16 May, 2007
Diversity on Campus
Posted by Socrates in AmeriKwa, jewed culture, Socrates, White identity at 7:08 pm | 
Permanent Link
Why does the “diversity movement” exist? Because White males no longer control the West. They allowed Jews, Blacks, Browns and women into leadership positions in the White countries. Bad idea. White males built the West and only they can manage it properly. Jews, Blacks and Browns aren’t Western. Wearing White clothes, driving White cars and speaking a White language doesn’t make you Western. (Are White women Western? That’s a good question for debate. It probably depends on what your definition of “Western” is: cultural? Intellectual? Spiritual?):
16 May, 2007 at 10:21 pm
An interesting question. It is tempting to assert that women transcend such epithets as “Western”, “Islamic”, “Christian” — meaning that a greater natural lassitude of character, and shallowness of mind, are not strictly amenable to any cultural form which is not close enough to the race of the female to leave no room for error, or better yet, errancy. The Hebrew often serves as a watermark of racial character and ideological commitment, and indeed, one observes in the Hebress a generally quite faithful member of the race, other qualities aside. Chinese females perhaps have a greater advantage in that certain cultural norms were in place while our own ancestors were everywhere in their cultural infancy. In light of the antiquity of these two races, then, Western, Christian, and Islamic cultural norms suffer from both the opposition of the female biological character itself (which is to say, the extent to which her biological existence determines – limits – her psychological existence) which ultimately cannot support or contribute to the cultural constructs of the male, and a certain youth and chaos which here & there succeeded in breeding morals into the female, but could not, owing to the dispersion of ethnoi and its consequences, as well as technological revolutions, sustain her at the primitive level of absolute identification with racial norms of which she is merely a part in the case of the Hebrews or the Chinese. While the position of the female under Shari’ah is subservient, operationally speaking, it is nonetheless a late cultural form and in any case only exaggerates (where it does not overturn) pre-existing cultural norms of the Arabian peninsula; it is safe to say that liberal ideology, stemming ultimately from the aristocratic idealists of the French Revolution, and carried hither by poor Anglo-Saxon imitations, has become the foil by which Shari’ah – and all frankly authoritarian cultural and political systems – appears to the female, and those who identify with them, as oppressive, brutal, etc. Face to face with the expectations of Shari’ah (and all moral systems), woman senses a decrement to her own selfishness established by liberal and Jewish ideology, that is to say, she is face to face with the specter of her own chastisement. Worse: she cannot possibly understand this, being too primitive and selfish mentally; and logically speaking, if she could understand that her insistence on “freedom” is in fact an assertion of her own petty selfishness unleashed, she would be under the logical responsibility of acknowledging the latter — which is logically impossible given that her selfishness is a factor at all. This applies to virtually all women today who fall within the orbit of modern urban culture, and increasingly to those without. The White Nationalist female presents to the shallow eye a seeming contradiction: she is obligated by the nature of the (quasi-) ideology which she adopts (which is however more often only the ideological trappings of a scene or aesthetic) to relegate herself to a precisely-defined, fetishized subservience: the wife. Yet this very conscious self-relegation to the domestic sphere, which would not even concern her if she, like many Western women today, enjoyed a measure of success in the corporate sphere, or were not jilted by a low position or failure therein, or could rely on good looks to keep her afloat in a vicious free-market society, is nothing more than role-play, the forced and heavily qualified adoption of a politicized cultural fetish which has no value to either party politically or culturally; that is to say: the conceit of the modern female finds yet another refuge in a self-consciously subservient role which is operationally antithetical to the now victorious paradigm and woman’s role therein. The pushy, almost “butch” quality of the White Nationalist female is, I am sure, familiar to most males who read VNN. She is no less bossy, mean, presumptuous, alienating, etc., than females of many other social groups; and to make matters worse, she is part of a fringe social group with an essentially hostile worldview (where it has not been watered down by inclusivity to the point of innocuousness, as with Stormfront), which draws on both violent subcultural fetishes (skinheadism, redneckism, guns, death metal, Nazi imagery, etc.) and propagandistic, quasi-cultural narcissism (“Aryan”, “Norse”, “heathen”, “Celtic”, wolf, fairy, dragon, unicorn fetishes), all of which greatly increase her own narcissism and selfishness. This is the origin of all your Aryan angels, princesses and goddesses: basically narcissistic modern females, with no capacity for ideology or political conscience, usually inferior aesthetically and socially, adapting to yet another masculine cultural trend. It is not insignificant that a few older single mothers are attracted to White Nationalism, which provides a sort of masculine placebo for the husband/mate they were unable to keep (without implication of fault) and will perhaps prove unable to get. — All of this is just to say that women cannot rightly be called “Western”, “Islamic”, “Christian” or anything else, for cultures which gave rise to these epithets arose from masculine genius; she may partake of their cultural norms, she may have been genuinely stamped by them at certain times, but she does not partake of their essence, because they did not arise from her essence. A woman could as well be a harlot as a Christian, as we see in the case of Mary Magdalene; that leaves the unique destiny of Christ himself — a man’s destiny unfolds, a woman’s merely follows. The only sense in which white women raised in the West can be securely classed as “Western”, apart from that very circumstance, is racial: she is said to be of “European” descent. And just here lay a great confusion among White Nationalists, who, under the same idiotic pretext as the equalitarians they claim to oppose, say all “whites” are of value. Not only is this fatally untrue in terms of subrace, it is so sexually. White equalitarianism is White Nationalism’s biggest ideological failure, arising from the desire to gain adherents at the expense of racial quality, when in fact neither numbers or quality have any bearing, strategically, against the Jews. But, the White Nationalist objects, we uphold the traditional roles of male and female — again, this is mere roleplay. A few WN couples manage to play out that “tradition”, but it is meaningless culturally and politically. Man and woman are both leveled and corrupted by modernity; WNs may spend their lives playing a role, as do many other social groups, but this does not touch the essence of the concepts “Western”, “Aryan”, etc. At most this “lifestyle choice” – and that is really all it is – may be called “Christian” in the tame sense of monogamy and domestic cleanliness, but to mistake such innocuousness, and the being it is designed to protect, satisfy, and in modernity aggrandize, woman, for adequate markers of CULTURE is simply false, and where attempted, only “modern” liberality with concepts to accommodate an inferior portion of the great cultural equation. The woman receives, the man gives. One must always bear that in mind.
