Switzerland Minus Minarets

Power to the Swiss people and the Schweizerische Volkspartei (SVP). The image caption reads, “Swiss quality, the middle class’ party”.

Swiss Ban Building of Minarets on Mosques – NYTimes.com:

The government must now draft a supporting law on the ban, a process that could take at least a year and could put Switzerland in breach of international conventions on human rights.

Apparently even the mildest, most indirect attempts to resist genocidal levels of immigration can put Whites in breach of “international conventions on human rights”.

Of 150 mosques or prayer rooms in Switzerland, only 4 have minarets, and only 2 more minarets are planned. None conduct the call to prayer. There are about 400,000 Muslims in a population of some 7.5 million people. Close to 90 percent of Muslims in Switzerland are from Kosovo and Turkey, and most do not adhere to the codes of dress and conduct associated with conservative Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, said Manon Schick, a spokeswoman for Amnesty International in Switzerland.

Nothing to see here. Only 5 percent of Switzerland’s population is muslim, close to 100 percent of them cultural and genetic aliens.

“Most painful for us is not the minaret ban, but the symbol sent by this vote,” said Farhad Afshar, who runs the Coordination of Islamic Organizations in Switzerland. “Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community.”

The kosovars, turks, and other muslims can go home, feel accepted, and build as many minarets as they like. Most painful for the Swiss is that if “international human rights” prevail it’s only a matter of time before the Swiss will be entirely dispossessed of their one and only homeland.

To the consternation of anti-White internationalists resistance is beginning to come not just from the “nativist”, “xenophobic”, “racist”, “nazi” SVP – but also from leftist feminists.

Women lead Swiss in vote to ban minarets – Times Online:

A right-wing campaign to outlaw minarets on mosques in a referendum being held in Switzerland today has received an unlikely boost from radical feminists arguing that the tower-like structures are “male power symbols” and reminders of Islam’s oppression of women.

A “stop the minarets” campaign has provoked ferment in the land of Heidi, where women are more likely than men to vote for the ban after warnings from prominent feminists that Islam threatens their rights.

This resistance is “right-wing” with “an unlikely boost” only if seen from an anti-White internationalist cheerleading point of view. Media bias isn’t “liberal”, it’s anti-White.

Socialist politicians have been furious to see icons of the left joining what is regarded as an anti-immigrant campaign by the populist Swiss People’s party, the biggest group in parliament.

One of them, Julia Onken, warned that failure to ban minarets would be “a signal of the state’s acceptance of the oppression of women”. She has sent out 4,000 emails attacking Muslims who condone forced marriage, honour killings and beating women.

Normal, healthy people don’t like being replaced by aliens who look, think, and act alien, obliterating their precious homeland and traditions before their very eyes, forever. Apparently, neither do radical feminists.

Swiss business is horrified. There are fears of a reaction against Swiss products similar to the one suffered by Denmark over the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad in 2005.

“The brand ‘Swiss’ must continue to represent values such as openness, pluralism and freedom of religion,” said Hanspeter Rentsch, a member of the board of Swatch, the watchmaker.

It’s more horrorifying that Swiss businessmen feel free to favor “brand ‘Swiss'” over people Swiss. The irony is that openness and pluralism will eventually destroy the Swiss and all their “brands”, and the freedom to build minarets will ultimately be very, very bad for business.

Can you guess who else thinks openness, pluralism and freedom of religion are more important than Swiss self-determination?

Push to ban minarets in Switzerland a ‘threat’:

Switzerland’s biggest Jewish groups said Wednesday that a far-right push to ban the construction of minarets here was a “threat” to religious harmony and hindered the integration of Muslims.

– The referendum infringes religious freedom, a concept enshrined in the constitution – said the Swiss Federation of Jewish Communities and the Platform of Liberal Jews in Switzerland in a statement.

It – also poses a threat to peaceful relations between the religions and inhibits the integration endeavours of Muslims in Switzerland – they added.

This is pure double-talk. Immigration brings the threat to harmony. The Swiss citizenry, who to the extent they’ve been informed and consulted have expressed their disfavor for immigration, muslim or otherwise, and should not be forced to suffer it, whether the immigrants wish to “integrate” with them or not. It is their very existence which is being infringed. What gives “jewish communities”, who have not integrated after more than two millenia among Europeans, any standing to lecture anyone about immigration or integration? They consider themselves jews first, not Swiss, so they can STFU or move to israel and lecture their own tribe about immigration and integration.

The two Jewish groups said they – take seriously the fears of the population that extremist ideas could be disseminated in Switzerland. –

– But banning minarets is no solution — it only creates in Muslims in Switzerland a sense of alienation and discrimination – they said.

