|
|
|
Early Internet Reaction to the American Third Position Party The early reaction to the formation of the American Third Position Party is all too tediously predictable: The Democratic Underground:
Ron Paul Forums (implicitly white and the only real political movement that has been opposed to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964): Sportbikes.net politics forum (implicitly white): Bodybuilding.com forum (Implicitly white): There is one exception though in a surprisingly objective article from Long Beach Press Telegram:
Comments:2
Posted by Gudmund on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:35 | # Most people don’t even know whites as a race are under attack despite it being blindingly obvious to anyone who doesn’t live in a self-imposed fantasy world, so these wild-eyed, foaming-at-the-mouth and utterly preprogrammed responses are quite predictable. Maybe when Aztlan and other things of that sort come to pass some of these lemmings will understand, too late of course, what MacDonald was trying to do here. Is there any hope for America? 4
Posted by Drifter on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:47 | #
It is an example of the entrenched radical leftist collectivism among all the ostensibly individualist and libertarian sympathisers out there. Are they aware of this contrast between their outer trappings and their inner beliefs? There’s always an opportunity to troll these folks with parody to bring this cognitive dissonance to the surface in order to force the contradiction’s resolution. Or, at least get them to admit their free will and individualism foundations are essentially bunk, if only because they all share this foundation exactly as a conforming collective. 5
Posted by PF on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:48 | # violence in the name of non-violence, and in the name of combating hatred, hatred. 6
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:03 | # Funny that some of the Ron Paul crowd are on the attack. Dont they ever look at the internet and notice the visceral hatred projected at them by Jewish commentators? Do they think piling on is going to change that? Perhaps the Freidrich Braun gestalt entity has an opinion - will thgis rehailitate the Ron Paulites in Jewish eyes? 7
Posted by the Narrator... on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:06 | # There are two kinds of White people in this world. Those who post their comments on forums and those who don’t…. The existence of this site, Stormfront, VNN and the numerous other sites and blogs out there demonstrate that there is a significant sentiment of White Consciousnesses in America. A lot of those who post on such subjects (especially the Ron Paulites) are the under 30 crowd. And let’s be honest here, they’ve been significantly dumbed down. Not all! But many of them. Nothing illustrates this better than a popular haunt of that demographic, IMDB (the Internet Movie Database). Seriously, spend some time there looking at the message boards of various movies. For example, just today I came across the following comment on the movie ‘Children of A Lesser God’ where a poster was complaining about the title confusing them,
Innumerable and better examples of the like exist. That was just one that I came across today. Idiocracy indeed. Back to the subject, Some of the criticism is valid. Mr. Johnson does look like Stuart Smalley.
As I said before, a video montage of them, their agenda and the reasons for their activity would have been preferable. ... 8
Posted by jamesUK on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:28 | # So A3P represents white interests of the majority when the majority does not support there most basic position on WN. EPIC FAIL! Why don’t A3P activists and other build there own little commune like some Mormon groups do or these people. 9
Posted by Q on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:20 | #
Perhaps something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZs8k4pJcyk using themes that highlight those methods being used to race-replace whites; e.g. non-white immigration, anti-White hate messages, and laws/official government policies that discriminate against whites to name a few. 10
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:39 | # Sorry, my comment was a bit mangled, I think it still makes sense. 11
Posted by PF on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:48 | # Lurker wrote:
lol! Gestalt entity!!! Who or what is it? Who will he be tommorow? Its more mysterious than a detective novel, except way, way less interesting. where is danielj by the way? 12
Posted by danielj on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:29 | # where is danielj by the way? Bristol, Rhode Island! Where are you? 13
Posted by danielj on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:37 | # I got caught up in the Ron Paul thing and watched my money disappear. I even went up to a Ron Paul rally where there were a few token Jews seated prominently in the front rows, beyarmulked and given priority during question time. I won’t be had again. Until the A3P gets a little more serious, gets rid of the criminal financial secretary, polishes their web presence and puts out something substantial, they won’t receive a penny from me. 14
Posted by jamesUK on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:04 | # To understand is to defeat Dugins article on the JQ has been removed from the Eurasian site and replaced by an interesting by another interesting article Soft tyranny of liberalism. “The combination of the economic «right» with the ideological «left» serves as the conceptual axis of contemporary mondialist strategy, a basis for the design of the coming civilization” http://evrazia.org/topic.php?id=11 Against Modern Times Alain de Benoist addresses Moscow State University. 15
Posted by the Narrator... on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:11 | #
Yes! They need to visually (as well as statistically) illustrate what is happening in America today and what that will mean for the very near future. If, as illustrated by the comments Mr. Bowery highlighted, many people do not accept or comprehend the precariousness of the situation then why would they take the offer of a remedy seriously? If you’re going to street market in places that are already multiculted then you need to go where your product is needed most. For example, single White moms living in minority-majority areas whose White children are being bullied and harassed at school by non-Whites. Ask them questions and give them literature. Present your group as an already large and quickly developing movement. Many of these people are looking for a safe harbor, but they fear that if they leave the security of their “I see no race” shelter they’ll be alone and attacked. If they sense that your political group is viable as a large, mainstream movement they’ll be much more receptive towards the idea of aligning themselves with it. If you’re going for the internet crowd, a video montage (complete with dramatic music) of the rapidly crumbling and increasingly violent streets of America is best. Show then and now. Show the ruins of Detroit. Show images of post Katrina New Orleans. Flash the black on White rape statistics. etc, etc. And I would addthat one thing the Tea Party movement has illustrated is that those over 50 are angry about the state of the nation and are willing to put their money where their mouth is. Don’t focus exclusively on 20 somethings. Seniors are a large demographic with the backbone (and memories of America when it was nearly 90% White) to step forward. Numbers are numbers. And other Whites will see large numbers as a viable safe harbor. Lastly, what is needed is not another straight up political party. Whites want and need what they currently do not have, and that is a sense of community. ... 16