16 May, 2007 at 11:48 pm
jews enrich ur lives whether you like it or not you faggots, do u use google, invented by a Jew… i just said that cuz i foud this website on google, so you fucking hypocritical sell outs as you take advantage of Jewish resources…. those jews went to colllege and soon will be the richest people on earth because of it… you dumb pieces of shit
17 May, 2007 at 5:50 am
the over-whelming majority of white (western) women born, let’s say, post-1970 r pretty much totally ZOGged…..IOW: nuthin’ but jew tools!
once yr as ZOGged as most of these slags r, yr pretty much a lost cause; wht’s more: u got too much to lose if the ‘status quo apple-cart’ is up-set; so, irrespective of the evidence presented (see here!), yr attitude will indubitably be: “”if yr on a ‘good thing’, stick with it!”
usually: it’s simply not worth the time & effort to get one of these ZOG bitches ‘on-side’; the amnt of energy expended to recruit one dubious, wavering femi-cunt could be much more productively expended else-where! (i think that’s how Strom ended up lookin’ @ his first missus!…..wonder how much of that fckn fiasco contributed to his subsequent FCK UPz?!?….a spurned white man will seek ‘solace’ in another woman’s arms….trouble is: Strom picked ones that were much too young!….but: such is the way of it…you’ll inevitably end up pickin’ some woman!)
WNs should therefore seek for white women in greener pastures else-where; say: Eastern Europe!
why?
because the bottom-line is: it’s simply not worth the ‘aggro’ & the ‘effort’ to de-programme ZOGettes!
17 May, 2007 at 7:39 am
(*foot-note* to my abv pst: Pierce was right abt ‘Eastern European’ women: they’re softer, more feminine & more wifely/motherly than these hard-nosed femi-cunt bull dykes currently ‘calling the shots’ in most Western ‘liberal democrapacies’!)
17 May, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Here are a few things for you to consider:
1) There is no such thing as a “white race,” or “white culture.”
2) You are playing the victim here.
3) Your values are antithetical to those held by most Americans.
4) Your values are inconsistent with the core values of the United States.
17 May, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Oy West can mean a lot of things-
think of all the ways we have heard it used-
“western civilization”
also one hears other groups talking about becoming “Westernized”, but somehow that translates to “materialistic, pop culture, celebrity worshipping, fashion-obsessed,consumer-driven, anything goes morality, sleazy as ‘cool’, and so on”, the things that suck , you know, since our society became so Jewikwa’d.. and soon, we will have Mexican uber-tacky culture mixed with Rothstein-ized MTV/porno culture.. hmm Heeb-a-mundo? The worst of both worlds.
17 May, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Briseis talks aright. Not about culture. Race is primary. If genetics is only important from the male then Aryan men should be able to impregnate anything and a little Aryan will pop out who can build up a civilisation equal to what was once considered Western. Doesn’t work that way though does it?
17 May, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Jimbo’s right though. After the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s and the now, you have a proximate demonstration of what I mean: our generation is left with a completely warped specimen which can be called “Western” or “Christian” – nevermind “Aryan” – taxonomically at best. She’s located in the West, she professes Christ (if that), and her skin is white. But that don’t make her “Western” in the ideal sense, however one wants to define that. An exogamic hunter-gatherer society, as KMac would say, or an “open society” as Jew Popper called it, does not produce racially committed females because its “race”, as we know a collection of various races or “subraces”, is too chaotic genetically and culturally. We lack the greater mass-uniformity of the Han and the tight exclusive uniformity of the Hebrew; both are more primitive — the Han produce enough females to nullify errancy, the Hebrews produce the mostly finely-tuned gametic product.
The white females walking around today are not “Western”. They are no touchstone for any ideal or achievement of Western culture. They do not remind one of anything but the last conceited, ill-tempered trollop which made one sick. To even be considered for inclusion in an unconscious racial or cultural tradition, the very least criterion is that one catches a glimpse of something beyond vulgar modernity; with the white female of today, of whatever cultural stamp or fetish (from MTV to WN), is completely separate from any tradition, which also explains the current fad of overestimating the virtue and value of the Eastern European female, who is believed, not altogether wrongly, to partake more of the primitive and thus be of greater value politically; which is nonsense — because having wives is not politics.
17 May, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Frank “super dick” Johnson tells us that there’s no such thing as the white race. Tell us, Franklin, is there a black race, or a jewish race? Have you informed the nation of islam or the ADL that their respective races don’t exist, or is it only the white race that’s a social construct?
As far as American white women go, the vast majority are a lost cause. They’ll even end a promising relationship if you hold pro-white racial beliefs. It’s best they die so as not to infect their/our children with suicidal notions of racial equality and “race doesn’t matter” attitudes. Western/nordic man is dead anyway. There’s no physical resistance ANYWHERE in the Western world to affirmative action, mass non-white immigration, non-white crime against whites and hate crime laws. The mantle will be passed to the slavic peoples of Eastern Europe and Russia and the Mediterranean types of South America.
17 May, 2007 at 9:53 pm
FTJ
17 May, 2007 at 10:22 pm
I’m deconstructing the social construct known as “Frank Johnson.”
Frank Johnson Says:
17 May, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Here are a few things for you to consider:
1) There is no such thing as a “white race,†or “white culture.â€
That’s so transparently stupid, nothing further needs to be said. If a person can’t or won’t see what’s clearly before their eyes, this website won’t do you a bit of good. You’re hopeless, and you’re not wanted or needed here. I believe this line of malignant fantasy comes from Jew hatemonger Noel Ignatiev, who advocates that the “social construct” known as the white race needs to be abolished.
17 May, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Marshall Lentini Says:
17 May, 2007 at 7:41 pm
The white females walking around today are not “Westernâ€. They are no touchstone for any ideal or achievement of Western culture. They do not remind one of anything but the last conceited, ill-tempered trollop which made one sick.
