An article at Taki's Magazine on Professor Oliver by (Nesta Bevan)titled The Forgotten Conservative
Pen name Nesta Bevan: maiden name of Nesta Helen Webster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nesta_Helen_Webster
Edited by: GardenState
[img]smileys/smiley32.gif[/img]
I simply can't believe I just read that!? RACIAL REALITY chez Taki? REVILO OLIVER mentioned and even lauded -- in a way -- somewhere outside of our kind of immediate circles? Holy antimatter!
Great find, Gard -- incredible! The saddest thing is that in </span>or kind of circles there's no culture of remembering past heroes and honoring present ones as they deserve, things other cultures than our supposedly "racist" write wing are famous for doing. I fondly remember Dr. Oliver's brilliant if Godless writings in Liberty Bell magazine. Erudite -- yes. Stimulating and amusing -- very. Basically another Wilmot Robertson but working in the open.
Revilo died, did Liberty Bell die? First it was there and had (what do you know) been quietly published for like decades, then I saw no more copies and it was never mentioned again.
I thought Taki and I were on different political planets, but man, he sounds real here!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taki_Theodoracopulos
THANKS, GardenState. What else you got up your sleeve? And what's this about Nesta Bevan? The great lady's been dead half a century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nesta_Webster
Edited by: Nelson3
I was just pointing out that the author of the article was using a nom de plume, clearly to protect herself/himself from retribution for writing this article. The fact that the author chose the pen name Nesta Bevan is telling. Not onlydid the author recognise the importance of Professor Oliver the man andthe signifigance of his writings, but by using the name Nesta Bevan (Webster) it isindicativeof the author's sympathy with race realism.
( I simply can't believe I just read that!?). Nelson, your prediliction toward Taki Theodoracopulosfor publishing the article will not be reciprocated among many in the conservative media elite. Their response will be the same as yours, "I simply can't believe I just read that!", but for a different reason.
Scott McConnell the editor of The American Conservative, and vocal Obama for President supporter and voter, comes to mind. Along with Taki and Buchanan, McConnell was one of the three founders of TAC. With the exception of Patrick J. Buchanan and Steve Sailer, McConnell has given the Buckley treatment to all white racialists/realists, meaning that they are notwelcomed in the respectable "conservative" movement. Taki,by publishing this article, I see asa direct rebuke to McConnell and the current TAC editors Buckleyism.Edited by: GardenState
THAT is sickening and repugnant -- about McConnell! But come on, how can anybody helping to run a major "conservative" magazine be pro-Obama??? ....especially working with PJB, who even in his worst "Mr. Hyde" moments never went that far.
Love that about Nesta. Concocting pen names is one of my favorite sidelines. Great words and names come your way and working them into your camouflage is a gas. "Scrymgeour" was high on the list till Harry Potter ruined it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrymageour
Pop anti-culture steals everything not nailed down, and much that is.
You're giving us good write-wing intel.
Edited by: Nelson3
That was my sentiment Nelson. So I wrote TAC in January 2009 saying I would not be renewing my subscription. I had been a charter member, however throughoutearly 2007 andthrough2008 I found myself reading only one or two articles in each issue. TAC had been declining rapidly since Taki and Buchanan handed the reins completely to McConnell.
I made it clear that as long as Mr. McConnell was editor I would not subscribe.I ended my letter stating that TAC "does not speak to me anymore," a retort that McConnell used in reference to Jared Taylor's American Renaissance. Not only has McConnell made it clear he does not want to be associated with Jared Taylor and other racialists, he proudly stated in theNovember 2008 issue of TAC that he was going to vote for Obama http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/nov/03/00011/(He also voted for Kerry in 2004).
My letter received a response from Kara Hopkins, Executive Editor of TAC. She defended McConnell's reasoning and arguments for voting for Obama, but disagreed with him on his selection. Ms. Hopkins statedthatthough I heldheterodox views, this should not be a reason to cancel my subcription. Hopkins was suprised as much as I was that McConnell decided to vote for Obama.She continued stating that TAC was the only conservative publication to challenge the neoconservatives. (I stated in my letter that I voted for Ron Paul in the GOP primary, and Chuck Baldwin for President. Ms. Hopkins replied that TAC actively supported Ron Paul.)
Ms. Hopkinsended the letter saying that she would hope I would reconsider. I have not.Edited by: GardenState
She sounds like a major vaccine-damage case. He sounds like a blithe, smug CFR judas goat barely concealing his laughter at the stunts he pulls on the sheeple out here beyond the beltway. It's good to communicate one's dissatisfaction to such creatures -- they'll never be able to claim nobody told them what they were doing wrong. Heterodox, my #%@#$ foot!
The word "conservative" has been "rode hard and put up wet" in recent times. A whole lot of people sick of PC think rightward but shun having the word applied to them. I believe the word is in fact on its way out. Those individuals and many others, often ex-liberal yuppies, are shy of labels and consider it uncool to be caught getting all that exercised about anything non-entertainment matter. To accept a political label is to be tarred as one not living for pleasure and indulgence and conformity alone -- ouch!
We nationalists of course shun the c-word because of what shysters and fakers have done to it -- the neocons plus the pre-neocon GOP establishment, the uniform-worshipping warmonger masses, etc. and above all Rush Windblab. Rush is a charter bait-and-switch neocon, natch, but is in a class himself as the loudest, most phenomenally overbearing and logorrheic of the lot with the widest name recognition and popular deification.
Further signs of changing times: Coast to Coast AM is now on the air and the host, for too long maddeningly doctrinaire about the "war" on "terror", is sounding off with a show guest about the stupidity of continuing it.
"Where's bin Ladin?" he scoffs. "I can't figure out what we're still doing there!"
This is major major major.</span>
Yeah, Chronicles has gotten rather moldy over the past 10, maybe 15 years. It helped get me off to a roaring start 20 years ago -- ahhh, those glory days! The mag was great enough before Sam, but when he came along it was unbelievable. Having discovered Chronicles via National Regiew (sic) and moved on to it, I soon discovered stronger stuff that left Chronicles politely in the dust. Now when I see a copy it just seems like so much elegant, erudite grumbling. OK, it's still great compared to National ReJew, for those who can only stand that dosage.
Now, back to TakiMag: JUST LOOK at what it's capable of!!! This IMHO is one of the hottest articles in a long while. We need to chronicle excrescences of the hippie-commie-rake-nihilist tyranny through history, as well as when and where civilization has reached its highest peaks -- that, quite often under white or whitish rule regardless of location on the globe. No doubt this Mazdak was simply a 6th-century Jerry Rubin and John Lennon rolled into one. (Lennon was a barely concealed gew, never doubt it.)
Lennonesque and Leninesque Wikipedia is a sucker for this "reformer"</span> . I simply can't believe how it all fits together:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdak
How good can it get -- the quest for truth and justice in the digital age???
http://www.takimag.com/article/dawn_of_decadence/
<div style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;" id="titleTitle">The Dawn of Decadence</font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;" id="titleByline">by Scott Locklin on September 28, 2009</div></span><br style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">One of the wheezes I get from my leftist friends in Berkeley is how
highly evolved their sense of morality is, as if 21st-century Berkeley
were some New Jerusalem of higher moral thought. These are folks who
calibrate their exquisitely sensitive moral barometers with a
protractor made from renewable soy plastic, a straight edged icon with </span>Germaine Greer‘s photograph in it, graph paper and a copy of the </span><i style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">New York Times[/i] Editorial Section. You may get a chuckle out of this, especially after looking at some photographs of the </span>local color,
but if you are forced to watch the type of agonies such people have
over the purchase of the correct varieties of Free Range Organic
Cruelty-Intolerating Pasta the way I have, you might begin to suspect
there is something to what they say. Fortunately, I am equipped with a
modest education in history which confers immunity to such nonsense.</span><br style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);"><br style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0);">About 1500 years ago, there was an advanced civilization known as the Sassanid empire.
We generally think of them as “Persians” or “Iranians right before
Islam.” Of earthly civilizations of their day, they were among the most
advanced. Their armies regularly defeated the Romans, Byzantines, Huns,
and everyone else they went up against. The empire was much larger than
present day Iran, it encompassed much of what we now know as the Middle
East, Afghanistan, parts of Turkey, Pakistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
North Africa and even parts of modern Russia.
They had a powerful and helpful civil service. People who lived in
the Sassanid Empire enjoyed fruits of prosperity that had been rare in
human history before the industrial revolution. By all accounts, the
Sassanid Empire was a pleasant, prosperous, tolerant, and wonderful
place to live. If I had to choose to live someplace in 500 AD, I’d have
to go with the Sassanids. The Western Roman Empire had fallen to the
German barbarians, and other than poor Belisarius;
the Eastern empire was a wreck, too. China was being invaded by Mongols
and was split into a low-level civil war between Buddhist and Taoist
camps. Korea divided in one of its interminable civil wars between
North and South, and Japan was doing no better. I’m not sure anyone
knows what people were up to in the Americas, probably eating each
other.
No, I’d take the civilized and decent Sassanids, with their
reverence for Greek Philosophy, their multicultural mixture of
Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and various forms of Christianity, and for
their pleasant climate.
The Sassanid empire also had people who believe in the exactly same
kind of nonsense that modern Northern Californian buffoons do.
Mazdak is sometimes
described as a “reformer.” In reality, he was a cultural revolutionary.
Active at the turn of the 6th century, Mazdak preached the virtues of
pacifism, though his followers often took part in riots where they’d
kill lots of people they didn’t like. And like most “highly evolved”
people, Mazdak was a vegetarian. He wore various forms of hair shirts,
looking like a slob being seen as a sign of dignity in his faith. His
faith also required the total abolition of private property. Mazdak,
despite being a sort of priest, was a radical anti-clerical type. His
ire was against the dominant Zoroastrian religion of Persia. He managed
to have most of the fire temples closed; in this, he was even more
effective against the powerful Zoroastrian clerics than the Bolsheviks
were against Russian Orthodoxy. Mazdak opened the state granaries to
the people so they didn’t have to work: these were store houses against
disaster or for military uses. Mazdak even required sexual ethics much
like those presently known as </span>Polyamory.
Yes, Mazdak was all for free love—especially for himself. At one point,
Kavadh I, the soft-hearted (to say nothing of soft-headed) king who
allowed this highly evolved nincompoop to ruin his country, was even
going to have a go at wife swapping with Mazdak</span>.....................
Originally Posted by Nelson3
The following article by E. Christian Kopff is a great rejoinder to the point you made Nelson regarding the conservative label Dropping the C-Word. Thanks to Michael for the link which I noticed posted in the comment section of the original article from TOQ online.
Kopff also voices the same concern about TAC editor Scott McConnell that I discussed in a previous post in this topic thread: Take this, for instance, from the TAC blog (Dec. 18, 2008)
Last edited by gardenstate; 11-03-2011 at 06:59 PM.
Great devastating finds, Gard. Bring us up to speed on a couple things if you can please: Is Taki still rated a reliable "anti-semite"? and how much is TOQ wrapped up in Jewish studies? I want the truth, but hope against hope for answers of "yes" and "very".
I still want to know where these gews plan to live when immigration swamps them personally as it inevitably will. The rich famous ones think they'll always have enough gelt to buy trouble off, but they forget their kinsmen Greenspan and Bernanke have worked just as hard to wreck the dollar.
There I go again, trying to apply logic to liberalism.
[img]smileys/smiley11.gif[/img]
Edited by: Nelson3
"Israel: The Bernie Madoff of Countries" -- ROTF!!! </span>Well, that's what it is.</span></span></font></font> THANKS, Gard.
Revilo speaks! Search "inciting":
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=153085
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote