google Translate interpreted these articles rather poorly.

The following is a cleaned-up translation of Enteo’s article from the Russian site  It’s likely that I made several small mistakes in interpreting Google’s mess, but the overall facts should be correct:

Dmitry Tsorionov (b. February 13, 1989), also known under the alias Dimitri Enteo or just Enteo, is a Russian Orthodox activist, the founder of the movement “God’s Will”, and a member of the Prophet Daniel Orthodox Missionary Movement. He is known for his outrageous and provocative actions, which involve many militant actions estimated by human rights activists to be illegal. As a young-earth creationist he considers unscientific the theory of evolution.

Dmitry Tsorionov was born on February 13, 1989 in Moscow (according to other sources – in North Ossetia). His Mother was Russian and his father was an Ossetian. By his own request, in 2012 he graduated from the Moscow State Institute with a degree in economics and served in the Airborne Forces of the Russian Federation. He also studied at the correspondence theologian school at Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University, where he was expelled for academic failure in August 2013. In 2010 he converted to Orthodoxy [from “neo-Buddhism and Hinduism“], at about the same time joining the “Prophet Daniel Orthodox Missionary Movement.” As of 2014, he was unemployed.

Dmitry Tsorionov advocates a theocracy, believing that the Bible has in itself the answers to all current challenges of our time.  He opposes scientism, is a young-earth creationist and a geocentrist, believing that all heavenly bodies revolve around the earth, whose age is 7522 years (2013).  He calls the theory of evolution an unscientific and unproven theory, advocating the abolition of its teaching in schools. He is a staunch opponent of abortion, convinced that human life originates at the time of fertilization. He opposes the propaganda of homosexuality, considering the latter a disease and calling it “sodomy”. Enteo’s followers call themselves Orthodox missionaries, considering Orthodoxy the only true Christianity from which all other Christan religions flow. Infidels and their supporters are wrong. Enteo supports the deputy Vitaly Milonova. In an interview he said that he positions himself as a civic activist, and that the actions of his organization are not beyond the law.

Promotions and actions
Dmitry “Enteo” is known for his outrageous and provocative actions and deeds. Some of them, according to the people affected by them, as well as human rights defenders, are against the law.

On August 27, 2012 in the Paveletsky railway station in Moscow, Enteo and a group of supporters approached a young man inside the train and tore off his T-shirt with the image of punk band “Pussy Riot” [the image showed a derogatory depiction of the Virgin Mary]. Activists attacked a supporter of the group, shouting, “Holy Rus, keep the Orthodox faith! So it will be with any scoffer!” Video of the action was published on YouTube. The owner of the T-shirt, Alex Myslivets, went to the police, where they refused to initiate a criminal case, citing lack of evidence under article “Deliberate destruction or damage of property” due to the fact that the material damage amounted to 800 rubles, too small for the initiation of proceedings under this article. Also, the police had not seen in the actions of the activists a gross violation of public order, socially dangerous action, degrading treatment of citizens, or religious hatred, and they referred to the lack of witnesses of the incident. In turn, Paul Pins, Chairman of the Human Rights Society “Agora”, commented on the situation, pointing out that in the jurisprudence of these attacks, they qualify as robbery. The South West transport prosecutor’s office in Moscow later deemed the decision not to institute criminal proceedings illegal and cancelled it, the case for an additional test.  Subsequently Enteo said in an interview that ripping the T-shirt was not an action, but it was his “personal act as a citizen and as an Orthodox believer” with the act described in the following words: “I believe that this is a normal reaction of any normal citizen, for whom God and His Mother is a real person.”


The shirt in question.

On the same day, 27 August 2012, Enteo entered the Moscow theater documentary play “Theatre.doc” with a group of supporters where they tried to disrupt those who were there at this point in the show, which was dedicated to the cause of Pussy Riot.

The next day, shortly before midnight Enteo and his followers entered the museum of erotic art “Point G”. One of the protesters carried a book with an Orthodox cross on the cover, the other a package with a brick. A participant of the action recorded the event on an iPad. Activists demanded to see the museum director Alexander Donskoi, who was at the time in Arkhangelsk. Without waiting for the Director, Enteo handed the brick to the museum administrator who perceived this as a threat to his own life. Enteo explained his action by the fact that he was outraged by the abundance of advertising from the museum, including distributing leaflets to young children, and the “donated” brick is interpreted as a symbol of the crucifixion and repentance. Don in an interview denied these claims, stating that the museum is located in an inconspicuous place, and the flyers, in which there is a sign of the age limit “18+”, were handed out only to adults.

August 17, 2013, activists of the movement “God’s will”, headed by Dmitry Enteo participated in the dispersal of an unauthorized procession of the Pastafarians in Moscow, called “Pasta course.” Enteo’s marchers squirted ketchup on the marchers, accompanied with curses. The procession was also met with riot police who arrested eight marchers. The Pastafarians that were squirted with ketchup went to the police.

On Thursday, November 28, 2013, Tsorionov and companion Mila Yesipenko tried to disrupt the play “An Ideal Husband” directed by Konstantin Bogomolov, who was walking in the Chekhov Moscow Art Theater. Coming on the scene at the time of the prayer of the homosexual priests, the activists began chanting “Do you not understand?” “This is sacrilege” and “Stop”.  As a result, they were expelled from the theater by security guards. Some spectators applauded the instigators. The General Directorate of the Ministry of Interior of Russia in Moscow announced the arrest of two young men for disorderly conduct at the theater. In an interview with Argumenty i Fakty Enteo said in a statement that he considered it an insult to the feelings of believers, and that this led him to his attempt to ruin the play. The activist also initiated a petition for its ban.

In the evening of February 20, 2014 Enteo, in the company of another young man, presumably another member of the movement “God’s Will”, Alexander Fomichev, entered the Moscow Museum of History of the Gulag where they attacked bookshop officer and Orthodox believer Dmitry Davydov. A surveillance camera captured Tsorionov spitting at the employee of the museum, while a second young man walked around the counter, behind which the employee stood, and began to beat Davydov. According to the testimony of the victim, the attackers forced him to publicly apologize for a statement he’d made in an interview about one of the participants of the disturbance of the performance at the Moscow Art Theatre, and in the case of Davydov’s further disobedience they threatened to beat him even more. Earlier, Davydov had said in an interview with “” that the girl Mila Yesipenko had not taken communion in the Church for two years. Alex Fomichev, after the incident, announced on his social network page his withdrawal from the “God’s Will” movement. ATS Tver district of Moscow adopted a statement on the attack on Davydova.

The activities and views of Dmitry Enteo undergo tough criticism from both the Liberals and by Orthodox religious leaders.

Leonid Y. Gozman has condemned the actions of Enteo and, after an interview with him, said: “I am extremely upset that the  absolutely wild, medieval attitude expressed by our guest today received the support of 56 percent of our listeners. It makes a very worrying outlook for the future of our country.”

Deacon Andrei Kuraev accused the activists of not understanding the scriptures in a rude manner by offering to reduce the temperature and the last stop “wank on schedule.” He also pointed out that the activist might have had the wrong mentors, and he called for Enteo’s speedy understanding and to correct his errors.

Philosopher Alexander Zelichenko called Enteo an “anti-clerical propaganda genius“, and suggested that his movement can be used by secret detractors to discredit the Russian Orthodox Church.

God’s Will has also worked to pass Russia’s anti-gay propaganda law, disrupted Russian concerts for Marilyn Manson and Cannibal Corpse, and thrown a pig head this year at another theater showing Oscar Wilde’s “An Ideal Husband”.


The pig’s head thrown at Moscow’s prestigious Chekhov Moscow Art Theater in protest of a staging of Oscar Wilde’s comedy “An Ideal Husband,” which deals with issues of promiscuity and adultery in contemporary Moscow and features a naked woman hung on the ceiling, representing the crucified Jesus, while an actor representing a homosexual priest worships her.

Enteo also gave an interview for Pravda back in 2012, when he first began to make headlines, where he describes how he began his crusade and what his beliefs are.  A few excerpts:

In 2009 I went to the mission school of Father Daniel Sysoev – thirty days after the murder of Daniel. The air was permeated with all the beauty of martyrdom, a feat, because for a Christian death for Christ is the highest that can be. . .

. . . The priest Daniel Sysoev made a spiritual explosion, he inspired thousands of people around the world to missionary work, and he clearly outlined the theological problems and their solutions. I learned in the missionary school of Daniel Sysoev, and for three years have been actively engaged in missionary work in many different directions, one of my directions – neo-Hinduism. . .

. . . I work in the service of helping people affected by the oriental cults, and we have met dozens of people suffering from eastern practices—yoga, meditation, reiki, occultism, Hare Krishna, and so on. We are engaged in a variety of missionary directions, working with prisoners, homeless people, migrant workers, giving them leaflets, telling them about the Orthodox faith, conducting interviews, and the Moscow mission trip tours across Russia. At the moment, this is my missionary work. . .

. . . My public activity began in the spring of this year, after we continuously followed every attack on the Russian Orthodox Church. In general, many Christians, after seeing the attacks on our shrines have ceased to be lukewarm, and they have realized that such attacks fundamentally undermine our moral values, and we also started to be more active and united. . .

. . . Many people turn to me through my page on the site “Vkontakte”, and we interact: one written on the site, other components of press releases, others pray for us, the fourth provides legal assistance and vseostalnye go with us for stocks. So it turns out that we combine active believers as well as Russian citizens who are not indifferent to what our society will be tomorrow. Our organization does not have a name, we are ordinary citizens who want to build a civil society that takes into account the interests of most citizens. A majority is Orthodox, who are now driven back over the fence, and were converted to marginalized sectors of society, but for them it will not be so. We are working on the social level because when society says the government is taking care of a problem, as long as society is silent, the government does nothing. Therefore, we learn not to simply pass by, but to transform the world around us, not just to pray, but also to act. . .

More information about them, in their own words, can be found here.

Does Enteo Go Too Far?

I am impressed by this Dmitry Enteo fellow.  His actions may seem over-the-top to us, but whom has he really hurt?  Without seriously injuring anyone, Enteo has fought against those forces who are deliberately trying to undermine Christian society through their endless promotion of corruption and filth under the guise of peace and liberty.


Enteo pelts eggs at homosexual rights protesters at the walls of the Russian Duma. The protesters were picketing against Russia’s adoption of the anti-gay propaganda law.

Notice that Enteo is not simply attacking non-Christians or homosexuals because they exist, but those who are advancing agendas to degrade Christian morality and society, either deliberately or through direct, visible support.

In fact, Enteo’s attacks are less than half of his work: he serves as a missionary to non-Believers in Russia and helps the homeless.  I doubt that he is cursing his would-be proselytes and squirting them with ketchup to convert them to Christ.

Do we who are Christian believe that our faith is an absolute, universal truth for all of humanity? Or is Christianity just one path out of many and it doesn’t really matter what people believe so long as we are all nice to one another?  It’s long past the time for us to live our faith and stand up for it!

I know that I myself can shed more worldly attitudes and possessions and work for the benefit of Christ’s church.  If we who are Christian all take our faith more seriously, not only by improving our lives and helping the lost, but by standing up to our enemies, then we could drive away the forces of evil, with God’s help and mercy, and restore sanity to our lands.


Clusivius-sqThe faith of Dmitry Enteo is something to admire, but his physical attacks against people do go at least a little too far.

Tearing an anti-Christian shirt off of an unsuspecting man, or roughing up an Orthodox museum director for unjust statements against another follower, such actions violate Christ’s teachings.  Should we physically assault our enemies or destroy their property in defense of our Lord?  Did He not say that we must love our enemies and pray for our persecutors?

Michael Brown at WND has a good article relating to this subject:

3) Jesus explicitly taught against fighting back. In the Garden of Gethsemane, shortly before His crucifixion, He told Peter to put down his sword, explaining that all who lived by the sword would die by the sword (Matthew 26:51-54).

4) The entire testimony of the New Testament is against us violently fighting against our persecutors. Instead, we are called to pray for them (Matthew 5:43-48), we are described as lambs going to the slaughter (Romans 8:35-39; 1 Peter 2:21-23), we are promised persecution (2 Timothy 3:12; John 15:18-20), and only those who suffer with Jesus will reign with Him (Romans 8:16-18). Great is their reward in heaven (Matthew 5:10-12).

5) Jesus told His disciples that if they were persecuted in one city, they should flee to another (Matthew 10:22-25). He could have given military alternatives as well, but He did not.

Granted, Brown is talking about fighting against Christian enemies with the sword (and in fairness to Brown, he lists some examples where it is acceptable for Christians to use the sword).  Enteo isn’t fighting people with deadly weapons, but his use of physical force against the enemies of Christ follows the spirit of the sword too closely.

Enteo’s other non-violent actions, such as disrupting plays and harassing politicians, fit (just) within the acceptable bounds of Christian activism, and are commendable.

But Christians should be wary of following Enteo’s violent example.


ConcorditasIt is difficult to decide the best ways to resist the all-pervasive wickedness that Western culture produces, yet Christians must resist it if we want ourselves and our children to keep the faith in the West.

Most of us choose a defensive posture.  We live our lives, trying to improve ourselves with God’s help, to resist evil, but very few of us take the offensive against our enemies.  It often seems like a struggle just to walk our faiths.

But our desire to get along and play nice has led our Christian nations to fall into darker and darker places for at least the past one hundred years, and definitely the last fifty.

When someone rises up who takes the fight for Christianity to the dens of the enemy, who causes them no real physical harm, just shock and humiliation, are we going to nitpick his tactics while we ourselves remain passively in our seats?

Jesus Himself overturned the tables of the money changers in the Temple in Jerusalem, and He forcibly drove them out.  Surely the Jews of His day considered His actions to be shockingly violent.

Enteo’s actions are extreme, but the actions of the enemy are even more extreme.  Enteo might sometimes err a little too far towards violence in his exploits, but he has never destroyed anyone’s life the way the Left has done.  He has consistently fought for the faith against the forces of evil.

Enteo deserves our support.

Is Scottish Government Cursed?


– 15 September 2014 –


Patulcius-sqThe Scots might look to history when they consider their independence on Thursday. Before the 1707 union with England, the sovereign state of Scotland suffered almost relentlessly from a scourge of infighting, incompetent leadership, bad luck, and wars.

Having no heirs to replace the deceased king Alexander III in 1286, rather than face a potential civil war among the various claimants to the throne, the Scottish nobles allowed the English king Edward I to arbitrate, foolishly granting him feudal concessions to do so. The English king then used his new power to undermine and eliminate Scottish sovereignty, leading ultimately to 60 years of devastating war just to win back the status quo of 1286.


The tragic reign, imprisonment, and death of Mary Queen of Scots perfectly exemplifies this curse on Scottish government. Can the Scots expect similar episodes of incompetence, social drama, and bad luck in the future?

The history of the Stewart (and Stuart) kings is one tragic soap opera from beginning to end, covering a period from 1371 to 1714, by which time Scotland and England had united. The early Stewarts were plagued by useless French alliances that dragged Scotland into repeated and indecisive wars with England. Insurrections in the Highlands and Borders were a regular annoyance. Kings had the bad luck to die prematurely, leaving devious regents to rule for the child heirs. The reign and death of Mary Queen of Scots is the perfect embodiment of this curse on Scotland.

When the Stuarts began to run England, too, they brought the Scottish curse to the whole of Britain, most notoriously with the English Civil Wars and Cromwell’s Protectorate, then the Glorious Revolution and finally the Jacobite uprisings after the last Stuart, Queen Anne, had died. From that time, the domestic history of the island of Britain was remarkably stable, excepting a few Jacobite uprisings in support of the Stuart pretender (“Fifteen” and “Forty-Five”).

After the Acts of Union in 1707, Scotland’s fortunes rose with England’s, resulting in the Scottish Enlightenment, and the country provided the world with some of history’s greatest scientists, philosophers, doctors, and engineers. Scottish culture blossomed along with its prosperity, and the English for the most part left Scottish society intact (with the exception of the Highlands). This general peace and prosperity has continued to the present day.

And why do the Scots want independence now? They want more political control from what they view as a neo-liberal Westminster government where Scotland has little influence. A desire to gain more say in one’s government does make sense, even though that means a more socialist, left-wing government in the case of Scotland today. In that vein, the Scottish National Party wants to ban nuclear weapons, expand government benefits, reduce the wage gap, et cetera. They also fear that the UK will leave the EU, and the Scottish National Party very much supports the EU, if not the Euro. They ironically oppose nationalism, mostly because nationalism is considered exclusionary and oppressive, in other words, “yucky”, for left-wingers. The SNP also says that the economy will benefit from independence, though this is impossible to predict with accuracy.


What is the point of gaining independence if the Scots are going to squander it with their support of the sovereignty-eroding EU?

What is the point of gaining independence if the Scots are going to squander it with their support of the sovereignty-eroding EU?  How is the unaccountable Brussels government much different from an unaccountable Westminster government?  I suspect that the politics of the SNP more closely matches that of the EU, and that this is more about their frustration with British politics than the self-determination of Scotland.  It’s a tantrum over the Scots’ disappointment that a Tory government is in power in the UK when they want the Left.

Most of the supporters of independence don’t seem to really care about Scottish nationhood, they just want more benefits from the government and smaller taxes, or a larger share of oil revenues.

What will happen when the Scottish government fails to deliver on their promises?

With Scots once again in control of their own destiny, they might well see the return of the old curse of Scottish leadership, with it’s incompetence, social drama, and bad luck.

Of course, the Yes vote isn’t likely to win. Elections are free and fair up to a point, but if the vote is close, and if the issue is of vital importance to the powers that be, the outcome can be safely manipulated. The Quebec independence vote of 1995 comes to mind, where the pro-independence vote failed by a mere 54,000 votes out of 4.7 million cast, and where many votes were questionably invalidated. If the English powers-that-be oppose Scottish independence, the vote will fail by hook or by crook.

The main reason that global elites might oppose Scottish independence has little to do with Scotland directly. With the loss of left-wing Scottish votes in Parliament along with the potential rise of UKIP, nationalist sentiments in England could threaten the established globalist hegemony in the British government. The Scottish independence vote has also spurred regional independence sentiments around the world, including Catalonia and Okinawa, and a Yes victory would likely fan even more sovereignty movements, particularly in Europe. If such secessionist movements occur around the world, international globalism could be threatened.


Clusivius-sqOr the shattering of large and powerful nation-states could actually make globalization even easier, with no strong power able to resist globalist expansion.

And it is a terrible exaggeration to suggest that all Scottish government endeavors before the Union met with failure.  The flowering of the Scottish enlightenment wouldn’t have occurred without the educational foundations of government-established Scottish universities and the cultural foundations of the government-established Scottish church.

And the pre-union history of Ireland is similarly plagued with dysfunction.  Now Ireland is functioning quite well on its own.  Scotland will, too.

Scotland should vote Yes for independence. The more remote the government, the less accountable it is to the people it claims to represent. Scotland is a nation that currently has little control over its own affairs, living under an unaccountable government that cares little for the Scottish people.

At one time the British government offered sound administration that promoted the fundamentals of civilization while posing no immediate threat to Scottland’s culture and national integrity. Now the British government isn’t even interested in protecting the English nation; it cares even less for the Scottish, Welsh, or Ulster nations within it.

Let Scotland go its own way, wherever that may lead. An independent Scotland would be no worse off than it is now under the decrepit British government. If Scotland makes mistakes, they will be Scottish mistakes, and they can find Scottish solutions.


ConcorditasAs the British government continues to sell out its own people in just about every way, Scotland should leave the United Kingdom while it has the opportunity to do so.

When the London caliphate rules the land, or the English nationalists crack down in reaction to political correctness, or whatever form a future British government might take, Scotland isn’t likely to have a second opportunity to peaceably withdraw.

