|
|
|
A question and an answer A commenter by the philosophically respectable if possible unsuitable name of Zarathustra asked a question on my Black Cab II thread which, whilst it is undoubtedly tawdry and boring, does deserve some elucidation. And not only from me. It seems to be addressed to everyone who reads this and is not already really, really convinced that negrifying the European genepool and filling up our living spaces with total aliens is not a Wholly Good Thing. Here it is:
In translation the first question here is not a question at all, of course, but a moral denunciation and, in most cases if not in Zarathustra’s, a statement of loathing, thus:
The promiscuity of its usage, and the bad faith of those stupid enough to use it, has long since rendered the term “racist” meaningless in their mouths. As a descriptor of anything even approaching real racism - which, as the victim of postmodernity, we Europeans alone encounter - it has zero value. It has no better purpose than to prevent us from living free and sovereign in our own lands. It is a Jew-tool. It is lie. Yet it hobbles the lives of hundreds of millions of us … supposedly free men and women who, because of our white skin, dare not say what we know to be true. We know in our hearts that the repellent moral dwarves who so mechanically reach for it are themselves fully deserving of the appellation. Yet because we are white we somehow agree to be oppressed by its thorns and cowed into silence. We know that living in close proximity to a negro population is dangerous and debilitating, and is something to be avoided at all costs. Every other people knows it too. But we are white and we are cowed into silence. We know that for a people to be forced out of its living spaces is the gravest of crimes. But we are white. We leave our homes, flee the invaders and we remain silent. Who, then, is this mythical racist? The voiceless European? How so? No African, Hispanic or Asian would be so called for defending his people against aggression, or for telling the truth about other families of Man. But we are white and we are not allowed to be normal. And, indeed, it is not normal to be hated as we are. Mindful of the special, leftist rules, this hatred we dutifully interpret as just and a deserved consequence of our forefathers’ deeds! As they were honest, self-confident and successful, so now we must be self-deceiving, humiliated and accepting of our dispossession and dissolution. But let’s turn this matter inside-out. We know who the racists, the hypocrites, the haters are. We know that it is tribal supremacism, and hatred and fear of us which drives the most powerful of them, and it is shame at their own abject moral, social and economic failure which drives the least. How, then, to adequately define their sin when there is so much of it? In these end-times, racism is the attack on the right of Europeans to live in peace together, to have work, even to exist. Racism is racial Marxism. Racism is left-liberalism. Racism is Jewish ethnocentrism in diaspore. Racism is the absurd and deceitful idea of blaming us because Africans are not our equal. Racism is the twisting of language in our mouths, the twisting of our history, the twisting of our children‘s minds. Racism is the encouragement of race-mixing and the endless parading of noble but entirely fraudulent negritude across our media. Racism is whatever is done, everything that is done against us in these, our lands. Today, the racist is the Other … the Jew, the non-white … and sometimes it is the self-contorted white liberal. Only we are just. Comments:2
Posted by Bodhidharma The Blue Eyed Barbarian on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:58 | # My spiel runs along the lines of: The term racist was invented in 1905 by Leon Trotsky as a refutation of Darwin. When you use it as a pejorative, you do two things: you identify yourself as a Trotskyist, and you reject Darwin, the full title of whose magnum opus, you may recall, was “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.” 3
Posted by Crusader on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 07:44 | # A dual morality is where one set of ethics is applied to one’s person, group, party, sect, or nation, but another set is applied to all others. In a universalist culture smart individualists promote the public interest, smart businessmen promote socialism, smart racists promote diversity, and smart nations promote globalism. Why? Someone must rule. It is better to write the rules and collect tribute than it is believe the rules and pay tribute. 4
Posted by Crusader on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:16 | # The public racist is, I believe, firstly afflicted with a highly reactive sympathetic nervous system and is more sensitive to environmental stimulation. Secondly, despite public words to the contrary he is a believer in the rules he doesn’t write. As these change he becomes mentally conflicted. Personal survival demands increased sensitivity from the nervous system. Social signals and cues ignored by the average person are scrutinized for survival meaning. Wrong interpretations proving harmful result in paranoia. Wrong but harmless interpretations result in neurosis. Far better it is for the racist practitioner of a dual morality to maintain status and the ability to live in exclusive, near-homogeneous neighborhoods by actively promoting diversity for his less intelligent or connected folk as the Democrats do, or by keeping his mouth shut as Republicans do. 5
Posted by the Narrator... on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:25 | # Reading the entire comment by Zarathustra I’d say there is a great possibility he/she is racially mixed. Half Asian, perhaps. But your point in answer GW is right on the mark. There are many tracks such a conversation can go, but in using yours in conversation might I suggest the following intro,