Posted by Silver on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:45 | # Bodybuilding isn’t implicitly white. Not only does the pursuit fail to provide any subconscious feeling of ‘white spiritual solidarity’ it exalts negroes to a degree rarely matched. Contrast that to the occurrence of ‘Many bands make white lurk.’ That said, bodybuilding.com used to be open to a great deal of explicit racial discussion (and still is, despite the ‘ban,’ provided the material only discusses, and doesn’t propagandize or attack), so much so that at one point posters dubbed the phenomenon “Racist Thread Sunday.” [‘03-‘05] Are you sure of the race of the posters whose comments you culled? Implicitly white doesn’t mean exclusively white, and implicitly white activities are commonly also attractive to Jews and other quasi-whites, who are typically unsupportive of racialism, so seeing negative sentiment being expressed doesn’t, of itself, tell you much. 17
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:38 | #
Jeez! Lets try again shall we: Jews and other quasi-whites, who are typically unsupportive of white racialism
18
Posted by Fr. John on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:04 | # So, you were expecting anything different? Who owns the ‘Jewsmedia’? Jews rule- for now. I agree with Fred. Moreover, nowhere in their position, was iterated the fundamental issue for the vast majority of Americans who care- Religious exclusivism- i.e., proclaiming trinitarian Christianity as the historical basis for all the rights enumerated in the Constitution, and undergirding the Bill of Rights, and restoring it to prominence. The COnstitution Party did that, far more than any other party, yet they, too, stepped back, because they had a Jew as their Prez candidate for two of the races in which they assumed they would even get a nod from the ‘Jewsmedia.’ We’re done with pussyfooting around. ‘The Faith is Europe: Europe is the Faith.’ - H. Belloc There is no other option. There is no other confession allowed within our dominions. (WHy do you THINK they are CALLED ‘dominions,’ anyway?) Christ is King And all the rest can/will (clearly, predestinatedly) GO TO HELL. 19
Posted by Silver on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:13 | # Lurker, I don’t think you really fixed anything. There are very few instances of Jews and quasis supporting other racialisms. It’s true they don’t fret much about, say, black or Chinese identities, but ‘racialism’ normally comes packaged with a political ideology, and it’s that that these peoples (J’s and Q’s) resist. However, one would expect them to oppose, say, Chinese racialism, too, if such a thing were ever explicated along the lines of white racialist ideology. But why the exasperation (“jeez!”)? Stepping on toes again am I? Facts are facts Lurk, and it’s a fact of ‘racial sociology/microsociology’ that the behavior of Jews and quasis is distinguished by association with ‘northerers’ (meaning those more northern than one) and participation in the same sorts of activities that attract the latter while at the same time being at the forefront of repudiating any mention of the racial aspect of that participation. That might not be so evident in the world of easy online racialism but step out into the real world and start paying attention and I’m sure you’ll quickly gather it’s as I claim. 20
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:24 | # Silver, Jews pursue what is good for Jews. You know that. They do not pursue what is good for anti-racism. When “anti-racism” is good for Jews they pursue it. Which it usually is. It is a Jew-tool - designed by Jews for Jews. That is why it is officially selective about which people’s natural interest in and desire for survival to pathologise as “hate”, while observing silence on all other peoples’ interests. You know that too. I know you do. So I am at a loss to explain why you talk so liberalistically about “‘racialism”. Make the distinction between actions in and for one’s own people’s survival and actions in and for another motive. Never, ever conflate the two. Leftists who are prone to do so are only demonstrating their own lack of subtlety and independence of mind. Further, the word “identity” is too loose. It is dehumanising, and should be excluded from our discourse. Who and what we are does not depend upon what we “identify” as the self. All that is natural to and permanent in us, all that is of the genes, of kind, is excised thereby. We are left with nothing but the thin gruel of what is acquired. It is not enough. 21
Posted by Trainspotter on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:09 | # “So can Ron Paul’s movement. Rot in hell, guys.” (Fred Scrooby) Amen, Fred. I’m sorry to say that I was one of the chumps who donated to Ron Paul, a fair amount in fact. Never again. If a candidate is not clearly in favor of white racial preservation, he won’t be getting any funds from yours truly. 22
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:41 | # GW writes: Further, the word “identity” is too loose. It is dehumanising, and should be excluded from our discourse. Who and what we are does not depend upon what we “identify” as the self. All that is natural to and permanent in us, all that is of the genes, of kind, is excised thereby. I think Salter managed to dispense with that problem with the word. “Identity” is too key a mathematical concept to be excluded from our discourse. When we get into the arithmetic of natural identity, as has Salter, we are in our own linguistic and intellectual territory. 23
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:56 | # I think Silver questions the need for a philosophy as he already has Nordicism and is depending on the Krauts to pull the Meds’ chestnuts out of the fire. Both positions not without merit. Re identity:
Attempt to expunge the word from the English language or insist upon its correct usage? Hmm. (Caveats, caveats: ‘But that’s not the way leftists and Jews use the word!’ Noted.) 24
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:00 | #
LOL! 25
