Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Friday, November 08, 2013

Ron Unz is Anti-White

Ron Unz is one of the relatively small number of jews who is mistaken as a "conservative", in part because he was the publisher, until recently, of The American Conservative. As typical for jews, Unz doesn't constrain himself to the usual left-right dichotomy.

Last year Unz wrote The Myth of American Meritocracy. In it he notes:

elite college admissions policy often consists of ethnic warfare waged by other means, or even that it could be summarized as a simple Leninesque question of “Who, Whom?”

His analysis distinguished jews from Whites (as "non-jewish whites"), but focused mainly on Asians (as "the new jews"). Given his anti-White attitudes, detailed below, this was likely an inoculative effort aimed at replacing more direct complaints on behalf of Whites.

Unz's participation in a recent non-debate about immigration provided a window into the kind of discussions which take place amongst the thoroughly judaized anti-White elite. Here, as usual, Unz comes across as "conservative" only in that he expresses more concern than the other participants to prevent a backlash against that elite:

The reason America in its history, largely avoided the disastrous political results of many European countries is that every decade Americans were wealthier and better off than they were before. That's no longer true today. And it's no longer been true for 40 years now. Allowing an unlimited number of impoverished foreign workers to come to the United States would obviously make that situation incredibly much worse. And the result would be an economic disaster.

It's true that possibly 1 percent or 2 percent or even 5 percent of Americans would benefit tremendously from that change. But probably 90 percent of the American population would suffer economically. And they are the people who vote. They are the people who can protest. And their views would certainly be made known. And the result would be tremendous political backlash. We have to ask ourselves whether one reason for many of the problems we've had in the last few decades economically is because the glorification, the amplification of theoretical concepts that may look very good to pure economic theorists, people basically spend their time in the ivory tower, but don't understand that ordinary workers suffer when their incomes don't rise for 40 years.

The apoplectic response of the south Asian immigrant (whose main concern is that America remain open to south Asian immigrants, even though he says they don't really want to come and the internet makes it unnecessary) was to misinterpret Unz as speaking in favor of the Whites they both see as their enemies, "these Tea Party anti-immigrant people who [go] around creating fear about the billions who are going to invade America and take away our jobs".

Twenty years ago Unz was campaigning to become governor of California, posing as a "conservative" while making the ridiculous argument that the state would be bankrupted not by immigrants but by the effort to cut off benefits to those immigrants. As he demogogued in the Los Angeles Times in 1994:

Most Californians view illegal immigrants as unwanted house guests. One very effective means of getting rid of such guests is to set your house on fire and burn it to the ground. This is Proposition 187's solution to illegal immigration. It would be a financial and social disaster for California, and the worst moral disaster for our state since the internment of Japanese Americans. No decent Californian should support it.

Proposition 187 passed but was never enforced. The will of a majority of California's Whites, including my family, was ultimately nullified by a single judge. As I've noted before, Governor Pete Wilson warned that immigration would bankrupt the state. It did.

For that Wilson is nowadays demonized. Though Unz-like disdain for Whites and White political interests has gone mainstream, Unz himself continues to dissimulate, posing as a rebel. His new website, The Unz Review: A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media, includes a reposting of his cover story for Commentary, the neocon journal of the American Jewish Committee, in late 1999. California and the End of White America begins:

Californians of European ancestry—”whites”—became a minority near the end of the 1980s, and this unprecedented ethnic transformation is probably responsible for the rise of a series of ethnically-charged political issues such as immigration, affirmative action, and bilingual education, as seen in Propositions 187, 209, and 227. Since America as a whole is undergoing the same ethnic transformation delayed by a few decades, the experience of these controversial campaigns tells us much about the future of our country on these ethnic issues.

Our political leaders should approach these ethnic issues by reaffirming America’s traditional support for immigration, but couple that with a return to the assimilative policies which America has emphasized in the past. Otherwise, whites as a group will inevitably begin to display the same ethnic-minority-group politics as other minority groups, and this could break our nation. We face the choice of either supporting “the New American Melting Pot” or accepting “the Coming of White Nationalism.”