If creating a sense of alienation is the concern then surely the alienation the native Swiss feel at the sight of minarets in their homeland trumps the senses of migrant muslims and jews, who after all are only guests. What the Swiss and all other Whites should take seriously is how jews and muslims do not hesitate to “discriminate”, i.e. identify with and advocate in favor of their own groups, even as they pathologize Whites for any attempt to do so.

It’s true that banning minarets is no solution. Deporting aliens would be better, but even that wouldn’t solve the problem. The problem is “international human rights”. What horrifies Swiss business is the precedent for internationalist punishment that has already been set by organized jewry. See The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany: The Economic Boycott of 1933.

Why would any normal, healthy people want to see the dysfunctional middle east recreated inside their country’s borders? In part because we’re constantly told, as we’re reminded here in this case, that it harms peaceful relations, harmony, and integration to see it this way. And in part because if we set that concern aside and persist then we’re threatened – all the double-talk about peaceful relations, harmony, and integration aside – with open war.

Some pundits characterize what’s happening to every White country, and only White countries, as “suicide”, or “self-destruction” caused by “liberalism”. This story of resistance from Switzerland, among others, puts the lie to that poisonous, blame-shifting meme.

UPDATE 2 Dec 2009: In a comment on Interview: Arthur Kemp, Hunter Wallace writes:

Banning minarets is treating symptoms, not the disease.

I disagree.

The disease is the idea, which produced its most fateful results during the Enlightenment in the service of emancipating jews, that Whites, and only Whites, must not “discriminate” against “minorities”. Since this meme took root it has been fed and twisted to genocidal proportions. Whites everywhere now live under a regime which subsidizes, supports, and even directly imposes “discrimination” against Whites, defending the interests of interloping aliens over the interests of the native-born citizenry.

The banning of minarets by popular vote strikes only obliquely at this idea, but it is a blow against the disease itself. Organized jewry roundly condemns it for exactly this reason. “Liberal” feminists played a prominent part in the minaret ban, putting the lie to the corollary meme, pimped constantly by faux-White pro-jews and others, that “suicidal” White “liberalism” is to blame for all that ills us. Even “liberals”, it turns out, resist when their “suicide” becomes too blatant. The genocide is inflicted in the name of “liberal” “non-discrimination” in name but not in fact, and it is inflicted by “the international community” – which means the plutocrats, their media, their jet-setting cosmopolitan courtiers, jewish groups, muslim groups, and the treaonous costume clowns who serve their interests in their governments.

“Treating symptoms” is more fairly applied to much of what conservatives do here in the US – for example, to their focus on the transfer of wealth via taxes or healthcare, never identifying who the wealth is transferred from or to; or to the “culture war”, never identifying who’s at war with whom.

41 thoughts on “Switzerland Minus Minarets”

  1. Excellent article, Tan. You have dissected much about the lies which are directed against the native White populations of all Western countries. International business basically IS jewish business, not the businesses of our traditional populations. The internationalist businesses owe alligiences only to international bankers, and each of these have long ago demonstrated their willingness to abandon the “native countries” which allowed them to flourish.

    One older traditional blogger identifies these apparatus as the International Trade Cartel, and states that:


    “The world is organized as an episcopacy – rule from the top down. The inner circle of the cartel’s episcopacy are few in number. Their immense power is derived from their incredible wealth accumulated over the centuries by usury banking, trade, and war.

    This International Trade Cartel (ITC) doesn’t need large numbers. It hires agents. It appoints kings to rule, great merchants to manage, and selects priests it needs to teach “universalism” to all Cartel subjects and to justify and bless Cartel’s acts.”

    And, “{The} “subject most desired by Cartel “kings”, “priests”, and “merchants” is the mixed-breed. This is why “universalism” or “integration” is an intregal part of Cartel rule.

    Thank God that the Swiss are showing backbone and exercising thier traditional rights to common sense which is what other countries have long since abandoned.

    We can expect to see the Swiss targeted for destruction and condemnation for a long time. There was not much exposure to the following news in the US, but you can imagine the reactions of those representatives of “international conventions on human rights” when the Swiss newspaper reported on incidents involving them:


    “Sweden’s Aftonbladet newspaper sparked the row last week when it published a report claiming Israeli soldiers snatched Palestinian youths to steal their organs and returned their dismembered bodies a few days later.

    The Swedish government has declined to condemn the piece, saying it has to respect the principle of freedom of expression enshrined in its constitution.

    The article has sparked outrage in Israel, with Netanyahu and scores of ministers and commentators calling it a “blood libel” smacking of anti-Semitic accusations against Jews.

    “The Swedish government cannot keep silent any longer. In the Middle Ages, slander was spread accusing Jews of preparing Passover matza (unleavened bread) with the blood of Christian children,” Steinitz said.