Boy, is that ever true. I said today to someone else, elsewhere, more or less the same thing, but more crudely (edited slightly for poor grammer):
I talked to an normal, racially aware white women in real time the last couple of days. For a few blessed hours, the world was right and lovely. Then she left and it tilted right back to “Alice in Wonderland” :-(
The only woman I could be with is a “racist” white woman. Even good looking white women, once they open their mouth and start babbling their clueless and oh so self important crap – let’s just say I get bored pretty quickly. It’s better to be alone than with a narcissistic retard that I’m going to have to fight every second.
I have no further point to make, other than it’s nice to see others who see the same things I do. It can get lonely, being one of the few people “awake” in the “matrix” around here.
17 May, 2007 at 11:31 pm
Our core values are inconsistent with those of the United States? Which United States? The one that our Founders built? Or does he mean the Hollywood construct made by jewish swindlers from Russia, who infiltrated in significant 100+ years later?
Fuck the Jewnited States, or any country. I only want to be consistent with the truth.
As for the bit about “the values” of “most Americans” is a particularly egregious example of ad popularum. Gosh – we don’t agree with the cool kids! We’d better get with it! But the arrogant Frank probably doesn’t know what ad popularum means. He only “knows” that the rulers are GOOD, and he and Hannity are saving the world from evil.
18 May, 2007 at 1:22 am
# Jake says
16 May, 2007 at 11:48 pm
jews enrich ur lives whether you like it or not you faggots, do u use google, invented by a Jew…
No, Google was invented by two people, one being Lawrence Page, the other a Jew,Sergey Brin, who was interested in “data-mining and pattern extraction.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin
Google has a bad reputation for privacy invasion. I do believe they hold onto personal web searches for until something like until 2038. Here’s a way around typical Jew inspired privacy intrusion:
http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm
Thanks for pointing out that we shouldn’t trust a Jew with privacy issues, Jake, as if most of us didn’t know that already.
18 May, 2007 at 3:14 am
1) There is no such thing as a “white race,†or “white culture.â€
–Forensic pathologists disagree with this, as do most non-whites, for this would mean that there is no “white” majority in The United States, from which it would follow that there are no “minorities”. That means any group or organization which exists to either protect, enrich, or spread the influence of any “minority” group should be abolished forthwith by the same specious logic by which you negated the existence of the white race. Be very careful what you wish for, for if the white race doesn’t exist, it cannot be guilty of anything. No reparations. No reason to feed the teeming colored masses. No colonial guilt. And no reason why we belong in North America any less than so-called “indigenous” populations. No groups, so no “hate crimes”. The educational establishment that taught a gentleman like you that there’s no such thing as a white race will, when it suits them and at the bat of an eye, turn around and immediately blame that same supposedly non-existent white race for just about anything imaginable. Whites are taught they don’t exist as a group, while other groups are taught to be hyper aware of their ethnicity and/or race.
2) You are playing the victim here.
–That’s currently the world’s most popular indoor sport. Why can’t we play? Is there a color barrier?
3) Your values are antithetical to those held by most Americans.
–The current American public is a collection of vapid, degenerate, materialistic voyeurs, who have scarcely batted an eye at the illegal overthrows of two national governments, and the brutal and continuing killings of hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims since 2001, not to mention the continual, and related, assaults on their own Bill of Rights. They re-elected George W. Bush, who lied to them to get them into the Iraqi conflict and whom the world correctly views as a war criminal and probable madman. Read the current AP article “Death in Iraq spawns grim subculture” for a glimpse at how the “values held by most Americans” have effected that pitiful nation and its people. Not sharing the “values” of “most Americans” should be the litmus test for all thinking, conscious, moral people.
4) Your values are inconsistent with the core values of the United States.
–So you do not believe The United States was always a racist nation? Which means all those things my social Marxist professors taught me are invalid? In fact, the social Marxists and Blacks are right: The United States was always a racist nation. It remained one until World War II and the mass, vulgar economic prosperity that it spawned anesthetized the population and corrupted the elites enough to allow parasitic, alien groups and ideas to grow and prosper. In fact, racial eugenics prospered here (where a sound barrier of segregation existed even in the north and west) much more than in Europe, and many of the most influential racial thinkers were American, not European–men like Madison Grant, Lothard Stoddard and Tom Watson. None of this was “inconsistent with the core values of The United States”, which was established as an alternative European society. I would also suggest you dig deeper into the works and words of such men as Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and find out what they really thought about blacks and alien races. Enjoy.
18 May, 2007 at 3:19 am
“There is no such thing as a “white race,†”
If so, why does the expression exist?
18 May, 2007 at 4:15 am
A selection of interesting postings, but puting aside the accuracy or otherwise of their observations, quite depressingly defeatist.
True, most White ‘wimmin’ are submerged in the ‘spirit’ of the present age. Whether it be trashy ‘Oprah’ style magazines, or the current religion of equality. White women will respect and respond to the leadership and direction from White men. Men who are clear about their aims and clear about their means. Men with balls.
Why are White women ‘on strike’, ie. not producing children? Because they see White men and their traditional values being ridiculed and humiliated nightly on the jewtube. Worse still, White men sit there and take it without protest!
It is imperative for White men to regain their honour, self-respect, and prestige.
18 May, 2007 at 10:14 am
3) Your values are antithetical to those held by most Americans.
4) Your values are inconsistent with the core values of the United States.
THe US has no “core values” aside from consumerism.
If the current immigration bill passes that will be the official death warrant of the US. Of course, the United States as envisioned by the Founders of the Republic actually vanished some time ago.