The Scottish embrace of the European Union is admittedly foolish, but it will be easier to leave the EU later than to leave the UK. And the EU is little worse than the Westminster government.

Not that, as an American, it’s really any of my business.

Is World War III a Sham?



ConcorditasThe theaters of war are being prepared all over the earth, much like the pagan blood alters of ages past. While the next World War isn’t likely to break out this year or the next, we are accelerating down a road that could put a final end to a decrepit but still dominant Western civilization.

In Europe, Russia is playing the increasingly cartoonish role of the aggressive tyrant while America and the EU are playing the passive-aggressive incompetents, serving a function similar to Britain’s Chamberlain before World War II. The lesser power is tempted to make a bold move against the seemingly weakened stronger one.

Meanwhile, the ongoing election in India suggests that their new government will take a harder line against Pakistan, while Japan under Shinzo Abe is arming itself against an increasingly bold China. And the ever-festering wounds between North and South Korea, and of Israel and its neighbors, are always waiting for the opportunity to tear themselves open again.

Who stands to gain in the aftermath of a new World War? Certainly not the people on the ground who, in incalculable millions, will sacrifice and die with selfless loyalty, frequent heroism, and patriotic devotion.

Mass Insanity


A feminist mob assaults steadfast Catholic men in Argentina

From city streets to the halls of government a mass insanity infects the public. Each side of the respective divide increasingly sees itself as a crusader against the opposing forces of evil. Rather than live and let live, people push to impose their worldviews upon those who increasingly appear to them as enemies, the more so because those with the other viewpoint would impose their ways upon them.

This zeal shows itself from day-to-day interactions in the workplace (e.g. the forced resignation of Brendan Eich from Mozilla), to domestic politics (the rise of nationalist parties across Europe, such as Greece’s Golden Dawn, Austria’s Freedom Party, and Hungary’s Jobbik, or the far-left governments in Latin America, like those in Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia—and Obama’s United States), to geopolitics (China and Japan squabbling over tiny islands in the East China Sea, the meddling of East and West in embattled Ukraine and Syria).

What drives this impatience and aggression that would seem to grow worse by the day? Is it just the faltering world economy?

Generational Dynamics


Since the 1990’s, Strauss and Howe have predicted the upcoming conflict.

The generational theories of Strauss and Howe see a pattern in generational behaviors that could account for some of this irrationality.

In its simplest form, the theory works like this: a nation endures a large-scale calamity, usually (but not necessarily) a war. In the aftermath, society establishes a new order to rebuild/transform society and to prevent the troubles of the previous calamity. Meanwhile, a new generation is born in this post-calamity society, and this generation grows up with no memory of the previous horrors and little understanding of the current establishment. The new generation rebels against the soul-less post-calamity establishment and eventually sets the new moral tone for society. When the old calamity generations die or retire, the zealots of the new post-calamity generation take over, and they drive their nation into a new calamity having forgotten the lessons of the old. Thus the cycle repeats.

If World War II was the last great calamity to face most of the world, then the generation born in its aftermath, the Baby Boomers, are the zealots who are driving us to war today. The old generations who can remember the last great war (the so-called Greatest Generation and the Silent Generation) have either died or retired and can no longer restrain the hot-heads. A fourth generation type, those of Generation X, act as the unloved minions of the Boomers, while the Millennials will sacrifice themselves as fodder in the coming war, but will gain the satisfaction of rebuilding what’s left of society afterward.

Could this generational system, assuming that it’s real, serve as a hard-wired aspect of the human mind that’s meant to keep our populations in check and to clean out the gene pool once in while?

We humans like to think of ourselves as rational beings, but instead we are rationalizing beings. We use our brains to justify the irrational drives and passions that stir from within. “A man always has two reasons for what he does—a good one, and the real one.” (J. P. Morgan). And even those who know their history are still doomed to repeat it.

Is World War III a Sham?


To what extent are world leaders just puppets of an international elite?

While the common people clamor for intolerance and war, the spidery elites deal with their inter-generational urges in a methodical manner, constructing a grand web that will manipulate the passions of the masses while setting the stage for the next conflict that ensures an outcome that will leave them better off than before it began.

What better way for an elite to hedge its bets than to cultivate the ruling elites of the enemy? There are plenty of signs that this happened with Hitler before World War II. We have seen this since at least the 1990’s with the United States sending technology and industry to China. We have also sent quite a bit of money and military hardware to the governments of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. (This cultivation is admittedly less clear with Vladimir Putin’s rise to power.) Those on the receiving end of this generosity may or may not be aware of the ruse, but what choice do they have? Those who haven’t played along have suffered the fates of Milošević, Saddam Hussein, and Gaddafi.

Meanwhile the West in general, and the United States in particular, has drastically cut its military power even as world tensions grow. Further cuts, of course, provoke greater boldness of the enemy. The aggressive threats by the United States barking-dog-in-chief only fan the flames.