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:43 | # I’m interested in moving completely away from the model of Man as iterated in No.4 in CC’s list - that’s my point. I think Salterism has something to say in this respect, and I hope eventually to see a linkage forged between the Heideggerian concept of being and the Salterian concept of EGI. That is something of interest to Dasein as well as myself. But in the meantime, my emphasis will be on replacing EGI with Being as the ultimate and, of course, original life-principle. This facilitates the extremely profitable division of Man and psyche into what belongs to us and is timeless on the one hand, and what we acquire - quite unconsciously - from time and place on the other. Unlike with the opposite Salterian terms of adaptive and maladaptive, the political struggle actually occurs on this field. That is to say that the acquired part of us, which is personality at the level of the individual and sociality at the level of the collective, is rightly judged by our enemies as “perfectible”. The perfectability of being is a religious question, and does not concern us. For us, being - or, to be absolutely accurate, the existent - is true, whereas no truth can attach to “choosing” another “identity” or “perfecting” the one we have under the liberal model. We can only lie to ourselves at the behest of others, and live in those lies with all the hurt that that entails. 26
Posted by GenoType on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:01 | #
Bravo! Not that this will change the Platonic focus of the Internet “movement’s” little kings. Genuine change, should it occur, will come from outside the “movement.” 27
Posted by Jean West on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:03 | # I added a comment at the Ron Paul forum, not in support of the party, which I know nothing about, but in support of MacDonald’s writings. O’Meara’s condescending Cold War on Whites offering at toqonline assures readers that A3P is safely middle of the road—not too anti-Jewish and not too pro-White. 28
Posted by Trainspotter on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:28 | # Important post, Guessedworker (12:43 a.m.) I’ll have more to say about this at some point down the road when I can devote more attention to the matter. It may be weeks or even quite a few months (probably the latter; I’m thinking summer), but I hope to provide at least a rough outline of something substantive along the lines that you have discussed. My standard posts tend to be polemics, which have a certain value. But I agree that we need to dig deeper, much deeper. In any event, posts like the one above help spur that process on, so thanks. 29
Posted by Silver on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:14 | # GW, Can’t some points simply be raised without making philosophical mountains out of verbal molehills? I had no idea I was speaking liberalistically about racialism; I thought it could just be summed up minimally as the position that race matters, can’t be made not to matter and shouldn’t be made not to matter. Works for me. I don’t know that Jews only do what is good for Jews. Maybe organized or orthodox Jewry (“Big Kike”) does that. But the average Jew is as human as the rest of us, and he’s often only a Jew to the extent that everyone else is something, so it’s a life preserver he can’t so easily let go of. This is the Jew I had in mind with my comments. And in this, in the effect he has on, you know, “things,” he’s no different to millions of semis and quasis.
I could almost buy that were it not for the fact that language is acquired, and I can tell you now that you’re going to have a very hard time convincing even me—ie someone who is prepared to believe (or to come to believe) whatever he must in order to see racialism prevail—that calling language “thin gruel” isn’t itself “dehumanising.” Furthermore, there is also “history,” which cannot really be described as “acquired,” yet is a potent identitarian force. Frankly, I don’t see the point of encumbering racialism (or whatever name you’d like it to go by) with this burdensome philosophical stance, not at this stage anyway. 30
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:44 | #
Moving completely away? I think “identity” as defined in iteration 4 is empirically validated in that after a certain point one’s core personality traits are pretty well set, not to mention that much of what one’s personality will be is in-born.
I don’t know, wouldn’t that be nothing much more than verbal slight-of-hand? Perhaps it may have a deeper emotional resonance with a greater number of people, but seems on the face of it to be more nebulous than EGI as it is less quantifiable. And would that not be an act of rhetoric more than one of philosophy? I mean, if you intend for “Being” to be synonymous with EGI, so when you are talking about “Being,” you are really talking about EGI, why not just stick with EGI? If the attempt at philosophy is not merely pretense it must be explained what our life characterized as “Being” can tell us about that life that EGI cannot or does not. 31
Posted by Red Mercury on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:45 | # I hope you ladies haven’t been cowed by the entirely predictable reaction to A3P from the internet fever swamps? Especially the tinfoil hat brigade who lined up behind Ron Paul. On a related note, I can’t believe anyone on MR would even consider donating to or voting for Paul. 32
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:48 | #
EGI is a step toward bringing the engineer’s mathematical tools into a better partnership with our real human nature—a nature grounded in Being. Identity, properly conceptualized, is simply one of those mathematical tools. 33
Posted by Silver on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:49 | # CC,
As for nordicism I don’t see how it can possibly be contested that by the time you move from NW Europe to SE Europe (or even just straight north-south, say, Kiel to Palermo) you’ve crossed racial lines. That isn’t why nordicism is problematic. Nordicism is problematic because there are gradations all the way down, such that it does become possible to group what were originally visibly disparate groups together. The Bavarian “Teuton” is uncomfortable with being low man on the totem pole so he scrounges around to include, say, the Gaul; but the Gaul doesn’t want to be low man on the totem pole either, so he scrounges around for someone to include too—say, the Italian; but the Italian, his own ethny significantly variegated, scrounges around and includes, say, the Yugoslav; but the Yugoslav, perhaps initially thankful, freaks out and includes the Greek; and at that point the Mediterranean Sea mercifully interjects and some people, waving a triumphant finger in the air, settle on Europe!. Fantastic. But what gets lost in all this is that those from points most northerly and southerly rarely seek each other out for company or experience much in the way of “social warmth” on the occasions they do come together (which racialism markets itself as promising to deliver). And yet we now have a problem: our Med or Armenid or Med-Armenid, having had ‘whiteness’ conferred upon him becomes reluctant to be parted from it, and the realization that he stands to be risks turning him against the whole racialist enterprise—“Oh, oh, not white, you say? Well here, take this boatload of Somalis you racist asshole!” Then in other cases he turns against what he formerly unquestioningly took to be his own, as I put it at n/a’s, he pinches his lapels and points his nose in the air and exclaims, “I don’t know what this piece of shit is, but I’m a…” And that of course opens the door for the professional anti-racist to come along and say, “See, see? See what we’re trying to spare people from?” 34
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:42 | # Philosopher Daniel Dennett on parasitic ideas, the subordination of genetic interests to other interest, and JB’s approach to the JQ, encouraging the evolution of avirulence. 35