18 May, 2007 at 12:33 pm
sean tracy: “Forensic pathologists disagree with this, as do most non-whites, for this would mean that there is no “white†majority in The United States, from which it would follow that there are no “minoritiesâ€. That means any group or organization which exists to either protect, enrich, or spread the influence of any “minority†group should be abolished forthwith by the same specious logic by which you negated the existence of the white race. Be very careful what you wish for, for if the white race doesn’t exist, it cannot be guilty of anything. No reparations. No reason to feed the teeming colored masses. No colonial guilt. And no reason why we belong in North America any less than so-called “indigenous†populations. No groups, so no “hate crimesâ€. The educational establishment that taught a gentleman like you that there’s no such thing as a white race will, when it suits them and at the bat of an eye, turn around and immediately blame that same supposedly non-existent white race for just about anything imaginable. Whites are taught they don’t exist as a group, while other groups are taught to be hyper aware of their ethnicity and/or race”
excellent analysis of the bogus logic used by most liberal democraps!
years ago, before the advent of ZOG ‘schmuels’, when subjects like logic, philosophy, the classics & Latin & Greek were taught to young white boys, such atrocious reasoning would have been ‘nailed’ by any junior secondary school student;
yr cmmnts expose a major non-sequitur: there is no link between the premiss & the conclusion!
this is the most glaring and obvious logical fallacy possible!
“…in thinking about the classification of fallacies, let us recall that the purpose of constructing arguments is to prove conclusions that are in some way un-known or doubtful or that have been challenged or called into question…(a conclusion can only be proved) if (an) argument employs premises that: i/are logically capable of all being true; ii/are such that they can be known to be true irrespective of whether or not the conclusion is true and iii/support the conclusion to the desired degree: with deductive arguments, the premisses must strictly guarantee the conclusion . The neglect of any one of these three requirements for a successful proof gives rise to a separate category of fallacies…..neglect of the third requirement gives rise to the fallacies of ‘non sequitur’ Latin for ‘it does not follow’!. These fallacious arguments are fallacies in the most obvious sense of the term, for their logical defect is that they have an in-sufficient link between premisses and conclusion”
(‘The Elements of Logic’ by: Stephen F Barker; 2nd edtn, McGraw-Hill pblshng, 1974)
syllogistically: the liberal democrap argument is:
There is no such thing as the White Race;
Various atrocities have been committed against many non-white races by the White Race;
Therefore: the White Race is collectively guilty!
(geneticists would also dis-agree that ‘there is no such thing as the White Race’!)
18 May, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Thanks for pointing out that we shouldn’t trust a Jew with privacy issues, Jake, as if most of us didn’t know that already.
says a duesh… but yet this website is still a member of the jewish run google business, someone needs to talk to alex linder and voice their complaints… oh and christians are the ones behind homeland security.. talk about a breach of privacy you fag
18 May, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Missed u guys…but if SGT SKULL is correct..”As far as American white women go, the vast majority are a lost cause. They’ll even end a promising relationship if you hold pro-white racial beliefs. It’s best they die so as not to infect their/our children with suicidal notions of racial equality and “race doesn’t matter†attitudes. Western/nordic man is dead anyway.”, and if jimbo is correct…”the over-whelming majority of white (western) women born, let’s say, post-1970 r pretty much totally ZOGged…..IOW: nuthin’ but jew tools!” …. then how can Frank Johnson be wrong? … Without the white women there can be no white race…The good news is that u queers can continue having sex with each other…what does it matter.
18 May, 2007 at 4:38 pm
REPLY TO: Frank Johnson
1) There is no such thing as a “white race,†or “white culture.â€
There is no such thing as you! Now respond to that and I’ll get back to you.
2) You are playing the victim here.
We are not playing.
3) Your values are antithetical to those held by most Americans.
If most Americans believe in a stupid thing, it’s still a stupid thing.
4) Your values are inconsistent with the core values of the United States.
See answer to #3.
.
18 May, 2007 at 5:44 pm
It’s a conceptual issue, “blacking,” and since you’re a nigger, it’s way over your head. I understand, you’re doing the best you can. So what’s on your agenda today? A rock of crack, a bucket of KFC, then humping your mammy, just like every other day? Mutha fuka mutha fuka, muh big black dick mutha fuka! ROTFLMAO :-)
“Jake,” this website isn’t run by the “Jewish run Google business” which, I pointed out, was co-founded, not invented, by a Jew, to correct your previous error. And the head of homeland security is a dual Israeli citizen – a hooked nosed Jew by the name of Michael Chertoff. Try again, Jew boy. Keep on swinging, sooner or later, you’re bound to hit ONE…
…aren’t you?
I’m sitting here chuckling. This is our “opposition” Things are looking up.
18 May, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Yo Sarge!
Skull: It’s best they [Goyesses] die so as not to infect their/our children with suicidal notions of racial equality and “race doesn’t matter†attitudes. …
Whymen, shiksa’s even, who needs ’em? Goyls, goyls, goyls!
Oy, Skully again: There’s no physical resistance ANYWHERE in the Western world to affirmative action, mass non-white immigration, non-white crime against whites and hate crime laws. The mantle will be passed to the slavic peoples of Eastern Europe and Russia and the Mediterranean types of South America.
Pooty-poot & Che to the rescue!
I liiiiiiike it.
Please, no more Goyman slave revolts, like the 1933-1945, alwight, alweady … G-wd no!!
18 May, 2007 at 10:26 pm
tom ridge wasnt jewish, there is a extreme lack of jews in bush’s cabinet who have leaked cia information.. and above al else at least im not a fag like u
19 May, 2007 at 7:48 am
Please, no more Goyman slave revolts, like the 1933-1945, alwight, alweady … G-wd no!!
That’s “aright aready”.
19 May, 2007 at 10:08 am
but heres the truth, your gonna keep on bitching complaining about jews, even discrediting some of my arguments (correct too) but i’m still gonna go to my good four year college, still going to be a successful jew like the rest of my family, and im gona go on vacations and have a family, big house, nice cars, like the rest of my kike family… but when i look back at u, ull still be sitting at ur computer doing this… even if ur successful so will i, and i know u all cant stand another successful jew yet u cant do nothing bout it bitches
19 May, 2007 at 7:24 pm
There is no point in debating anything with kikes. Let’s not waste our time and energy doing so. Has it ever been useful to ‘discuss’ with a scorpion or a rattle snake?
19 May, 2007 at 8:56 pm
FUCK ALL YOU HATERS!!!!!