    “And today it is IDF (Israel Defence Forces) soldiers who are accused of killing Palestinians to take their organs,” he said.”


  2. “The banning of minarets by popular vote strikes only obliquely at this idea, but it is a blow against the disease itself. Organized jewry roundly condemns it for exactly this reason.” Nails it exactly. This is the real issue, White right to take the actual steps needed that result in White survival, and their organized groups see that and take the opposite side from us.

  3. In Swiss voters ban the minaret; the West’s anti-Western establishment is shocked and scandalized, faux-White pro-jew Auster writes:

    This vote by the Swiss people is an important sign that ordinary Westerners are starting to reject the suicidal liberal belief that Western society is defined by tolerance, even toward the intolerant; by non-discrimination, even toward cultures and peoples that are radically incompatible with our own; and by freedom of religion, even of religions commanded by their god to subjugate and destroy us.

    Hey Larry. Where does this “suicidal” belief come from? Cui bono? It certainly doesn’t come from the ordinary folk you continue to imply are “suiciding” themselves. So where is it coming from? Oh wait. I see. Liberalism is secularized Christianity. Those conniving Christians. That explains why the media and the courts continue to bash Christians and Christianity while defending muslims and jews. It’s suicide!

    Auster quotes a news account anticipating the ban:

    If confirmed, the result would be a huge embarrassment for the neutral Swiss government, which had warned that amending the constitution to ban construction of minarets could serve could “serve the interests of extremist circles.” [LA replies: By “extremists,” the Swiss government means people who don’t want their society to be Islamized.]

    And by “extremists” Larry means people who don’t want their society judaized.

    As far as I can see it isn’t “liberals” making a stink about the minaret ban. It’s a bunch of people invoking “liberalism”, but with their own self-interests in mind.

  4. A sampling of current media reports.

    Top UN Human Rights Official Calls Minaret Ban Discriminatory:

    “The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, has said she hesitates to condemn a democratic vote,” Colville said. “But, she has no hesitation at all in condemning the anti-foreigner scare mongering which has characterized political campaigns in a number of countries including Switzerland, which helps produce results like this.”

    That’s some balancing act. They may hesitate, but in the end these internationalists are condemning not only the vote, but what it stands for, which is the very right of the Swiss to define and defend themselves.

    Politics based on xenophobia or intolerance is extremely disquieting, wherever it occurs,” says Rupert Colville, spokesman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights

    Disingenuous rhetoric that seeks to doom the Swiss to obliteration by genocidal levels of immigration is far more disquieting.

    World’s press dissect Swiss minaret ban.

    A concentrated collection of excerpts of opinion-shaping. They know this ban is wrong, they just can’t decide whether the cause is insanity, ignorance, calumny, intolerance, racism, hatred, fear, or xenophobia. The problem being entirely with the Swiss, of course. There is no suggestion that the Swiss are expressing a healthy and normal desire not to be alienated or hated in their own homeland, or that the interloping aliens deserve even part of the blame.

    In Minarets and Islamic Supremacism, Andrew Bostom writes:

    The venerable Brill Encyclopedia of Islam (EOI) entry on minarets makes plain that minarets are a political statement of Islamic supremacism.

    Good to know when watching Video: Swissed-off: Outrage as ‘Minaret ban’ scandal flares up, where the pretense is that muslims are the most peaceful, unassuming, tolerant people on earth and the nasty “islamophobic” Swiss are the real problem.

    You know who, again. In Wake Of Minaret Ban, ADL Urges Swiss Government To Ensure Religious Freedom:

    The Federation of Swiss Jewish Communities (FSJC) clearly stated its opposition to the initiative before the vote and expressed its disappointment at the result. This is not the first time a Swiss popular vote has been used to promote religious intolerance. A century ago, a Swiss referendum banned Jewish ritual slaughter in an attempt to drive out its Jewish population. We share the FSJC’s stated concern that those who initiated the anti-minaret campaign could try to further erode religious freedom through similar means.

    Of course organized jewry only does what “liberalism”, ie. “secular Christianity”, tells them to.

  5. More media reports…

    Dutch MPs reject motion against minarets | Radio Netherlands Worldwide:

    The motion was submitted by an orthodox Christian party the SGP following the Swiss referendum to ban minarets. Only Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party and MP Rita Verdonk supported the motion.

    Look at that. Christians against minarets. Now why would they do that?

    SGP MP Kees van der Staaij told Radio Netherlands Worldwide that the building of minarets and mosques increased polarisation in Dutch society.

    A voice of sanity in the storm.

    He said he would think it perfectly normal if Saudi Arabia banned the building of cathedrals in Mecca.

    They already do. In all of Saudia Arabia. The UN and “the international community” might look into that if really cared about “human rights”.

