From Meccania to Atlantis - Part 1: The March of the Body Snatchers


Current events have been begging for direct, pragmatic commentary. This serial essay is therefore cutting into the "Empire of Yin" series, which is more philosophical. Apology to my long-suffering readers. "Empire" will resume in a few weeks.

European Commissioners opine that “Immigration Is Moral Necessity” and “Islam Is Welcome.” A French President predicts that “Arabic Is the Language of the Future.”  A Moroccan becomes Mayor of Rotterdam. Europeans who wish to assert their ethnic identity and interests versus those of aliens are roughed up.

In the United States -- a country that has ruined itself through its own naïveté about human nature, about the world and about itself, the presidential election is being contested between a right-liberal candidate of the Stupid Party and a left-liberal candidate of the Evil Party. The latter’s position’s is that America’s wealth should be redistributed to the Afro-American “community” so that the country can have its salvation. He may have rephrased this idea in more unctuous words as his political shrewdness was increasing over the years, but essentially this is still the intention.

Yet, Mr. Obama is likely to win, partly due to electoral fraud of his supporters and fawning adulation by mainstream media that disseminate news and opinions filtered to put him in the White House.

With Barack Obama in the White House and his party on the way to a supermajority in Congress, soon enough the United States will be turning from a stupid form of capitalism to a stupid form of socialism, and from a stupid form of multiculturalism to an evil one – of the Eurabian kind. It will be Sweden West, without the virtues that ethnic Swedes still possess.

Indeed, Mr. Obama would fit seamlessly as Norway’s Prime Minister or France’s Minister of Housing, give or take a language or two. He has vowed not only to transform America but also to “change the world.”  Many millions in the United States and around the world are waiting for this changin’ and rearrangin’, ignorant that Lenin also promised to change his country and the world – which he did.

Keeping Lenin in mind, what are people like us to do? Here are one man’s answers, based on years of acquaintanceship with “people like us” in a dozen countries over many years. To begin with, who are “we”?


One Identity

We are the ethno-conservatives -- perhaps 60 million people in Western Europe, North America and Oceania. There are probably four times that number who are like us, but they are latent, unable at this time to cut through the fog of suppressive propaganda and inertia.

In every Western country, we are a minority encircled by brainwashed zealots discharged at a steady rate from the left-only assembly line of public education. The conveyor belt’s propulsive power is multiplied many times over by the giant dynamos of Mainstream Media (MSM) and manufactured pop culture. Our own propulsive power comes from inner conviction, books by Dead White Males, and – to steal a phrase from Abraham Lincoln – the mystic chords of memory.

We are vastly outnumbered, and have few friends among the leading elites of the Western world. But it helps to remember that 185 million ex-Russia, non-Muslim Eastern Europeans are behind us. Living under Soviet tyranny has immunized them against the terrible mental virus that has ravaged the West. They have their own problems, related to economic development, but their combined weight is on our side. We ought not to forget who came to the rescue of Vienna and Western civilization in their hopeless encirclement in 1683.

Over 1.5 billion East Asians are of the same mind as we are with regard to their own answers as to who they are. But they are busy beating us at our own game: technology, industry, innovation, commerce. And the reason they are beating us is that the same elites and their remote-controlled supporters who have brought us Eurabia and Multimerica have also brought us a stifling socialism in Europe and a dumb and self-defeating capitalism in America.

Our common denominator is not white, for our most numerous and powerful opponents are also white. Rather, it is our opposition to our disfranchisement, marginalization and impoverishment by our own ruling elites in government, media, education, culture and business.

In America, we steam for having been abandoned by our government to mayhem and rape by illegal aliens. The two parties and their presidential candidates leave us a choice only between the details of how they will legalize the 12 –18 million illegals, with all the terrorists and vicious criminals embedded among them. We have nothing left but festering rage and memorials to the victims on YouTube.

But that’s exactly the same experience relayed through innumerable news items posted by Brussels Journal about Europeans victimized and terrorized by Muslim or just plain-African immigrants who are under European governments’ sponsorship and protection while the choices left to the rightful owners of Europe are to stew in terminal frustration, read The Camp of the Saints under cover with a flashlight, or emigrate.

We are unwilling to shut up about the de facto culling of whites by black and brown  (1) crime and Muslim terrorists. We are angry at the authorities’ cowardice in confronting these problems.

We are not Islamophobes, not really.  Anyone who has spent time in, say, Qatar, Kazakhstan or Brunei, has experienced values and features of a society that challenge one’s notions of the superiority of Western democracy and the wisdom of the Western über-value of hedonistic freedom.  It’s just that these people do not belong in the schoolrooms and supermarket aisles of Rome, London or Charlottesville, just as we don’t belong in Islamabad, Mecca, or Batna.

This is so obvious, that our ruling elites’ willful subversion of this precept is the greatest act of mass treason and insanity in the history of the world. In America’s case, it even has a farcical dimension, for here is a country that’s invading the Muslim world in the name of spreading freedom, while inviting Muslims from all over the world to live within its borders, thereby curtailing its own citizens’ freedom.

Nearly all the 9/11 Muslim terrorists had US-issued drivers licenses that enabled them to carry out all the preparations and the boarding of  the planes that they would crash into the country that had welcomed them. It’s relevant too that Mr. Obama’s main accomplishment in his all-too-brief legal career was his lawsuit on behalf of ACORN to implement the Motor Voter law in Illinois in the mid-1990s. For all we know, Mohammad Atta @ Co. voted in American elections, as can millions of illegal aliens with American drivers licenses. And they vote Obama.

It’s our own ruling elites that have put us on a collision course with Muslims, by importing them to our countries and subjecting us to a gross devaluation of our social capital through constant friction with people too different for us to absorb and digest, with alien ways and mores that we cannot condone.

Moreover, it’s our own ruling elites and the suprastructures they support such as EU and UN that have put us on a collision course with Islam. Jihad is an opportunistic infection that lay dormant as long as the West was strong and self-confident. The West's own impairment of its cultural immune functions and the related importation of millions of Muslims has allowed the dormant jihadi virus to thaw and flourish.

We are not racist. Nature’s strength is in diversity, and so is Humanity’s. But we are not Nature or Humanity. We are particular people trying to live our particular lives. And for that, we need our particular ethnicity and our singular culture, as other peoples need theirs.