20 May, 2007 at 3:53 am
jake: “but heres the truth, your gonna keep on bitching complaining about jews, even discrediting some of my arguments (correct too) but i’m still gonna go to my good four year college, still going to be a successful jew like the rest of my family, and im gona go on vacations and have a family, big house, nice cars, like the rest of my kike family… but when i look back at u, ull still be sitting at ur computer doing this… even if ur successful so will i, and i know u all cant stand another successful jew yet u cant do nothing bout it bitches”
yr time’s rapidly expiring, jew-boy!
pity yr too effin’ stoopid to see that, despite yr ‘college education’!
but: then: jews have never actually been ‘smart’, just ‘rat-cunning’;
if youse were smart youse wouldn’t have created that Talmudic gangsta homunculus-enclave called Yidsrael and youse wouldn’t have pulled a fckn idiotic stunt like 9/11;
wht you WOULD HAVE DONE is devoted all yr energies to: i/stifling & styming any resurgent white racial movement and ii/preventing the emergence of any ‘media’ you couldn’t control;
but: you haven’t and you didn’t!
so: ENJOY! the few short yrs remaining to yr parasitical anti-race!
like
20 May, 2007 at 12:09 pm
we’re not a race not an ethnic group, once again if the jews were behind 9/11 some of my family and friends would be alive… was einstein rat cunning, um if i would be correct i think ppl regard him as the smartest man ever.. how are we expiring i just see us getting stronger… so fuck u jimbo u redneck idiot do something to stop us.. give me ur address hit me in my big jew nose, before college i sepnt a 3 year tour of dutty in the idf killing haters like, golani brgade… sniper, see what happens, give me ur address if ur not afraid of this kike with only rat cunningness
20 May, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Abstract
Proponents of Einstein have acted in a way that appears to corrupt the historical record. Albert Einstein (1879-1955), Time Magazine’s “Person of the Century”, wrote a long treatise on special relativity theory (it was actually called “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, 1905a), without listing any references. Many of the key ideas it presented were known to Lorentz (for example, the Lorentz transformation) and Poincaré before Einstein wrote the famous 1905 paper.
As was typical of Einstein, he did not discover theories; he merely commandeered them. He took an existing body of knowledge, picked and chose the ideas he liked, then wove them into a tale about his contribution to special relativity. This was done with the full knowledge and consent of many of his peers, such as the editors at Annalen der Physik.
The most recognisable equation of all time is E = mc2. It is attributed by convention to be the sole province of Albert Einstein (1905). However, the conversion of matter into energy and energy into matter was known to Sir Isaac Newton (“Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another…”, 1704). The equation can be attributed to S. Tolver Preston (1875), to Jules Henri Poincaré (1900; according to Brown, 1967) and to Olinto De Pretto (1904) before Einstein. Since Einstein never correctly derived E = mc2 (Ives, 1952), there appears nothing to connect the equation with anything original by Einstein.
Arthur Eddington’s selective presentation of data from the 1919 Eclipse so that it supposedly supported “Einstein’s” general relativity theory is surely one of the biggest scientific hoaxes of the 20th century. His lavish support of Einstein corrupted the course of history. Eddington was less interested in testing a theory than he was in crowning Einstein the king of science.
The physics community, unwittingly perhaps, has engaged in a kind of fraud and silent conspiracy; this is the byproduct of simply being bystanders as the hyperinflation of Einstein’s record and reputation took place. This silence benefited anyone supporting Einstein.
Introduction
Science, by its very nature, is insular. In general, chemists read and write about chemistry, biologists read and write about biology, and physicists read and write about physics. But they may all be competing for the same research dollar (in its broadest sense). Thus, if scientists wanted more money for themselves, they might decide to compete unfairly. The way they can do this is convince the funding agencies that they are more important than any other branch of science. If the funding agencies agree, it could spell difficulty for the remaining sciences. One way to get more money is to create a superhero – a superhero like Einstein.
Einstein’s standing is the product of the physics community, his followers and the media. Each group benefits enormously by elevating Einstein to icon status. The physics community receives billions in research grants, Einstein’s supporters are handsomely rewarded, and media corporations like Time Magazine get to sell millions of magazines by placing Einstein on the cover as “Person of the Century”.
When the scandal breaks, the physics community, Einstein’s supporters and the media will attempt to downplay the negative news and put a positive spin on it. However, their efforts will be shown up when Einstein’s paper, “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, is seen for what it is: the consummate act of plagiarism in the 20th century.
Special Relativity
Jules Henri Poincaré (1854-1912) was a great scientist who made a significant contribution to special relativity theory. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy website says that Poincaré: (1) “sketched a preliminary version of the special theory of relativity”; (2) “stated that the velocity of light is a limit velocity” (in his 1904 paper from the Bull. of Sci. Math. 28, Poincaré indicated “a whole new mechanics, where the inertia increasing with the velocity of light would become a limit and not be exceeded”); (3) suggested that “mass depends on speed”; (4) “formulated the principle of relativity, according to which no mechanical or electromagnetic experiment can discriminate between a state of uniform motion and a state of rest”; and (5) “derived the Lorentz transformation”.
It is evident how deeply involved with special relativity Poincaré was. Even Keswani (1965) was prompted to say that “As far back as 1895, Poincaré, the innovator, had conjectured that it is impossible to detect absolute motion”, and that “In 1900, he introduced ‘the principle of relative motion’ which he later called by the equivalent terms ‘the law of relativity’ and ‘the principle of relativity’ in his book, Science and Hypothesis, published in 1902”. Einstein acknowledged none of this preceding theoretical work when he wrote his unreferenced 1905 paper.
In addition to having sketched the preliminary version of relativity, Poincar̩ provided a critical part of the whole concept Рnamely, his treatment of local time. He also originated the idea of clock synchronisation, which is critical to special relativity.
Charles Nordman was prompted to write, “They will show that the credit for most of the things which are currently attributed to Einstein is, in reality, due to Poincaré”, and “…in the opinion of the Relativists it is the measuring rods which create space, the clocks which create time. All this was known by Poincaré and others long before the time of Einstein, and one does injustice to truth in ascribing the discovery to him”.
Other scientists have not been quite as impressed with “Einstein’s” special relativity theory as has the public. “Another curious feature of the now famous paper, Einstein, 1905, is the absence of any reference to Poincaré or anyone else,” Max Born wrote in Physics in My Generation. “It gives you the impression of quite a new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not true” (Born, 1956). G. Burniston Brown (1967) noted, “It will be seen that, contrary to popular belief, Einstein played only a minor part in the derivation of the useful formulae in the restricted or special relativity theory, and Whittaker called it the relativity theory of Poincaré and Lorentze”
Due to the fact that Einstein’s special relativity theory was known in some circles as the relativity theory of Poincaré and Lorentz, one would think that Poincaré and Lorentz might have had something to do with its creation. What is disturbing about the Einstein paper is that even though Poincaré was the world’s leading expert on relativity, apparently Einstein had never heard of him or thought he had done anything worth referencing!
Poincaré, in a public address delivered in September 1904, made some notable comments on special relativity theory. “From all these results, if they are confirmed, would arise an entirely new mechanics, “would be, above all, characterised by this fact that no velocity could surpass that of light” because bodies would oppose an increasing inertia to the causes, which would tend to accelerate their motion; and this inertia would become infinite when one approached the velocity of light. No more for an observer carried along himself in a translation, he did not suspect any apparent velocity could surpass that of light: and this would be then a contradiction, if we recall that this observer would not use the same clocks as a fixed observer, but, indeed, clocks marking ‘local time’.” (Poincaré, 1905)
Einstein, the Plagiarist
It is now time to speak directly to the issue of what Einstein was: he was first and foremost a plagiarist. He had few qualms about stealing the work of others and submitting it as his own. That this was deliberate seems obvious.
Take this passage from Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times (there are no references to Poincaré here; just a few meaningless quotes). This is how page 101 reads: “‘On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies’…is in many ways one of the most remarkable scientific papers that had ever been written. Even in form and style it was unusual, lacking the notes and references which give weight to most serious expositions” (emphasis added).
Why would Einstein, with his training as a patent clerk, not recognise the need to cite references in his article on special relativity? One would think that Einstein, as a neophyte, would overreference rather than underreference.
Wouldn’t one also expect somewhat higher standards from an editor when faced with a long manuscript that had obviously not been credited? Apparently there was no attempt at quality control when it was published in Annalen der Physik. Most competent editors would have rejected the paper without even reading it. At the barest minimum, one would expect the editor to research the literature to determine whether Einstein’s claim of primacy was correct.
Max Born stated, “The striking point is that it contains not a single reference to previous literature” (emphasis added) (Born, 1956). He is clearly indicating that the absence of references is abnormal and that, even by early 20th century standards, this is most peculiar, even unprofessional.
Einstein twisted and turned to avoid plagiarism charges, but these were transparent.
From Bjerknes (2002), we learn the following passage from James MacKaye: “Einstein’s explanation is a dimensional disguise for Lorentz’sThus Einstein’s theory is not a denial of, nor an alternative for, that of Lorentz. It is only a duplicate and disguise for it. Einstein continually maintains that the theory of Lorentz is right, only he disagrees with his ‘interpretation’. Is it not clear, therefore, that in this [case], as in other cases, Einstein’s theory is merely a disguise for Lorentz’s, the apparent disagreement about ‘interpretation’ being a matter of words only?”
Poincaré wrote 30 books and over 500 papers on philosophy, mathematics and physics. Einstein wrote on mathematics, physics and philosophy, but claimed he’d never read Poincaré’s contributions to physics.
Yet many of Poincaré’s ideas – for example, that the speed of light is a limit and that mass increases with speed – wound up in Einstein’s paper, “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies” without being credited.
Einstein’s act of stealing almost the entire body of literature by Lorentz and Poincaré to write his document raised the bar for plagiarism. In the information age, this kind of plagiarism could never be perpetrated indefinitely, yet the physics community has still not set the record straight.
In his 1907 paper, Einstein spelled out his views on plagiarism: “It appears to me that it is the nature of the business that what follows has already been partly solved by other authors. Despite that fact, since the issues of concern are here addressed from a new point of view, I am entitled to leave out a thoroughly pedantic survey of the literature…”
With this statement, Einstein declared that plagiarism, suitably packaged, is an acceptable research tool.
Here is the definition of “to plagiarise” from an unimpeachable source, Webster’s New International Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition, Unabridged, 1947, p. 1,878: “To steal or purloin and pass off as one’s own (the ideas, words, artistic productions, etc. of one another); to use without due credit the ideas, expressions or productions of another. To commit plagiarism” (emphasis added). Isn’t this exactly what Einstein did?
Giving due credit involves two aspects: timeliness and appropriateness. Telling the world that Lorentz provided the basis for special relativity 30 years after the fact is not timely (see below), is not appropriate and is not giving due credit. Nothing Einstein wrote ex post facto with respect to Lorentz’s contributions alters the fundamental act of plagiarism.
The true nature of Einstein’s plagiarism is set forth in his 1935 paper, “Elementary Derivation of the Equivalence of Mass and Energy”, where, in a discussion on Maxwell, he wrote, “The question as to the independence of those relations is a natural one because the Lorentz transformation, the real basis of special relativity theory…” (emphasis added).
So, Einstein even acknowledged that the Lorentz transformation was the real basis of his 1905 paper. Anyone who doubts that he was a plagiarist should ask one simple question: “What did Einstein know and when did he know it?” Einstein got away with premeditated plagiarism, not the incidental plagiarism that is ubiquitous (Moody, 2001).
The History of E = mc2
Who originated the concept of matter being transformed into energy and vice versa? It dates back at least to Sir Isaac Newton (1704). Brown (1967) made the following statement: “Thus gradually arose the formula E = mc2, suggested without general proof by Poincaré in 1900”.
One thing we can say with certainty is that Einstein did not originate the equation E = mc2.
Then the question becomes: “Who did?”
Bjerknes (2002) suggested as a possible candidate S. Tolver Preston, who “formulated atomic energy, the atom bomb and superconductivity back in the 1870s, based on the formula E = mc2”.
In addition to Preston, a major player in the history of E = mc2 who deserves a lot of credit is Olinto De Pretto (1904). What makes this timing so suspicious is that Einstein was fluent in Italian, he was reviewing papers written by Italian physicists and his best friend was Michele Besso, a Swiss Italian. Clearly, Einstein (1905b) would have had access to the literature and the competence to read it. In “Einstein’s E = mc2 ‘was Italian’s idea'” (Carroll, 1999), we see clear evidence that De Pretto was ahead of Einstein in terms of the formula E = mc2.
In terms of his understanding the vast amount of energy that could be released with a small amount of mass, Preston (1875) can be credited with knowing this before Einstein was born. Clearly, Preston was using the E = mc2 formula in his work, because the value he determined – e.g., that one grain could lift a 100,000-ton object up to a height of 1.9 miles – yields the equation E = mc2.
According to Ives (1952), the derivation Einstein attempted of the formula E = mc2 was fatally flawed because Einstein set out to prove what he assumed. This is similar to the careless handling of the equations for radioactive decay which Einstein derived. It turns out that Einstein mixed kinematics and mechanics, and out popped the neutrino. The neutrino may be a mythical particle accidentally created by Einstein (Carezani, 1999). We have two choices with respect to neutrinos: there are at least 40 different types or there are zero types. Occam’s razor rules here.
The Eclipse of 1919
There can be no clearer definition of scientific fraud than what went on in the Tropics on May 29, 1919. What is particularly clear is that Eddington fudged the solar eclipse data to make the results conform to “Einstein’s” work on general relativity. Poor (1930), Brown (1967), Clark (1984) and McCausland (2001) all address the issues surrounding this eclipse.
What makes the expeditions to Sobral and Principe so suspect is Eddington’s zealous support of Einstein, as can be seen in his statement, “By standing foremost in testing, and ultimately verifying the ‘enemy’ theory, our national observatory kept alive the finest traditions of science…” (emphasis added) (Clark, 1984). In this instance, apparently Eddington was not familiar with the basic tenets of science. His job was to collect data – not verify Einstein’s theories.
Further evidence for the fraud can be deduced from Eddington’s own statements and the introduction to them provided by Clark (ibid., p. 285): “May 29 began with heavy rain, which stopped only about noon. Not until 1.30 pm when the eclipse had already begun did the party get its first glimpse of the sun: ‘We had to carry out our programme of photographs on faith…'” (emphasis added). Eddington reveals his true prejudice: he was willing to do anything to see that Einstein was proved right. But Eddington was not to be deterred: “It looked as though the effort, so far as the Principe expedition was concerned, might have been abortive”; “We developed the photographs, two each night for six nights after the eclipseThe cloudy weather upset my plans and I had to treat the measures in a different way from what I intended; consequently I have not been able to make any preliminary announcement of the result” (emphasis added) (Clark, ibid.).
Actually, Eddington’s words speak volumes about the result. As soon as he found one shred of evidence that was consistent with “Einstein’s” general relativity theory, he immediately proclaimed it as proof of the theory. Is this science?
Where were the astronomers when Eddington presented his findings? Did anyone besides Eddington actually look at the photographic plates? Poor did, and he completely repudiated the findings of Eddington. This should have given pause to any ethical scientist.
Here are some quotes from Poor’s summary: “The mathematical formula, by which Einstein calculated his deflection of 1.75 seconds for light rays passing the edge of the sun, is a well known and simple formula of physical optics”; “Not a single one of the fundamental concepts of varying time, or warped or twisted space, of simultaneity, or of the relativity of motion is in any way involved in Einstein’s prediction of, or formulas for, the deflection of light”; “The many and elaborate eclipse expeditions have, therefore, been given a fictitious importance. Their results can neither prove nor disprove the relativity theory.” (emphasis added) (Poor, 1930).
From Brown (1967), we learn that Eddington couldn’t wait to get it out to the world community that Einstein’s theory was confirmed. What Eddington based this on was a premature assessment of the photographic plates. Initially, stars did “appear” to bend as they should, as required by Einstein, but then, according to Brown, the unexpected happened: several stars were then observed to bend in a direction transverse to the expected direction and still others to bend in a direction opposite to that predicted by relativity.
The absurdity of the data collected during the Eclipse of 1919 was demonstrated by Poor (1930), who pointed out that 85% of the data were discarded from the South American eclipse due to “accidental error”, i.e., it contradicted Einstein’s scale constant. By a strange coincidence, the 15% of the “good” data were consistent with Einstein’s scale constant. Somehow, the stars that did not conform to Einstein’s theories conveniently got temporarily shelved – and the myth began.
So, based on a handful of ambiguous data points, 200 years of theory, experimentation and observation were cast aside to make room for Einstein. Yet the discredited experiment by Eddington is still quoted as gospel by Stephen Hawking (1999). It is difficult to comprehend how Hawking could comment that “The new theory of curved space-time was called general relativityIt was confirmed in spectacular fashion in 1919, when a British expedition to West Africa observed a slight shift in the position of stars near the sun during an eclipse. Their light, as Einstein had predicted, was bent as it passed the sun. Here was direct evidence that space and time were warped”. Does Hawking honestly believe that a handful of data points, massaged more thoroughly than a side of Kobe beef, constitutes the basis for overthrowing a paradigm that had survived over two centuries of acid scrutiny?