    Swiss minaret ban reflects ‘ignorance’: Indonesia | The Jakarta Post:

    The new foreign minister said the controversial referendum in the European country reflected the need for more interfaith dialogues between religious communities as prejudice against Islam persists in Western countries. “We cannot afford to appreciate a policy that is based on ignorance,” he said.

    He stopped short of saying, however, whether he feared the new cultural disharmony between Islam and liberal Europe would spark violent protests in the Muslim world, with Indonesia having the biggest population, as happened in 2006 over the Danish cartoon controversy.

    The “ignorance” argument is an interesting distortion. Ignorance is what allowed islam to get its nose in Europe’s tent. Ignorance is what makes it possible to brow-beat and insult the Swiss in the name of “liberalism”, “tolerance”, and “freedom of religion”. The Swiss don’t want to learn what they can see the Dutch, French, and Germans have already learned. That’s not ignorance. It’s good sense.

    Indonesians should mind their own damn business.

    Minaret Ban Shoves Swiss Hard to the Right – Surprise vote shows anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim sentiment on the rise:

    The 53% turnout was unusually large for Switzerland, with a mass of rural voters overwhelming more liberal city dwellers. “It represents a two finger gesture against the towns, foreigners, the powerful, the better educated and the like,” said one Swiss analyst. The vote undermines Switzerland’s carefully cultivated neutral image. “This vote is shocking because it took place in a state which advocates secularism and which prides itself on treating all religions on an equal basis,” said one Algerian paper.

    You could fairly describe the US government as shoving banker bailouts, stimulus, cap and trade, perpetual global war, Obamacare, and amnesty down our throats, against what voters want. You could even describe it as anti-public, anti-native, anti-citizen, or anti-voter. For some reason the media never does that. But let 57.5% of the vote favor something the media doesn’t like and THAT gets characterized as shoving, hard, anti-this and anti-that.

    This is shocking (not really) because it takes place in a media that carefully cultivates and prides itself on a neutral image (which is completely false).

  6. This bit of that last quote rings very true:

    with a mass of rural voters overwhelming more liberal city dwellers. “It represents a two finger gesture against the towns, foreigners, the powerful, the better educated and the like,”

    Note again that the blame is placed entirely on the ordinary people, the “rural voters”, rather than on the powerful cosmopolitan city dwellers and foreigners who despise them and who, if they get their way, will transform and destroy Switzerland and lives of the “rural voters”. The internationalists could all jet over to Istanbul and tolerate each other to death, but that’s not what they want.

    The divide exposed by the minaret ban is similar to what was exposed by the Polanski arrest. That case revealed a collection of rich and powerful moral and ethical cripples who would defend an absconding child rapist. This case reveals rich and powerful moral and ethical cripples who would repress the Swiss to protect the interests of arrogant, intolerant, discriminatory, supremacist aliens. Aliens who could and would be forced to leave by any sane government truly representing the interests of its native people.

    This case is much more important than Polanski. The fate of an entire country hangs in the balance. More than that, Switzerland stands in effigy here for all White countries. I wish the best for the Swiss, but I also hope the internationalists overplay their hand – ratcheting their rhetoric and sanctions so high that those of us who have so far remained ignorant or tolerant or skeptical of the genocidal threat will lose these and all others excuses to avoid facing it.

  7. The Swiss minaret ban: Anxieties, unveiled | Culture Monster | Los Angeles Times blames Swiss paranoia. The URL shows the original title was “The Swiss minaret ban: Islamophobia, Lightly Veiled”. Hatred for Whites, loud and clear.

    A separate editorial from the LAT, Swiss ban on minarets is pure discrimination:

    It’s religious discrimination pure and simple.

    Yet whoever wrote this is aware of the purer and simpler muslim discrimination that already exists. They conclude:

    The comparison won’t be lost on Muslim governments that stifle the expression of Christianity. Why should Saudi Arabia allow Christians to worship openly if a supposed paragon of pluralism such as Switzerland requires Muslims to efface their identity?

    The question every White, Christian or not, should ask is: Why are all these people who are supposedly so upset about tolerance, pluralism, and identity not doing anything but bashing Whites about it? Hatred for Whites, loud and clear.

    Indonesia calling again, Thanking the Swiss vote | The Jakarta Post:

    The Swiss vote is only a ban against minarets. Muslims there can still have mosques, just without symbols that many Swiss find offensive. This is already much more than what many religious minorities have in a predominantly Muslim Indonesia.

    This is a future asylum seeker, assuming he escapes Indonesia alive. Shocking, is it not, that the UN hasn’t already investigated and set straight Indonesia’s violation of “international human rights”.