Our ethnicity has a universal component: we are all Europeans, or descendants of Europeans. This is implanted in our cultural, spiritual and moral makeup. The molded life-forms encircling us charge that this amounts to a fixation on whiteness, blondness, disdain for other skin colors, cultures etc. But that’s absurd.

There are undoubtedly some people sitting right now in a bierstube in Leipzig or Baton Rouge who are classical racists. But that’s a small minority. Of all the people on earth, none are as fixated on skin color, and as racist as Africans and people of African descent are. People whose main political expression is an organization called La Raza certainly are not far behind, with the rest of non-whites in the world exhibiting ethnocentric and racist attitudes far beyond those of whites.

One wanders what would be the public reaction if the university graduation thesis of the white wife of the candidate for the U.S. presidency contained the sentence, “As a member of the white community, I am obligated to this community and will utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the white community first and foremost.” Yet these are the words of Michelle Obama, with “white” substituting for her original “black.”

European ethnicity is bound predominantly with white racial characteristics, but no one sound of mind and soul would exclude from it the part-black Pushkin and Dumas families, with all their distinguished members. Nor are there many among us who split hairs as to Aryan–Caucasian-Semite differences, what with sizeable Jewish presence in Europe going back to 400 BCE, and the Jewish imprint on Euro-Western culture ranging from Moses, Jesus, Peter and Paul to Mendelssohn, Kant, Disraeli, Einstein, von Mises and Salk. 

I say to liberals who accuse me of “racist” objections to Barack Obama that if Thomas Sowell ran against John McCain, I would be voting for the black man. But ultimately, one cannot convince a life-form spewed from a conveyor belt. I think we ought to accept the charge of “racism” calmly and not run for cover. For Nature itself is “racist.”

Racial differences are real, and not only in obvious physical features but in cognitive and psychological ones as well. This is increasingly moving from the realm of behavioral and cognitive statistics to hard genomic science.

Many of the differences do not favor whites, e.g. mean IQs versus East Asians or bodily-kinesthetic and musical intelligence scores versus those of blacks. But whites score far better than blacks and browns do in areas of intelligence like Logical-Mathematical and Verbal-Linguistic that are prerequisite for well-paying jobs in the modern economy. And since liberalism starts from the premise that all people would be equal in education, status and income but for malign social structures that hold back “minorities,” liberals spare no effort to stop contrary science.

We are not xenophobes. Most of the people I know on our side of the political divide – including in Japan – like to have foreigners among them. Life in Tokyo without pastry shops operated by the best of German and French patissiers would be as dull as French or Dutch football might be without black midfielders.

It’s a question of balance. 4% -5% of foreign-origin residents seems to be the level at which the marginal utility of diversity becomes zero, with negative values beyond that. And that in a unicultural but cosmopolitan society, which seems to be the optimal model. Even then, additional restrictions ought to apply on foreigners who are certain that they alone have a direct, exclusive telephone line to God, and those who do not are enemies to be subdued.

In contrast, the ruling American elite – including Republicans – has gone mad to such an extent that “minorities” are now over 1/3 of America’s population, soon to be half. And the EU ruling elite is welcoming, nay, soliciting, an Islamic wave that will accomplish what it failed previously at Tours, Lepanto and Vienna.

Together, they have brainwashed two generations of Westerners so effectively that the majority of whites in the world, notably among the young, celebrates “diversity” -- i.e. their peoples’ and Western Civilization’s inevitable dissolution – as their core value. It is against this part of the population, and the politicians and subversive intellectuals who hold their puppet strings, that I believe we ought to define ourselves.


The Pods

Most contemporary whites are docilely or actively complicit in their own displacement, disappropriation, and disproportional share of rape, battery and murder by more savage peoples who have fewer scruples.

The epitome is the Amy Biehl Syndrome. Amy Biehl was a young poster-girl “progressive”: blonde and upper–middle class, young and pretty, Stanford graduate and Fulbright scholar on a mission to help South Africa.

One day in 1993, Amy drove to the shantytown of Gugutelu, on a do-good mission. A mob of 80 black men started throwing rocks on her car. She got out of the car and was stabbed and killed on the spot.

Four men were convicted of the murder. They spent five years in prison before applying for pardon. Amy Biehl’s parents came to the pardon hearings, in her father’s words, “as Amy came, in a spirit of committed friendship."

The Biehls not only forgave their daughter’s killers. They established a charitable foundation for the benefit of Gugutelu’s youngsters, and employed two of Amy’s killers in it. Mrs. Biehl has said  about her daughter’s murderers, "It was like an adoption. These were just children who didn't have a chance to have a childhood."

The Biehls are not monsters, but loving parents who decided to upend the laws of gravity in the social and moral realms. Except for small and esoteric sects like the Indian Jains, this particular inclination appears only among whites. And, except for one, no analogy conveys this bizarre refusal to perceive reality, as though the act of suspending an idea could suspend the object of the idea. Indeed, no true leftist – whether Marxist, cultural Marxist, Christian social penitent, New York liberal or Amsterdam libertine -- will ever let reality interfere with a good theory.

That’s why I think of them as “Pods” and of us as “Nonpods.”  I use these words in the context of one of the great masterpieces of American cinema, “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”,  released in 1956 and directed by Don Siegel, based on a novel by Jack Finney. In it, a doctor returns to a small California town to find out that one by one, its people, most of whom he has known all his life, have been replaced by dopplegängers.

These emotionless beings animated by a single instinct – proliferation -- develop from large, foaming seedpods; in effect a biological production line for lifelike automatons, set up by evil space aliens.

One by one, real people disappear – acquaintances, friends and ultimately the protagonist’s girlfriend, until he remains the sole nonpod, encircled by human-like, giant legumes: the Body Snatchers.

Pods whose previous identities have been snatched and extinguished seem to be multiplying in our world too, and they are passionate in their hatred -- of us. Middle-aged men and women who demonstrate publicly their desire for Europe to remain European are beaten up by Antifa gangs half their age and twenty times their number. The few Americans who have the courage to demonstrate their support for the alternative to a crypto-Marxist disciple of Black Theology are heckled, beaten up, or firebombed in the Country of the Free.