Unz sees that mass immigration and forced integration has had a genocidal impact on Whites. His main concern, then and now, is that this genocide continue unimpeded. He is even aware of this criticism. Commenting as "RKU" on Sailer's blog in the wake of Breivik's attack:

One very mainstream but very true explanation of the factors motivating the Oslo guy's rampage was the exceptionally shrill and wild rhetoric found on lots of HDB, anti-Islamic, and quasi-WN websites. Both the management and the commenters are always accusing their political opponents of being "traitors" aiming at the "extermination" of their racial group via a deliberate policy of "genocide." Traitors...extermination...genocide...traitors...extermination...genocide...

So maybe after many years of reading all those websites, the Oslo guy started to actually take all that crazy rhetoric seriously. And if "traitors" really are attempting to "exterminate" your people via a deliberate policy of "genocide", well, shooting as many of them as you can isn't really so unreasonable, is it? As near as I can tell, since the attacks half the chatter on those websites has been "we really, really didn't mean it!!" while the other half has been "great job, Oslo guy!"

Now Norway's on the other side of the world, and there was also an extremely strong Israel/Zionist angle, so the story doesn't seem have legs in the American MSM. But perhaps people should consider that vast numbers of American "activists" read those same "excitable" websites. And if some crazy American guy did the same thing, and massacred a whole campful of Young Democrats because of the all the crazy "traitor---extermination---genocide" rhetoric he'd been reading, well, I suspect that *extremely* bad things would immediately happen to an awful lot of loudmouth bloggers, some of whom probably deserve it and some of whom probably don't. And the MSM barrage would probably ensure that 95% of the public supported doing all those extremely bad things, just like the mass roundups of Muslims after 9/11.

Endlessly shouting "traitor!"---"extermination!"---"genocide!" at your political opponents has always struck me as being pretty ridiculous, and perhaps now pretty clearly unwise as well.

RKU makes the same argument "liberal" jews made about Sarah Palin. His ridicule and fantasies about "extremely bad things" being done to his White enemies also call to mind Tim Wise's drunken tick tock rant.

Jews know better than anyone else how well shouting "genocide!" works. Since WWII they have thrust their holocaust narrative to the very center of Western consciousness - sanctifying themselves while demonizing Whites.

Labels: , ,



Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm no fan of Ron Unz. Like you, I remember his opposition to prop 187 and his veiled threats about "very bad things" happening to "loadmouth bloggers".

However, I wonder if he is really as bad as you paint him?

For instance, on his TAC blog he linked to Kevin MacDonald's excellent TOO commentary on the Meritocracy article.

11/08/2013 01:49:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like how Unz says "the Israel/Zionist thing," implying that Anders Breivik was anti-semitic rather than philo-semitic.

11/08/2013 07:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vivek Wadhwa is one of the most odious Indians in America. He's been trying to expand H1-B programs for years and has lied about the alleged inability of American IT workers.

11/08/2013 10:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Bogolyubski said...

That's quite a shit-sandwich from Unz in the wake of Breivik, who was a pro-Israel Neo-con-man to the core according to his manifesto (which admittedly is very suspicious as it appears to a random cut-and-paste job created by an affirmative-action rocket-scientist at the State Dept. or CIA from blogs ranging from Stormfront and GOV along with a smattering of Ted Kaczynski).

I shouldn't be surprised as he hails from the greatest salesmen of shit-sandwiches in world history. The whole Utoya Island shoot-em-up strikes me as the work of a CIA or possibly Mossad asset. The future quislings of Norway (with apologies to the real Vikdun Quisling) were ramping up the calls for support of the Palestinians just before the attack, complete with demands for divestiture of Israel.

Npte also how Breivik was almost 'performing' for the Ministry of Truth (owned by guess who) chopper, while holding a Mini-14 which is quite capable of downing a chopper at such close range. Any WN worth his salt would relish the opportunity to make the world a slightly better place by sending a "journalist" or two to their richly deserved eternal reward.