Of course it depends on the person. The half-hearted, semi-traditionalist, who pays lip service to PC thought will respond favorably to satire and the accompanying discussion which GW and PF spelled out. If it’s a died-in-the-wool liberal, then you have to converse with them much like you would have a member of the Jim Jones Cult inquiring why you “hate” (refuse to join the cult of) Jim Jones. There is no reasoning with those types, so it’s probably best to respond like a 19th century “fire and brimstone” preacher. Which is to say, aggressively assertive, with the demeanor and tone of one ordained by Almighty God to declare the law. ... 6
Posted by cladrastis on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:31 | # OK, this may come as a complete shock, but here goes: I’m a racist. I believe in the existence of geographical human races, I believe in the inequality of those races, and I believe that the only way that we can maintain the diversity (and perhaps diversification) of existing human races (to say nothing about culture) is to create barriers to introgression between them. Let’s be honest kiddos: we have more to fear than a stupid word. 7
Posted by Crusader on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:09 | #
Your questions are internally inconsistent and irrelevant to the man who reigns. No culture is/has been universally universalist, for all men are dual ethicists by degree. The practicing dualist privately follows one set of ethics and espouses another. Success is indicated by the relative impenetrability of the former by the latter. The attainment and continuity of wealth, status, and power are reward enough. It is found in yourself and neighbor, not just in bossholes. It has always been that way. Life and afterlife are sufficient for universalists. Angry life isn’t what you thought it was? Disturbed about having missed the ride? Inwardly share a sense of responsibility for the present? Wish to improve circumstances for yourself/posterity? Then get smart and become one with the present program. Food for thought. Have a good day. 8
Posted by Crusader on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:02 | #
Beneath outward expressions of universalism lies the petty ethics of the individual. The difference between your hypocrisy and mine is you complain much about thingd upon which you’ve not given much thought.
Universal ethics and individualism/tribalism/nationalism/globalism are inherently inconsistent, but not equally so. Would it not be better to follow Milton’s advice? The smart racist promotes diversity, is happy, survives easily, and collects tribute. The clueless racist complains about diversity, is unhappy, survives precariously, and pays tribute. 9
Posted by danielj on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:15 | # I can’t use the words to describe the kind of person Crusader is because that kind of language has been banned here as part of GW’s wish to “keep things civil.” I can. He is the kind of person ‘uh’ is, or is in fact, uh himself. 10
Posted by tc on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:31 | # “[Are you] angry [that] life isn’t what you thought it was? Disturbed about having missed the ride? Inwardly share a sense of responsibility for the present? Wish to improve circumstances for yourself/posterity? Then get smart and become one with the present program. Food for thought. Have a good day.” (—Crusader) No, on all counts. I do well left to my own devices - and demand to be left alone. I don’t want to play with those kids. Their games simply do not interest me. And lemme tell you, once I can’t find a corner for myself to play in, all their games will be disrupted as well. They’ve been lucky so far, in that I’m a resourcefull fella… 12
Posted by Crusader on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:40 | #
You are smarter than white elites? Christian birthrates are up, docility is adaptive, and elite rule is propped by multiculturalism’ inherent “divide and conquer” tactics. Meat aplenty for the grinder is yet available in North America, Europe, and Down Under. It shall remain that way for a very long time, long past our engagement with the grave. Better to celebrate Milton, I would think. 13
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:00 | # “No, on all counts. I do well left to my own devices - and demand to be left alone. I don’t want to play with those kids. Their games simply do not interest me. And lemme tell you, once I can’t find a corner for myself to play in, all their games will be disrupted as well. They’ve been lucky so far, in that I’m a resourcefull fella…” Uh’s persona is the ‘deep guy’ whose verbal eruptions from Mount Uranus that Kafka first stuck his flag in are but ‘a reflection of the times’. Wading through it all with the knowledge that it will end is such bitter sweet sorrow. Stay strong my friend, the peace you did not find in life awaits you in death. LOL! P.S. Aren’t you some kind of Med from NYC? With all those verbal chips you gots to floss you never once tried to bag a Jewish bitch (just tell her you’re a Jew, she might believe)? Something to think about at least. 14
Posted by PF on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:13 | # I think uh’s last persona/pose was “the white nationalist who finally saw the folly and corrupting influence One thing I do know is that uh loves Brazilian chicks. 15
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:46 | # “One thing I do know is that uh loves Brazilian chicks.” If he pines after it that badly and at the last thinks he’s too good to pay for it if necessary then I have very little sympathy for him. I mean hell, what do you suppose Silver did when he was in Thailand? If it’s good enough for Silver, it should be good enough for uh. Word. I mean, isn’t that just an accepted aspect of the tourist experience? 16
Posted by danielj on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:54 | # isn’t that just an accepted aspect of the tourist experience? Henry Rollins - before his conversion to Democratic apparatchik was complete - had a very funny bit about this very subject. His cab driver repeatedly tried to take him to the whore houses and was like a saddened child when Henry wanted to go to the zoo instead. 17
Posted by Q on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:14 | # Are you guys - Fred Scrooby excluded - certain crusader is uh? He sounds more like GT to me. 18
Posted by Crusader on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:55 | # The grouplet’s attempt to change the subject with guesses as to my identity underscores its cluelessness. Smart racists desiring power promote diversity and division, and scapegoat outspoken, less intelligent racists. It is what the Jews do. It is what elite gentiles do. And why should they not? Morality is dual. The universal ethics sold to the dumbest facilitates voluntary altruism. Better they go to the block willingly, so the smartest may live. One might think racists would know better. The fools among them don’t. They are expendable, along with that handful of innocents who genuinely buy the universalist tripe. It’s Darwin, baby! So this is part of what you’re up against. Solve the problem and you win. Fail and lose. Sorry, friends, but this Gordian knot is composed of ideas – not fiber. It can’t be cut with a sword. 19
Posted by danielj on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:14 | # The grouplet’s attempt to change the subject with guesses as to my identity underscores its cluelessness. I’m not clueless. I just disagree. You’re cynical chic and that is cool with me. Hell,75r I am too in some of my pensive, red wine sipping moments. 20
Posted by Crusader on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:29 | #
So you look for corners in which to hide until the day of “racial reckoning”? Rest assured, ole buddy, plenty of corners will remain available before that day comes.
Brave words. Better to die celebrated, feted, and mourned as a former member of the “in” crowd! You’ll die quite peacefully, I suspect, with only the fear of eternal nothingness to contemplate as you slip into unconsciousness IV’ed with painkiller and are physically graduated into fertilizer. Another life wasted in tribute with interest owed. That is the nature of the thing, gentlemen. Better to be a smart racist. Else solve the problem and sell the solution. 21
Posted by GenoType on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:48 | #
Says Fred upon leaving the water-cooler defeated, with snickers and catcalls following him down the hallway. Come now, ole buddy, either provide us with a universalist ethic for racial nationalism or make yourself useful by teaching French to white homeschooled children.
Bravo, Q. You’re beginning to have your moments. Keep it up! 22
Posted by Fade the Butcher=Friedrich Braun? on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 05:43 | # A question that needs an answer—- is Friedrich Braun one of the many pseudonyms of Fade the Butcher, also known as Hunter Wallace, Prozium and so on of Occidental Dissent and formerly Odessa Syndicate? We need to answer this question. 23
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:44 | # I think the above poster raises a legitimate question that needs to be answered. 24
Posted by PF on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 08:14 | # Crusader wrote:
Is this some blah-blah reasoning about inner circle/outer circle morality? I can’t even read this sort of thing, as the lack of any evidence or even anecdotes and just the presumed rightness of it, presumably based on the plausibility of its presentation, destroys my focus as I read it. there’s some sort of willingness to interpret required to engage with ‘the world is this way’ prose. look, my analysis cuts reality in just the right way. I’ve got the straight dope. somehow the belief in the ability to resolve realities in this way dissipates over time to the point where one can no longer be bothered. I cant be fucked to try and puzzle out what this random loser is trying to sell. 25
Posted by PF on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 08:18 | # ...perhaps because the effort of thought is at last so onerous that one only takes up the effort in the service of some trusted name… a man whose thought-tracks offer repayment. 26
Posted by Hunter Wallace on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:21 | # No, I am not friedrich braun. If friedrich would do an interview, this would become immediately obvious. I’ve always claimed to be from East Alabama. My voice reflects that. 27
Posted by Ivan on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:32 | # Hey, Hunter Wallace, good to hear from you brother. We can carry our conversation here since you have banned me from your blog for “not being able to answer a simple question”, can’t we, in civilized manner of course lest GW bans me from here as well. You have posted replies to my comments by other commenters on your site while I’m banned and therefore cannot address their arguments. As my kids say, it’s not fair, Paaap. On second thought, I am not sure if there is much left to discuss with you after you have subjected yourself so unwisely to Giles’ scrutiny. The picture that came out in the aftermath of your interview with Giles ain’t pretty. The stench is beyond what my “blue tick nose” (to borrow Jim’s jargon) can tolerate. I’m sure HW is not FB. I would like to propose a question more to the point - what is the difference between these two giants of intellect? 28
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:17 | #
No, the formula is falsifiable. How do you account for smart racists supporting racism, apartheid South Africa, for instance. It served self-interest. The formula should read smart racists desiring power support self-interest. Thus the genius of JB’s Laboratory of the States. 29
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:40 | #
A southern accent? 30
Posted by Ivan on Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:18 | # A southern accent? This is the best comment ever by FB. Polite, concise, no cursing, no annoying self-confidence, excellent humor. A+++. 31
Posted by tc on Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:06 | # You see, I could actually write up some sort of a response to refute the “uh” concept, which I assume is deragatory - but I don’t care to. You seem to only enjoy your imaginary ivory tower of babble here, so go on, obviously it would not stick - since you here carry the torch, and noone must touch the sacrament. Right? ‘Deep guy’? You should be so lucky, but you are not. Just an other guy, who’s back is against the wall - with technology and data mining and applied statistics catching up to the fact, that he is not PC. My options are limited, but I will not go quietly. Does that bother you brother? What do you want me to do? Come up with an other intellectual headstand to justify why am I not killing the one who is killing me and have been killing my people for millenia? An other thing which you are not is - friendly. I predict this trait would come in handy to you someday, nor far in the future. Practice it. 32
Posted by Ivan on Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:14 | # This Crusader guy sounds like one tough and angry monkey. It seems he found a philosophy that suits and works for him. Good for him. I have no problem with tough monkeys showing off how smart they are. In fact, I enjoy it in the way one might enjoy a freak show. Besides, anything that escalates the tension between the parasites and the host should be encouraged and welcomed. The only problem I see with the monkeys is that when the day, that tc is alluding to, comes it is not going that easy to identify the Crusader type monkeys because they won’t be anywhere in sight showing off how tough and smart they are. By then, tc, they will be on your side as the friendliest and humblest creatures you can imagine. They are smart, remember. 33
Posted by Lurker on Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:46 | # I noticed FB over at Occidental Dissent the other day, commenting thus:
So I take it that FB’s last comment here on December 21, 2009 at 10:40 PM will be the last he ever makes here. Farewell! 34
Posted by GenoType on Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:24 | #
Fred has only a vague idea regarding the moral nature of the problem. Butthurt at me for illuminating his cluelessness, he intentionally misrepresents my position. I await his universalist defense of racial nationalism. Shall I hold my breath in anticipation? Desmond misses the point entirely. The best he can do is cite the failed example of South Africa and defend the “genius” behind King James’ “laboratory” experiment and “scientific” predictions for 2012. GW’s absolutely correct about the need for philosophy. 35
Posted by Gudmund on Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:20 | # GenoType, It would be better for the benefit of your readers to be direct rather than circumspect. If you’ve a point to make there is no reason to obfuscate. I have an idea what you’re getting at but it’s no good guessing at it, we’re not mind readers able to read into your cryptic posts. 36
Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 24 Dec 2009 11:09 | # I’ve seen a lot from ‘our side’, or at least those who claim that for themselves, in recent times that really makes me scratch my head. From those who have flirted with the idea of joining the judeophilic obfuscationists, if that is necessary to protect Jews from vengeance, to those who have stated that it is better for the mass of White to ‘go to the block if…’. The bottom line, their loyalty has been found wanting. My visceral reaction to it all is: “Fuck you goddamn traitors and hypocrites!” Of course that’s only my visceral reaction, I suppose it could be intellectualized or verbally finessed away at a later date, but that would be a lie. Post a comment:
Next entry: Nick Griffin on Copenhagen and the man-made global warming scam
|
|
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 PF on Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:31 | #
Racism is the refusal to shield northern european women from the sexual advances of peoples who, scientifically demonstrably, tend more to sexual aggression than what was previously the norm in white societies.
Racism is the refusal to acknowledge the slower maturation rates of northern european males in this game of competition.
Racism is the proclamation of the ideal of ‘coolness’ whereas it is known that we tend to introversion/shyness and awkwardness.
Racism is the importance of dancing, appearance, and ‘flair’ instead of character, intellect, pedigree, accomplishment.
Racism is the re-biasing of northern european society to accomodate all these strange imported norms.
Racism is a rhetorical buzzword in a society that requires constant monitoring just to function tolerably well.
Racism is deracinated european man’s last chance to experience a feeling of righteousness.
Something to go on a crusade against, in a world where all other evils and enemies have been relativized.
Racism is the last shibboleth Europeans collectively can believe in.