Posted by No Reply on Fri, 07 Nov 2014 07:19 | #

Since we are not getting much response yet to the rather innocuous request for suggestions regarding interview candidates for GW, this email that I sent emerges somewhat relevant.

There was no reply to this either, a joint email I sent to KM, Greg, GW and James, which I endeavored as an account as to why I might have the mistaken status of persona non-gratis for some in WN. I surmise that for some it is a matter of my acerbicness to other WN. There are some I’d just as soon not be bothered with…but others, if they are well meaning indeed, probably should not be stand-offish.

This was in fact, a second email, rather bemused by the lack of response to the first - hence, I am admitting that it doesn’t really bother me too much, as I went ahead with this account:

Well, the email that I sent to all of you went over like a lead balloon. Perhaps I should never do that again! or at least not send a mail when in state of melatonin inspiration upon waking after a good sleep. I don’t know if there is anything else you would Not care to tell me.

However, there have been instances when emailing was discouraged as they failed to get through, on this side or that, for being tangled-up with my old VoR address. So maybe that accounts for the silence.

I am still convinced that we are coming to a stable platform here at Majority Rights. One that values intellectual insight into the description and advocacy of White/European people as a whole, in maintaining their discreet nations and in diaspora; recognizes Jews as not only other, but powerful (in 7 key niches) and hostile in their elite directives and in their biological pattern; does not endorse Christianity - a place for those of us who see Christianity as unhelpful if not destructive (though Christian bashing is not our pleasure); and yes, a place that takes what we feel is a normal perspective in European advocacy, that Hitler had some things right, of course, his rancor did not appear ex nihilo, but that he was in fact too hostile and destructive to non-German Europeans - Eastern more than Western, but nevertheless - too much to hold up as a unifying and representative leader of our people - just the opposite. I don’t know why some cannot look upon him as military leader who went to fantastic heights - a historical figure now, similar as Caesar in success but also similar as Caesar in producing dubious results - results not to be totally admired and certainly not emulated in his external affairs. Whatever the case, our new generations bear little-to-no-responsibility for what he might have done wrong.

Anyway, it is perhaps not taken as the thing to do to talk to you all four together - bright fellows all, you can see why I tried to speak to you at once despite my having had some prickly differences at times.

I have had my fights with other WN, but if you care to note, they have not been gratuitous - where I have been harder and more disrespectful of theoretical and idiosyncatic error it has been where it happened to coincide with Hitler advocacy, either in their person, their particular statement or as he is enmeshed in their general platform. I don’t like Hitler – sorry.

If requested, I can provide an account of whatever negativity other WN may have experienced from me as being animated in me by this aversion to Hitler.

Matt Parrott provided a semi-exception at first to this rule of my being particularly acerbic only to those who advocate Hitler. Prior to his taking any postion on behalf of Hitler, on the VoR chat and seemingly out of the blue, he started “defending people against me”, pooh-poohing me when I balked at his white knight defense of former mudsharks, challenging me to not call his friends by epithets, which I had not done and had no intention of doing. It was then I noticed a sort of self appointed bureaucrat and step-fatherly protector (on the drop of a hat) in him…. he went further to suggest that I could start up my own blog…furthering the bureaucratic line, as there had been no discussion from me prior (or after) that I wanted to, or yet from others that I should pursue my “better horizons elsewhere.” It was curious that Matt suggested this of his bureaucratic authority. He was fingering a pink-slip for me. He acknowledged Jesus as his lord and savior indeed; but added that he gets along with non-Christians when I suggested that might be a cause for his difference with me. He asked me if someone having a small part non-European heritage was a problem to the Euro DNA Nation that I began to float and I assured him that of course it was not.

Still no big deal. VoR was just a website after all and I could, in fact, go somewhere else, for almost any reason but would not want to just because Matt said so, of course. At that point, I just thought that Matt was a bit more obnoxious for me than I realized. I didn’t hate him or anything, just thought that he was perhaps one of these traditional conservative types that I wasn’t going to completely relate to. Worse, that he may have an unhelpful bureaucratic streak which comported some backwards ideas - but at that point it wasn’t very important, just a clue as to relational dynamics of certain parts of WN advocacy.

In any event, when Professor MacDonald at first liked my Euro-DNA essay enough to request to edit-it in preparation for publishing at TOO and then suddenly changed his mind, I began to wonder if there was not something a bit more to his reasoning to putting off its publication than just the fact that a genetic lab was not yet in line to cooperate. (Matt would go on to say, self righteously, that KM did not owe me an account, and true, he does not, but for Matt to assume that I thought that he did owe me an account is a straw man. Matt added that he cannot help it if I am hopelessly simplistic; but it is rather the case that he sees me as that simplistic – one who might exclude him because he is 1/16th Indian, doesn’t see the need for community, family, shared narrative, etc.).