    Daniel Ammann: The Real Reasons Why the Swiss Voted to Ban Minarets – because the paranoid racists tricked the good and trusting anti-racists. At least he provides more numbers than the mainstream media has:

    The small, landlocked country in the middle of Europe has 7.7 million inhabitants, 1.7 million (or 22 percent) of which are foreigners. There are an estimated 400,000 to 450,000 Muslims living in Switzerland — almost three times as many as twenty years ago (1990: 152’000). Islam is today the second largest religion after Christianity with roughly 150 mosques all over the country.

    The first LAT link above claims there are only 350,000 muslims. I think it’s safe to assume the true number is higher than what any media/government source admits. In downplaying the Swiss cause for concern no mainstream source has mentioned the muslim population tripling in the past twenty years. Wouldn’t that be a good thing to know in trying to judge whether Swiss fears are justified?

    This HuffPo guy advises against suppressing votes or discussion. Mainstream op-eds, on the other hand, are withholding and distorting information even as they pretend they’re faithfully providing it, blaming the Swiss for imagining there is any threat, and blaming them for all the problems immigration has brought. This makes them complicit in the perpetration of genocide.

  8. I saw “Where did Dennis Mangan’s blog go?” Thanks for taking the trouble to make that backup. Takedowns for violations of terms of use are usually labelled as such, so Mangan’s problem likely stems from either a technical glitch or someone hijacking his google account. But it’s still a wakeup call. I advise everyone to download and save anything that’s precious to you.

  9. Ismael Amin, the former president of Association of Islamic Organisations in Zurich believes, the Swiss were misled over the minaret vote. – swissinfo. What’s apparent from the media reports I’ve cited above, and from this muslim’s taqiyya here, is that the Swiss and the rest of us certainly have been and continue to be misled.

    Vatican criticises Swiss minaret ban – Europe – World – The Times of India:

    The Vatican on Monday endorsed criticism by Swiss bishops that a vote in Switzerland to ban the construction of mosque minarets was a blow to religious freedom.

    Antonio Maria Sveglio, president of the pontifical council on migration, told the ANSA news agency that “we are on the same page” as the Conference of Swiss Bishops.

    In a statement after Sunday’s vote, the conference said it “heightens the problems of cohabitation between religions” while secretary-general Felix Gmur told Vatican Radio it was “heavy blow to religious freedom and integration”.

    No mention of how this ban compares to the heavier, longer-standing blows to religious freedom and integration elsewhere. Despite the headline, the bulk of the article consists of non-Christians bashing the Swiss.

    UN condemns Swiss minaret ban. Another misleading headline. The article is all about what an imam of a mosque in Geneva has to say:

    ”Muslims and Islam have been condemned,” he said. ”Even if today we say it’s not the case, it is the case.”

    This despite the overwhelming drumbeat in the media, including this article, which explicitly condemns the Swiss.

    Turkey chides Swiss over minaret ban | Jerusalem Post:

    Supporters of the ban say the number of Muslims in Switzerland had grown sharply from 50,000 in 1980, but it is still only 4 percent of the 7.5 million population.

    So muslim alien numbers have only grown by a factor of 9 in the past thirty years, and the media and “international community” only condemn the Swiss. What’s the big deal? It’s only genocide.

  10. Switzerland Minus Minarets | The Occidental Quarterly links here.

    Wodinaz comments on the abuses heaped on the Copts in Egypt:

    The Copts are essentially only allowed to manage garbage, their daughters are routinely raped and sons slain etc.

    A persecuted minority in their own homeland. What people would willingly acquiesce to this?

    The aliens should not have come. They should go home. That would produce more tolerance, harmony, and peace than bashing and blaming the Swiss for resisting. If the Swiss disappear the various alien factions will go at each other. But of course this isn’t about tolerance, harmony, or peace. It’s about making the Swiss, and all Whites, disappear.

  11. The end of the article is where you lost me, Tan.

    “Some pundits characterize what’s happening to every White country, and only White countries, as “suicide”, or “self-destruction” caused by “liberalism”. This story of resistance from Switzerland, among others, puts the lie to that poisonous, blame-shifting meme.”

    What? Do I understand that you mean the internationalists hide behind a false meme of “liberalism” to shift the blame? I disagree with that premise in the most profound and urgent sense. And the word “liberalism” is not the correct term. The correct term is “cultural Marxism.” And cultural Marxism is the weapon used to promote, institutionalize and enforce ALL the movements harmful to white Western Civilization.

    Cultural Marxism is the subversive tool that is taking down the United States and all of Europe. It is wielded by the globalists in their quest to dominate the world.
    And it is wielded against the white world MOST noticeably because it is the white world that must be reduced to the level of primitive ignorance necessary for the globalists to control the masses. The rest of the world is already at this point for the most part.

