|
|
|
Nationalism hard and soft by Happy Cracker What follows are adumbrations of the spiritual dimension of nationalism. Nationalism, by its nature, ultimately demands for itself the right to call it’s sons to die for the collective. That is the secret (and not-so-secret) understanding that lies behind a system of thought that glories in collective existence and continuity. Behind the old symbols is the underlying understanding that one may have to risk one’s life for the group - even give up one’s life for the group. Our fathers’ and grandfathers’ generations were called upon to to answer this demand, in two intra-European fratricidal wars which perhaps lacked a proper Grand Strategy, but were nevertheless fought with courage and self-sacrifice. [note: this post is not about World War I or II.] Any proper understanding of nationalism will be heroic, that is to say it will acknowledge the central nature of this “ultimate promise to pay” in the nation’s social contract; just to make this clear, I will sometimes refer to this ultimate promise to pay as “the honor-promise”, going forward. In times of war, nations survive by the sacrifice and willing bloodshed of their young men. Nationalism places the eternal nation in the elevated, august position such that a young man’s life can be sacrificed to it without loss of dignity on his part - regardless of the achievements, background and character of the young man. A family which assiduously stores up human capital through generations of careful breeding and attainment, would no doubt be loth to give up their proudest specimens and representatives of their blood-lines, to die grisly deaths on foreign soil - were it not for the honor-promise which underlies all national belonging. Nationalism thus follows logically from Hamilton’s Rule. At one remove, we can view this as an exchange of goods. The young man gives his life - or more palatably, his effort in a high-risk situation - and receives honor in exchange from the collective. Military decorations, memorials, social status as a soldier, and the patriotic ethos of the people are the means by which the collective attempts to repay the honor-debt incurred by the [putative, at this point] sacrifice. This honor-promise is problematized, of course, when the collective loses its elevated position and therefore loses its ability to repay the honor-debt thus incurred: when the res publica is no longer honorable in itself, it cannot be called upon as a source of honor to repay the sacrifices of soldiers. In my opinion, Western states find themselves in this situation presently - lacking the legitimacy to actually sanction the death of their own men in their name. One reason I suspect why suicides among soldiers in Iraq reach such staggering numbers is that few men can muster enough belief in the legitimacy of the State to justify the death of their comrades. Thus one is confronted with the horrible knowledge that one’s friends have died “for nothing” - or for something that was not worth their lives. I suspect it is this knowledge, of the rottenness of their cause, which is so psychologically debilitating and destructive to morale. This is a result of the shift that states have undergone - specifically, insofar as they have become tinker-toys of liberalist redistribution ideologies, or in the case of the US government, co-opted by powerful minority interests (mp3 file). They now try to repay the honor-debt through compelled respect and the equivalent of fiat-honor currencies: see, for example, Obama mouthing the platitudes of respect for servicemen - whereas the existence of such a one as himself is really a repudiation both of American nationhood, and his life likewise a repudiation of militarist ethics and code of honor. Unsurprisingly, he would like young men to lay down their lives to realize his [handlers’] plans. Nationalism is an ideology that demands a great deal from those who follow it; the more so if they understand its nature rather than merely ape its outward symbolism. Rather than a comforting world-view which reconciles all parties and points to a fuzzy utopian future, nationalism properly understood is a gun cocked and aimed at one’s own head; which one keeps there in the knowledge that this is the price of admission to the world of human groups. If you escape paying the honor-promise, then its likely your son will have to pay it. If he escapes it, your grandson may yet have to pay it. No one is free from the promise implicit in the flag which waves over his head in peacetime. This understanding is tragic, but reflects historical and evolutionary reality properly. And because nationalism demands a lot, it can afford to give a lot. It can give spontaneous uncompelled resource sharing, historical continuity, and a sense of transcendent values which are rooted in evolutionary imperatives. The resource sharing is group life, the historical community is tradition and legacy, and the transcendent values are the ethos required for the perfection of human character. Most non-nationalist ideologies do not explicitly demand something as harsh as the honor-promise from their adherents (even if they compel the same in practice), but they do not realistically offer the same benefits either - they simply posit the possible existence of these benefits. By way of contrast, you may want to consider the sacrifices demanded by Marxism and Objectivism, and the rewards posited by both systems (also the mechanisms through which these rewards are obtained). In recent decades, social engineers have experimented with various marketing ploys to alleviate the primordially harsh nature of nationalism. Various friendly, all-inclusive varieties of gesture-based and symbol-based [non-heroic] nationalism have sprung up - “civic patriotism”, “the proposition nation”, the faux-patriotism of the popular moderate press, etc. Those of us who participate in online discussions of the national question are constantly confronted with the spiritual fallout of these schemes: people who want a watered-down nationalism, a comfortably relaxed nationalism: everyone wants a kind of nationalism that will reflect the specific spiritual imposture which one oneself has cultivated in the wake of post-modernist cultural collapse. Nationalism is watered down in order to assuage two objections: 1. That it is too harsh against foreigners and non-nationals Jewish writers and thinkers are doing a great deal to answer the demand for this faux nationalism. Its a role they were born to play, themselves naturally understanding that any interpretation of nationalism which is not regulated with a view to their interests, will likely ‘devolve’ into the primordial understanding of nationalism - which is a dark, heady, pre-rational, very spiritual place. It is this spiritual mode of which they are very rightly afraid, for here lies a touchstone of spiritual power for the white man, from which he must be debarred access. It’s here that Lawrence Auster and other such Western Civ advocates - including even Steve Sailer - find their niche: in marketing a kind of nationalism lite: nationalism for the spiritually anemic European Man. It is a difficult path to walk, since one is making genuflection towards another ethnic group part of the core strategy - and one is thus open to constant manipulation and re-manipulation regarding the terms of this genuflection. Old, unrepentant nationalism didn’t have to jockey for an inoffensive public image in order to assuage it’s jewish handlers of it’s right to exist: it didn’t have jewish handlers. Thus, it was not abstemiously concerned about the excesses of its own spirit. There is something deeply offensive to the soul of a true nationalist about these varieties of faux nationalism. It is impossible to ignore the fact that they spring from the desire to make nationalism harmless (to foreigners) and painless (to new initiates). This kind of obsequiousness is ignoble in matters of such great import. There is a contradiction involved here. The contradiction is that nationalism would demand fulfillment of the honor-promise, i.e. the death of a young man who accepts its truth - and yet would not want to offend sensibilities of those who do not belong to the nation and those who do not respect nationalism as such! An entity that is this obsequious to its declared enemies does not have the honor-reserve in the first place to place any heroic demands on young men’s lives - it is thus fitting for an era where the honor-promise will not be demanded - and in the relatively short time-horizon of our current political landscape, it certainly will not be. Faux nationalism doesn’t want to require payment of the honor-promise, because it knows it hasn’t sufficient honor to repay the debt thus incurred. Thus one accedes to be payed in faux fiat-honor-currency because one knows the exchange was never contractually stipulated thus, will probably never be realized, hence the bankruptcy of the state in terms of honor is not currently a matter of concern. This calculus will only emerge as a matter of importance if one finds oneself in times where the honor-promise is being collected upon by these varieties of nationalism. In which case, men may indeed want to see to it that they are risking their lives for something greater than mere immunity from Larry Auster’s ravings and a seat at the anti-Islam table next to Fjordman. Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:45 | #
Hoff in Moscow should be pretty fluent in Russian by now; he could function as translator. 4
Posted by Josef Vicelwitz on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 04:12 | # Good OP and totally True! The jew can not survive in a Truly Nationalist entity and this is why they seek to water it down. Here is a link to an Article that explores ‘hard and soft’ nationalism from the ‘other end’ so to speak: Two Models of White Racialism: A Preliminary Exploration of a Changing Morality http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol3no4/gc-twomodels.html 5
Posted by Great article on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:49 | # The following is a great article on how Jewish ideals and spirituality have replaced White ideals and spirituality - http://www.toqonline.com/2009/04/evolas-anti-semitism/ 6
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:33 | # That link to ToQ does not work, and a local search is negative. 7
Posted by danielj on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:50 | # Hoff in Moscow should be pretty fluent in Russian by now; he could function as translator. Maybe he could do something more useful and translate Solzhenitsyn? 8
Posted by Dasein on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:33 | # GW, I was able to access the page earlier and it’s still open in my browser. Let me know if you’d like me to paste it in here. 9
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:38 | # Dasien, I get the ToC, but the message reads:-
No idea why that should be. Is it worthwhile posting a critiqued version here? 10
Posted by weston on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:09 | # Guessedworker, It’s not the complete essay, just the opening and closing paragraphs. 11
Posted by Dasein on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:32 | # What I accessed is the full article. GW, I’ll send it to you by e-mail. I only had a chance to read the first half of it, but so far quite good. I’m not sure why it was taken down, maybe the author wanted to edit some bits. I think it would be worth a critique as a main blog entry (and not to get exPF’s comment thread off track). 12
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:39 | # Nationalism = The comfort of useless collectivists who cant compete individually. 13
Posted by weston on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:41 | # This is what I get:
So I only accessed about half of the article, Guessedworker can’t access it all, and Dasein can access the whole thing. That’s pretty weird. 14
Posted by weston on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:57 | #
Nationalism = the natural outgrowth of the love of one’s self, one’s family, and one’s ethnic group, expressed politically. Of course, an Asian forced to live amongst racial aliens because his kin are incapable of creating a society with a decent standard of living wouldn’t know anything about that. 15
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:32 | # Yep sounds like collectivism alright. Also you are making a little mistake there. “Kins” don’t create anything. Individuals do. Individuals do inventions. Leeches might try to steal other people’s credit, by trying to find ways to associate themselves with the actual creators, but make no mistake. There is no such thing, spare to foster the egos, of pre-mentioned leeches & losers. 16
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:37 | #
17
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:47 | # Another thing, I would bet $100 to a bagel that your criticism of nationalism is confined to relatively politically powerless (at the moment) European people from Western countries proposalsand that you have never once gone on a Zionist (you know, the people who run the Jews only country that even exludes Jews if they happen to be black) forum and criticized their currently enforced policies. 18
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:03 | # Since this false flag libertarian doesn’t support any socialistic system, for “foreigners” or “domestics”, that’s not a problem of my own devising. Tit-for-tat immigration is non-sensial, since it presumes that mankind is obligated to hold specific population densities in certain places of the earth forever. 19
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:06 | # Israel? Those guys down there that do collective punishment, eg 3000 collateral damage for 3 soldiers, and get gazi-billions of tax payers money “aid”? You think that I like Israel? LOLZ 20
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:14 | # Sen’s quip would be good for the next “snappy refutations” exercise:
We get that all the time from libertarians (and sometimes from Jews, as if Jews truly compete individually — no, not a shred of Jewish nepotism is responsible for Michael Eisner’s Disney Company being top-to-bottom Jewish, not a shred, and Eisner’s outfit is pretty typical of that particular Jewish modus operandi). Weston and John, above, touch on the right answer to give the walking braindead like Sen who always trot this line out, namely that in a free Euro society with the untrammeled right of free association intact and zero anti-Euro measures of the kind that currently abound in Euro societies disadvantaging Euros to the benefit of mystery meat, protecting mystery meat fully with the full force of the central government, showering mystery meat with tax money confiscated from whites, with jobs confiscated from whites, with promotions stolen from deserving whites by the federal government to be showered on mystery meat for explicit Jewish racial engineering purposes, and so on, mystery meat would have no chance whatsoever of establishing a toehold in Euro society. So, in regard to “who can compete individually and who can’t,” once the federal government brings in the mystery meat for its racial engineering purposes there’s no further question of “competing individually”: Euros are explicitly and harshly placed by government at a disadvantage and mystery meat explicitly protected, kept from failing, and carefully and artificially elevated to a position of overlordship over Euros. That’s not “competing individually,” it’s government-backed, government-enforced, government-mandated race-replacement. Don’t worry, in a situation where there’s a level playing field in Euro homelands (and even in mystery meat homelands, I’d bet) the native Euros will have no difficulty competing “as individuals” with the material brought in by the government and winning. Just keep the government’s thumb off the scales, all right, moron? 22
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:24 | # Oh really? So Virgin, BP, Nokia, IKEA, BMW, EADS, Thales, are non-Euro companies eh? Jews: ...come to think about it. They are nationalists alright. They even have cute mandatory military training to teach young people authority and everything! They have even managed to combine the idea of religion with a specific national identity as well. You would have thought you guys would luv them! Other comment: Ewww. How classy. 23
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:24 | # Let’s just take renting: how far would mystery meat get in Euro countries if Euro landlords were at liberty to refuse to rent apartments to them? To sell housing to them? How far would they get if Euro business owners were at liberty to refuse to hire them? To promote them? How far would they get if Euros were at liberty to say openly to Euro girls not to socialize with mystery meat males? How far would mystery meat get if James Bowery’s rules for physical confrontation between native Euro men and mystery meat men were permitted the way dueling was tolerated until 150 years ago? That kind of situation would be the “individual competition” Sen refers to, and mystery meat would lose. 24
