HISTORY
REINTERPRETED

"If they can get you asking the wrong questions,
they don't have to worry about the answers."
Thomas Pynchon

Overview

In "Critical Issues," we briefly looked at some important trends that are wrecking America today. I explained that I am not describing these issues simply to scare people or add to their worries, but rather to help them accurately diagnose the true nature of America's problems.

After making an accurate diagnosis, our task is then to identify strategies for ourselves and the people we can influence or join forces with in our local communities. Hopefully we can learn how to lead more sane, healthy, prosperous, productive, and effective lives while similtaneously increasing our defenses against misfortune.

In "Resolving Opposing Ideologies," we looked at ways to ideologically untangle confusion over the true nature of policy options.

Our Next Step: Now we have to deal with another major stumbling block. We have to examine how we interpret the past. This is very important, because people usually make policy recommendations for the future based upon the use of some kind of interpretation of past events. Dr. Ralph Raico, in his Mises Institute lecture, emphasized this point when he alluded to Winston Smith's job in the Ministry of Truth in George Orville's novel 1984. Smith scanned old newspapers for content that did not seem to fit Big Brother's current policies and threw them down the memory hole. "He who controls the past controls the present, and he who controls the present controls the future."

In this section I want to provide an overview regarding the way in which each perspective described in my "Resolving Opposing Ideologies" section helps us to start asking some of the right historical questions. These perspectives are summarized again as follows:

a) Environmental top down (also known as authoritarian modern liberalism, liberal fascism, and "neo-Jacobinism," all of which describes what America has become today)
b) Environmental bottom up (also known as contemporary anarcho-libertarianism, this is a "sanitized," non-racialist, non-ethnic version of the American Old Right)
c) Genetic top down (also known as authoritarian racial nationalism, this includes German national socialism and Zionism.)
d) Genetic bottom up (I call this libertarian racial nationalism. This is also known as 19th century classical liberalism, the American Old Right, and Paleo-Conservatism)
e) Mutualism vs. Parasitism (Productive practices vs. criminality. The latter include political corruption, organized crime, and subversion).

Link to the following discussions regarding how each of these perspectives produces a unique interpretation of American historical trends:

a) Environmental top down (liberal or neo-Jacobin fascism, what America has today)
b) Environmental bottom up (anarcho-libertarianism)
c) Genetic top down (authoritarian racial nationalism)
d) Genetic bottom up (libertarian racial nationalism, America's founding ideology)
e) Mutualism vs. Parasitism (Productivity vs. criminality --are criminals winning in America today?)

The genetic top down viewpoint

As a line of intellectual analysis, the "top down" racial nationalist viewpoint tends to look at social, economic, and political problems relative to the need of society to protect its most vital asset of all --its genetic interests. These interests tend to be closely expressed by a society's indigeneous ethnic, cultural, and religious institutions, therefore these things have to be protected as well. Authoritarian racial nationalists believe that over the very long run, the call of nature and evolutionary logic trumps everything else, to include the business "free market" (although one might argue that from the viewpoint of medical anthropology that looks at "gene flow," there is an interesting kind of "free market" that operates on this level as well). Authoritarian racial nationalists believe that government intervention is a vital and necessary tool to protect and help guide the aforementioned vital genetic-related interests. They tend to view conflict first in terms of race, ethnicity, culture, and religion, and place secondary importance on factional and class conflict, although sometimes the first group can often overlap the second group. Last, but not least, they tend to view all these later elements in aggregate form from a macro-social and historial perspective.

Obviously genetic top down theorists tend to be elitists. They have one big advantage over environmental top down theorists in that they can point to the right hand side of the bell-shaped distribution curves of genetic traits and note how IQ scores and virtually everything else with genetic basis has a relatively small population compared to the middle group. One often hears the saying in business that 20% of the people do 80% of the real work. I have also heard some very successful business people say that part of their secret is to ally themselves with the top 20% within the top 20% who are the ones who really know what is going and have the means to do something about it.