    “Liberalism” is a good word distorted and misused by cultural Marxists to describe themselves and their policies; when in fact they were the exact opposite of everything the word stands for.

    So, “Liberalism” as you incorrectly call the phenomenon, is the disease and banning the minarets strikes at the problem obliquely, but it is a blow.

  12. Tan says:

    “Liberal” feminists played a prominent part in the minaret ban, putting the lie to the corollary meme, pimped constantly by faux-White pro-jews and others, that “suicidal” White “liberalism” is to blame for all that ills us.”

    This is the comment that really interested me, Tan. So, you are of the opinion that those who voice opposition to “liberalism” – what I term as “cultural Marxism” -are actually shills of the internationalists? Thus you label the anti-minaret activism of feminists as proof that this is a meme serving internationalist interests?

    And your reasoning makes sense on the surface. After all, why would white liberals support Islam, after all?

    But that is where politics makes for strange bedfellows. Tan, the internationalists and jihadists are in bed together against the West in a marriage of convenience. What happens after the West is defeated is anyone’s guess, but for now, they are allied against white civilization.

    Feminism around the world has been a political tool of cultural Marxism. The movement and all its peripheral movements have been exploited by the cultural Marxists to destroy the West. Genuine feminists within the movement are often “useful idiots” with good intentions serving a higher subversive purpose.

    My prediction is that you will see similar conflicts in more liberal movements where they begin to brush up against the encroachment of Islam into the West. Gay Rights for instance.

    The Islamafication of Europe and America is stage two of a plan to conquer the West. Stage one was the tearing down of Christianity as the basis of Western Civilization. Who knows what stage three will be; but it can’t be pleasant.

  13. Apologies for my muddled writing. You seem to have gotten the gist of what I meant. Allow me to try and clarify.

    I see most of the babble today about liberalism as sloppy painting with a broad brush, and in many cases I think it’s intentional. When I write “liberalism” it’s because I’m disdainful of the term. I’m maybe overly sensitive to the differences between the classic liberalism of JS Mill and Thomas Jefferson, and its antithesis embodied in the judaized neo-liberalism of the cultural marxists.

    The West’s problem isn’t an ill-defined, amorphous political philosophy called “liberalism”, and pretending it is serves no purpose other than to diffuse the blame, transfering it away from the individuals with whom it rightly belongs. As we see with the minaret ban, many voters were motivated by a desire to preserve their “liberalism”. They’re not suicidal. They object to their displacement. It is the media, bureaucrats, and jews who think they have a right to not be offended that takes precedence over the Swiss right to exist. That’s not libera
    lism, that’s the media, bureaucrats, and jews. We can get even more specific and blame every individual asshole who has condemned and denounced the Swiss voters.

    The problem isn’t liberalism, and it isn’t suicide either. As I wrote in the UPDATE to the original post, the problem is the idea that Whites, and only Whites, must not “discriminate” against “minorities” (more words I disdain). As the reaction to this ban illustrates, this poisonous anti-White idea is pushed relentlessly by specific groups and individuals. They push it because it is in their interest to do so. Many go along with the brow-beating and the brain-washing. There’s nothing suicidal about it. It’s genocidal.

  14. Hey Larry. Where does this “suicidal” belief come from? Cui bono? It certainly doesn’t come from the ordinary folk you continue to imply are “suiciding” themselves.

    As Matt Ridley said, our genes didn’t evolve to kill us. And as George C. Williams said, “As a general rule, a modern biologist seeing an animal doing something to benefit another assumes either that it is being manipulated by the other individual or that it is being subtly selfish.” There’s no subtle selfishness in suicide. We’re being manipulated, and some of us know by whom.

  15. Top UN Human Rights Official Calls Minaret Ban Discriminatory:

    Of course, it’s discriminatory, but when you consider that immunology is known as the science of “self/non-self discrimination”, you realize that discrimination is good. It’s the essence of property; it’s the essence of life. And, of course, we know exactly what the intent of any anti-discrimination law must be; by definition, it’s murder.

  16. Is Williams suggesting the subtle selfishness provides that individual animal with an advantage or in an evolutionary sense is it adaptive?

  17. The real genocide is the pro-choice, contraceptive mentality implanted in stupid White people.

    That’s what’s doing the real damage.

  18. Tan said:

    “The West’s problem isn’t an ill-defined, amorphous political philosophy called “liberalism”, and pretending it is serves no purpose other than to diffuse the blame, transfering it away from the individuals with whom it rightly belongs.”

    I’m enclosing a good link for you to read Tan. Hopefully, everyone will read this. It is a short essay on the history of cultural Marxism.