Despite such cultivation, the elites could still perish in a major war; history is riddled with the monuments of fallen aristocracies. The common people may provide the cannon fodder, but at least the new conquerers typically prefer to keep them around for labor if nothing else. The former elites are usually hunted and slaughtered en masse. No amount of preparation can completely predetermine the outcome of a large-scale war.

Is it a sham? Probably so in the sense that the conflict has been set up and manipulated, but to everyone but a few at the top, war will taste and smell the same.


Clusivius-sqLittle do the common people know that the impending war is not so much a struggle between our countries against aggressive foreign powers, but of our own governments against what remains of our independence!

The common people pose a threat to the existence of the ruling order so long as we can freely bear arms and raise our own children, and so long as we can speak our minds and maintain our privacy, and practice and share our faiths, and generally live our lives without depending upon their system.

The war will provide an excuse to impose order. Those who resist will be labelled as traitors, but very few are likely to resist during a large-scale war against a foreign power (especially one that has nuked our people). And when the war is over at devastating cost, the power of independent nations will be blamed and they will say that a world government must be established to prevent sovereign nations from ever threatening the world with their ambitions, their bigotry, and their oppression of others. The people will meekly accept or tolerate almost anything that the world government demands as the price of peace and the restoration of some level of prosperity.

That seems to be the plan anyhow.

Ukraine and the West: Let Crimea Go



Patulcius-sqNow that the Ukrainian protesters have succeeded in chasing Viktor Yanukovich from office, the world seems surprised that the Russians have acted so decisively to retain their influence in the Crimean Peninsula, where ethnic Russians form about 60% of the population and Russian speakers almost 80%.

Yes, the West must make a show of collectively wringing their hands while urging the Russians to withdraw or else the great leaders of the West will consider imposing the terrifying reprisals of economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation. In other words, the West will do next to nothing despite having encouraged this situation from the start.

And the West should do nothing.

The West should have stayed out of Ukraine since the beginning of these pro-EU protests, which were largely fanned and fed by Western NGO’s. What are our interests in this game, besides irritating Russia? The nearly bankrupt country is no political or economic asset for the EU or US. Presumably this is a game to provoke Putin into looking like a despot in order to justify more meddling within Russia itself, or perhaps to help justify a war later on. If the Western manipulators could fan a civil war in Ukraine, then maybe enough Russian people would grow sick of Putin’s government that they would rally in the streets until he resigns or flees as Yanukovich did.

But Russian opposition isn’t very likely. Russians seem to be rallying behind Putin in this affair, which only makes sense. Most of them see this as a patriotic cause, with Russians and Russian supporters under a perceived (and admittedly exaggerated) threat from the nationalist Ukrainians, or from a passive-aggressive West. Would Americans respond any differently if the tables were turned and Russians were encouraging pro-Cuban protests in Puerto Rico, or socialist forces in Mexico, that ultimately overthrew their governments?

Ukraine falls well within Russia’s sphere of influence where it has remained for hundreds of years. Half the people support Russian influence there. The country is home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. No one could realistically expect that Putin would do nothing while Ukraine slips into the arms of the European Union and NATO.

At the very least Putin must protect Russia’s naval interests in Crimea, which is proving quite easy to accomplish because of the large Russian population. Additionally, he can fan separatist interests in southern and eastern Ukraine like he did in Georgia, where Russian troops have secured the independence of the de facto statelets of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Or he can once again take advantage of the inevitable disunity and corruption among Ukraine’s political elites in order to restore that country to Russia’s fold, as Russia ultimately did after the Orange Revolution, a scenario that seems unlikely because the protesters are specifically calling for closer integration with the EU.

Pro-Western Ukrainians should welcome any separation of these provinces because it will dilute the electoral power of their political opposition within the remainder of Ukraine. Even the loss of Crimea and Sevastopol, with their overwhelming pro-Russian political tilt, would boost the chances for a permanent pro-Western electoral domination of the rest of Ukraine. But monetary interests play a part as well, and these regions (particularly those of eastern Ukraine) contribute to much of the country’s economy.

If the West really cared about the liberty of the people of Ukraine, they would accept the separation of Crimea and any other portions of eastern and southern Ukraine that might demand secession. Do the wishes of this part of Ukraine count for less than those of the western half? The West could negotiate its acceptance of these breakaway territories on the condition that these lands remain technically independent nations (rather than Russian annexes). This would seem a reasonable approach considering Western support for the secession of Kosovo from Serbia in 2008, which Russia opposed.   And because of the Georgian example, it’s very possible that Putin would accept such a compromise.

However, the West has little interest in the well-being of the Ukrainian people, nor of peace with Russia. Our nihilistic elites are more interested in spreading pro-Western progressivism into Russia, even if it takes another world war to do it. If a few million Ukrainians die in the process, well, it wouldn’t be the first time, would it? The Ukrainian protesters are just pawns in their nasty little game.


Russian military movements in Crimea as of March 3.


Clusivius-sqIt is difficult to say how much the recent protests were fed by Western meddlers and how much arose from legitimate demands by a sizable portion of the Ukrainian people. Certainly the people of Ukraine have much to complain about in their corrupt government.