The bottom line is that no matter what kind of political or economic system one has, or how rational the organizational charts appear to be, generally speaking, everywhere you go in the world, the leadership strata of societies tend to run in gangs and cliques. Everywhere you go, successful economics has a certain trickle down, paternalistic flavor to it. Everywhere you go, the most experienced and powerful people in an industry tend to be a fairly small number who have huge advantages over everyone else trying to climb the ladder of success.

I have already mentioned this elsewhere, but it bears repeating that Nordic socieites have historically tended to be more instinctively liberatarian with a significantly larger middle class demographic bulge compared to most other societies, which have tend to be more pyramidal. However, while this is an important difference, it is still only a relative difference. It is still the exception that helps to prove the rule. So perhaps the genetic top down theorists are just a bit more honest about all this than the egalitarians.

In comparing the genetic and environmentally-related lines of analysis on an overall social level, I see an interesting analogy with value vs. momentum stock analysis in the stock market.

On the one hand you have your "deep value" Graham and Dodd analysts who look at book value, price to book, price to cash flow, P/E multiples, and other expressions of deep fundamentals. They also feel that it is very important to visit a company, get to know its management and products in great detail, go over all its financial information in great detail, talk to competitors, analyze the industry in great detail, and perform other deep research. Deep value investors such as a Warren Buffet realize that eventually even the craziest markets will eventually regress back to some reasonable valuation based upon sustainable fundamentals.

Similarly genetic theorists look closely at the innate temperamental traits of a given people. They feel that you cannot understand their long term history unless you understand such factors as their innate level of intelligence, their instinctive tendencies towards authoritarianism as opposed to decentralization, their innate nervous system "rythm" or operational tempo, their tendency to engage in forms of adaptive mimicry (deception) as opposed to technological behavior (rational behavior), and their tendency to engage in impulsive immediate gratification as opposed to long range delayed gratification. Genetic theorists believe that over the long run, the political and social insituations of a particular people tend to revert to type. Hence, our study of the innate traits of a people and their longstanding institutions should complement and reinforce each other.

At the other end of the spectrum from the value analysts are the "momentum" analysts. These analysts are not particularly concerned about the deep fundamentals behind companies unless they break out in the news, get absorbed into investor's consciousness, and become market movers. Momentum analysts have a shorter term focus, looking at such variables as technical chart patterns, buying pressure, spin doctoring by financial news sources, and the activities of major market makers or market movers such as institutional investors, hedge funds, and dealers. They are not so concerned about the objective reality behind a company, as much as how that reality is perceived by market movers. They look more closely at derivative "indicators" such as insider buying, sector trends, the Wall Street analyst concensus, market sentiment indicators, and intermarket analysis rather than the deep fundamentals involving any individual company. Since they have no linkages to fundamentals, they can drive markets to extreme valuations. This is also a world with tremendous room for fraud and manipulation, as witnessed by the 2003 securities industry settlement where ten major Wall Street firms paid a fine of $1.3 billion for defrauding investors. More recently, John Embry, head of the Canadian firm Sprott Asset Management, has issued the report "Move Over Adam Smith" alleging manipulation of major capital markets.

Similarly in regard to political science, your environmental theorists are much more concerned about what interest groups, factions, and classes are likely to do right now than how they got into power over a long term period or where society may be headed ten or twenty years from now. They are political correctness "momentum dudes" only concerned with the power of political factions to move the society now, such as influence its foreign policy, media, financial institutions, and its immigration policy.

A major problem with the environmental approach is that often so many white lies and arbitrary decisions get built on top of each other that people wind up in a position analogous to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic before a major fundamental "correction" comes along to bring a society back in line with reality. I agree with Bill Bonner, James Turk, James Puplava, and other financial commentators regarding the likelihood of a perfect financial storm ahead that will probably roil America worse than the hyperinflationary meltdown that wiped out over half of Argentina's middle class in 2001 and give quite a few Americans a whole new perspective on life, to say the least