Pods are deeply committed to the idea that freedom and equality are not mutually exclusive. They are the emotional children of the French Revolution and worship its motto so much that they are willing to install PC tyranny in the name of Liberté, enforce racist and gender discrimination and robbery of private property in the name of Egalité, and stop at no fraud, libel and persecution of their opponents in the name of Fraternité.

Pods view biological race and gender differences as social constructs, and therefore social group differences as an unjust inequality that must be rectified by reconstructing society. They view nation, ethnoculture, and private property as obsolete obstacles in the way of freedom, equality and fraternity of all people. Therefore, the right of anyone to immigrate anywhere precedes the right of the one suffering the destruction of his social capital by this immigration. The right of a slacker to home, sustenance, and self-esteem counseling precedes the right of the 80-hours-a-week worker not to have his earnings confiscated to float the slacker in splendid idleness.

They view the refusal to tolerate the intolerable as unacceptable intolerance, and the desire to protect and preserve one’s family, community, country and culture as racism and xenophobia. And lastly, they have stood Jesus’ metaphor on its end, so that they fail to see the beam in the nonwhites’, non-Christians’ eye, but they see and greatly magnify the speck in their own peoples’ eye.

This is deep, delusionary dementia. A recent headline conveys the essence of this syndrome: Cyclists 'braved freezing cold temps' to promote global warming awareness...

This mental disorder is now the dominant orientation of the Western peoples, with its triumphant apotheosis, The One We Have Been Waiting For, coasting on the final approach to the most powerful job in the world, so that he can change the world into Pod kingdom.

The dementia’s hold on the brains of the majority of the white population is such that the vile Afro-American racism that America’s probable 44th president imbibed during most of his adulthood goes unmentioned and uncriticized by the MSM. Even Mr. Obama’s opponent in the presidential election remains paralyzed by the possibility that anything he might say would be deemed "racist."

Barack Obama is expected to receive 75 - 80% of the white vote in many urban areas of the United States. If this is not having one’s body and soul snatched, nothing is.


Podism in history

Mass dementia across wide swaths of the population occurs only once in several hundred years. In the early 13th century, tens of thousands of Europeans, including many children, set out for the Holy Land, to convert Muslims to Christianity through love.  They were convinced that the Mediterranean Sea would part to let them through. Most of them would be killed by disease and shipwreck, and the rest were sold into slavery in Tunisia.

In mid-17th century, European Jews were gripped by messianic fever. The One They Had Been Waiting For was Shabbetai Tzvi, a Syrian Jewish kabbalist with delusions of grandeur and a taste for the good life.

In 1648, Shabbetai declared himself as the true Messianic redeemer, designated by God to change the world. His fame swept throughout Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities. He acquired wealth, a beautiful wife, and a veritable court.  He was issuing edicts that were circulating throughout the synagogues of Europe, and wherever he went, crowds of Jews greeted him with, "Long live our King, our Messiah!"

In 1666, “the Messiah” traveled to Istanbul, expecting the fulfillment of the prophecy of his campaign manager, one Nathan of Gaza, that he would be crowned as the sultan. Instead, the actual sultan had him put in chains and imprisoned, but on lenient terms. The lenient incarceration allowed The One to live in the prison castle in splendor -- financed by a huge stream of contributions from his many ardent followers.

Nathan of Gaza, a brilliant propagandist, kept disseminating fanciful reports about the miraculous deeds "the Messiah" was performing while incarcerated. Therefore, the incarceration, instead of proving to the adherents that Shabbetai was an impostor, strengthened their Messianic delusions instead.

But the charade had to end. Under the sultan’s pressure, Shabbetai, still a prisoner, converted to Islam. He received his freedom and various favors in exchange. Some of his followers also went over to Islam, but largely the conversion of the Jewish Messiah to Islam was so devastating to most of his myriad followers that echoes of the damage persist among traditional Jews to this day.

It is significant that despite Shabbetai's apostasy, Nathan’s astute propaganda campaign turned what should have been the spike of death for Shabbetianism into just a bump on the road to self-perpetuation. Many adherents –by then certified Pods—continued to cling to The One, asserting that his conversion was a part of the Messianic scheme.

Paul Johnson writes in his (philosemitic) A History of the Jews that Nathan of Gaza was an outstanding example of a “highly imaginative and dangerous Jewish archetype.” Like Marx and Freud, Johnson adds, Nathan could construct a system of explanations of events that was both highly plausible and sufficiently imprecise to accommodate new, contrary events.  And he could do it with tremendous conviction and aplomb. (2)

We will look into the eerily similar role of Barack Obama’s campaign manager, David Axelrod, in a later chapter. But the talent for Body Snatching is found not only among Jews, for it is fundamental to phenomena such as mass advertising and pop culture, Islam and other forms of extreme religious fundamentalism, Fascism, Maoism, Peronism, and more.

Not to forget the Third Reich. What can be said about Hitler’s Germany that has not been said before? How could the country of Gutenberg, Goethe, Schiller, Mann, Bach, Beethoven, Kepler, Heisenberg, Bonhoeffer– and thousands more -- follow in ecstatic obedience to its doom and infamy an obvious, raving mad housepainter from Braunau?

Only Podism can account for that. One by one, your friends, your children, your wife, come home changed by an overwhelming force of propaganda they are unable to resist. And then you are left alone, doubting your sanity or preparing to emigrate. Just as we do now.


The Road from Meccania

Muslim fanatics and La Raza are easy. But the difficulty facing us versus the Pods is enormous. Because these are not space aliens but neighbors, wives and children. And they are not only on the identifiable left but also on the misidentified right, including such leaders of the right as George Bush and John McCain.

Readers of this website know about the attacks perpetrated on it by a section of the “anti-jihadist” blogosphere. There is much credence as well given by ostensibly reasonable Americans to leftist propaganda about the “extreme right” European parties, while the latter are in fact a thin red line standing alone in the way of a nascent Eurabian Caliphate. One can see Pod dementia even among libertarians, e.g. in this attack on two respected and scrupulous ethno-conservatives, slinging trope like “white nationalist,” “racist,” “crackpot” and “nonsense.”

Seeing that Eurabia and Multimerica may be merging into one ideological superstate, if not yet a formal one, naming it would be usefu so that it remains an easily identifiable concept.