Posted by Josef Vicelwitz on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:27 | #
Individualists are going to be Crushed during the coming Collapse. You better smarten up and Collectivize to survive buddy! PS I am going to go and play Bioshock now! 25
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:42 | # A) Renting: You realize that renting is being done by contract right? It is called “don’t put the signature”. You don’t even have to state a reason, you can simply change your mind. Of cource the reality in the end is that most landlords do want to rent their properties as fast as possible in order to “start getting moneys”. So they don’t really care. B) Girls: Amazing as it might sound, no one says to Euro girls to go with someone in particular either. It is called… errr…. “not going with someone”? C) Physical confrontation: Err, no. That’s libertarianism I am on about here, not anarchy. Anarchic nations that don’t value life, would appear to be *suspiciously* similar to places you’d call third world and degenerate. 26
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:04 | # By The Way. Have you guys heard of this little nifty thing some capitalist technocrats have whipped up called genetics? We can actually tell what the “mystery meat” of other Humans, is made up exactly if interested. But that’s not the cool thing. Oh no, yawn. That’s the boring thing. I always wondered, what is the fate of racial ideologies going to be exactly, inside a civilization, that can choose & change, as well as manufacture races at will? Ever heard of Transhumanism? “Paradigm shift” perhaps? Because I just happen to know some lovely guys following an ideology about to be caught in one, so much, they won’t realize what the hell happened. Your ideology is about to become 100 years too late. 27
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:30 | # Designer babies, genetically-modified intelligence, genetically modified races are nowhere on the horizon. There’s as much justification for the view we won’t see them for a thousand years, ten thousand, a million, or never, as for the view we’ll see them any time this century. In 2002 Godless Capitalist was saying one reason immigration didn’t matter was by 2020 we’d have babies genetically designed to our specifications. 2020 is eleven years away: it’s just been learned that there is no “intelligence gene”: intelligence, on the contrary, is the result of hundreds if not thousands of genes. There’s no gene you tweak in the lab to make the embryo smarter. In 2020 there will be no baby designed to any specification whatsoever, whether intelligence or otherwise, apart from genetically correcting specific genetic diseases like muscular dystrophy and even that’s making unbelievably slow progress and may not be available for a very long time. There aren’t going to be Negro babies in 2020 who are made OK by genetically boosting their IQs. Immigration does matter and when the day will come that it won’t matter is unknown and for all science knows will as likely be never as it will in a hundred, five hundred, five hundred thousand, or five hundred billion years. Godless Capitalist is wrong. So is Sen. As for computers taking over from men, that’s also not gonna happen. For one thing, the software is getting slower faster than the hardware is getting faster. The proper attitude to have when the libertardians, the genetic engineering/designer baby fantasists, and “singularity” buffs start their blasé predictions is “I’ll believe that when I see it. In the meantime I’ll change zero of my ideas and zero of my ways of doing things.” 28
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:32 | # Sen is a know-nothing dreg, an intellectual zero, and a moral non-entity. 29
Posted by Gudmund on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:34 | # Sen, Please read what this blog concerns before spouting such asininity. Your sniping does nothing but make you look like a fool. Btw, idiot, duels have nothing to do with anarchy. They are matters of personal honour, something that people understood until your vile libertine ideals took over our society. 30
Posted by Darren on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:37 | # Free market, blah blah blah dogmatic moralistic drivel. Money as the dominant cultural paradigm, as if there is nothing else that interests humans; no yearnings the great or the bold but instead whatever can be traded and sold for cut rate. As if the human and especially the European desire for individuality (which you take as a universal) means he never comes together with his fellow man to create a great culture and good society for future generations. He would rather let dollars than ethics dictate his future. Idiot. Hey man, I heard the Sun is going to go red giant in a few billion years. Lets throw up our hands in the air and give up on life already! 31
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:42 | # Since this false flag libertarian doesn’t support any socialistic system, for “foreigners” or “domestics”, that’s not a problem of my own devising. Assuming your libertarianism is genuine, your solution is half-assed. Letting anyone in with one way plane fare will 1. add to social problems (who pays for restitution, incarceration, wandalism, etc.?) and 2. assuming the new arrivals are to be given franchise rights, result in yet more and more entrenched socialism. If the system crashes, the aftermath with hostile immigrants and their progeny, addicted to govt “teat”, will harm the natives more than ever socialism did. Also, as Fred pointed out, in the west there is no freedom of association and as I mentioned there is affirmative action. Shouldn’t these from a libertarian perspective be corrected before opening the gates?