There is an interesting correlation between genetic policy and the financial markets. Perhaps we should not be too surprised, since what people do with their money is similarly of vital importance compared to what they do with their genetic-related interests. I am reminded of the "mini-skirt" market indicator of the 1960's. As the mini-skirts got shorter, the stock market got more speculative and frothier. Of course both mini-skirts and the stock market probably had a "proxy" rather than a cause-and-effect relationship involving deeper factors, such as very liberal Great Society spending programs, racial integration, the Fed's London Gold pool manipulation, and foreign intervention policies in Vietnam that were also getting into gear. There are so many factors involved it is probably impossible to scientifically prove any kind of direct relationship between hemlines and the stock market. However, one can discern some bare threads of unifying logic. Shorter mini-skirts imply a greater propensity to tease men, which in turn implies a greater propensity towards promiscuity. This in turn suggests a greater chance of random investment in genetic assets (ie. more interracial marriage and illigitimate child-bearing). So if a society is getting more reckless in deploying its genetic assets, why would it behave that much differently regarding its financial assets?

That was back in the 1960's. Today we may be seeing an even greater correlation between genetic assets and financial assets on a global, super macro level. In contrast to the 19th century, where "racism" and "white supremacy" was "in" and open discussion of promiscuous sex was "out," today all that is reversed. With massive Third world immigration existing not only in American and Canada, but also in indigenous European habitats such as Norway, Sweden, Ireland, England, Switzerland, Italy, France, and Germany, it is safe to say that never before in world history has white racial pride and consciousness been at such bear market lows. The "price" of blonds is in the toilet. Meanwhile, Jewish, Negro, Asian, and Mestizo "stocks" are soaring like Internet and Telecom stocks in the late 1990's. Simultaneously, never before in history have whites gone so far out on a limb to aid an alien cause such as Zionism, particularly in view of all of its attendant costs involved in miltary meddling in the Middle East (eg. depleted uranium mass destruction, oil shocks, Abu Ghraib, over a trillion in direct financial costs, etc).

In regard to the financial markets, never before in financial history have all the major nations of the world been so completely delinked from gold where they are floating on nothing but seas of fiat currencies. Never before have financial markets seen such bubble markets as the late 1990's American bull market (still kept reflated by expansive Fed monetary policy) or the current housing market. Never before have global financial markets been so heavily leveraged with extremely risky unregulated derivatives, now amounting to over $200 trillion. Never before in American history have consumers, corporations, and government been so leveraged on debt.

As a former full time stock broker, I noticed on an unscientific, anecdotal level that people who were involved in interracial marriage seemed to be more likely to engage in extremely risky, speculative trading, and I think that a similar pattern currently applies on a super macro social level.

A first step in the genetic top down analysis is to look at the ethno-racial composition of a society, and in particular the power positions held by key racial and ethic groups during different phases of American history. I think that it is really critical to look at the character of the people who shaped America's institutions in the 18th and 19th century before America got caught up in the accellerating tug of leftist authoritarianism ever since the War Between the States.

In his Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Dr. Thomas Woods notes "First basic fact: the colonists were not paragons of `diversity.' They came from one part of Europe. They spoke a common language. The worshipped the same God." He lists the first four waves of immigration:

In The Dispossessed Majority, Wilmot Robertson provides in his "Appendix A" (page 563) racial composition estimates from the mother country made by Carl Brigham, associate professor of psychology at Princeton University. The United Kingdom was listed as 80% light white Nordic and 20% dark white mediterranean. Scotland was listed as 85% Nordic, 15% Mediterranean. In other words, early America was a de facto Nordic ethno state.

Among other things, Wilmot Robertson debunks the "huddled masses and wretched refuse from teaming shores" propaganda written by the Jewish Marxist poet Emma Lazarus in the early 20th century. Instead, early Americans were a proud, courageous, individualistic people engaged in a brutal Darwinian struggle. On pages 42-44 Robertson notes:

Robertson notes that the overwhelmingly Nordic percentage of the white population began to decline during the War Between the States, and has been in decline ever since. Most racial historican like Robertson view the War Between the States as a tragic form of "reductionism" on both sides with virtually no redeeming features whatsoever. It started America down the path towards ever growing liberal fascist government and eventual ruin. What little existed of white racial pride and solidarity in America before the war was largely shattered. All of its political institutions were degraded down a quantum level towards more graft, demogogery, and pork barrel corruption. The scandals of the Robber Baron Age seemed to herald this more decadent new chapter in American history.