A good name already exists in literature’s archives. It is the fictional Meccania – an oppressive police tyranny regimented and controlled by the government as much as errant garbage recyclers are monitored by CCTV cameras in the UK, cartoonists are kept in check by the PC compliance pashas of Eurabia, and unruly bananas are proscribed by EC Commission Regulation No 2257/94.

The neat thing is that Gregory Owen’s Meccania, the Super-State was published in 1918. And the other neat thing is that Meccania, probably attempting to conjure a mechanized society of the future, has the name Mecca in it.

Maybe it’s time to start thinking about the common denominator of the besieged ones in Meccania, and develop a joint course of action. Maybe Benjamin Franklin was right when he said that we must all hang together, or we shall all hang separately.

A European who cares about Europe ought to care about America or Australia. Because when America goes, so does his freedom, whatever remains of it. And if Australia goes, he has no place to go in case life in Eurabia has become untenable and Multiamerica slides into a 1984  scenario.

Conversely, a Flemamericanadian who writes a bestseller gloating over Europe’s coasting toward the abyss, is not only blind to the provenance of all his mental furniture, but deaf to the gasping of his own, deeply wounded country.

Just as there is a Green Party everywhere – and that’s a poster case for an association of Pods – why not a Nonpod Party everywhere? 

Nonpod may not be the right name, but we can come up with the right name. The Peoples Party (no apostrophe), perhaps. The principle is to stand the Pods’ agenda on its head: think locally, act globally -- with local manifestation. And ultimately, perhaps, shrug Atlas’ burden  globally too, and leave the dhimmi-pods to their fate with the Ummah, the rappers and the rapists.





(1) One would love to quote a compendium of similar cases and statistics based in Europe. Alas, there is no hope that the EU would ever venture in this direction, and the mass media are far more cowed in this regard than they are in the U.S.


(2) Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews, Harper Perennial, 1988, pp. 267- 273.


See also: From Meccania to Atlantis - Part 2: From the Clenched Fist to the Raised Middle Finger, 1 November 2008 From Meccania to Atlantis - Part 3: From Encirclement to Breakout, 27 November 2008


From Meccania to Atlantis - Part 4: Tribe, 12 December 2008 


@Traveller: on educating Muslims and ourselves

I was ready to explode in a premature "what on earth does @traveller mean with convincing the islamic masses?", when I got a call.
Meanwhile you posted two well appreciated addenda. Thnx.

It seems that the killing of unbelievers will lead to cheers from Muslims, provided the connection with Islam is clear. Your relabeling would only conceal that link from them, leave Islam out of the picture,  and cheers would not arise. How is that beneficial to the West?
You couldn't have illustrated my point more cogently. It wouldn't change the threat of Islamic doctrine to Western civilization.

I applaud you for wanting to educate the Islamic masses worldwide. I think however that it might be way too ambitious for any Westerner to expect any discernable influence on the creeping Islamization of Western countries. My focus would be on Islam, and on banning that doctrine in all its manifestations from Western lands, not on Muslims. We are in agreement that analysis alone doesn't mean a thing when current developments are allowed to run their course.


Kind regs,


@ Sagunto

Sorry, there is no threat from islamic doctrine. There is a threat by gangsters who use the islamic doctrine, like there was no threat from nazism, but well from gangsters who used that doctrine, as well as Stalin and Mao with communism.
Do I like those doctrines? Definitely not. But eliminate the gangsters who use the doctrine and you win.
They are powerhungry gangsters, not Ph.D's.
Most of those leaders don't even know islamic teachings. Gulbuddin Hikmatyar is a rough gangster with no real education. He is now the biggest threat in Afghanistan.
Listen to Tariq Ramadan, a real threat as intelligent debater and "misleader", he will never step outside the islamic verbage, unless he talks about western "obligations" towards islam. As far as obligations by islamists he will use their "codewords".

@traveller: some last remarks, all in good spirit ;-)


I'll try to be brief in noting a few of the reasons why I think your mention of personal friendships with Muslims is of limited value when the danger of Islam to the West is concerned:

-  The point is obviously anecdotal, but that's not the main thing. You wouldn't be the first nor the last unbeliever who could be heard saying in despair (after former Muslim friends turned nasty): 'How is that possible, we were always getting along so well..'

Same thing with parents, like the father of a  youngster that suddenly turns up in Pakistan, Chechnya and places, 'He always was such a nice and decent young man. We don't understand..' The real trouble is that deep within their harts they felt the change.

That's why I think that for argument's sake, it's better to rely on some basic knowledge of the doctrine, instead of acquaintance with individual Muslims. 

- I have a problem with the argument that in order to preserve some form of peaceful coexistence, one should refrain from discussing religion with Muslims.

As to the tactical/contextual relabeling.

- What does that say about your view on uneducated Muslims? Perhaps they are more easily deceived by mullahs, but do you really think that Western comments about violent Jihad are believed to be compliments? I heard some expert make the point, but that was obviously in an attempt to exonerate Islam from any blame for violent Jihadism, i.e. as an apology and a sophisticated version of the same old disclaimer by Islam apologists: "This has nothing to do with Islam!".

- Your views on not confusing uneducated Muslims seem to suggest that there's something to gain there. How is that exactly, apart from the old argument that stirring things is by definition the wrong way, when it could breed more Jihadis?

- As to educating Muslims it might as well be argued that through negative comments about Jihad from the West, it is possible that more and more "traditional" Muslims (trad. as in laxe, undemanding) will indeed educate themselves to find out that Western grievances are well deserved (eh.. did I say that right?).


- Your comments about violent Jihad would require one to be untruthful and inaccurate - when Muslims could be expected to listen - about the orthodox, common nature of it in Islamic doctrine trough all ages. I wouldn't like that, especially not in my own country.


Kind regs from Amsterdam,


*** Hey, see that you posted while I was writing. Perhaps I should have kept it shorter ***

@ Sagunto

If a western comment would sound like: jihadis have blown up the WTC in NY, they would and were cheering. They showed their strength.
If the comment would be: gangsters have blown up the WTC, the inhuman gangsters died in the explosion, they would ask themselves why the muslim fact and martyrs would be ignored and there would only be muted applause, it`s even for them difficult to applaud gangsters.

@ Sagunto

The funny thing is that I never had even an argument with a muslim about islam. My position was always very clear from the beginning: I am christian, you are muslim and now that that is settled let`s talk business and no bullsh.. Since I was older and "wiser" because of white hair from the age of 42, I never had any comment. In my workshop in Pakistan they didn`t even have praying time, unless it was deducted from their salary. During ramadan they had no time-off allowed, except if it was deducted from their salary. Those iron fisted rules were respected and kept without problem.

Practical and theoretical

Nations need to maintain a dominant culture. They should not aspire to universality, which results in discord and tyrannical suppression of discord. Western societies should allow only minimal numbers of Moslems within their borders and no Moslem organizations. These suggested policies are both practical (which does not mean easy) and consistent with the essential nature of humanity and human society. They are consistent with, and arguably required by, Christianity.

gangsters # 2

@ Traveller

I think I understand your first point better now.  Your deeper point seems to be that one must consider the 'audience' when using particular words.  So, yes, it would not be wise to call jihadis "gansters", nor to call gansters "jihadis", in front of (for example) Pakistani masses.  My comments were addressed to educated and 'western' readers.  Clearly, they can make the distinction between these 2 different phenomena. And, surely, you have not gone that much 'native', or have you? 

I have my doubts about your "deficiencies" explanation/justification.  I suspect that the criminal human mind is not that different around the world, but remain open to alternate opinions on that.  

@ marcfrans, Takua and Sagunto

We can talk sense and logic to each other all day long about islam, that is not going to solve the problem, on the contrary, we are giving more weight to the "users" and "abusers".
Believe me that I read the koran and haddith literature many, many hours and it was totally useless in discussions with uneducated people who don`t even have a clue except for what their idiotic "imam" as told them.
Don`t forget that our main audience in Europe and the islamic countries are uneducated or poorly educated. The discussions about right or wrong according to islam is in such contradiction with our western culture, society and laws, it`s totally ridiculous. That is the reason I am saying that the Spencers, Elst, Vermeulen are good for explaining the problem to us and the western educated people and I applaud them for that, but useless against the islamic threath.We will never convince the islamic masses by talking their language, we will only make an impact by talking our language, according to our laws and culture, and f..k them if they break the law. As islamists they will never listen to us, as western rulers and educators they will listen to us, because it`s FOR our laws and not AGAINST them.

Very, very big difference.

You know that I prefer everytime pragmatism as against theory, how beautiful it may be, here we are purely talking pragmatic approach, and yes, guided by experience.


I am always arguing with Republicans in the U.S. because all they are interested in is maligning the Democrats. Not that there are no good reasons, but it’s not very helpful. What’s helpful is to look at the deficiencies that the Republican Party has, which are multiple and deep, and trying to correct them. After that, other options become viable.



It’s the same with Islam/ Muslims. I don’t find anything in Islam attractive or applicable in the West but I don’t want to waste energy on criticizing the creed and lifestyle of 1.2 billion people. It’s none of my business either – as long as all that is not seeping into the West. Besides, there are many knowledgeable experts and websites, e.g. Spencer, Bostom,, etc. already doing that well.



The main thing is that Islam and its practitioners, for a variety of reasons, do not belong in the West. It is so obvious that only a mass dementia of our ruling class can explain the repeal of this precept. And the main struggle, without which nothing said about resistance to Islam can work, is against that ruling class of white post-Christians, with practicing Christians, and Jews, quite numerous in that camp too, at least in the U.S.



@Traveller: "It's not the vocabulary.."

Yet, I understand what you're sayin'

I even have a somewhat similar experience with Muslim friends. Very cordial, until you (well I, actually) start talking religion, and start to hear scary stuff. I know, it's a looney hobby, exploring and probing the beliefsystems of others, but I can't help it. I am interested. The friendship went a little eh.. sour, to say the least ;-)

I still maintain that knowing the doctrine (in whatever vocabulary) is far more important than knowing however many Muslims. But I am not blind to the fact that, apart from a fistful of specialists (and weirdos suffering from the same deviation as myself), most people have far better things to occupy themselves with.  


Kind regs from Amsterdam,


@Traveller: well said


I do understand the rationale behind the point you're making, and I think it holds some water.
But there's another side to being reluctant to associate too many instances of violence with islam. And the other side is, alas, Islam itself. A "movement" that has many faces to show: from decent to violent, the "decent" ones potentially no less dangerous for Western civilization and elementary civil rights than the violent ones.

The doctrine of Islam is not extremely varied around the globe. What differs is the level (and mode) of activism ("literalism" is not the problem). And though many in the West are weary and say they're not interested in Islam (and rightfully so), regrettably, Islam is pretty interested in the West.

You focus on terrorists and - as I understand it - regret that their membership of this death-cult is brought so much to the front, instead of just labeling them by their core business: violence and gangsterism. You are right to make that point, but they are Islamists none the less, and justify their own deeds not on the holy memoirs of Al Capone. I understand that you consider Islam - at least in this instant - to be something of a superficial, rather flimsy excuse these thugs use to claim some sort of legitimacy, right? You might even think that this political religion is sort of a convenient excuse for many things, but in itself a tad bit uninteresting and a matter of personal choice for whoever happens to adhere to it.

If that's indeed the case, then I beg to differ, like  some other commenters did. But I couldn't blame anyone for having acquired somewhat of an allergic response to the whole "Islam-debate". Reading the Koran is boring beyond belief and, besides the obvious incitement to violence, the doctrine in general is strikingly unspiritual.

And Islamic violence features so prominently these days, that some have already succumbed to 'Islamo-fatigue' - i.e., being fed up with all this talk about that boring religion. And of course there will always be people, fairly educated and all, who just don't think any religion is worthy of whatever (cautious) consideration.


I heard a politician sigh the other day that, "Islam is so much more than just terrorism". The man was both absolutely right and terribly wrong. Islamic doctrine is, among other nasty things, basically a "License to kill" (sorry Takuan, it's Bond-time again ;-) , but submission can be achieved in many different ways. Our politicians want us and the media to focus on a few terrorists, in order to distract from Islam in general and its less violent, sort of creeping ways of jihaad and al-da'wa.

