by Neil Vodavzny

I got to thinking the other day how come there are so many pulp-derived blogs? It’s not just that they’re there, it’s that they’re indispensible. You stumble across them,
and are instantly caught-up in the knowing references and astonishing design/artwork. What, in short, connects the pulp universes – from ERB and REH to Marvel and DC?

For a start, they lend themselves to narrative art – whether spot illustrations or comics. That trait you could say is common to all classics, whether heroes of the Bible or Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, viewing the Bible through a sort of folkloric prism, natch. According to my idea of classical (Go East part 2), there is a playful element and a type of legendary energy – it can’t be completely po-faced.

The playfulness captures the heart and invites you into a world which is not too literal, very suggestive and even mask-like – as in the superheroes (Roy Thomas’s long-running fanzine is called Alter Ego). Within their universe, the energy is very real and can be fantastically classical, as in Burne Hogarth’s Tarzan newspaper strips

Now, the fabulousness of this art is derived from playful energy – a type of artifice. What is this playful energy? Very good question. My idea is it’s akin to the question at the heart of religions – a type of unknown or nonsense that is visualised through symbol (only).

READ MORE...

   
        Toward a relative social and less sheerly objective view of our peoples
        – i.e., in terms of our interests. 2,450 words

For those intelligent minds inquiring without the better of academia’s time tested structures in the humanities, but only proceeding of their will to make their way through erudition from their standpoint, their penchant in Western advocacy would have us return to modernity (were it possible) and objectivism.

To the academically inexperienced and untrained advocate of Western interests there are two grand disadvantages.

First, he is not appraised of the sublime workings and analyses of these scholarly apparati as they might be applied in our interests; and secondly, what he does know and hear about them tends to be vast perversions of the notions as passed through Jewish academia and media.

The well meaning Westerner thus sets about to cure us of all this hogwash, and would unbeknownst return us to obsolete tenets of modernity and objectivism - precursors to the very afflictions to our homeostasis that he seeks to cure, such as liberalism.

To him, “objectivism” is good. “Relativism” is bad.

He does not sufficiently appreciate that the analytic framework of objectivism, relativism and subjectivism is not inherently antagonistic to Western interests. The same would apply to a myriad of terms and concepts that have been misapplied against European interests and rather stupidly taken by White Nationalists as such - inherently bad or wrong. It is a temptation and an easy mistake, but a bad mistake – as these are deliberate traps set against European interests unbeknownst to those without a privileged vantage on the working of Jewish academics over these scholarly apparati.

Let me address just objectivism and relativism briefly.

Critique of objectivism ranges from what would correctly be seen as the most brazen and vulgar Jewish sophistry to the most sublime calculations of Heisenberg or Gödel.

However, when I critique objectivism it will tend to be heard by those outside of the academic humanities as if I am disposing of the framework which has yielded such fantastic scientific advances in its entirety, as if I am a Jew looking to make rhetorical tropes the king.

The truth is that there are limits and very real problems for us as a people in the pursuit of mere objectivism. It is among the central elements of our problems.

Plato being granted some permission by Christianity, thus having gravity in our traditions, will incline many to see in this argument a stupid straw man that all is relative. That I am promoting sheer sophistry and relativism. Not. In fact, hyper-relativism is an upshot of objectivism.

On the other hand, there is an aspect of rhetoric called casuistry which has also gotten a bad name from Jewish misuse. However, casuistry proper would take into account the sublime limitation of objectivism, taking the facts yielded by its experience and inquiry indeed BUT then making the best argument that it can on the basis of those facts in conjunction with one’s interests inherently social as they are. There is no denial of facts but a prioritizing of them as they accord to human concern. That is right.

READ MORE...

On the radio page now, Paul Weston, the man who managed to get himself arrested for reading from Winston Churchill’s The River War, talks to GW and DanielS about himself, his party, nationalism and the political climate, the nature of UKIP, blogging on the DT, that adventure in Winchester, and (even) the JQ.  He’s a good guy.  You should listen.

Upon Winchester Guildhall, Paul Weston quoted the following passage from Churchill’s “The River War”:

‘How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!,’ wrote Churchill.

‘Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

‘The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

‘A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

‘The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

‘Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.

‘No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.’

Paul Weston’s “I am a racist”

READ MORE...

READ MORE...

                                        Anti-immigration protests in Rome

People of Tor Sapienza interviewed by Italian TV networks say that they are forced to go out in the morning carrying a knife for fear of assaults, and that in the area every 100 metres there is an apartment building of squatters while “our own people have no home.”

They say that men and women are unemployed. A girl says that she’s about to lose her job and her mother and brother are jobless, so she’s going to ask for the hospitality of the immigrant centre: 30 euros a day, accommodation, food, and cigarette voucher— not a bad deal.

            - Enza Ferreri on anti-immigration protests

by Neil Vodavzny

Chinese folk-hero Wong Fei Hung has been portrayed in countless Hong Kong Kung Fu movies as the staunch defender of national characteristics against western invaders. Some people have a habit of rolling their eyes and saying, “oh, kung fu”, in that way. In fact, on the Once Upon A Time In China DVD, one commentator Mark King, who was in the film as a western infidel, was such a downer that he admitted he was just in it for the money. There are people like that (called capitalists usually) but, since he’s a long-time HK resident, I’ll let him off.

OUATIC is nothing like OUATIA – one of the dullest epics ever made – and I’ll tell you why. The physical discipline of the hero is as much a part of his moral code. In Once Upon A Time In China Wong battles the treacherous Iron Robe and is cut by a blade hidden in the queue. Wong is outraged and in a furious sequence throws the hidden dagger through two hoops – a symbolic gesture. The next scene is equally telling, the treacherous Iron Robe dying in a hail of western bullets, his disciple crying, “Kung Fu is no match for western guns”.

This film – in fact the whole OUATIC series – is famed for its historical context. The Chinese fighting amongst themselves and the nefarious westerners recruiting allies amongst the triads. Wong symbolises not just the physical strength of a master, but the inner struggle for identity in a world of steel and powder. One commentator cited the interesting historical footnote that Japan outlawed gunpowder for 30 years as the Emperor knew it would signal the end of the Samurai chivalric code.

READ MORE...