Not true. Countries that are desirable to live in would have much mutual exchange. Countries that are not desirable to live could always get their act together and turn themselves into desirable places to live in. ............ One more thing… Go harangue some Zionists. 32
Posted by GT on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:43 | # Transhumanism = Comforting bitter “individualists” who have forsaken their roots and love of kin. The concept reminds me of baby bears. 33
Posted by GR on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:43 | # Still, as it’s a mistake to apotheosize human relations solely in economic terms, it’s a grosser mistake, and one more unforgivably romantic, to remove economics from the picture entirely. Homer is heroic, but the plot is essentially Achilles acting like a bitch because he didn’t get a good enough share; so how much do you think the other Akhaians got? We’re not primitive Germans upinhere, nahmsayn. Money sucks but it isn’t going anywhere, and you wouldn’t see the glorious dawn of moneyless camaraderie anymore under the illusory white nationalist sun than we did under the marxian. 34
Posted by GR on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:48 | # Your ideology is about to become 100 years too late. It was already too late a hundred years ago. It will be too late a hundred years hence, but they’ll be heralding “the Collapse” and inevitable “victory” all the same. But I don’t know what your point is, Sen. You seem to not even be good at “sniping”. 35
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:03 | #
Another thing, my suggestion addresses and yours doesn’t address the one-way flow (which holds the population densities of India, Japan, China, etc the same while markedly changing those of western countries). 36
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:08 | #
Selecting whom you rent to on the basis of race, religion, national origin, homosexuality, etc., is illegal: it’ll get you fined and/or jailed. Just recently at http://www.Fdesouche.com they linked to a series of public service video clips the French government ran on French TV graphically warning French landlords not to pretend there’s no vacancy when mystery meat knocks on the door looking for lodgings because that’ll land them in jail or with a heavy fine.
Then why the need for the huge array of Jewish-instigated laws outlawing discrimination in renting and selling real estate? No, asshole, when whites are left to themselves to be “individuals” and when the “free market” is left to function freely without Jewish race-engineering interference they prefer white neighborhoods, and both rental logdings and real estate located in white neighborhoods command premium prices on the “free market,” and landlords and real estate agents want to keep mystery meat away for that “free market” reason alone, not to mention scores of others. 37
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:20 | #
There is what is adaptive and unadaptive in securing our ultimate interests, our Ethnic Genetic Interests.
The Greek conception of heroism was the extraordinary man striving for glory in competition with his excellent fellows. That was a part of, and could only reach such heights standing on the backs of, his people was taken for granted. That is not Happy Cracker’s characterization of heroism. So what is your point?
Money is a medium that more efficiently facilitates exchange of goods and services than does the barter system. It is not an end unto itself. Its use is either adaptive or unadaptive for securing our Ethnic Genetic Interests; the contention that we think in terms of dispensing with it altogether is a glib straw man. 39
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:39 | # I think that in a completely libertarian system where charity is completely private, freedom of association is absolute, there is a free market in everything including money and the law is only concerned with harm to person or property and breech of contract, the displacement and dispossession of our people we’re witnessing would not be possible. Put another way, mass immigration is necessary to the multicuti project but not sufficient. It requires in addition a socialistic system and limits on freedom of association (and possibly speech as well as the effects of mass immigration become obvious to even the cud-cheing masses). I have encountered “libertarians” on other forums who emphasize the “right to live wherever you want (never mind what those already living there want)” and pay occasional lip service to opposition to socialism and (when pressed) freedom of association. I call them false flag libertarians. Any “libertarian” who comes on to a nationalist site accusing the posters of “collectivism” (the big sin of libertarianism) is automatically of false flag variety in my book. 40
Posted by GT on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:42 | # Here’s a nursery tale reduced to a simple economic transaction: The Story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears Once upon a time, there was a little girl named Goldilocks. She went for a walk in the forest. Pretty soon, she came upon a house. She knocked and, when no one answered, she walked right in. At the table in the kitchen, there were three bowls of porridge. Goldilocks was hungry. She tasted the porridge from the first bowl. “This porridge is too hot!” she exclaimed. So, she tasted the porridge from the second bowl. “This porridge is too cold,” she said So, she tasted the last bowl of porridge. “Ahhh, this porridge is just right,” she said happily and she ate it all up. After she’d eaten the three bears’ breakfasts she decided she was feeling a little tired. So, she walked into the living room where she saw three chairs. Goldilocks sat in the first chair to rest her feet. “This chair is too big!” she exclaimed. So she sat in the second chair. “This chair is too big, too!” she whined. So she tried the last and smallest chair. “Ahhh, this chair is just right,” she sighed. But just as she settled down into the chair to rest, it broke into pieces! Goldilocks was very tired by this time, so she went upstairs to the bedroom. She lay down in the first bed, but it was too hard. Then she lay in the second bed, but it was too soft. Then she lay down in the third bed and it was just right. Goldilocks fell asleep. As she was sleeping, the three bears came home. “Someone’s been eating my porridge,” growled the Papa bear. “Someone’s been eating my porridge,” said the Mama bear. “Someone’s been eating my porridge and they ate it all up!” cried the Baby bear. “Someone’s been sitting in my chair,” growled the Papa bear. “Someone’s been sitting in my chair,” said the Mama bear. “Someone’s been sitting in my chair and they’ve broken it all to pieces,” cried the Baby bear. They decided to look around some more and when they got upstairs to the bedroom, Papa bear growled, “Someone’s been sleeping in my bed,” “Someone’s been sleeping in my bed, too” said the Mama bear “Someone’s been sleeping in my bed and she’s still there!” exclaimed Baby bear. Just then, Goldilocks woke up and saw the three bears. She screamed, “I have money!” She jumped to her feet, retrieved her purse, and pulled out several C-notes. Goldilocks paid the bears for the mussed bed covers, broken chair, consumed porridge, and mental distress, then promised to never again enter the bears’ home uninvited. Satisfied with the bribe, the bears didn’t eat Goldilocks. Instead, they allowed her to run down the stairs, open the door, and run away into the forest. THE END 41
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:09 | # @ Gudmund: As far as “libertine” ideas go. From the sound of it then, if they have “took over your/our society”, then they sound like they are OUTCOMPETING you grossly. As supremacists, shouldn’t you bow to the superior? @ Darren: Yes, that complain about money has been heard before. Here is a nice essay to read about it: It appears that all speak about value “up there in the air”, except when it comes to the direct, and objective, representation of it. Then things become a little bit tougher eh? @ Fred Scrooby Government regulations, not a problem of my own devising. (Although I still have yet to see a case where the “I don’t feel like signing that contract after all, deal’s off” rule doesn’t apply. And I am very close to the property business myself) Of course, if someone is going to do away with such government regulations, then someone would have to do away with regulations prevent foreigners from owning property as well, as nationalists often wish to institute. If you want to play libertarian, then it’s all or nothing eh. No problem letting the market decide prices there. After all, I believe that in free, capitalism, in the end, as good old game theory tells us, cooperating, ends up being better than antagonizing. Just watch how, the cultures “synchronise”, the frictions reduce (and the wealth increases) to all the cultures where globalization/capitalism has spread. I am especially fond of corrupting and eroding Dubai lately. (and of course, I love the merging of the military-industrial complex of Europe. Just try to do a war now, lol) Because in the end, you sell more stuff, if you don’t beat half your clients up. 42
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:37 | #
Don’t worry, I don’t want to play libertardian: acting and thinking like a mongoloid idiot somehow just doesn’t hold out much attraction for me. 43
Posted by Gudmund on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:39 | # Sen, You are as thick as two planks. Any realistic observer knows that all the nonsense, fairy-tale stuff you spout has absolutely zero chance of working in the real world. Typical of the jewish need to drag people into a fantasy world. I guess that’s why your ideals are “outcompeting” mine - people love to escape into wonderland. 44
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:43 | # Ok, let me get this right. My stuff, is fairy tale that can’t work in the real world. But every second post of yours, whines about how the “libertines” have dominated society. A-ha. That makes perfect sense. 45
Posted by Sen on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:52 | # @Fred Scrooby Oh no, tell me that you didn’t just call me a mongoloid! That… that hurt. You know. In your tummy where it feels warm when someone someone hugs you? There, it hurts right now. :( Unless thats my cooking. 46
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:28 | # Sen is the extreme libertardian version of Arcane. 47
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:30 | # What drugs do you use regularly, Sen? Marijuana and what else? 48
Posted by John on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:54 | #
If that mongolian idiot Ron Paul had his way, starting from 1913, there would have been no American involvement in WWI (and therefore no WWII), freedom of association at the state level would still be in place (no integrated schools and a big push factor for “mystery meat), no HUD, welfare, affirmative action, slave number system, aka social security (no pull factor for “mystery meat), gold would still be money (making the financial looting we’ve seen lately much more difficult to pull off), no military aid to Israel, etc. etc. 49
Posted by Dasein on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:57 | # Non-White detritus like Sen are keen to get us to jump through strained hoops to join their faggot party. Guess what, Sen? Whites don’t need you, they don’t need cognitive elitism, they don’t need libertardism. They would prefer that non-White dreck and Jews like you fuck off. Stop invading my liberty. 50
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:12 | # I had intended “mongoloid idiot” to mean someone with a kind of mental retardation (it was formerly the medical term for a person with Down’s Syndrome) but realizing now that Sen must be an Oriental (which hadn’t occurred to me previously) I see the term’s inadvertant aptness: he is indeed a Mongoloid idiot. 51
Posted by Wandrin on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:22 | # Sen,
Judaism = stealth jewish ultra-nationalism for collectivists who want to compete as a pack while convincing other groups to compete as individuals. Looked at in that way Libertarianism is the perfect ideology for modern parasite jews in the west. In the past it was marxism - using collective working class struggle to catapult jews into positions of wealth and power but now they have the wealth and power they want to promote individualist ideologies among White people to weaken their ability to compete against the jewish pack even further. It’s even better to use both - promoting individualist ideologies among Whites while at the same time promoting collective marxist ideologies amongst third worlders. It’s easy to be politically clever when you have no moral boundaries.
Two year old inventors?
The trouble with the jewish model is it is just so supremely racist and ethno-centric that any White nation that copies judaism 100% will become a threat to all other nations in the same way jews are. The White nations do need to copy jewish ethno-centrism as a defence against them but to a maximum of 98% in my view, never 100% or we become as bad as them. 52
Posted by Wandrin on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:27 | # Happy Cracker, Great article. For a long time now watching “my glorious leaders” paying respect to the dead and injured in Iraq and Afghanistan I’ve felt a growing sense of sickness. I think this article puts words to an instinctive feeling that a lot of people probably have without realising the cause. 53
Posted by Taxonomy: gender, race, nationality, religion, cla on Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:27 | # On an Indian feminist’s blog who says her race does matter as much as her gender (her post was in response to a post by silver on his new blog), I’ve posted a comment agreeing with her that gender in many senses matters more than race/ethnicity because it is much more basic and primal; in turn, I would say that race/ethnicity trumps nationality/citizenship/regional identification because it is in turn more basic and primal; following this in this theoretical taxonomy of basic human identification includes religion (slot varies), class/occupation, political beliefs, and so on. Here is the comments I left:
54
Posted by EXPOSE JEWISH INTERNATIONALISM on Wed, 29 Apr 2009 01:49 | #
Good analysis, but a bit off I think. I would say that: Judaism = stealth Jewish ultra-internationalism/transnationalism/globalism combined with cosmopolitanism, not Jewish ultra-nationalism. Being of Near Eastern/Semitic genetic and cultural background Jews are naturally collectivistic/tribalistic, but they are not and cannot be nationalists because true nationalism is of the “blood and soil” variety, and while Jews share common blood ties the mass of them do not share common soil and have not for very many centuries. The supposed ‘Jewish state’ of Israel is a very recent, unstable, and still very incomplete development, not to mention the fact that the majority of world Jewry does not live there, has never lived there, and will never live there - Israel is basically a large Mediterranean welfare resort kept afloat by untold of billions of dollars pilfered from the USA, Germany, the UK, Russia, and other countries, not to mention the many billions more in ‘donations’ which diaspora Jewry collectively sends to Israel every year from perhaps dozens of other countries around the world. Jews have evolved to become wandering, stateless, international parasites and it is highly unlikely that they will ever succeed in forming a true nation state containing all or nearly all of world Jewry…after examining the evidence it seems clear that Jews cannot exist without a host group or nation (or preferably host groupS and nationS) to economically latch on to and drain its economic lifeblood. Thus the general inferiority of Jewry is again revealed, a complete and utter failure of a group which is in fact so pathetic and dependent on other groups that it cannot even maintain a true Jewish nation-state - Jews are complete and abject losers and incompetents when it comes to statecraft and are a basically a permanent diaspora, which is the sure sign of a failed and inferior group. Even some important Zionists fully admit the shocking extent of Jewish dependency, incompetency, and failure when it comes to statecraft. (read various quotes here) Taken as a whole Jews are stateless internationalists, transnationalists, and globalists - they have imposed ‘permanent homelessness’ upon themselves and are ‘super gypsies’ if you will (hence the phrase ‘international Jewry’ and the murmurings about a ‘global Jewish conspiracy’ and so on). While there may not be a clear, planned, and definite global Jewish conspiracy per se, their internationalism/transnationalism gives them a clear advantage (which many deem conspiratorial) over other more rooted and relatively fixed groups and peoples who inhabit the world because they so often remain connected and in touch in spite of political, geographic, and national borders because they are bound together by their common ethnic identity wherever they reside worldwide - Jews can literally connect, conspire, or do business with other Jews anywhere in the world under the pretext of the ‘religion’ of Judaism simply by walking in to a synagogue wherever an active one stands on Earth (also notice how Yiddish used to function as an international/borderless Jewish language until just a few decades ago, facilitating worldwide Jewish cooperation, communication, and commerce when needed - Yiddish had the added bonus in that it was unable to be understood at all by non-Jews, especially in its very important written-form which was used for long-distance postal communication, Jewish-only commerce, and to keep certain Jewish writings hidden from non-Jewish eyes). Yes, as you say it is easy to be politically clever when you have no moral boundaries - but also understand that, again, Jews have no true political, national, or geographic boundaries like the vast majority of the various rooted peoples and groups of the world. This rootlessness internationalism, combined with their general cosmopolitanism, clearly gives them a majorly unfair, immoral, and yes even conspiratorial advantage over the vast majority of other racial/ethnic groups and even whole nations in terms of international economics/finance/trade and foreign affairs in general. Normal and healthy groups form attachment to their native land, their soil, their home (these are now referred to as nation-states) - Jews feel no attachment to any particular land, soil, home, or nation-state and as a result are not normal but are in fact highly abnormal, pathological, and dysfunctional as a result. - White Western Man (perhaps the editors here at MR would like to place this well-developed comment as a main entry on this site? I wouldn’t object to it.) 55
Posted by Gudmund on Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:16 | #
Libertardians are libertines. You hold nothing sacred other than the most crass materialism. You are the mirror image of Communists in that regard. A healthy society has no place for your degenerate ideals. Our society is not healthy, or rational, or grounded in reality - and judging by how well the “laissez-faire” stuff worked, i.e., the economic meltdown (maybe you were too stoned to hear of that), my thesis seems fairly strong in light of that. This is entirely the wrong time to spout your nonsense as right now it is apparent that it is airy-fairy hocus-pocus smoke-and-mirrors. 56
Posted by John Alan Martinson, II on Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:50 | # One World Nazi Party Platform Introduction Post a comment:
Next entry: Snappy Refutations, Exercise 7
|
|
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 james on Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:04 | #
I didn’t get a responce so I’ll post it again here.
It would be good if you could contact people in Alexander Dugin’s Eurasia movement he has contacts on his website http://eurasia.com.ru/english.html and an email address which I could email to see if someone in his organisation would be willing to do an interview with Majority Rights radio on subjects like what’s basis of the movement is about, its ideological underpinnings, its take on NATO, US expansion in Central Asia war on terror, financial collapse, etc.