Your focus is different and well intended, but such tactical re-labeling might run the risk of underestimating the devastating effects of non-violent Islamization, whatever words you'd like to use for Moh's hooligans.


just my 2 eurocents

Kind regs from Amsterdam, 


@ Sagunto

My basic theory is that we cannot fight islam, except for all-out war and destruction of islamic countries and populations, from a European perspective or with an islamic vocabulary, which Takuan, marcfrans and yourself are using.
My point is that as long as you use their vocabulary and circumvent-symbols like jihadi's, you lose the upper hand.
My experience is that the islamists are secretly in awe and jealous of our education. They will do anything to cover our conversations and dialogues with them with their own symbols and expressions which have a total different meaning to their uneducated masses than to us You call a murderer a jihadi, you can as well call him a saint, and you lost your uneducated islamic audience, while it is that audience which you need to capture and convince. You call a murderer a murderer and you don't use their verbage at all, they will sit back and listen. Further you apply the full force of the law and they will not protest if you prove the murder/crime in the normal western way, because for us and for our western laws, my friend, they are not jihadi's or islamists or anything else but murderers.
We called the nazis monsters and murderers. We called Stalin and Mao monsters and murderers and we won, halfway, until we started teaching their words and their symbols and the didactics in our universities and woof, they are back, but much more clever and in command of the lingo, look at Obama, he lives from the verbage.

I don't give a damned thing about islam, it's attractive as a simple controlled lifestyle for idiots and uneducated masses, which attracts the leading wolves and if we take them seriously and follow their verbage, the uneducated will follow them since we take them seriously.
Meanwhile they have already "proven" to their masses that we are scared of them, which made us look silly and idiotic and "powerless" against islam, that's deadly.

The above comes from live experience and nothing else with some of the islamic leaders/gangsters. You know what? They respect me and call me uncle because I told them the truth from the very start: I am not muslim, I am christian, I respect good people and I hate bad people. They actually called me their friend and they never, ever, talked religion with me. They sought even my advice in the punishment of some of their people who misbehaved. It went that far.


@ Traveller

1.  Your comment on the Greenspan-hearing and on 'elites' is well-taken.

2. I agree with Takuan Seiyo that gangsterism and jihadism are two different phenomena.  While jihadis and gangsters may often take 'similar' actions (in terms of their results and their ruthlesness), they are driven by very different motivations.  This does not preclude that a subset of apparent-jihadis are really simply gangsters, whereas the opposite would be very rare.

3. I disagree that many become gangsters "by deficiencies of all kinds", unless you are willing to site those 'deficiencies' in those individuals themselves.  If you remove the necessity for personal responsibility for one's own actions, you remove any rational basis for making judgements about any 'normal' person.     

@ marcfrans

My choice of the word gangsters is simply that I don't want any excuses for them and the common people should not be confused by the name jihadi's or whatever else the MSM comes up with. By reducing everything to the simplest expression you take any "excuses" like Palestine etc. etc. away. I take for this the example of my educated frieznds in Pakistan, they will never ever call them jihadi's or anything of the kind, just gangsters.
The deficiencies I am referring to are definitely not meant to be excuses. But there are to many to name them all. I am talking about deficiencies which turn normal human beings into massmurderers or killers of opponents of any kind. I had the doubtful privilege of knowing quite a few "deficient" people amongst the Afghan "mujahedeen". They were just murderers who didn't realise how atrocious they were and definitely not fit to be in any kind of human society. They became such by being trained as killers against the "infidel" Russians from the age of 7/8 years old. The verbage was islamic, the actions were murderous and supported by adult gangsters who saw only pleasure in killing. The aim was money or land, power in general. By talking about islam you give to much honour to the killers in front of the whole islamic uneducated community which starts to believe that those killings are not so bad and justified. I hope I made my point clear enough, I am not sure.

Civil War 2

Thomas W Chittum wrote a badly edited book about 10-15 years ago about describing the breakup of America into racially based states. The book was called Civil War 2: The Coming Breakup of America and it showed how the US might breakup and included maps of the southeastern United States showing how the White population was in danger if war did break out.

Chittum believed that the US southwest would join Mexico, the Souhteast would become a Black country and the northern US would become a White homeland, possibly in association with Canada. Tho book is available here on Amazon, can be bought in PDF form for $6 here, or it can be downloaded illegally here. I'll leave the moral decision up to you, but it is worth reading just for a glimpse of what might happen if things begin to spin wildly out of control.

The New World

Check out Frederick Turner's The New World (1985). The Uess in the 24th century consists of the Free Counties, the Black Counties, the Riots, and the burbs. A post-liberal, post-democratic world. An outstanding epic poem, followed by his Genesis (1987), an epic about the war between the Eco-theists who dominate Earth and the rebels who terraform and colonize Mars.

@Kaptein Andre

I did notice your astute inference from my mention of Rokossowski. Forgive me for not having responded; I try to concentrate my energy on the big issues before us; often I can’t get to reading comments for days and weeks.



Try Zubrowka.



Your comment re: leadership is true, But I am not talking about the present. The GOP, for instance, is useless precisely because it does not have its Praetorian Guard. But unless one is raised for the future, given the demographic changes in America, the GOP may never again see power except if it continues to outpander, outspend, out-color and out-ruin the US relative to the Democrats. And it’s possible that real change is impossible, except by arising from ruins.



As to jihadis, I beg to differ. Mohammad Atta @ Co. were no gangsters. Jihadism at its top is pure, undistilled religious craziness. It is true that there is much criminality and gangsterism among diaspora Muslims, and sometimes it may hide under a jihadi label, but it's a separate phenomenon. It really doesn't matter though. The pox on both of them. 



@ Takuan Seiyo

My comment about islamic gangsters versus other names makes it much easier to fight them. If everybody, politicians, justice systems, police and anti-terrorist services would just keep it simple and if the MSM would just call them gangsters and nothing else, like the educated muslims in their own country do, it would be much easier to eradicate them. There would be no graduation or classification of the "poor misled" guys. Somebody who kills 3.000 people is a gangster and a criminal with an added sauce of religious craziness, but I am not intrested in that sauce.

@Takuan Seiyo

Hah! I knew you were a Pole and said so as much some time ago - to no response.


Given the choice, which one would you choose:







Re: Your comment about the necessary virtues you’ll find in node/3338  that I wrote this:


Only a governing elite can curb democracy's tendency to run amok, says Fujiwara. Members of the elite must possess four characteristics: a broad cultural and historical erudition, an ability to see "the big picture," exceptional strength of character, and sufficient love of their people and country to sacrifice for them their lives in an hour of need. Japan, Fujiwara adds, used to but no longer has such an elite. One of his greatest delusions is that Great Britain, France, and the U.S. still do.