    Tan, I recommend that we all drop the word “liberalism.” As I said before, it is a meaningless term nowadays. The right phrase is “cultural Marxism”. And it is the political strategy being employed by internationalists to destroy Western Culture. The Islamification of Europe is not the head of the snake. It’s merely a part of an overall strategy being employed by the anti-Western Axis to destroy our civilization. This Axis is composed of active subversives and also Leninist “useful idiots” in the individual “victim rights” movements. The old Marxist paradigm has changed since the cold war. This new coalition is much more lethal and diverse.

    The bottom line is, banning minarets is a good move. But it will not solve your problem, or mine here in the US, or the Brits, or the Italians, or any other white civilization. The solution to this problem involves overturning the cultural rot brought about by 70 years of cultural Marxism. The only way to do this is to return to the things that made us a great civilization. It involves a rejection of the whole secular humanist politically correct paradigm introduced into the West over the past 120 years.

    “There’s nothing suicidal about it. It’s genocidal.”

    I see your point. But when good people allow evil people to destroy them without any resistance, it still results in death, no matter what you call it.

    12/03/2009 05:36:00 PM

  19. Is hiding rot a good idea? They need a law banning Muhammadans and non-European from immigrating to Switzerland; not a law banning minarets. But maybe this is a good start?

  20. The solution to this problem involves overturning the cultural rot brought about by 70 years of cultural Marxism. The only way to do this is to return to the things that made us a great civilization.

    The only way to do this is to target, detain, or assassinate the Marxist political, economic, and cultural elites in the West today, and their third world foot-soldiers. Any revolution, or counter-revolution, will involve bloodshed. Let’s not kid ourselves that the present course will end without bloodshed. Whites must be prepared to make some difficult choices. Subject without confines.

  21. (Hey Tan, just wanted to let you know that I can’t comment at your blog with Firefox ( because the Captcha image disappears, and I get a 404 if I try to right-click and “view image.” I don’t know if this is common for Blogger (and other FF users), because the only other blog I read here is Sailer’s and he doesn’t use Captcha for Name/URL comments.)

    Incrementalism belies the “suicide wish” canard. If you have a frog who wants to commit suicide, you don’t boil him so slowly he can’t detect the threat. Now, if you want to murder the frog…

    When whites are asked, we say no. So they stopped asking us.

  22. I see your point. But when good people allow evil people to destroy them without any resistance, it still results in death, no matter what you call it.

    If you see my point then why do you continue to describe what’s happening in terms that suggest it’s suicide and everybody knows it?

    Setting aside the fraction of Whites who have no idea that they’re being “suicided” much less that they’re “allowing” it to happen, and the fraction who are aware but are resisting, what fraction do you see as allowing themselves to be suicided without any resistance? I don’t know anyone like that. Do you?

    The media doesn’t talk about White suicide. The media’s line is that there’s absolutely no threat to Whites, and to imagine otherwise makes you a paranoid “hater”. Now as Svigor might say, if we’re suiciding ourselves, why are they pretending we’re not?

  23. No, that’s martyrdom.

    “One who makes great sacrifices or suffers much in order to further a belief, …”

  24. As you see gathered above Howard, there’s plenty of evidence that what’s happening in Switzerland, and to Whites everywhere, isn’t “self-destruction”. Unlimited immigration and special preferences for aliens isn’t what indigenous Whites want.

    What’s happening is that these things are demanded and imposed by self-interested muslims joined and guided by jews specifically citing self-righteous, self-serving, one-way principles (“tolerance”, “religious freedom”).

    Overseeing and refereeing it all are the bureaucrats and media, the lie that they represent popular interests and public opinion laid bare here for all to see.

    So where is the “self-destruction”? It’s nothing but a libel compounding the crime: “It’s not genocide, you’re doing it to yourselves!”

  25. http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/anti-semitism-up-islamophobia-down-a-new-academic-research-s.html

    “One-quarter of Europeans believe that “Jews have too much influence“

    31% agree that “Jews in general do not care about anything or anyone but their own kind.”

    45.7% of the Europeans somewhat or strongly agree that “Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians.”

    About 37.4% agree with the following statement: “Considering Israel’s policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews.”

    According to new research conducted by Bielefeld University hatred towards Muslims decreased over the past year while hatred of Jews is growing. Israelis must be concerned. The sudden drop in European Islamophobia doesn’t fit into the Zionist global plan in which Muslims are cornered and ostracised as reactionaries while Israel is dropping bombs in the name of democracy and liberalism. According to the leading Israeli paper Ynet, “the level of resentment against most minorities declined – sexism considerably, Islamophobia slightly. There were only two exceptions: homophobia and anti-Semitism.” {The article continues at the link}.