As bad as the slavery problem was before the war, conditions after war became even worse from the viewpoint of white self-determination everywhere in America. Now blacks were forcefully integrated into white society on artificially equal terms rather than repatriated to their natural homeland. This made it much harder for whites to form homogeneous white societies regardless of how whites feel about blacks, or their historic relationship with them. This is true even for nationalists who genuinely want to show compassion for blacks and help them on a humanitarian level, yet simultaneously reserve the right to live in a white society with white values that controls its own destiny.

Even worse than all of this, America would evolve a neo-Jacobin social philosophy to justify this forced integration that it would later promote in Europe following World War II. American pressure has helped to create serious racial problems with Third World immigrants in indigenous white homelands such a Britian, Scotland, Ireland, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. Whites are now being genetically replaced in ancient homelands where there has never been any question whatsover of any kind of oppressive behavior towards other races. Combine this with the below replacement white birth rate, and we are witnessing a slow form of anti-white genocide across Europe.

This viewpoint stands in sharp contrast to the Whig Theory of history espoused by environmental historians that I describe earlier, who view the Civil War as a great, noble, and redeeming step towards a more perfect society.

Please allow me to vividly illustrate the racial historian's perspective in a different way.

Imagine that we have a large family with a cruel and finicky father. He has eight teenage kids. Imagine that three of the kids want to move out of the house because they think the father is mean and they want to be on their own. In contrast, the father needs them to keep doing chores on the farm. During a heated family argument, the father incites the five other kids who are loyal to him to attack the three dissidents. One child is ax-murdered, and the two others are cut up badly.

Now let us ask the obvious question. Imagine this is a rich family, and as a result of this tragic incident, this family spends the next three decades having all of its members undergo the best, most expensive, most professional psychological counseling on a regular basis. The cruel father even adopts alien kids into the family to try to show off how "loving" he can be. Despite all this, do you ever think this family will ever be "normal?"

As a more subtle question, do you even need to know that much about any ideological or personality differences within the family to begin to form a strong gut feeling that this family will never, ever be normal under any circumstances?

So I would simply ask, after white Americans had been incited to kill 640,000 of their fellow whites, and after a "Reconstruction" era in which whites were subordinated to blacks, do you think that even with all the ensuing liberal propaganda to "bind our wounds," that America could ever again really be "normal?" Or do you think instead it would always remain a highly fractured society, prone to do even more weird and goofy things, like the cruel father who adopts alien kids to show his "compassion?"

The normal pattern throughout history has been that the more similar people are on a racial, ethnic, and cultural level, they are more likely they are to support each other, not kill each other. When people of the same race and ethnicity start killing each other, they typically pay an extreme ideological price in addition to an extreme emotional and physical price.

To add insult to injury, the theme of whites killing fellow whites continued in the 20th century. For ages, Germany has been considered a heartland and a bastion of Western Civilization. Americans killed millions of them, both directly and indirectly. This included blotting out completely defenseless cities with no military value whatsoever such as Dresden. Americans even handed a third of Germany over to Communist tyranny for over four decades.

Again, let us ask a very fundamental question. Did a one hundred year-long pattern in which white Americans were incited to kill millions of fellow whites --did any of this help to make us more "normal?"

Last, but not least, let me return to that more subtle question. Do you really have to know that much about the ideological or personality differences involving white Southerners or Germans to begin to form a gut judgment on this issue?

Not surprisingly, the gigantic fault shifts in America's demographics came after the gigantic whites-killing-fellow whites fratricidal wars. The biggest demographic change in the 20th century came with the Immigration Reform Act of 1965. Footnote 17 on page 146 of Hans Hermann-Hoppe's Democracy --The God That Failed notes that:

In his book Jewish Supremacism, Dr. David Duke claims that these anti-white, pro-Third World immigration changes were the culmination of a relentless campaign waged by Jewish organizations over the prior six decades. This included efforts in the 1920's to block the publication of classic racialist books such as The Passing of the Great Race by the American natural historian Madison Grant about the decline of America's Nordic population.

A good next step in our analysis is to look at the power positions of various groups in America today. I have already discussed the instinctive libertarian tendancies of Nordics who set the tone for America up until the 20th century in my environmental vs. genetic section in "Resolving Opposing Ideologies." Not surprisingly, 19th century America was largely a Popular Science Magazine kind of society, with a major focus on technological innovation and the manufacture of higher quality goods at lower costs. I think that My Life and Work by Henry Ford really captures the spirit of that era. Take a trip to the Smithsonian Institution and look at all the great inventions of that era. By 1900 America produced about 30% of global GDP compared to 10% for Britain and 10% for Germany.

The greatest anomoly today involves the power and influence of the Jewish community. With only 3% of the national population, it has over 30% of the most wealthy individuals on the Forbes 400 list, according to Michael Collins Piper in his book The New Jerusalem. Jews also comprise 30% of the faculties of many Ivy League schools, to include Jewish law professor Alan Dershovitz at Harvard who condones torture. According to the Lichter and Rothman study that appeared in Public Opinion Magazine, 60% of the electronic media elite grew up in a Jewish household. Various rightist sources such as National Vanguard claim that Jews now dominate all of America's largest national media firms. In the High Priests of War, Michael Collins Piper describes the power of the Jewish lobby to control U.S. foreign policy and drag America into the Iraqi quagmire.

The rapid growth in Jewish power after the 20th century has been documented by such books as An Empire of their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood by Neal Gabler and The Creature from Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin about the role of the Rothschilds and other elite Jewish interests allied with the Morgans and Rockefellers in setting up the Federal Reserve Banking System,. Also interesting is the four Volume International Jew series by Henry Ford which describes the Jewish takeover of major American newspapers. Ford also describes the Balfour Declaration, in which Britain promised Palestine to Jews if in return American Jews dragged America into World War I. He also describes how Wilson was surrounded by Jewish advisors, and their role in getting him to approve the disastrous Versailles Treaty that led to World War II. They also encouraged a "hands-off" policy towards White Russians seeking to overthrow the Bolsheviks, most of whom were Jewish kinsmen.

Speaking of Henry Ford, we understand perfectly well how he got rich, starting with the cars he built in his own garage. However, the origins of aggregate Jewish wealth and power is far more mysterious. For example, we know that varous prominent Jewish families such as the Rothschilds had cracked a number of European central banks by the time of the Napoleonic Wars, to include the Bank of England, and also that they were involved in some amazing financial legerdermain juggling fractional reserve and fiat money systems that enable them to create vast amounts of money out of thin air. In my other section I mentioned the famous episode where the Rothschiilds sneaked a gold shipment under Napoleon's nose to Wellington's troops in Spain, and had close ties with the underworld. We also know from Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy by Michael Collins Piper that Israeli-Mossad-Mafia ties are very significant. So what remains mysterious involves determining how much of Jewish wealth in the American economy comes from a Henry Ford-like "value proposition" that addresses real consumer needs, and how much involves involves massive fraud and huge sums redistributed under the table to fellow tribesmen to launder in legitimate businesses.

Now that Jews have set the tone for America, and now that their media have done such a thorough job of teaching Nordics and other whites how to embrace multi-racialism and feel guilty and debase themselves before nonwhites, we are left with some amazing discrepancies between the alleged extraordinary gifts of the Jews and their impact on society.

There are obviously some huge qualitative differences between the Nordic and the Jewish approaches to capitalism that most modern libertarians refuse to address publicly. On pages 192-193 of The Dispossessed Majority, Wilmot Robertson addressed some of the enigmas involved in Jewish alleged superiority:

As discussed in my Critical Issues sction, in the 20th century America has gone from an all-white country, that once had the most powerful economic base and the highest standard of living in the world, to a country where whites are rapidly sliding into minority status. America has lost most of its industry, is bankrupt, and is rapidly taking on all the characteristics of a Third World country.

I agree with the genetic top down theorists that one must spend time studying the Jewish role in America and the Jewish modus operandi before American economic, political, and social policies throughout much of the 20th century start to make any sense all. This begins a fascinating voyage into a bizarro world (a favorite term of antiwar.com commentator Justin Raimondo) that reminds me of the character of the simultaneously brilliant and self-destructive Dr. Edward Morbius in the classic science fiction film The Forbidden Planet.

We might look at an anology involving nature. When animals come into a new environment, they tend to instinctively reorient it to suit their characteristics. As an example, when a group of ants enter a tract of flat earth, ant hills start happening. As another example, when a group of beavers enter a pristine marshland, beaver dams start happening. I think that if a beaver had to live in a pristine marshland area without any beaver dams happening for any extended period of time, we would wind up with one very anxiety-ridden, freaked out beaver.

Similarly, if we look at the evolutionary history of the Jewish people, we see that for the last two to three thousand years they have been a small but exceptionally dynamic minority everywhere they have gone. They have survived in brokerage jobs where they have had to engage in financial manipulation and keep multiple sets of mental books to transact and negotiate between parties, typically playing them off against each other. They have tended to survive best in multi-cultural, multi-racial decaying civilizations. To avoid assimilation, they have distrusted authorities, used deception, and have punished Jewish renegades. They have simultaneously had to be charming while secretly feeling hateful rejection of their hosts. Jews who have failed to show these characteristics have either died out or have been absorbed by the host population. On the other hand Jews who have been really good at intrigue and wealth accumulation have become heroes in a culture that strongly values this behavior. They have been specially sought out by Jewish women to have disproportionately more children.

Many genetic theorists believe that two to three thousand years may be long enough to shape the pattern of innate temperamental traits of a people, much like the way the cultural selective preferences of Japanese fisherman has shaped the Heike Crab from Carl Sagan's Cosmos that I described in my environmental vs. genetic section. The Jews have been cunning aliens in quasi-hostile environments for so long that the role of the duplicitous alien has in effect become imprinted in their DNA. They tend to become subconsciously uncomfortable in any dissimilar environments. Therefore, they tend to subconsciously reorient new environments, to include initially very friendly and accomodative environments, to become like the miserable ones to which they have been adapted for over two thousand years. Where no enemies or intrigue exist, Jews become like freaked out beavers and start creating all of this in order to feel "more at home."

Therefore, paradoxically, the most hateful and the most utterly anti-Jewish thing you can possibly do to the Jews is to be passive-aggressive and acquiese to them and not publicly criticize them or otherwise try to hold them in check, analogous to giving an an alcoholic all the booze he wants.

Genetic theorists would predict that if Jews entered, for example, a pristine, homogeneous, productive Nordic society, as Jews gain influence over time, they will tend to subconsciously reorient the society to become similar to their own peculiar characteristics. Over time, everyone will eventually be turned into a minority. The economy will become skewed towards financial manipulation and away from the production of tangible useful goods. Everyone will eventually be required to keep multiple sets of mental books to survive, ranging from the political correctness things they feel forced to say publicly to the more truthful things they believe privately. Everyone will come to distrust authorities and feel contempt for the overall society, while quietly feeling forced to draw strength from their ethnocultural bonds on a local community level. Last, but not least, if the stealth tactics that Jews use so effectively as a quasi-covert small minority succeed all too well in accumulating power so that Jews actually start to run a society, Jews will find it very hard to shift gears and change their deceptive, divide and conquor brokerage tactics. Jews will instinctively persist at degrading the honest, productive values of the host society upon which they depend for sustenance.

To expect anything different is like expecting beavers to quit building dams, ants to quit creating nests, or the Heike Crab to lose the face of the samurai. Humans are not separated from nature, but rather always show "the nature of the beast." Over the long run, it is really all about evolutionary or biological logic rather than ideological or purely rational logic.

Knowing this, elite Jews tend to do everything possible to jam and discredit all forms of racial consciousness among outsiders to prevent them from asking the right questions about their instinctive tendencies that might cause people to thwart them. By "elite Jews" we usually mean of course "criminal Jews" in line with the libertarian analysis provided in my "Resolving Opposing Viewpoints" commentary. Jewish culture seems to be heavily skewed towards stealth and manipulation. Much like the CIA, KGB, Mossad, and other espionage organizations, it seems to lack checks and balances to prevent bad people from rising to the top.

Incidentally, before we leave the topic of Jewish affairs, an important issue involves the extent to which elite criminal Jews have victimized their own people. For example, Rabbi Moshe Shonfeld accuses the Zionists of collaborating in the Nazi persecution of fellow Jews in his book "Holocaust Victims Accuse." The Jewish underground organization Haganah set off an explosion inside the S.S. Patria in November 1940, killing 268 fellow Jews. According to Naeim Galadi, in 1950 Zionist undercover operatives killed fellow Jews in Iraq to terrorize other Jews into immigrating to Israel. Also, the tycoon Robert Maxwell may have been killed by Mossad agents.

I could go on, but once again, it is worth re-emphasizing that we are dealing with a bizarro world where intrigue gets spun endlessly and where it endlessly spins out of control, where cunning often outwits itself, and where Jews as well as gentiles alike need too work harder on a grass roots level to straighten things out and identify and reign in criminal leaders.

Before leaving the realm of genetic top down analysis, there are a number of classics that merit special attention. The fact that they were written before World War II is actually an asset, to the extent that they are completely unconstrained by any current mileau of political correctness squeamishness.

The first is Ways That Are Dark: The Truth About China written in 1933 by "our man in China" Ralph Townsend. It is not for nothing that the Chinese have often been referred to as "The Jews of the East." His studies of the Chinese and the very different Japanese character remain timeless. This book underscores the point that one can hardly judge a country's political institutions without first coming to grips with the underlying innate character of its people. Paradoxically, having a wise appreciation of racial differences may do more to aid mutually respectful, self-restrained, and beneficial long term trade relations than to proceed on false premises and make oneself vulnerable.

Secondly, the collected works of Dr. Lothrop Stoddard are always a great read. Most of these works were written from the 1910's to the 1920's. Stoddard got his Phd from Harvard and remains a very perceptive author with a good writing style. His works include Racial Realities in Europe, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy, The Revolt Against Civilization, and the New World of Islam. Stoddard's works show us how the patterns of behavior that we see in Nordic early America are very similar to patterns shown by whites in ancient, pre-Christian times such as in Greece and Rome. In my "Reconciling Opposing Ideologies" discussion I go into more detail about how there was nothing about early America that was really that new in regard to the creation of republican government that had not already been done many times over in Europe stretching back to prehistoric times.

Stoddard's The French Revolution in Santo Domingo, about the overthrow of white people Haiti in the late 18th century, is a timeless classic about patterns of racial behavior that are now being repeated over and over again abroad in places like the former Rhodesia and South Africa as well as on home turf in places like Detroit and Washington, D.C.. Where Black Rules White: A Journey Across and About Hayti by Hesketh Prichard, written in the late 19th century, gives us a valuable perspective on a purely black society, and what blacks had wrought after nine decades of exclusive stewardship of what was once one of the most properous colonies in the Western hemisphere run by whites. We learn from these books that compared to the white world, the indigenous black world is very different in terms of its innate operational tempo, its capacity for delayed gratification, and its marked inability to distinguish facts and logic from fantasy and surrealism.

Then there are the scientific works that help us understand the evolutionary dynamics that shape racial behavior. They include the Evolution of Ethics and A New Theory of Evolution by Sir Arthur Keith, Race Evolution, and Behavior by J. Philippe Rushton, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis by Dr. Edward Wilson, and A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, with Diaspora Peoples by Dr. Kevin MacDonald. They also include the collected works of Dr. Arthur Jensen and Dr. Raymond Cattell.

My Awakening and Jewish Supremacism by Dr. David Duke uses very straight, easy-to-read layman's language for people who want to skip the academic jargon about important forces of anti-white exploitation and deception that are wrecking America today. Dr. Duke insists that he is not a white supremacist, but rather favors self-determination for all ethno-racial groups, including Jews. However, he is obviously disturbed by the patterns that he sees over and over and over and over again in Jewish history. He feels that criminal Jews must be kept in check for the benefit of all mankind, to include noncriminal Jews.

Even the older works, written in plainer language by people such as Ralph Townsend and Lothrop Stoddard help to reconfirm the old saw that "The more things change, the more they stay the same."