@ Takuan Seiyo

The quote by Fujiwara is academically intresting and noteworthy but totally useless in our consumer society. I have seen the shameful congress hearing with Greenspan, one of the "elites" where democratic congressmen attacked Greenspan as if they were totally innocent. Greenspan was the biggest disillusion by the way he wanted to explain his innocence. Utter BS on all sides. This "elite" is utterly useless.
As far as islam is concerned, I have some experience by living as an isolated businessman in the midst of an islamic society for many years.
My, very short, conclusion: people are people, created with a bunch of strengths and weaknesses. The family, culture, ethnic environment, physical and mental construction are so many variables leading to a certain result. But one thing is clear with every healthy human being: he wants to be happy and he is never a gangster by choice from the start. They become gangsters by deficiencies of all kinds and growing into it.
I use the word gangsters because the words fundamentalism, extremism, religious zeal etc. etc. don't tell the truth. The educated "normal" muslims don't see the "jihadis" as any other than gangsters and they are right.
We should never talk about "jihadis" or such similar drivel, we can only talk about criminals and gangsters, it's much more clear and educating.


Thank you for being such a diligent proof reader. However, your snark is tiresome. You would fit seamlessly as an alpha male in a senior high school class in the American suburbia. Ultimately, much of what you will get from any text you will have brought to it yourself. I can’t fault you for the way you choose to read this text, but I don’t wish to spend time on discussing it either.



Tokyo pastry boutique revisited.. and closed.

Take it easy Seiyo, you almost seem to get as excited about the mass-movement of football as you were about the life & times of Madonna ;-)

And indeed you're right, it's wise not to start rolling the ball when you don't want to play, or what was that old saying again, "Those who play at bowls, must look out for rubs".

Anyway, hardly worth to get too worked-up about.

To close the black Dutch football issue on a more serious note, I might add that the black midfielders, that you brought into play, are closely associated with a short period of uncontrolled mass-immigration of blacks from Surinam into the Netherlands ('70s). That event quite literally brought racism to Amsterdam. So when you'd have looked beyond the patisseu - hey, you've changed it. Merci bien. - beyond that i.m.o. rather superficial "diversity statement" of yours, you might have discovered a more interesting story, to complement the remarks you made about racism.

And before I'll sink back into the grey mass of global consumerism, allow me a few last asides.

- Islam & "Islamophobia"

Why the peculiar defence against the charge of "Islamophobia"? When engaging in polemics with an adversary using their propagandistic labels, isn't it more straightforward to plainly state what you think of Islam and call it by its proper name, e.g. like Robert Spencer does, by identifying his position as Islamo-realism?

What you do basically, is respond with anecdotal wisdom about pretty decent people somewhere in Qatar [Paraphr:]: "I am , [pardon].."We" are not Islamophobic, because I  heard that some people in Qatar seem to have risen above the level of licentious hedonism" (shouldn't be too hard to accomplish that, right?).

So there is decent Muslim-folk in Qatar. On the other hand you state: "Muslims,[...] people too different for us to absorb and digest, with alien ways and mores that we cannot condone." 

I agree with that last statement, but what exactly does it say about your view on Islam? Are the civilized ones in Quatar not Muslims then, or "enlightened" Muslims perhaps? Or would these people regress to mores and alien ways that become indigestible when exported? Why combine two totally different sets of Muslims when talking about Islam/Islamophobia?
The libel of Islamophobia is primarily levelled against those who criticize Islamic doctrine, not necessarily those who happen to dislike Muslims.

- Multiculti and Racism

And what precisely are you trying to say about multiculturalism and racism? [Q:] "We are not racist. Nature’s strength is in diversity, and so is Humanity’s."
Eh.. what does that refer to? Presumably not the same "diversity" you rightly object to, when you say [Q:] "..the young, celebrate[s] “diversity” -- i.e. their peoples’ and Western Civilization’s inevitable dissolution.."

Elsewhere you write [Q:] "One wanders what would be the public reaction if the university graduation thesis of the white wife of the candidate for the U.S. presidency contained the sentence, “As a member of the white community, I am obligated to this community..".."

- Well, what would your reaction be?

Multiculturalism, the celebration of "diversity" and so on, is aimed at the dissolution of Western Civilization, you write. Agreed. But from your lengthy piece it is not entirely clear whether you are 100% opposed to the "philosophy" of multiculturalism, or that you'd only like to accuse it of being a "false" or "stupid" sort of multiculturalism. In my view, it is stupid and dangerous enough for sure, but what is your take on the underlying presuppositions?
Perhaps you only differ from other, indeed anti-Western, multiculturalists in the sense that you'd like to include native Westerners as another "minority" who should enjoy just as much claim on the discourse of victimhood or as any other disenfranchised minoritygroup.

You wouldn't condemn multiculturalism in se, only the current stupid leftist version, that is unfair to Western Culture. Right?

Kind regs from Amsterdam,



Polish history and literature


Thank you for considering the relevance of my thoughts on Fire/Sword. My formal education in Polish ended with the 3rd grade but as, by then, I had already read all of Sienkiewicz’s work twice and had become quite knowledgeable about Polish history, I have some observations that would be relevant to your question. You should, BTW, consider all of Sienkiewicz’s trilogy, as it sheds light on important aspects of European history, including, after Fire/Sword, the Polish–Swedish wars that were sort of an extension of the 30 Years War, and the wars with Turkish invaders, leading to Vienna 1683.

But it’s a large subject; even Fire/ Sword alone would take 4 pages at least. I am planning a separate article for BJ that will highlight some elements of Polish history that have application to Eurabia’s present situation. For now, I’d like to share with you what I wrote in an e-mail to a reader who accused me of being “too soft” on Islam.

Even when I was growing up, in Commie times, every news transmission of Polish radio started with a bugle dirge cut-off in the middle (it’s called Hejnal Mariacki, you can google it). This had been going on since the invention of radio, and continues to this day. This audio-logo, as it were, commemorates a 13th-century bugler who saved Krakow from being overrun by savage Muslim hordes from Asia.