The end result of the rampage appeared to have worked as planned too:

Nationalistic parties lost public support across Scandinavia, Norway's Quisling Party dropped its enthusiasm for the Palestinians, and the usual suspects ramped up the program to Africanize the place. Oslo is now minority white.

11/09/2013 12:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you. Pete Wilson, California's Prop 187, and Unz. Brings back memories of 'good old days' - especially when compared to the Obamanation.

But this sort of 'uncover the Jew' journalism should be done weekly by every Media outlet in the country. Helps us remember that it's always been 'Them' vs. US, ever since Good Friday.

"His blood be on us and on our children" is the 'watchword of their faith.... in themselves as Jews."

And for that, I will never forgive, nor forget.
- Fr. John+

11/09/2013 02:20:00 PM  
Blogger Enza Ferreri said...


I'd like to ask you if you can include my anti-Islam blog, whose title is Enza Ferreri, in your blogroll.

Thank you.
Best wishes


11/15/2013 11:32:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

What is Uniquely Good about Western Civilisation Derives from Christianity

Enza, as you say at about 16:00, "We must know who we are." Exactly right. Confusion over this point is at the root of all the problems you discuss.

Are you jewish?

"The left", communism, the Frankfurt School, "cultural marxism" and even Christianity are jewish intellectual movements. What is unique, and uniquely good, about "the West" is Westerners - AKA Europeans, Whites. The jews are uniquely hostile to us, and thus uniquely bad.

11/16/2013 10:57:00 AM  
Anonymous ben tillman said...

Nicely done, Tan. I had not seen or had forgotten a number of those quotes from Unz.

11/16/2013 08:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Gerald said...

'"The left", communism, the Frankfurt School, "cultural marxism" and even Christianity are jewish intellectual movements. What is unique, and uniquely good, about "the West" is Westerners - AKA Europeans, Whites. The jews are uniquely hostile to us, and thus uniquely bad.'

Tan, could you flesh this out a bit? If Jews are uniquely bad, than presumably their 'intellectual movements' are as well. If so, do you think Christianity is uniquely bad?

I'm not just asking about the Christianity of today, which I think most of us would agree is part of the problem, but in general. In other words, are you joining those on the alt-right who think we should completely abandon and reject on principle the historic faith of the West and our forefathers?

11/17/2013 12:17:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"do you think Christianity is uniquely bad ... reject on principle the historic faith of the West and our forefathers?"

I think that historically speaking the spiritual instincts of Europeans have been hijacked and redirected, in much the same way and for the same reasons that the contemporary "counter-jihad" represents the hijacking and redirection of nationalist instincts.

Today's "judeo-Christianity" quite openly serves alien interests to the detriment of Europeans. So yes, in that sense, I think Christianity has been uniquely bad for Europeans.

11/18/2013 11:33:00 AM  
Blogger Vanishing American said...

Since so few people ever speak up to defend Christianity in this context I always feel compelled to.
However I won't take up space here to offer that defense, except to say that anything called 'Judeo-Christianity' is some kind of chimera, because Judaism and Christianity are diametrically opposed in many ways. I am not sure who coined that oxymoron, 'Judeo-Christian' but I know it began to be used in earnest as recently as the 1950s, and I would not be at all suprised if it were someone other than a Christian who coined it.
There are numbers of Jewish writers who objected to the term themselves, as they said Judaism and Christianity differ too profoundly.
What passes as 'Christianity' today has been ''hijacked and redirected'' also, along with every other institution in society.

I realize these few words won't convince those who disagree, and I will possibly write on this on my own blog.

11/18/2013 10:20:00 PM  
Blogger Bigmo said...

I am not White anyways but I do support the causes of many White Nationalists like Kevin Macdonald, Matt Parrott, and Richard Spencer, David Duke etc especially concerning mass immigration and White displacement. However I detected that they make some serious strategic mistakes and they will most likely lose or create chaos in America (race warfare and secessionist movements). We know that once 2016 hits many Whites will realize that they have been displaced as the dominant cultural and political force in America and there will be probably some reactions and even mass rebellion could take place. But we need to understand how this has taken place. To do that we need to revisit Abraham Lincoln and the civil war. Its my belief that Whites rejection of America as a bi national society is the reason why multiculturalism won and took control. Its my belief white rejection of the outcome of the civil war is the reason why external forces (especially Jews) have been successful in turning America to a third world like country. Many Whites simply couldn’t intellectual defend America’s uni nationalism and refused to accept bi nationalism (European majority, west African minority) and so the only player left was multi nationalism.

There is a karma in this. If you don’t appreciate what you have you could lose it all. Whites were 90% in 1965 and Blacks were about 10%. Today Whites are only about 65% and will expect to be 55% maybe in 15 years to 20 years if not less. Blacks are not even the largest minority anymore. But many Whites simply refused to accept Blacks as a component of American identity and spent a lot of their energy fighting equality and integration and complaining about welfare and crime. Now they are losing the whole country and would sell their homes if they can get the 1960 demographic back. They need to unify an reconcile with the Blacks of the country and create an alliance rejecting the 1965 immigration act as an act of war by an alien elite and revoke the citizenship of all who have gotten citizenship from that law.

What I am trying to say i that Whites did not establish a definition of America they can defend and I have not seen any Nationalist able to do so. America is a European majority nation with a West African minority and its immigration laws should reflect that to protect and maintain that demographic. That is a definition that is historically supported and expresses the reality of America. But would White Nationalist accept that? I doubt it.

Also talking about Muslims is a distraction. Their numbers in America is small and a third of them are Blacks anyways. In Europe their percentages are higher but no way near the demographic shift like America. Europe is still 90% whites and probably will remain so. Talking about Muslims is an admittance that religion is more important than ethnicity. White Nationalists separate between Latinos, Blacks and Whites even if they are all Christians but with Muslims they see them as a common religious community which is a mistake for them to do. I believe Jewish activists encourage that because they want people to see Jews as a religious community and not an ethnic one. In the end Muslims are not really a component of American history and therefore the non Blacks of them could be classified as aliens who entered from the 1965 law that is now null and void. To do that Whites have to accept the outcome of the civil war and the place Blacks have in America’s identity. If they don’t they will intellectually lose. Attacking Abraham Lincoln is defying destiny and what God has chosen and its a suicide.

11/19/2013 05:24:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...


"What passes as 'Christianity' today has been ''hijacked and redirected'' also, along with every other institution in society."

Good point.

The difference is that Christianity's latent payload, the jewish "we're all the same"/"love the Other" mind-virus, has always been there, prior to the manifestation of most other European institutions. In whatever other ways Christianity may have helped Europeans, it enabled jewish/alien infiltration of itself and, from there, European societies.

11/19/2013 10:30:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"America is a European majority nation with a West African minority and its immigration laws should reflect that to protect and maintain that demographic. That is a definition that is historically supported and expresses the reality of America. But would White Nationalist accept that? I doubt it.

Also talking about Muslims is a distraction. Their numbers in America is small and a third of them are Blacks anyways."

Speaking of distractions, your distorted understanding of nation and nationalism is typical. Any nation worthy of the label is relatively racially and culturally homogeneous - the opposite of the multi-culti/multi-racial ideal promulgated by self-interested alien infiltrators.

11/19/2013 10:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Prop 187 suck, it didn't punished the companies for hiring illegal immigrants. I voted for it but a better path was what Arizona did by punishing the companies more. Too much of the right like the so-called conservative economic approach like Ron Paul which doesn't punish companies for hiring them. Unz has a good idea rise the wage to 12 per hr and native born folks will apply to do cleaning jobs and companies will hire white guys.

12/04/2013 01:54:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home