It was a bit frustrating as Mike Conner was dragging his feet on publishing the Euro DNA Nation at VoR and I could not understand why. One of the reasons that he gave me was that some people were disappointed by their DNA results. I didn’t consider that a good reason, because neither I nor any normal person is going to consider a person non-White who has a smidgen of non-White genetics. On the other hand, they might not get to choose to be Swedish if they are Spanish, but should they be able to? Anyway, the other thing that Mike suggested was that I was trying to push “my pet project.”

I really didn’t see it that way. Did I invent DNA and the “skin (DNA) is your nation” idea? No, but I did conjure and find interesting the project of coordinating three important but ostensibly conflicting interests of Europeans on the grounds of DNA - 1) The ancient nations and habitats 2) The freedom to reconstruct communities - in diaspora as well, with a bit more prerogative as to novel blends through European peoples on other continents 3) The overall coordination of our interests for reasons of defense and economy sufficient to projects requiring enormous funding and numbers.

It is not only a constructive idea, but as it is voluntary, its pretty benign.

At any rate, I have tried to include other people in “my pet project”, the best I could find to participate in its execution in order to anticipate and solve any problems from the get go - that’s why I readily included Bowery there, particularly regarding the diaspora community project; and asked others to have a look. As I had said, Kevin seemed to like it and offered to edit and publish it.

I had asked Matt Parrott to have a look at it as well. He sent me an email where I began experiencing another one of his bureaucratic characteristics - a deluge of straw men. But one of these straw men, “that The Euro DNA Nation was ‘wrong at every turn” summed-up the proclivity of his assessment.

Nevertheless, this is what Matt apparently refused to understand - I still did not have malice toward him.

Growing skepticism as to his agenda, the value of his beliefs and motives then, but not malice.

I was mystified though, by the sudden stone wall to the essay, particularly where it seemed to have effect beyond Matt.

I took it to Majority Rights, where Soren helped me edit the piece and published it there for me.

I was still mystified by the resistance from VoR and TOO and trying to poke-out some answers, seeing none of the reasons that I had been given as sufficient. Some of the feedback from the MR commentariat was unpleasant - Nazis trying to say Nazis should be in charge, but whatever; they had been a nuisance at MR since before I came. More pesky and obnoxious than a serious concern.

But at this point, Matt was just Matt - ok, he’s a young-fogey - he might have some cred with some WN insiders but there are counter balances against his Christianity and conservatism. I could ignore him as just a bit obnoxious for my perspective.

My genuine irritation began to flare with Matt when he ran this at Counter Currents:

“And even if a tsunami of White Advocates did topple this regime, what would they do afterwards? Instantiate Linder’s cowboy libertarianism inside with a militant force of ruthless militants standing vigil on the perimeters? Add a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to Freedom From Association and carry on with business as usual? The Fourth Reich? Confederate States of America 2.0? LDS theodemocracy (don’t laugh, it’s more likely than the others I listed…)?

I’m working on answers to those questions, which involves reading, pondering, and occasionally throwing an idea or proposition out here or there for feedback and perspective.

What’s been really startling to me, more than the (entirely expected) resistance to the very taboo ideas I presented…was how many people who were capable of verbalizing the stuff about our impending oblivion/genocide would then blink and…do nothing.

Most people are rather risk-averse, unintelligent, and lacking in curiosity. I get that, and I never got frustrated about that. Most people don’t think. That’s just how it is. What’s crawled under my skin and frustrated me is the inaction and indifference of those who allegedly got it. Of course most people are going to dismiss you when you claim that the sky is falling, but what about those who fully agree with you that the sky is falling and can repeat the assertion as clearly as you…and yet are not motivated to act or seek a solution?

That’s what baffles me. It seems to be the result of some deeper spiritual or psychological problem and getting to the bottom of that mystery, rather than engaging in street activism, will be the focus of my work for the meantime.”

The combination of his arrogance in appointing himself uniquely resourced to do the job right on behalf of all of us, including scholars twice his age and far more informed and wise than him, of his straw man characterizations of other WN efforts, including complete stone walling of the Euro-DNA Nation - note that Matt had already read it and rendered his “critique” at that point, but completely ignored it and went on to say that “no one is motivated to seek a solution”..and that despite the verbal acumen of WN, they are “doing nothing” to stave off our impending genocide - and yes, Kevin, Greg, James and GW, this made me angry. But it was still more for his arrogance than for whatever derailing of the Euro DNA Nation that he may have caused, the stalling of which, for all I knew, may have had nothing to do with his bureaucracy and arrogance. 

Nevertheless, I wanted to forge ahead with the DNA Nation and I did not think then and do not now think that Matt’s reasons for disparaging it were remotely sufficient.