  26. Auster: “rising anti-Semitism in France,” “very disturbing,” “the function of the French mind is NOT to see reality,” “the French hate the Jews”

    Auster’s commenter Tiberge:
    “The French are blaming the Jews for the presence of Muslims. … Daniel Cohn-Bendit is partly responsible–he was one of the prime leaders of the May ’68 revolt. He gets on TV and screams that just as Europe killed the Jews so they are now turning on the poor Muslims who want minarets. The thing that politicians and Jewish celebrities have done is to equate anti-Semitism with “Islamophobia”–this is one reason for the extreme hatred unleashed against the Jews.”

    “The MSM are very subdued on these events. Only websites like Francois Desouche post the truth. Then it starts flying all over the French websites. But no one that I know of has pointed to specific anti-Semitic acts,, because no one cares about them. The Catholics DO have a point–that Catholics are targeted as well, but the government ignores this completely.

    In general, Jews, in the Jewish neighborhoods all over France are subjected to daily harassment, muggings, beatings, etc. If, however, a Jewish cemetery or synagogue is damaged it usually makes the news, to the detriment of the Catholic churches that are vandalized. This infuriates the Catholics. If a Jewish person, like Ilan Halimi, is brutally murdered, it makes the news, but non-Jews are also killed and injured, and it is played down. (I’m trying to explain some of the reasons for the French anger at Jews.)”

    Given all of this, why is Auster surprised that the French are not favorably disposed toward Jews?

  27. Auster admitted moons ago that the liberalism of the West would be less deadly if it did not receive the full support of his Tribe all these years. Don’t have the exact posts but I remember being shocked at his honesty (however temporary) in the matter.

    Where would the French or Russian revolutions have been without the full faith and credit of the international-money-changers? Less harmful certainly than the American. Serbia, Germany, GB, et al. would not now be the “suicidal” shells they are. Egalite, fraternite, communiste, would have been quashed for the evil farce it is instead of being institutionalized. No, make that — canonized and monetized.

    Russia seems to be pulling completely away from the Western philosemitic funhouse it but I cannot be sure from here.

  28. “Given all of this, why is Auster surprised that the French are not favorably disposed toward Jews?”

    Do really think he is?

    And is hatred of the international home-wreckers really growing this time? Are the peoples really figuring it whos black magic is poisoning their wells? According to the MSM press, “anti-Semitism” is always on the rise.

  29. Lawrence Auster: It’s impossible to follow the workings of the French mind. The French hate the Jews because the Jews are pro multiculti and pro immigration and helped let in the Muslims. The French also hate Israel and its friend the U.S. because they are the real threat to Europe and are war mongers against Islam. So, the French hate the Jews because the Jews empower Islam, and the French hate the Jews because the Jews are war mongers against Islam.

    Notice how Auster makes the assumption that the French dislike Israel because they are fighting Islam. The French people are generally not anti-Israel and certainly not anti-Semitic. The French media and ruling class tend to be less sympathetic to Israel than their US equivalents – not that that is saying much! – but they are not anti-Israel.

    Indeed, the French were much more pro-Israel back in the 40s and 50s before the US became a sycophantic friend of Israel’s. As the US got closer to Israel, France moved away (starting under De Gaulle) and became more friendly with the Arab states that the US previously had better relations with. The French have behaved similarly in other parts of the world. Though the French are US allies they, like all states, have their own interests. Often these interests are pursued with smaller states that don’t have good relations with the US. Why? Because states with very close relations with the US will rarely need the French all that much so the French can have more influence of their own with those states that the Americans don’t care much about.

    In other words whatever French hostility there is towards Israel, and there isn’t much, is based on geopolitics, not hatred of Jews or any kind of moralism. But as we’ve seen over the past decade Israel’s American supporters reject other states having interests and inject moralism and anti-Semitism into all foreign policy matters.

  30. Someone: “The French are blaming the Jews for the presence of Muslims”

    I disagree. A huge majority of French people do not know of the Jewish responsibility in organizing immigration. And they don’t realize that the anti-racist, pro-immigration propaganda in the French media is largely Jewish.

  31. A huge majority of French people do not know of the Jewish responsibility in organizing immigration. And they don’t realize that the anti-racist, pro-immigration propaganda in the French media is largely Jewish.

    Likewise in America.

    The views of Auster and friends are Austarded. For them it’s perfectly acceptable to blame “the majority” collectively, not for being ignorant but in spite of their ignorance, as if they’re not ignorant, as if the Austards themselves aren’t helping keep them ignorant, pathologizing and excoriating the few Whites who aren’t ignorant for even holding the individual jews who are responsible accountable for what they’ve actually done.

    Some jews say, “Hey you racist schmucks, open your borders!”, and others say “Hey you dumb schmucks, stop suiciding yourselves!” Whatever they disagree about, they agree that it’s always our fault and never theirs.

Comments are closed.