Standing high in the tower of the grand church of the city (and of Poland, to this day) the bugler saw a large force of the barbarian invaders approaching on horseback toward Krakow, and gave the alert to close the city gates. In the middle, a Tartar arrow pierced his throat.

So you can see that, improbable though it may seem, I -- and every Pole, Hungarian, Serb, Bulgarian etc. -- knew at the age of five what the adult population of Western Europe still by an large disbelieves, and Americans are underestimating.

Serious folk

Mr. Seiyo: Thank you for your reply. I look forward to your article on Polish history, as well as to reading The Deluge and Pan Michael. In With Fire and Sword, the hero must sacrifice himself in the war for civilization--and Christ--against savagery. That sacrifice is rewarded. The West used to understand knighthood very well. Many Westerners still do. But there is also great confusion of the kinds you have diagnosed.

@ Nataraja and traveller

I understand your puzzlement as to the apparent contradiction between what I appear to be and what I write. I don’t like to divert attention to myself, partly because my biography is more complicated than any I know of, and is impossible to relay without a presumptuously large number of words. But also because an important part of me is constructed of Japanese ideas, albeit pre-1870, and dwelling on the ‘I’ and ‘me’ goes against the grain of that.

However, there is such a thing as truth in advertising, disclosure of vested biases etc. In that spirit I’ll tell you, if it helps, that I am Polish and Catholic by birth, half-Jewish and very comfortable with that. However, there is a personal baggage linked to that too, which in my case implies that my entire family, other than my parents I described in node/2655 and a small branch in Switzerland, had been wiped out in WW2 and its wealth had been robbed by German and Soviet invaders.

My parents and I escaped the commies with one suitcase when I was 9 years old. After that, to make a long story short, we lived in Switzerland and after that I moved to France and eventually America. I have therefore acquired a fairly broad basis in what I’d “European” culture, including the Slavic one that my mother continued to impart to me even when we were living in the West. But all my university education and early career was in the U.S. The rest (of the career) was all over the world, until I settled in Japan.

I’ve taken training in some Zen-related disciplines, think highly of the old Japanese culture, rather lowly of the modern one, though overall it’s still a nice balance. But the books on my bookshelves are in four European languages, the CDs playing on my audio system are by European composers, the churches I go to, when I do, are only in Europe, my political ideas come mostly from dead Euro-Americans, and the landscapes and influences of my childhood are an indelible part of me. So I feel comfortable writing about European and American themes, and hope you will feel comfortable reading me.

Great Poles

I look forward to hearing, some day, Mr. Seiyo's thoughts on Sienkiewicz's With Fire and Sword, a sustained meditation on civilization and savagery and one of the greatest novels of world literature. Anent the above essay, the Pods remain in the background--i.e., those eager to betray their country and their civilization in the name of a perverted order--but they nearly succeed in their evil design. If the novel has any place in the constellation of Mr. Seiyo's meditations on our own times, it would be interesting to learn about it.

@Sag For some reason


For some reason football seems to bring out yobbism even in those who might otherwise be normal. I should not have gone there. Indeed team sports on TV have become the opium of the masses. There is no hope of recovery unless we cut back on that severely.

For snarks tethered to their 25” super flat-panels, this is the wrong place, and understanding metaphor is an endeavor doomed. 

Go spill your coffee elsewhere.


Dear Takuan Seiyo

How should I match your self-description as
"bi-racial, tri-national, quadri-degreed, quinti-lingual and sexto-ethnic"
"Europeans who wish to assert their ethnic identity and interests versus those of aliens", "a stupid form of multiculturalism to an evil one ", "One Identity- We are the ethno-conservatives...", "Our own propulsive power comes from inner conviction, books by Dead White Males", "our opposition to our disfranchisement, marginalization and impoverishment by our own ruling elites in government, media, education, culture and business", "Nature’s strength is in diversity, and so is Humanity’s. But we are not Nature or Humanity. We are particular people trying to live our particular lives. And for that, we need our particular ethnicity and our singular culture, as other peoples need theirs".

Do you understand me when I say I have trouble placing you?


P.S. This is not an attack. I liked your article.

Dear Nataraja

Takuan Seiyo doesn't need me to explain himself but I can tell you how I see him:
A multi-component human being who has found himself and is comfortable with it.
He would love for other individuals to feel the same comfort, which is practically impossible if you deny where you come from and want to join the multi-cul-anti-white-anti-christian-anti-us(not US, though mostly incorporated also) movement.
By personal experience I know that it is possible to live comfortably in other cultures, but not by trying to adopt them, just by staying yourself.

Dear Nataraja 2 (Voegelinian)

I would add to the previous comment that Mr. Seiyo is not advocating a bureaucratic and "mechanistic" concept of ethnicity to stand against the bureaucratic and mechanistic policy of global community pushed by the leftist, globalist Pods. His concept of ethnicity is holistic and polypolar, involving a paradoxical interplay of body and spirit. I see in Mr. Seiyo's commentary a Voegelinian orientation towards seeking attunement to the divine order, and a recognition that a complex ethnic and civilizational loyalty is part of that order. As human beings, it is not our role to change the divine order at will. That is what the Gnostic rebels of the left seek to do. However, it is our role to discover it anew with everything we have at our disposal. See Science and Faith, Eric Gans (1993).

Dull non-black Dutch midfielders? But seriously..


"..Life in Tokyo without pastry shops operated by the best of German and French patisseurs would be as dull as [...] Dutch football might be without black midfielders.."

[..gulp, cough..] There goes my "koffie verkeerd", sprayed all over the 25'' sw super flat-panel, turning it into a 60Hz neo-Pollockian caffeine "dripping" of some sort..
Thnx man ;-)

So "Clarence in Orange" would be like a French pastry vendor in Tokyo, is that right?
By the way, wouldn't that be (forget about the hood) "patissiers" instead?

Remember Germany, WorldCup 1974, and the new Dutch "total football"? Seen any black Dutch midfielders? Think it was dull?

Isn't that just the problem with statements like the above quoted, I mean, that they basically espouse a "tourist view" of the world? Kind of a globalized multiculturalism-light, that already reproduces some ready-made cultural identities, wherever you go? Would that be what you'd call an "intelligent form of multiculturalism"?

I ask this, because I seriously doubt that multiculturalism, in whatever form or flavour, could ever be considered intelligent. By intelligent folk that is.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,