If the people of western Ukraine have legitimate grievances against their government, and they are calling for their EU neighbors to intervene, does the West have any interest in helping them? Maybe the under-the-table support that we’ve given them so far is about as much as we can responsibly give, and perhaps we might negotiate with Russia over the partition of the country.

Another question comes to mind, however: is a military clash between the United States and Russia inevitable?

If yes, then we should do everything possible to weaken and isolate the Russians before we provoke them to either strike the West or to give us an excuse to attack Russia ourselves. The current situation does share some similarities with events that led to the German invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938, an event that demonstrated Hitler’s expansionist intentions and served as a precursor to World War II.  If war is truly inevitable, it is better to fight Russia when it is weak and divided.

But so far, Russia has not shown expansionist intentions and seems only interested in operating within its traditional spheres of influence: the far east of Europe, the Caucasus, and parts of Central Asia, and perhaps the Slavic portions of the Balkans.

It is the West that has encroached within this sphere, presumably with the consent of the affected nations. And so far Russia has accommodated most of this expansion, particularly the growth of the EU into Eastern Europe.

But Putin has shown less accomodation to the spread of Western influence in the Caucasus and Ukraine. If Russia’s response to the Rose Revolution in Georgia is any example of what we could expect in Ukraine, then Russia will militarily support breakaway republics.

At worst, Russia could simply invade Ukraine and set up a puppet government. I doubt that the West would do much more against a blatant invasion and overthrow than we are doing against Russia’s takeover of Crimea, and this Western weakness might well provoke Putin to invade, especially since the Russian Duma has granted Putin the authority to do that very thing. But this would embroil Russia in an insurgency or even a civil war, a situation that Russia can ill afford economically and that Putin would pay for politically. As time passes without a full-fledged Russian invasion, such a scenario seems less and less likely.

In any case, this is no recipe for inevitable conflict with Russia. If there will be war, it will arise because of Western meddling and provocation, not Russia’s hunger for expansion.

Many people believe that the Western nations are the “good guys”, the peaceful ones who stand up for the civil rights of oppressed peoples and extol freedom for all. In some ways, this is correct. Certainly Russia and (especially) China are no beacons of individual liberty.

But increasingly the West, particularly the UK and United States, has shown a darker side. People have more freedom to consume than ever before, be it physical products or drugs or sex of almost any sort. But real liberties are on the wane. Increasingly, we are being monitored, tagged, silenced, and fenced in. And the Western elites are on the move to expand their power across the world, sowing unrest in previously stable nations and using their economic power to raise one group over another, to corrupt officials, and to manipulate public opinion.

Seemingly only a few nations, such as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, stand in their way. I have a feeling that a world war is intended to deal with these nations as well as to quell domestic resistance in the nations of the West.

Is war with Russia inevitable? Only if the West makes it so.


ConcorditasIt is a pity that the people of Ukraine have no real prospects for liberty and self determination. Their leaders from just about any political stripe have shown themselves to be corrupt sell-outs to outside interests, and Ukrainian grievances are fanned by these same outside interests to promote foreign power and influence rather than the well-being of the people. Freedom-loving Ukrainians are encouraged to fill the streets only to get shot down, and what good will come from their sacrifices?

While the West should stand behind the pro-Western people in Ukraine and seek a diplomatic solution to Ukraine’s political troubles, we should refrain from meddling in their internal affairs and certainly accept that the Russian-speaking portions of the country, and Russia itself, have legitimate interests there as well.

Instead the West will destabilize Ukraine in an attempt to get at Russia.

Further Signs of Decline? U.S. Fertility Rate Hit Historic Low in 2012



Patulcius-sqVia LifeSiteNews

The U.S. fertility rate hit an all-time low in 2012, according to the latest statistics released by the Center for Disease Control (CDC).

According to the CDC, in 2012 3,952,841 births were registered in the U.S., which was 749 fewer than in 2011. This translated into a total fertility rate of 63.0 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44, down from 63.2 births in 2011.

While a fertility rate of about 2.1 babies per women over their lifetime is required to maintain a steady population in developed countries, in the United States it currently sits at 1.88, down from 1.89 in 2011.

The country’s fertility rate first dipped below replacement level in 2010.

But while the fertility rate has declined every year for the past five years, the CDC reports that the decline slowed down between 2010 and 2012.

Meanwhile, the average age of women who become mothers for the first time rose to 25.8 years. Delayed child-bearing is one contributor to decreasing birth rates across the west.

Live Births and General Fertility Rates

How long will our nation stand when its people won’t even bother to reproduce themselves?

It is a sign of our overall decline, though not of our imminent fall. The clever Romans limped along for hundreds of years with a low birthrate. It’s amazing how long a nation can drag itself along after its people have grown self-centered and hedonistic. But are Americans as clever as the Romans? Our decay seems very rapid compared to theirs, and our collapse might arrive more quickly as well.

The CDC also found that the number of babies born to non-married mothers remained steady, at 40.7 percent. However, “The nonmarital birth rate was 13 percent lower in 2012 than in 2007 and 2008, when it was at its historic peak of 51.8 per 1,000,” the CDC study observes.