The real question, though, is: “Where was Einstein in all this?” Surely, by the time he wrote his 1935 paper, he must have known of the work of Poor: “The actual stellar displacements, if real, do not show the slightest resemblance to the predicted Einstein deflections: they do not agree in direction, in size, or the rate of decrease with distance from the sun”. Why didn’t he go on the record and address a paper that directly contradicted his work? Why haven’t the followers of Einstein tried to set the record straight with respect to the bogus data of 1919?
http://farshores.org/rm04ein.htm
20 May, 2007 at 4:07 pm
In response to Jake…Your kind is nothing new, and your presence on this sight is highly inappropriate. Since you clearly do not understand the nature of Jewish power in this country or how it is propogated, please stop posting stupid, hate-filled messages. And please stop saying faggot so many times–it is starting to seem suspiciously like overcompensation. Also, no one cares if you spent time in the Israeli Defense Force…congratulations; you slaughtered poor farmers’ sons from your position of political and military immunity. Of course the kikes dominate militarily..they have the support of the global superpower. Your time would be better spent mourning for the approximately 1.3 million Jews that died of various plagues in the work camps. Although I will give it to you people…the myth of 6,000,000 is probably the most effective lie in the history of the world. After all, what better opportunity to establish one’s agenda than in the war-torn, governmentless wasteland of Eastern Europe after the War. Well done! Now you just have to sell some of your beach-houses for plastic surgery…living in a city that is 50% Jewish, I have yet to find an attractive specimen. (P.S.–Tay Sach’s is God’s way of punishing your insularity in Eastern Europe–Ashkenazi Swine)
20 May, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Jakey poohh… Jew….
You come off like that retarded sheenie on tbat video linked on duke.org last week.
http://www.davidduke.com/general/2121_2121.html#more-2121
20 May, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Oh I did forget Jake….
Big tough guy. I think your dumb Ashkenazim asses were soundly kicked by an Arab militia. 30 more days and all your armour would have been melted down by Russian handheld tankbusters. And how the retarded Amerikans frantically shipped you sheenies more weaponry when you pissed it all away murdering innocent civilians. Your boy Halutz is now sneaking around Harvard – wanted signs for him are up everywhere. Itz coming.
21 May, 2007 at 12:42 am
CITE
SIGHT
SITE
Can anyone under 60 spell anymore?
“and your presence on this sight”
. . .should be site. . .
21 May, 2007 at 4:01 am
jake: “we’re not a race not an ethnic group, once again if the jews were behind 9/11 some of my family and friends would be alive… was einstein rat cunning, um if i would be correct i think ppl regard him as the smartest man ever.. how are we expiring i just see us getting stronger… so fuck u jimbo u redneck idiot do something to stop us.. give me ur address hit me in my big jew nose, before college i sepnt a 3 year tour of dutty in the idf killing haters like, golani brgade… sniper, see what happens, give me ur address if ur not afraid of this kike with only rat cunningness”
my contact details r on me blog’: take it from there if u like! u fckn jew bastard…..i’m gunna “do sumthin’ ” to jews, don’t worry abt that, you fckn kike piece of shit!
21 May, 2007 at 4:40 am
Re jigabooze
I’m only a layman, but wasn’t it Enrico Fermi who named and ‘discovered’ the neutrino (little neutral one) as a way to explain the energy distribution in beta decay? Saint Einstein had little input there.
The great German physicist Johannes Stark had the full measure of Einstein’s pretentions.
21 May, 2007 at 10:03 am
you’re not the sharpest pencil in the pencilbox, Jake. If you ever get anything right, Jewboy, oy vey, it’d be a miracle. That, or you’re lying, which is typical of your type. Michael Chertoff, an ugly hooknosed Jew is the head of homeland Security, not Tom Ridge.
Take a look at his loathsome Jew mug:
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/biography_0116.shtm
Jew Einstein did not discover the formula E=MC squared, it was discovered earlier:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence
“The mass-energy equivalence in terms of E = mc² was derived by Henri Poincare in 1900.”
As far as threatening any one of us, Internet tough guy, I’m pretty damn sure that any one of us, females included, would knock the teeth out of the ugly jewboy cocksucker you call a mouth, in any sort of face to face confrontation. You know it, I know it, and everyone reading this knows it.
Just as Hezbollah kicked the asses of your cowardly, swindling, whining lot, so too, the same would happen to you, on a individual scale.
In addittion, you’re lying about your “three years with the IDF.” It’s as obvious as the big hook nose on your face. It’s obvious for reasons you wouldn’t comprehend. I’m guessing that during your “three years.” the only “sniping” you did was “shooting” nasty jewboy sperm, as you pulled your little jewboy dick in frustration, while looking at the pictures of white women who’d puke at the thought of you touching them.
As far as doing something to stop you, oh, its coming, just like it always has in history, when the population, tired of your tribe’s swindling and destruction, boots your sorry jewboy asses right out of the country in question. Enjoy your illusion of safety, Jake.
21 May, 2007 at 10:54 am
Jake Says:
20 May, 2007 at 12:09 pm
…….before college i sepnt a 3 year tour of dutty in the idf..
# Jake Says:
19 May, 2007 at 10:08 am
……but i’m still gonna go to my good four year college,….
Thanks for the chuckle, Jake, at your expense, of course.
21 May, 2007 at 11:58 am
Re jigabooze
“I’m only a layman, but wasn’t it Enrico Fermi who named and ‘discovered’ the neutrino (little neutral one) as a way to explain the energy distribution in beta decay? Saint Einstein had little input there.”
I was wondering why you are asking me- then it dawned on me that maybe you thought I wrote the posting. I thought that the posting was obviously copied and pasted, what with the link at the end. The purpose was to show that Einstein is, in the final analysis, just another KIKE. I have never heard of beta decay.
A physicist, Paul Nachman, writing in today’s VDARE (5/21):
“I’d much rather spend my time thinking about physics! But Madison’s creation has been undone. Today—and especially this week—patriotic Americans are being forced to worry about politics.”
10 March, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Why is the United States allowing foreign born Jews, Orientals and Arabs to control the United States? Jerry Yang, the founder of Yahoo, was born in Taiwan, and Sergey Brin, the founder of Google, was born in Russia. These two individuals were not raised in Western culture and do not share Western values and morals. Morals do not even exist in Russia and Taiwan. Studies have shown that the most compassionate people are in the United States and Europe, basically white societies. Sergey Brin has the nerve to say Google’s motto is “Do no evil.” Google’s motto is the opposite, “Do the most evil for the most web traffic.” The Jews have been expelled from every country they ever trespassed to. England expelled the Jews in the seventeenth century. Why have we let the Jews take over the United States? Google is destroying the moral fabric of this country. Let’s arrest Google criminals as Italy recently did for their tormenting of an innocent child. Sergey Brin, Larry Paige and Jerry Yang belong in jail!