Posted by danielj on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:46 | # On a related note, I can’t believe anyone on MR would even consider donating to or voting for Paul. A bit of breathing room would have been ours had Ron Paul been elected even if he just vetoed every bill that came in front of him. 36
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:13 | # Regarding Dennett’s TED video: He chickened out at the end. First of all, memetics, as with all of science, is influenced by our values. There are somethings we seek to understand more than others, not just because they are more “interesting” in some abstract sense of the word, but precisely because they impinge on our values. He, himself, gives an example when he brings up HIV. Admittedly, HIV is an interesting pathogen in the abstract sense that they represent a relatively advanced notion of virulence—attacking the immune system’s very source in stem cells—but if that virulence afflicted not us, but some species we cared little about, the amount of investment in HIV research would be relatively non-existent. Second, I would submit that the lack of funding for memetic research is the result of a defense mechanism of virulent memes, and that Dennett’s intellectual cowardice is the expression of an evolved memetic defensive strategy. If we REALLY understood memes, we would discover a great many HIV-like memes that would, precisely because the direction of science is influenced by our values, come under intense scrutiny. These memes have infected the “stem cells” of our social “immune system”, such as academia, rendering it inoperative. The way this expressed most obviously in Dennett’s talk is not simply in his denial of values in the direction of science, but in the low priority he granted to evolutionary medicine—priority so low, in fact, that he didn’t talk about it! Now watch what happens in your mind as I do this… Evolutionary medicine tells us that virulence evolves from horizontal transmission while symbiosis evolves from vertical transmission. Vertical transmission is, by definition, transmission from parents to children during biological reproduction. Horizontal transmission is, by definition, transmission that is not from parent to child. What does this say about transmission of memes? 37
Posted by PF on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:52 | # Silver wrote:
This dance of your imagined philosophical puppets only actually plays out in a dream-world where you have abbreviated the worlds peoples into racial glyphs assigned a value according to the purity of their Nordic derivation. Human beings don’t conceive of their belonging to groups in this way. Its an insulting way to think about peoples, one-dimensionally, and points to the complete and utter inexperience of these peoples as total phenomena; it is genuinely obsessive racialism without a foothold in the realities it describes: obviously one is a student of physiognomies and not much besides, making remarks like this. Italians know they are something bigger and more than their percentage of Nordic blood, so do all of us who actually belong to peoples or derive from them directly. GW’s philosophical endeavor is to free European mean from all abbreviated, that is violent and partial, understandings of himself. (if I understand him rightly.)
Your low estimation of philosophical man ignores the - to my mind rather obvious - principle of the search for truth, as always, pursued with an indifference to what one would theoretically desire. Its a way of lowering the bar and projecting your laziness (i.e. ‘explication of preference’) upon the whole philosophical endeavor of man, using the sly assertion that everyone is basically stacking the deck. It is possible to observe where emotion corrupts reason and assumptions determine the outcome of philosophies, and thus the element of self-deception inherent in philosophizing *is* something that can be observed. This doesn’t give one a free hand to understand philosophy as an effort at self-deception. To imagine that you’ve fathomed GW by asserting that he insists on Being because his imaginary future model calls it necessary for a certain outcome, is to ignore the whole search for truth that has gone on during the course of GW’s life. If everyone were a lazy solipsistic child this would be a fine way to view the world but there being more serious things in the world, philosophy is not always doomed to remain stuck in adolescent self-congratulation and service as a vanity-prop. It is possible for it to be something more. 38
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:18 | # True, Dennett chickens out but that’s pretty much par for the course. How is language (arguably the ultimate meme) acquired, vertical or horizontal transmission? 39
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:40 | # Almost all of our memes are a mixture of varying degrees of horizontal and vertical transmission. Latin, Spanish and then English are Western languages that went largely horizontal. It would be interesting to see how they compare in terms of virulent “magic words”—or at least how they compare in terms of originating them. 40
Posted by danielj on Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:57 | # This dance of your imagined philosophical puppets only actually plays out in a dream-world where you have abbreviated the worlds peoples into racial glyphs assigned a value according to the purity of their Nordic derivation. Human beings don’t conceive of their belonging to groups in this way. Italians are adulterated Nords…. Now I get it. 41
Posted by Desmond Jones on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:59 | # Do you think magic words were always virulent or only arose upon host infection? Is there thought without language? 42
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:39 | # CC, I think “identity” as defined in iteration 4 is empirically validated in that after a certain point one’s core personality traits are pretty well set, not to mention that much of what one’s personality will be is in-born. In Part 1 of the still putative series “What it is to be human” I tried to question what is, in that the conscious self we identify with is not conscious and is not there. In Part 2, I offered half of an answer to that question, namely that our psychological reality is a series of processes in regions of the brain which exist for the same evolutionary reason as every other part of the body, and if they may act in some unknowable way as a throne-room for the self it is most assuredly not that self. We are fixated on the results of these processes. But they are pure noumena, the reflection of phenomena the internalisation or impact of which we are unaware and lack any means to control. We are passive in the creation of the noumena and absent under the spell of their agitation. Now, for sure this is an extreme reading of the human condition, and I don’t expect anyone who has not already thought long and hard about this matter to come quickly to an appreciation of what it means and why it is true. Nevertheless, this is my house and the one place in this world where I can, if I choose, be completely uncompromising. On this question of our reality I will not compromise: there are no acquired aspects of personality which pass the test, as there are no aspects of our essential nature which do not. Perhaps it [being] may have a deeper emotional resonance with a greater number of people, but seems on the face of it to be more nebulous than EGI as it is less quantifiable. This is a fair criticism. Being would appear to slip over the emotional void. But that’s today. We are on a voyage and we don’t know where we will be taken. Is being, in fact, a genetic substrate which will prove connectable to EGI, as Dasein has recently contended? Or is it some kind of raw universal energy that can be predicted according to the scientific method? Or is it beyond energy and science, and is a state that can be formalised by the maths of quantum mechanics, as James contends? I do not know, because this being-thing is always beyond the observable - for me, anyway - and I am not a scientist or a mathematician. Still, I think we should get further along with the journey before we reach any absolute conclusions - even that EGI is more quantifiable. why not just stick with EGI? Because EGI is too close to the surface. Imagine a vertical dynamic, at the centre of which lies the reproductive interest of the individual. Above that is ethnic genetic interest, because the individual has an interest in the maximisation of the number of copies of his distinctive genes in the world. Above that is ethnocentrism, and above that patriotism, etc. Beneath the reproductive interest of the individual is Nature’s pressage on the morrow, and beneath that all that exists. And downward in small steps we go to the fundament of being itself, beneath which only faith and James can speculate. If the attempt at philosophy is not merely pretense it must be explained what our life characterized as “Being” can tell us about that life that EGI cannot or does not. There is no characterisation in any of this. An ontology of the politics of European nationalism plainly ought to yield a wider truth than EGI, allowing us to know what we are and are not, and providing a sound means of cleaving life and politics and the world. 43
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:19 | # CC:
Capt. Silver has much right as anybody to an opinion however we should remember that he has at various times claimed to be Asian or Serbian or Greek and at various times claimed to be living in Australia or the US or UK. So I never know to what degreee he is arguing in good faith. And cue Silver… 44
Posted by Lurker on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:49 | # Silver:
(Btw, are you addressing this with your Greek or Yugoslav hat on today?) Thats a big ‘ole straw man you are building there pal. Do you have any credible evidence that these groups keep widening their ethnic net to include others they regard as lower men on the totem pole, other than the workings of your own imagination? Maybe Ive led a sheltered life but I have never even come across this idea before. Seems to me that its as least as likely that with this new totem pole theory of human relations those at the top might seek to cut loose those at the bottom. Many American WNs would be quite happy if blacks packed their bags and went to live in Africa. Thats not predicted by your theory really is it. You could just as easily argue that the low men on the totem pole would seek to separate themselves off and start their own pole. Do more northern Germans look down on Bavarians, do all Germans look down on Austrians? What if Austrians looked down on Prussians, maybe they do? If they do that blows your idea right out of the water. In England we look down on the French, though its more of a running joke than anything else, most English people dont in any way regard the French as inferior in any respect. (In what way is this ‘inferiority’, low man status supposed to manifest itself btw?) And why is that relevant? Because the French look down on the English as well! Where does that leave your totem pole theory now? Perhaps a neutral 3rd party could ajudicate on the inferiority of the English vs the French and set out a definitive totem ranking? “Yes, the English are objectively inferior to the French, therefore from now on French superiority is confirmed and English feelings of superiority is merely a comical misunderstanding on their part. Case closed.” Id be fascinated to know if your totem theory means you actually believe some groups to be inferior/superior or whether its all about perception. If northern Germans really are ‘better’ than southern Germans, or meds what are you worrying about, its the natural order. How about low caste Hindus who jump ship and become Muslims? Thats a process that helped the division of India. Those low caste guys voted themselves right out of the Indian identity. According to you they should have fishing around for even more lowly groups to include to shore up their self-esteem. (Guess you will be addressing that with your Asian hat on) 45
Posted by realist on Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:31 | #
Ah, the fever dreams of teenage wannabe Nazis. I am laughing my ass off at the notion of the Krauts saving anything. And save the Meds? Italy will still be Italian long after Germany has been thoroughly colonized by the Turks. 46
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:00 | #
Funny that, as in this house it is sought to labor in the vineyard that the Krauts Kant and Heidegger brought into being. 47
Posted by PF on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 01:42 | # Wow, CaptainChaos, you seem to really think that the Nazi movement, in spite of inflaming European powers to civil war against each other, was somehow the last word on the white man having anything touching bravery in the face of non-whites. I sympathize with you but don’t fully agree in the implicit assessment. Maybe it would be useful, in combating the exclusive mandate of this mental image, to try and penetrate aspects of pre-WWII Anglo culture and see (build up a store of images) how pre-1950s Anglos thought and felt about themselves and how they dealt with non-whites. You surely have an idea of what post-1950s Anglos have manifested in this regard. And obviously NS manifestations have made a big impact on you; at least as a contrast and inversion of present day trends. Try to make a picture of Georgian English people, say the officers of WWI and II; or the English upper class in those days, foppishness and silly caricatures aside. Try to find out about the American upper classes of those times, how they lived in Boston or New York or Detroit. How did they view races? How did they view themselves? Were they brave? Did they fight for God and country? I knew this tradition existed because of grandparents who could relate parts of it, I know that the world of Elgar and Kipling and british military parades and all that was quite strong and serious. Insufficient to combat the death of the god and the relativization of all truth, and J-inspired social critiques. Long story short, Hitler was made in retrospect to represent those things which he stands for now: white racial pride, questioning of Jewish influence, desire to reconnect with the past. In a realistic historical framework, he really stands as much for conquering Czechoslovakia and France as he does for white racial pride. I mean he actually did those things, whatever was in his speeches. This situation arises because post-1970’s whites can only absorb this through caricature. These elements were already inherent in most pre-post-modernist European cultural circles since forever. So the Jews set up a bipolar moral universe and the young WN, hoping to rebel, chooses the other pole. But the distinction is in some larger sense, not even a real one. Thats why lefties find racism in all our past authors and books. What supposedly finds unique articulation in NS was endemic at many others times and places. NS was uniquely fever pitch because its central figure was a fanatic (not used polemically, I mean this literally) and it occured at and precipitated cataclysm. 48
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:07 | # GW, What I am attempting to get at here is just how radically what is ‘acquired’ of the self is to be defined and the effect that may have on the individual. It is possible I think to say reasonably that the acquired is even more encompassing than you may imply. Not only can this include basic, for the most part genetically predetermined personality traits such as level of extroversion and conscientiousness, but, depending on how defined, even the body at the peak of its maturity. As with the development of the mind to its presumptive genetically determined ceiling, so too the body must be satisfied throughout the course of its development with what it needs during ‘critical periods’ to reach peak functioning giving it the best opportunity to pass along its genes. An infant cannot, left to its own devices, procure its own food in the long run, and if subjected to such conditions will perish before reaching physical and sexual majority - so in that sense we can say it very physical and sexual majority are ‘acquired’. Likewise, a child during its formative years not exposed to language and who does not use language during that period will very likely not acquire that much needed skill for facilitating the passing along of its genes - so that mental faculty is also ‘acquired’. Point being, by applying the same criteria across the board we may well be able to say that almost all of what we are is ‘acquired’. To do less, to say that is a bridge too far, implicitly employs the body-mind dualism, something which I suspect you want to avoid. Yet, for the sake of cleaner categorization to facilitate better understanding it may be justified to merely reserve the attribution of ‘acquired’ to the personality, and not also extend that to the body, which could be done, as I think I’ve demonstrated above. I think it is true that as a practical matter to achieve the ends desired that the personality should be a major focus for edification via the philosophy being developed here, and that it does not profit that process of edification, nor necessarily parsimony, to say that ALL of the personality is acquired, when much of it would have been just as it is now assuming it was nurtured as required during its ‘critical periods’ of development regardless of the incidental warps of its experiences along the way. 49
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 04:15 | # Dasein,
And yet there is very little, dare I say nothing, of the ancient Greeks left that would satisfy us as to the preservation of Nordic peoples - a personable but relatively swarthy people with an IQ around 90. Just about what Britain can expect if its native stock is subsumed by the Pakistani and Indian hordes of its former empire. PF,
Zowy.
As you are not even aiming for the correct target it would seem misplaced to call you on having missed. It was always the implicit, and towards the end explicit, aim of National Socialism to bring all of Europe under its ideological sway thus securing the life of the European peoples in perpetuity. Read: There is naught that non-Whites could dream of doing to Whites given that Whites have self-interested self mastery or that Whites are mastered by a White elite who govern them with the true interests of those White masses at heart. The latter must be had, one way or the other.
Images dwelling on the surface like light reflected off water, very pleasing to the eye and potential food for some thought I’m sure, but the Anglo way has failed us. If not, then why this need for a philosophy to right the ship before it strikes the shoals? Because the Anglo way has proved vulnerable, that it why. NS was - shortsightedly - defeated in the field, but had it triumphed it is not even arguable that our race would be looking doom in the face any time soon. Not even arguable. And the suggestion that because NS was defeated in the field, and that because the kangaroo court at Nuremberg trotted out its alleged ‘final verdict’ on the matter, thus renders National Socialism as finally discredited in the sense that it was not then and would not now be effective in staving off our racial destruction if implemented is so risible as not to be even worth addressing. If the course of philosophy proves insufficiently muscular to achieve what need be achieved and then one throws in the towel unwilling to go the extra mile of ideological racialism backed up with the full military power of the state then one truly is guilty of dilettantism. Apologies if the above comes across as unjustly harsh. 50
Posted by PF on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:14 | # CC,
Its the plausibility of implementing National Socialism that I’m questioning, first off. Firstly, who is going to sell this to the people? Obviously NS was a historical phenomenon and can never truly exist again, so we are talking about some form of imitation. Who gets to be Hitler this time? There needs to be a ruling clique because the system is very authoritarian. So who gets to be the ruling clique? Does the person who makes himself Hitler II get to kill all opposition straight up, or will there be a trial process? Because you will have to kill lots of white people to implement this. Then, people who would otherwise be favorably disposed to you, but dislike the killing you’ve been forced to do to stifle opposition, would turn against you. [I dont advocate violence, if anyone of our masters are reading this]. Are we going to invade Czechoslovakia again, or find an analogous situation in our own geographical domain and invade them? Put another way, is the first political unit constituted under this new theoretical rubric going to attempt an immediate take-over of its surrounding entities? At the nearest possible opportunity? And to be brutal, how many whites have you tried to get interested in National Socialism? OK, I imagine you probably haven’t tried that on a modern college campus, perhaps you spared yourself the difficulty it would cause you. I mean, I’ve hung out with and had friends who were pretty hardcore pro-white guys, although not activists. They may have been fascinated with NS, to some degree, but they weren’t actually believing in it as a feasible political option. I don’t even think you could win over my pro-white friends to NS. So who are you going to win over, then? I don’t even think you can win me over to NS. So is this a political movement of the people, for their own continued existence, or is this you knowing better than them, and holding out hope that they can be browbeaten into accepting something they would never freely choose, because you ultimately know it to be in their best interest? And how are you going to make yourself the master of the white race to force their salvation down their own protesting throats? I mean lets be honest, at some point you would probably have to kill me as well. I might say something untoward about you or have my own ideas. Perhaps my brother doesn’t like it, and you kill him. Do you see why this isn’t going to work? There is no way to return to authoritarian structures once you come as far as western man has. Even NS only achieved it with masterful propaganda, in a technologically propitious moment for propaganda, and in a time of complete upheaval - and then briefly. 51
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:49 | # PF, Let me tell you what was on the front page of my local paper yesterday: Local Haitian ‘immigrants’ in one article and a picture of a beautiful blond woman surrounded by niggers on the spot in Haiti in another. I am sick and damn tired of living in a society that leaves me quivering with rage and feeling like I’d like to vomit rather than gives joy. Your reaction to NS as it was then and as it would manifest itself now is not justified. It is almost as if you confuse NS with Judeo-Bolshevism: a dreary little totalitarian farce at best and a torture-chamber of a nightmare at worst. Give me a break. With the relatively light work (when contrasted with the bringing to heel the other White nations of 30s/40s Europe) of removing non-Whites and Jews from our midst (yes, all of them) the softer side of NS - that is the volkisch socialism - will come into flower. NS, or whatever incarnation it is that comes to pass, isn’t about men in leather coats standing behind you with a pistol at all times to force you to do just what it is that you would least like to do. That is bullshit. NS is about giving the people what they want, and giving it to them all day long, for the small price of doing right by the race. A little bit from a lot of people goes a long way, and truth be told you would probably get more out of the deal than you were ever required to put in. You make it seem as if you would be harder to be a White man under that system than under the present. Horsepucky. It would never be easier to be a White man than under NS in peace time. The skids would have been greased from here to Timbuktu. Imagine a world in which just being in it would fill you with optimism and not disgust and dread. Imagine a world going in the right direction, not in the wrong. Getting there is the hard part, living well after the fact will be easy. 52
Posted by Gudmund on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:41 | #
You know, the NS weren’t even the first to try something like that. There is compelling evidence that Napoleon Bonaparte was a racialist whose ultimate desire was to unite the White world in a front against the others. Of course those sorts of plans always seem to be dashed by petty-statism. I don’t really object to your point that such an order would be desirable, but I do wonder how to make such a scheme happen. It bears mentioning too that the men of today are not quite of the caliber of Napoleon or Hitler, not to mention that those two great men didn’t succeed in their aims either. The dilemma here is not so much the ultimate undesirability of NS or some other type of racialist dictatorship but rather how to achieve it where those who came before could not. 53
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:41 | # It would be interesting to see an exposition of National Socialism that included all regimes to which the term applies. Obviously, “National Socialism” has become a kind of “magic word”—a word whose meaning is submerged in its effect. 54
Posted by danielj on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:30 | # There is compelling evidence that Napoleon Bonaparte was a racialist whose ultimate desire was to unite the White world in a front against the others. Apparently, Bonaparte used to hand out copies of Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Man to the troops so I would find the notion that he was trying to unite the white world under a pan-European confederation slightly suspect. It bears mentioning too that the men of today are not quite of the caliber of Napoleon or Hitler, not to mention that those two great men didn’t succeed in their aims either. I’m not sure I agree. We don’t face the same challenges or have the same opportunities they had. 55
Posted by danielj on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:33 | # Wow, CaptainChaos, you seem to really think that the Nazi movement, in spite of inflaming European powers to civil war against each other, was somehow the last word on the white man having anything touching bravery in the face of non-whites. I sympathize with you but don’t fully agree in the implicit assessment. The communists had nothing to do with said “civil” wars? 56
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:00 | # No Jews, no Bolshevism; no Bolshevism, no National Socialism. 57
Posted by Gudmund on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:34 | #
Oh, he had liberal notions to be sure. How far he actually bought them is questionable, he might have used such things as a means of getting his fighting men into a revolutionary mindset; his actions also show he did not care for Negroes. He was also a philosemite. None of these facts necessarily would have been in conflict with his stated goal for a European empire. Regardless of how “liberal” this state would have been in theory, in practice it’s aristocracy would have been Napoleon and other men of quality.
Goes without saying; our situation is completely different and in some ways, i.e. that Europeans are no longer at each other’s throats, we’re better off. Though let’s not get too optimistic. Our civilization is in a period of crisis. 58
Posted by danielj on Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:17 | # Goes without saying; our situation is completely different and in some ways, i.e. that Europeans are no longer at each other’s throats, we’re better off. Though let’s not get too optimistic. Our civilization is in a period of crisis. I used to think ‘crisis’ but I’m leaning toward ‘stasis’ now. No Spanish Flu or Black Death going around after all. If you find any value in metaphysics then I would suggest to you that it is probably that kind of problem we currently find ourselves in and it is some corrosive form of nominalism gnawing away at our societies and cultures. Richard Weaver nailed it pretty well in my estimation. I’m not sure Napoleon qualifies as entirely aristocratic since a see a bit of my middling self in him. He also wrote something in a letter that I most certainly can relate with. In fact, I imagine all of us in our mid-twenties could do so:
Replace Frenchmen with Mexicans and you’ve described my childhood and adolescence with great accuracy. 59
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:40 | # CC, In response to your thoughts along the lines of a virtual universality of acquisition I would ask you to look at this from the other way round. Concentrate on what is native in the widest sense, and then I think you will find that what is left is drawn wholly from time and place. 60
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 18 Jan 2010 02:24 | # GW, I think it is worth considering that a more radical definition of the acquired can instill in individuals a greater sense of ownership of the collective and in the collective a greater sense of ownership of individuals that are part of the collective, thus countering deracinated individualism. Also important, we can agree that we speak of what is essential as being very approximately the same with the acknowledgement that to view the essential from a different angle, a different perspective, can convey different meanings, and for different individuals. A proper philosophic system which is general should also be capable of minor calibrations on the spot for those expert in its application to elicit the desired emotional and intellectual orientation from one’s interlocutor consistent with the ends towards which the philosophic system aims. I think that perhaps I have provided an example of that. Dasein, Wasn’t Galton’s estimation for the ancient Athenian IQ equivalent to 130? Which would make many of us here average if we had lived then. 61
Posted by Silver on Thu, 28 Jan 2010 04:38 | # Sigh. Obviously the process I describe happens as people ‘racialize,’ as they begin to grasp that race, in a rather profound way, matters. You hang around race-talk blogs and forums long enough and you see it happen. I’m just describing it. Obviously, again, I, personally, don’t feel that way about things at all. But there’s no doubting that it’s out there—and problematic. As for “claiming to be Asian,” grow up will you, you pathetic little git. 62
Posted by Michael Santomauro on Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:37 | # A Sense of Peoplehood is not a Pathology It is not racist for a professor such as Alan Dershowitz or for a professor like Kevin MacDonald to advocate for their ethnic group interests. The words for bigotry, that are often used, such as: ant-Semitic, anti-white, anti-black, anti-Arab, anti-feminist, anti-gay and hundreds of other labels, are for the most part overstated. Instead, it should be seen as pro-white, or pro-Jewish or pro-women or pro-traditional family and not be ashamed of it. These “pro” sensibilities are part of the human condition, not to be pathologized into an “anti.” It is about group interests. A race or an ethnie without a sense of peoplehood or ethnichood will end up being used to achieve the goals of other ethnies. (Yes, ethnie, not ethnic). The feelings or thoughts for peoplehood is not a pathology. The European-American will have White ethnic interests and it is not racist to have them. Just as Hispanics, Asians, Jews and Blacks have their own ethnic interests, it should not be a pathology for Whites to have ethnic interests. –Michael Santomauro An Ethnie without a sense of peoplehood will end up being used to achieve the goals of other ethnies. — Michael Santomauro 63
Posted by Robert Jones on Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:32 | # Thank God, at long last we Americans of European decent have an advocacy group that addresses our distinct concerns and needs. Other ethnic groups are encouraged to support their own community service organizations such as the NAACP, La Raza, AIPAC, without stigma and now we Europeans can become politically engaged in a similar manner. 64
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:55 | # Prof. Tom Sunic has joined the A3P board of directors: http://american3p.org/?p=401 . Excellent news. Of course there will be sniping because he’s “not American.” Just ignore that. Question: why aren’t the Tea Partiers flocking to the A3P? It would seem they were tailor-made for each other. Answer: I suppose it’s because they don’t know about the party or don’t want to be called “racists” by the Jews. If the latter reason, they have to understand the Jews are going to call them racists and anti-Semites no matter what, so they’d better start 1) getting used to it and 2) ignoring it and seeing to their interests as the Jews see to theirs. I haven’t been following the Tea Party “movement” because I see it as the same as the Ross Perot phenomenon years ago — namely, white people (including Ross Perot himself) who don’t have the mental clarity to grasp that the issue is 1) race and 2) the Jew-led alliance trying to damage and ultimately extinguish the white race. The Tea Partiers are good folk, salt of the earth, but clueless, in other words. It’s sad and frustrating to see them falling all over themselves trying to deny they’re “racists.” (There are no such things as “racists” in the sense meant by that Jewish term. There are normal people and there are degenerate people. That’s all.) Here, for example, is Christopher Donovan a couple of days ago blogging about Tea Partier naïveté (Frank Rich is a Jewish columnist for the Jew York Times):
Tea Partiers: you need to join the A3P, the American Third Position Party. Do you even know about it? Check it out here: http://american3p.org/ Get with the <strike>pogrom</strike> program please. Or here, let me change that, I was right the first time: Get with the pogrom please. Did you know there was a progrom going on? Well, there is. Yours. Figure it out and figure it out fast because the race you save may be your own. Don’t worry about being called names by the Jewish media. The Jews will hate you no matter what you do. You cannot please them because you aren’t Jewish. It’s really and truly as simple as that. Just 1) wake up, 2) smell the coffee, and 3) see to your own interests. The Jews will never, ever see to your interests or approve of your seeing to them. Someone else will approve though, someone way more important than the Jews: your white children and grandchilren, and theirs, and theirs. Now, which is more important, they or the Jews? A3P. Join it now. There’s little time left in which to turn this catastrophe around. 65
Posted by AD on Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:14 | # Prof. Tom Sunic has joined the A3P board of directors: Ah yes, the man who defines nouveau blanche. With big shots like he and April Gaede at the helm, well, says it all really. This is who Tommy Sunic represents, btw
66
Posted by Wandrin on Sat, 03 Apr 2010 20:25 | # These things start very slow but the A3P seem to have set the bar at a reasonable level to get mainstream people involved - although that’s hard for me to judge from outside the US. 67
Posted by Wandrin on Sat, 03 Apr 2010 20:27 | # However, they do need to update their site daily to get people in the habit of looking every day. Post a comment:
Next entry: The Unenlightenment
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by AB on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:44 | #
The cowards at Ron Paul Forums have pulled the thread.
Some quotes from Democratic Underground:
“Wow, what a first class asshole.”
“Please tell me this jackass isn’t still employed at a state university.”
“How the fuck does someone like this manage to get a job at a Cal State university??? How do they function in the larger society? What a worthless piece of shit he is. Here is the fucker:”
“He should be totally drummed out of the academic community.”
“How do dimwits like this have jobs teaching? Go back to the compound, you fucking hick.”
“Jeez, where’s a radical biologist with a pitcher of ice water when you need him?”
“Second time I’ll say this today: Nazi punks fuck off.”