A third generation of children from broken homes—many raised with a minimal presence of a father and within dysfunctional households—also bodes poorly for the future of our nation. The sad bastard child-man, Barrack Obama, is a fine specimen of the kind of broken and incompetent leadership that we can expect to see more commonly in the future.

Some demographic forecasters have linked the decline in birth rate over the past five years to the economic recession, and predicted that with relative economic stability in place, birth rates should begin to climb again.

“The United States has seen marked declines in childbearing in the wake of the Great Recession [which began with the financial crisis of 2007-2008], but we think that this fertility decline is now over,” Sam Sturgeon, president of Demographic Intelligence, told USA Today last fall.

Our economy is on the road to recovery! The media reports this nonsense with the wide-eyed sincerity of children reporting the gifts that Santa Claus will surely bring them. Do these blathering heads believe their own lies?

It is more likely that we’re in the middle of a long-term economic depression. Despite manipulated unemployment and inflated Dow Jones numbers, the economic situation of the US is still grim and shows no signs of meaningful improvement.

None of the fundamental factors that created the Great Recession has been addressed. We still have high energy prices, political instability, and plenty of toxic debt in the banking system.  Retiring Baby Boomers continue to join a growing section of the population—rich or poor—whom the government totally supports.  The government continues to accumulate large amounts of public debt that the Federal Reserve increasingly finances with less expectation that any of it can be financed by future growth and inflation. Add to the mix the debacle of ObamaCare, and we have no end in sight to a crippled economy.  Road to recovery!

However, Mary Mederios Kent of the Population Reference Bureau expressed skepticism about more optimistic projections.

“The question remains, will fertility bounce back when the economy improves, or will low fertility become the norm for Americans, as it has for Canadians and Europeans?” she asked.

“Even at its current low level,” she wrote, “the U.S. rate is higher than nearly every developed country, and these countries also experienced fertility declines during the recent recession. Will couples eventually have the babies they postponed during the recession?”

Mary Mederios Kent is right to question the optimistic projections.

Parts of the non-Hispanic White and most of the Black populations have very low fertility rates similar to those in Europe and Japan, and the fertility rates of these groups are likely to decline further with time regardless of economic improvement.

Other areas, such as Mormon-dominated Utah and Idaho, along with (oddly) many of the plains states, have relatively high fertility rates that will likely bounce back after the depression finally ends. While Utah’s rates have fallen more than other areas of the country since the Great Recession began, the Mormons in particular show a fecundity not only in childbearing but in productivity overall, and their fertility will likely restore itself.

Overall, barring some dramatic change in the culture, post-depression fertility rates will likely show a modest rise before resuming their gradual decline.




Things aren’t good for the United States and the West overall, but conditions don’t remain static.

While the West is certainly in a state of decline, it probably has at least a couple of hundred years of life remaining. As Patulcius wrote above, a nation can limp along for centuries as it declines.

The fundamentals of the US economy are not so terrible as they might seem. Thanks to hydraulic fracturing, we are in the beginnings of an oil boom and we currently export more oil than we import. Our industrial base, while not as great as in our heyday, is still quite large and reasonably stable. We still possess the world’s largest economy, accounting for 19.5% of world GDP. (China is next at only 14.7%. Of course, the European Union is slightly larger as a whole, but this doesn’t detract from the overall point.) We still attract the greatest minds in the world to live and work here and our economy is still free enough that a person can hope to grow rich when starting a business with nothing. Certainly there are signs of decline, but many of our fundamentals are still strong.

Our birthrate remains above that of other developed countries. When the depression is over, it will likely return to near-replacement levels, largely because of the Hispanic and Mormon populations, as previously mentioned.

The Hispanic population should not be written off so blithely. Unlike Europe’s Muslim immigrants, Hispanics show signs of assimilation where they don’t overwhelm large regions of the country with their numbers, and they are Christian. So long as they don’t dominate too great an area, as they do in southern California, their numbers should be manageable and could be beneficial to the long-term survival of the country. Like the Germans in Rome, Hispanic immigrants do present some problems, but perhaps like the Germans helped the post-Roman world, the Hispanics might help the people of the United States, in whatever form they might ultimately take, after the fall of the West to rebuild under their next civilizational incarnation.

In other words, it’s not necessarily the end of the world.


ConcorditasWhile leaders can change and countries can change course, the culture of a nation is harder to change.  And even if the moral fabric of a nation is somehow restored, its cultural integrity upheld, and its economy restored, the demographic decline of a nation takes generations to reverse.

Putin’s Russia is a good example.  In general, the Russians seem to have returned to their cultural roots, but their demographic decline is causing many problems with their economy and with their security.  These troubles might destroy the Russian nation in the long run even if we assume that the Russians will remain focused on the reconstruction of the foundations of their civilization.  It takes people to make a society function, and the Russians aren’t making enough.  And neither are we.

That is why a seemingly minor demographic indication like the low fertility rate is so troubling for the future.

  • May 2018
    S M T W T F S
    « Feb    
%d bloggers like this: