Race Wars or Situation Normal? — That is the Question

Our English correspondent Seneca III sends his take on the WAYCISM hysteria that has lately manifested itself on both sides of the Atlantic.

Race Wars or Situation Normal? — That is the Question

by Seneca III

In Europe, America and the UK the signs are that a huge race war is in the offing. The false accusations manufactured to create division and discord, the torrent of malignant propaganda and the obvious determination of those who expect to benefit therefrom by starting it are everywhere.

Yet, the reality is that we all observe, either intuitively or rationally, that human beings are to a greater or lesser degree racist, a trait that evolution has hardwired into the genes of our species for good reason — survival of the homogenous group to which each belongs and the retention of its resources and achievements — and it has little to do with the melanin content of the either tribe’s skin, although that can often be an indicator of historic intent and practice… actions in our past and that of many other nations being classic examples thereof. The propagation of the concept that racism is solely the product of different skin colours is a very red herring indeed.

But, times are dynamic, and at last we Whites appear to be looking to our disparate tribal origins and beginning to understand that to unilaterally forgo the survival benefits of racism is but a subtle form of suicide, and once we are no longer prepared to accept this fate we will have surmounted the deleterious effects of the decades-long campaign designed to neutralize our will to survive. Those who seek to destroy us know that first they must undermine our ancient social cohesion with lashings of historic guilt… and they have almost succeeded.

Now, the only question remaining is what shall we do to take our freedom, our lands and our physical and mental resources back into our own hands… remove the enemy within, the enemy without, or both? Because that is the way of things, and otherwise we will cease to exist. Well, within human culture war has always been the most common form of political intercourse between tribes. It is invariably the result of competition for power and resources, precipitated by an incursion or invasion undertaken by one group with the intention of seizing, controlling or parasitizing the resources of another group.

As the human mind is inarguably the ultimate resource our species possesses, it endows unlimited power and wealth upon those who can control it. Be they priests or politicians, or an unholy alliance of both, those who seek to gain such control so define their ultimate objective. The extermination or subordination of a group identity has always been the principal determinant in the enslavement or destruction of one tribe by another. It is both the essential precursor to and the sine qua non of abiding conquest.

In the West, in this the second decade of the 21st century, this precursor form is exquisitely manifested in that illegitimate spawn of political correctness, ‘The Racist Doctrine of Multiculturalism’, a deconstructionist agenda which is essentially a combination of Marxist-Socialist propaganda — an induced ‘Mea Culpa!’ Syndrome [original white sin or toxic masculinity] — and its obverse, a culture-wide ‘Stockholm Syndrome’. It is simply the first step in the imposition of a New World Order, one of subjugation to and draconian rule by a cabal of the self-selected few.

Essentially, the ‘Phoney War’, if it ever existed, is over, and the beginning of the real war is now hard by the door.

— Seneca III, in what is coming more to resemble the Middle East combined with Middle Africa rather than Middle England, this 22nd day of February 2019.

For links to previous essays by Seneca III, see the Seneca III Archives.

46 thoughts on “Race Wars or Situation Normal? — That is the Question

  1. Your outlook is way too pessimistic. And I thought I was bad? No things will start to change for the better. The exit of Gt Britain from the EUSSR will collapse the latter. The British provide a huge sum of money for their mad cap schemes and megalomania. There is not going to be a Globalist “New World Order” as like most unnatural ambitions and actions it is against natural law, as is Multiculturalism and and all the perversion of the same it pushes in its sublime inhumanity. Globalism is failing fast. Humanity will come through as always. The Cosmos is a lot more than your pessimistic view- a lot more. I am now certain their is a Moral Imperative and Intelligence behind it all.

    Those seeking the Void and Nothingness fail to comprehend the Somethingness from which all is created. Paradox is the key to comprehension. Once one sees that then all else falls into place. No we will survive as always.

    • Yes, we will survive but the catharsis is most likely to be very painful and even bloody. There’s is no escape from the ways the cards were dealt in the last, say, 50+ years – that’s what Seneca is reflecting upon.

      I say “no escape” and mean no solution which would not substantially curtail our Western freedoms and liberties, perhaps even put our lives at stake.

      It is hard to disagree with Seneca on anything factual and substantive.

    • I think you are wrong.
      Mama Merkel will just announce again that the fat years are over and that Germany because of its past and the war and the historical guilt etc and the international responsibilities and commitments Germany will have to take up the tab and pay the money the british did.

    • Seneca’s view is realistic. The world is re-tribalizing and Whites are the only “group” that are not allowed self defense or self determination.

      To survive you must want it. Nothing in Nature is about fairness or equality or justice. These are abstractions we must strive for. Yes, there will still be Humans, but the West will not survive if its most iconic ethnicity dies. There’s a good reason why our civilization cannot be reproduced in non majority White societies. And non-whites have no obligation or interest to defend “us”.

  2. I doubt if the present country and government can continue as is, although I don’t see any structural need for extensive bloodshed. By that, I mean if just a few of the parties involved act out of rational self-interest, things could stabilize in a form largely compatible with the liberties Westerners prize.

    I don’t see any way the US can remain together as a coherent country. California is the leading edge; it ignores the US laws it disagrees with, sponsors liberal courts and appeals courts that ignore the law to sabotage actions wanted by the rest of the country, and actively takes in as protected citizens unfiltered illegal immigrants from virtually any other country. After a few years, these people can travel freely to other states.

    So, the states have got to break up, perhaps reverting to a modified Articles of Confederation (AoF). The AoF specify free travel between the states except for criminals, vagabonds, and indigent. This should provide the basis for a rigorous control of travel between states, a measure that is coming to be sorely needed.

    Most likely any functional confederacy would contain elements of informal apartheid and the Israeli no-state solution to the Palestinians. By apartheid, I mean schemes to limit areas like neighborhoods to certain ethnic, cultural or racial groups would be legal, and people might be limited in their ability to cast votes, depending on how they were identified. For example, in Iran, Jews don’t cast votes in the general balloting, but elect a representative who represents Jewish interests in the Iranian parliament. By all accounts, Iranian Jews are quite happy, far happier than, say, French Jews who are attacked and mauled by uncontrolled Muslim immigrants.

    Anyway, depending how easily people accepted new arrangements, lower-ability peoples could either accept the benefits of competent administration in lieu of having an equal vote, as in the pre-intifada Palestine, which had one of the highest rates of economic growth in the world. Or, like the Palestinians, they could throw away their economic integration in favor of a suicidal political agenda, and end up as a massive welfare basket walled off to prevent suicide bombings.

    The US has strong regional differences probably making real government impossible as is. Rather than square the circle of trying to reconcile doctrinaire, totally-irrational, economically-illiterate socialists with working-class, rust-belt and manufacturing people, it’s better to create more homogeneous political entities which would have bilateral relations as external, rather than internal, neighbors.

    • If you haven’t already, you should check out the writings of John Michael Greer. Some of his stuff gets into nutty environmentalism, but his outlook on the future of the country regarding breaking up into much smaller regions and the necessity for it is in line with your thinking as well.

    • You mean something like a federal system, with a constitutionally limited national government. Who knew it could be that simple. I wonder why the founders didn’t think of that?

      • Nope. It’s the difference between a federation (Constitution) and confederation (Articles of Confederation). Read the anti-Federalist papers to see the arguments against a constitutionally-limited, but all-powerful central government.

        • Your “constitutionally-limited, but all-powerful central government” locution is a contradiction in terms. The powers originally delegated to the federal government were limited. Period. Period. Period.

          Fedgov didn’t become all powerful until the Supreme Court got busy “incorporating” the Bill of Rights and applying most of them to the states. “Congress shall make no law” became “States shall make no law.” Who knew? God knows all the ways that the 14th Amendment has been extended past the original purpose of regularizing the status of blacks. The 16th and 17th Amendments were what allowed Fedgov to get the bit between its teeth and the coup de grace was the Court’s simply ceasing to enforce the Interstate Commerce Clause. The discernment of emanations from penumbras was a comedic elaboration but clearly part of the Grand Scheme to destroy liberty.

          The Constitution is a dead letter now but for a few dead cat bounces in the area of separation of powers. Kamala Harris will happily participate in the coming presidential mud wrestling and hog calling contest and never will be heard a discouraging word about her not being a natural born citizen. And Donald Trump doesn’t know care that Art. IV, Sect. 1 demands that he protect the states against invasion.

          • “Your “constitutionally-limited, but all-powerful central government” locution is a contradiction in terms. …”

            It’s true, given the premises that the restrictions continue to be observed, as you yourself averred.

            I’m pretty much echoing the arguments of the anti-Federalists, who opposed the adoption of the original Constitution. The original Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the Constitutional form of government, left critical decisions to a vote of assemblages of the states. The states themselves voted, through their assemblies, on national questions.

            The Constitution changed the locus of power from the states to a central assembly populated by representatives. But, once appointed or elected, the representatives in the central government held powers independent of the consent of the states.

            The arguments of the anti-Federalists mirrored exactly what happened: over time, the limitations will slough off and the centralized power of the national government dampened only indirectly by the states, would remain.

            The Supreme Court hasn’t been entirely bad. During the New Deal, they invalidated the fascist National Recovery Act, which was a blueprint for total control by the federal government over every business and enterprise. According to the Constitution, on most legislation, the Congress may exclude the legislation from judicial review. I think that given the diversity of values and cultures represented in Congress, you’ll never see that being done.

          • For Col Bunny,

            Much of what you say makes sense. I emphasize that much, or most, prediction of the authoritarian future of a strong central government came from the contemporary critics of the Constitution, the ones who wrote the anti-Federalist papers. But, I also agree with you that the original Constitution was far superior to the present, amended, tweaked version, especially as interpreted by an imperial Supreme Court.

            We’re dealing in might-have-beens, but one question is, would the structure of the Articles of Confederation, where the real power of legislation lay directly in the state assemblies, have prevented the co-option of power by the federal government we see today? Or, is there a general deterioration which occurs in a successful government over time, regardless of its form. This was the argument made by Spengler in “Decline of the West”.

            The question of the Bill of Rights is tricky. If we interpret the Bill of Rights as only applying to the federal government, it is the right of a separate state to suppress political criticism, and to institute strict gun control. It simply can’t be done by the federal government. The same goes for unreasonable search and seizure, unusual punishments, etc, etc. In other words, states treated as sovereign regions with control over their own citizens. Is that something you’d be comfortable with? Genuine question.

        • I don’t see that the Constitution “changed the locus of power from the states to a central assembly.” A central government was created that was on its face limited to the powers delegated in At. I, Sect. 8. This is not a long list nor are the powers granted important powers other than responsibility for war, foreign relations, and certain aspects of the militia. These very limited powers were excecisable independent of state consent but the control of state legislatures over senators ensured that state interests would be considered, if not controlling, in exercises of the legislative power.

          I’m woefully ignorant of the debates surrounding ratification but I am not above dishonest and selective quotes from The Federalist Papers when it suits me. However, I think the Federalists probably didn’t say that constitutional limitations would “slough off” so much as they spoke of their fears that firm constitutional limitations would be as tissue paper before the winds of faction. If I’m driving past my headlights on that, well, ok, but what actually happened was that hugely unwise amendments were made and legislation enacted that gutted the original scheme and/or handed enormous power to Fedgov.

          The tragedy that has befallen our noble experiment in liberty and self-government is that clear and powerful tools in the Constitution have simply been ignored. The swine on the Supreme Court who curled up in a ball and sucked their thumb while FDR ran riot in the realm of national politics should have been impeached eo instante but they and countless other officials skated away and inflicted more damage. Impeachment ought to be as common as crabgrass but it’s treated like the last splinter of the True Cross to be locked away in the Vatican subbasement.

          Trump just signed a spending bill that is nothing less than an insult to him, just as was the jumbotron spending bill a year ago. He signed it.

          Spending and debt are through the roof. Congressional power of the purse? It is to laugh.

          Congressional power over war-making? That’s a good one. The AUMF from the Spanish American War now authorizes war against satanic ISIS and other lunatics in Syria.

          So, bottom line, the document was excellent and would have worked fine except no one foresaw how our leaders would treat it as paper for the bottom of the bird cage. Well, Jefferson and Franklin had inklings of the energy and wisdom that would have to be expended constantly to keep the whole thing humming.

          As other commenters here have aptly noted, no one foresaw that African primitives, universal franchise zealots, progressive morons, and outright communists would come to play such a prominent role in destroying the whole edifice.

    • RonaldB, If California continues on it’s current course, the feds will send the military in and take it over. They will arrest every legislature and hangers on for treason and sedition, most will be hanged as a lesson to the rest of the states on what will happen if they get out of line. This is already being talked about in government circles. They will then put California under a military governor for a few years.

      • It’s impossible to disprove a negative, but I have to say in terms of your assertion, I absolutely don’t believe it. California is extremely powerful in Democratic politics, and the Democrats have an absolute veto on government actions, except for administration decrees.

        We can’t even get the Homeland Security to deport non-criminal aliens or to enforce any e-verify bans on illegal employment. We can’t get the government to even put up 100 feet of prototype wall along the borders. So, to say the government will occupy California and hang state legislators is simply fanciful.

        • There’s no will to square California away. Half the country is for open borders and mawkish sentimentality in the area of national survival.

          Our national appetite for hogwash and servility is apparently unlimited.

        • Ronald B, Sorry my friend, but as one who worked for Uncle Sam for over 25 years in both military and Federal Law Enforcement, these scenarios have been run on a regular basis for years and continue to this day. It won’t matter what the democrats have to say for if Trump pulls a Lincoln, the rest will be as they say, history.

          • For G:

            Not having any experience or direct knowledge of any law enforcement, I can’t affirm or deny your assertion. I can say without reservation that such actions would be a clear break from the government we know.

            As for Trump pulling a “Lincoln” I remind you that it was actually the Confederacy that initiated the shooting war. In one of the stupidest decisions of the past two centuries, Jefferson Davis and his cabinet decided to take Fort Sumter by force, giving Lincoln the occasion he probably wanted, but was unable to initiate without widespread support from his electorate. There is a great chance that if the South had focused its actions on not riling the United States, the Confederacy would be in existence today, probably as a close and valued ally to the US.

            But, it’s hard to conceive of a government unable to even put up a defensive wall, as sending troops and achieving a military take-over of California. As I say, you claim to have the inside knowledge which I definitely do not, so I can’t contradict you on the bent of law enforcement.

        • RonaldB, Government red tape often does throw monkey wrenches into public works, but one thing that the military does with cold, ruthless efficiency is get the job done. Just the fact that California is thumbing its nose at Washington and ignoring Federal Immigration Law and whether the south attacked or not is irrelevant and immaterial, once a state goes rogue, the feds will do whatever is necessary to bring them back into the fold once again. It doesn’t take much to send MARSOC and SOCOM personnel to round up Californian treasonous seditious, malcontents. Frankly, I would pay good money to go on those raids to see the looks of shock and awe on their self-righteous faces. Don’t think it can’t happen? Just you wait my friend, it’s coming.

      • Let’s hope this happens… Hit SF with a neutron bomb while they are at it too.

        I am a California refugee; I don’t expect to be able to return within my lifetime.

        • In a sensible world, being on the dole should be reason to have the right to vote suspended, until such time as they re-join the workforce.

          Those who have worked for thirty or forty years and have retired have put in the effort, have paid taxes of up to half of our earnings (the overtime I’ve had to work during my years in law enforcement and then as an RN at the VA took nearly half of everything I earned), and so should be eligible to vote, in spite of no longer being employed or running a business. Same with those of us who are veterans, especially those who made a career out of having served in the Armed Forces.

        • I’m a refugee from both CA (moved there in ’73, left in ’95) and Oregon (moved there in ’97, left in 2008). If the old hippies, and their children, who currently run Oregon were offered free drugs in exchange for their right to vote, Oregon could be turned around quickly, as most of the folks who _don’t_ live in Eugene, Corvallis, Salem, or Portland are pretty conservative.

          I’d second the notion of using a neutron bomb on those cities if they refused. All three states on the Pacific coast have so much natural beauty, it’s a crying shame the progressives have forced so many of us out.

          I’m happy here in SW Montana. It will be my last home. I’m not moving again, no matter how badly the cities here try to screw things up. There are other choices besides neutron bombs.

    • I figure that 15 million people or about 1/2 of Californians need to be liquidated. Likewise about 8 million in NYC. These people are largely disarmed now so this should be a breeze.

  3. Diversity/3rd world forced Multiculturalism = Balkanization = Massive Bloodshed, as history has demonstrated time and time again. This will be no different in the coming days as the anger rises and the natives of Western Civilization come to the stark, cold, cruel, brutal, harsh, realization, them or us.

  4. Though some of the battles may appear to racial in nature, I believe they are all actually cultural. While it’s certainly possible that a culture can be dominant in a single race, the cause of the separation is still cultural. Zudhi Jasser, Thomas Sowell, and Mark Levin would most likely fight on the same side.

    • Race and religion are good, but not perfect, indicators of cultural identification. The 10 or 15% of blacks and Hispanics who voted for Trump probably identified more as Americans than as racial denizens. And yet, 85 – 90% identified with the interests of their ethnic group.

      Similarly for Jews. Something like 70% voted Democratic. But Jewish cultural identification is more determined by the sect: liberal Judaism is hard-left in its cultural expression, while the majority in traditional (Orthodox) Judaism supported Trump (I’m extrapolating a bit, since the polls didn’t seem to break them down by sect).

      Recall there were some Mexican citizens fighting in the Alamo alongside Davy Crockett and Jim Travis. So again, ethnicity is not a perfect determinant of political position.

      A mature state/country needs a way of differentiating and handling these outliers: not sensitive enough, and genuine patriots are treated as threats; too sensitive, and you allow those who genuinely hate the culture, such as Alexandria Cortex, Keith Ellison, and Luis Vicente Gutiérrez, to have influential political voices.

      • Heinlein had the right idea in his novel Starship Troopers regarding exactly who could govern and elect those who are in control. Rome also had a similar system in place in their republic era, with a two-tiered system of citizenship whereby foreigners could become Roman citizens and earn the rights and privileges of being a citizen of Rome through military service. Even America had a very restricted franchise system for much of the history of the country where for the most part, one had to have some skin in the game to run for office and elect those who wished to rule.

        I don’t see a way that the almost unlimited franchise that exists now in the US can be rolled back without some kind of violent crisis to act as a catalyst. When idiots outnumber, outbreed, and outvote those who want to preserve the unique culture and heritage of our country, it is impossible to convince them to voluntarily give up this power of mob rule, and the republican system of laws designed to protect against mob rule can be dismantled one by one as they have been in our day and age.

        Nevertheless, this will have to be done to allow those who love their country and want their children to inherit the same freedoms that they enjoyed to do so.

        • Seconded. That’s why I shudder and cringe when I hear some nitwit claiming that StarShip Troopers is about Fascism©. No such thing! This is yet another reason of why I so despise democracy. Universal Democracy is self-destructive because to give the vote to irresponsible people is like handling the fox the keys to the coop.

          • If one’s only experience with Heinlein is the horrible “Starship Troopers” movie by that leftist nitwit Veerhoven, and they had the misfortune to have been crippled with a public school (non-critical thinking) education, then they can be forgiven for thinking Heinlein is about fascism.

        • As a brilliant commenter said somewhere on the internet (SOTI) the problems created by liberalism can only be solved by illiberal means. There are many absurdities that dictate our national life (e.g., multiculturalism, open borders, judicial supremacy, living Constitution) but the one that really takes the cake is the bedrock principle that my vote is canceled by someone who can barely speak English, let alone write it, and wants an Obamapho’ and an EBT card for her trouble.

  5. Nobody was asked if they wanted their country to become a Muslim [sump]. These people were just imported by the millions and dropped onto the country like a giant dog [excrement].

    In thousands of years, the Celtic, Irish population grew to 4M, the Scottish to 4M, the Northern Irish to 1.8M and the Welsh to 2,5M. It took THOUSANDS of years.

    These imported Muslims have out bred the native population every year. In 1960, there were 10K. Now, only 58 years later they are 5M strong and getting stronger.

    They now outnumber the 4 of the 5 indigenous white population. Whites account for 10% of the world population.
    Basically, if you disagree with turning Britain into a Muslim [sump] you will be followed by the secret police. If you rise your voice against this, you will be incarcerated.

    It has been a political decision to destroy white Europe and white America through white genocide. You have two choices. Either force repatriation or die as a race. It’s that simple.

    It hurts to say this, but the politicians don’t give a [darn]. They too are becoming browner by the day. You just have to watch the BREXIT debates. Hardly any can speak the English language, yet they are deciding the future, not only of the country but the race.

    [Fie to] global warnings and environmental protection. The last white person should press the big red button just 5 seconds before they draw their last breath.

    • “Becoming browner”? In the UK, ethnic minorities are probably over-represented in the media and entertainment, but under-represented in politics, at least at national level, though this may be partly due to fewer putting themselves forward.

  6. If you don’t have a sustainable bugout location with provisions, particularly of a robust firearm variety, then you will die in 10-15 years. If you don’t teach your children to prep, you are a child abuser.

    Western Civilization (TM) is over. Pure and simple. Prep or die. There IS no middle ground.

    • Then the prudent thing to do would be convert to islam and get your kids set up to succeed under islamic rule. Or if your thing is the Chinese, remember them?, then learn mandarin. The chinese prefer clients who speak their language to deal with the foreign guilo rather than do so directly. Lots of opportunities as a middle man.

      Or you could keep fighting, or START as the case may be. When was the last time you attended a school board meeting? or you local city council meeting? neighborhood meeting with your council rep? If you aren’t participating, why would you expect any different than what you’re seeing?

      Run for office yourself. School board to city council is a time honored path. Plenty of county planning commission or similar positions are available. Every election, we have people running unopposed on the ballot for local positions. NO ONE should EVER run unopposed, if we have things that they aren’t doing for us.

      If you can’t recognize your mayor, alderman, city councilwoman, etc at the most local level by sight, you aren’t doing it right.

      n

      • “If you can’t recognize your mayor, alderman, city councilwoman, etc at the most local level by sight, you aren’t doing it right.”

        Yes, target identification will be very useful when order breaks down and those responsible start to impose tyranny on a local level.

        Trying to fight City Hall is an exercise in futility, and trying to beat them through infiltration is even more so. A surfeit of morons who vote, and non-morons feasting from the public trough who also happen to vote, ensure that those who really wish to fix a broken system will not succeed. Nothing short of Rule .303 can fix a system that is in such a negative feedback loop.

        • Not only should you recognize your local officials on sight, you should know where they live too. My state of NC just had a constitutional amendment nullified by an appointed activist judge. This judge must be brought to justice soon.

  7. Accurate, sad…not disheartening. Illuminating and trending -not yet viral. But spreading. Hope and grok? on the rise.
    Whew…dawn, will come again.

  8. Oh, stop. The natural order of things will work itself out. Everything that we know to be true is still true. Now, if the good Brits would just get their [fundaments] in gear and get the heck out of the EU.

    • billria, So you get BREXIT, then what? You still have the millions of the 3rd world that will need to [go]… Sorry but, one way or another, you and many like you are going to have to get your hands dirty, for nobody is going to save you but yourselves.

  9. The anthropologists tell us that about 10,000 years ago we ran out of hunter-gatherer locations because our population grew to large. Thus we has to develope agriculture and the social instincts of cooperation and trust so that we could trade and keep accounts and use money.

    But the instincts of distrusting strangers which had served us a tribes for 200,000 years were still close and hard-wired and are still with us today. We probably were always on the verge of starvation for all this time and any other tribe coming over hill at night had to be driven off or killed. If
    we were not fighters for all these years, we would not be here now.

    Hence what we know as xenophobia now—fear of outsiders or strangers—is quite the norm in our long history. It is what we would expect. Not just fear of different races, but any stranger outside our tribe of 50-150 people.

    So any movement that deliberately patronizes this fear by stirring up identity politics, or causes us to believe that half of us are victims or oppressed, is using a very clever tactic built on human genetics and root instincts.

    These movements we have to take very seriously and they deserve much debate and strategy effort.

    We have all been propagandize by the Howard Zinns of the world too, so that we are essentially brainwashed. Imagine how vigorously we would defend our country if we were all Howard Zinns.

    Thus, our survival now is not totally certain and we are going to have to exert robust and clever strategy to extricate ourselves victoriously from this battle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.