So, I decided to test whether Matt was the key stumbling block in the network of WN who might otherwise go with it and I ran a short post charging that the reason why WN did not yet have the Euro DNA Nation was because of Matt’s obstruction.

The post was taken down - ok, it was pretty mean of me - but coincidentally, that same day Matt ran an article at Counter Currents saying how he’d come around on Hitler and that in effect, nobody should throw Hitler under the bus, he wasn’t just kind to animals, he was one of us, on our side and good for all of us.

http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/04/never-leave-a-fallen-comrade/

“I’ve got all sorts of opinions about this or that decision by Hitler, most of which don’t settle well with neo-Nazis and historical revisionists. I can’t answer for every excess, error, or atrocity of his. I don’t stand behind everything he did. But I do stand firmly in solidarity with him in an overarching metapolitical sense.”

This was a new wrinkle for Matt…

“On my way to my first Counter-Currents retreat, I passed a large sign immediately before the airport exit: the exit to Peoria. I kept going, symbolically committing myself to personally and publicly sticking to a radical position instead of exhaustively attempting to reconcile what I actually believe with “Will it play in Peoria?..

I objected, but the smears pretty much stuck. My principles and motives are, after all, closer to those of a marauding Klansman or a barking Nazi than they are to anything within the “respectable” spectrum of mainstream American politics.”

As I have said, when people start to go Hitler, I become proportionately less polite and less diplomatic about their other foibles, theoretical and otherwise.

At that point, Matt came to MR with his deluges of straw men, it would seem, to try to bury the real issue and make it go away - the real issue being skepticism regarding his bureaucratic personality as a blockade for some motives that are perhaps dubious, along with shoddy, counter productive traditions.

But he asserted his straw man rather, that it was all about my “pet project” (where did I hear that before? - i.e., he was displaying that there was some network resistance made evident with this obviously shared designation of “my” pet project).

I countered that I believed that his ego was perhaps the problem – that it was inappropriate as these matters are too important for that - that he wanted to be the One and his primary reason for not liking the Euro DNA Nation was because he did not author it (better than accusing him of rejecting it for being 1/16th Indian. Let’s hope that did not have much to do with it). Yet absurdly, he suggested that my skepticism of his motives was all the more proof the Euro DNA Nation was unworthy. How “100 percent unreliable” I was (in sum, for rejecting Hitler, I can only imagine).

Posted by No Reply on Fri, 07 Nov 2014 07:20 | #

Continued..

In fact, his initial response to the essay made it evident that he had not read with much concern, certainly not beyond the first paragraph of this short, 1,000 word essay, let alone grant the benefit of the doubt of my understanding matters that cannot be elaborated in such a short piece. No, he would try to say that the community aspect was “unhinged” and against things like organic connection, when in fact, if he’d read beyond the first paragraph, it was explicit to say that connection was not only genetic (which I imagine would include family), but also that connection to the land was imperative (going so far in the original form of the essay to say that it would be Cartesian – i.e., bad – otherwise - a fact that he could have known with a simple question). He added that DNA coordination was naive as to the nature of the Jews as intransigent parasites who will not let go.

In fact I am impervious to none of these concerns and they are connected with each of three major concerns of WN addressed in the Euro DNA Nation.

Nothing but more deluges of straw men from Matt. In fact, I had only “proved how unworthy the Euro DNA Nation was” by besmirching him.

He sent me a black and white computer image of Hitler, the darker shades formed by the words, “the euro dna nation sucks.”

Now, am I to suppose that this guy is not motivated but rather objective in his assessment?

Looking back, as I have healed over a life-time and the dust has settled on my past, I can see many cringe-worthy acts on my part. Oh, I can’t believe I said that, did that….

It can happen as we are fairly young, in stressful circumstances, trying to maintain our potential to correct the disastrous situation we have been thrown into, as we might wish, and yet finally, enmeshed in some nasty and shallow feedback from others whom we might somehow need at the time, might inappropriately borrow some of their offhand remarks - so we move their affected stuff along, disparaging others without much thought, which is not really native to our deepest interests.

Matt speaks thus with forked tongue, sends his smoke signals, beats his war drum, convenes in pow wows against others “pet projects”, rants in drunken visions, chants and dances on behalf of his tribe…

Oh can’t I have some fun? Was the scandal of revealing his 1/16th Amerindian ancestry just too juicy to keep secret or was it too tedious a non-issue and too conceited a secret to be bothered with? And was what he was trying to bury too important to us all for me to not call him to account as to why it was being obstructed?

What I am saying to Matt is that I believe that on balance he was mistaken in his assessment, but I have made plenty of embarrassing mistakes myself that I can look back upon. Its not that big of a deal. He is articulate enough so that he might explain it as the mistake that it was if anyone even cares for an account, hardly in need of forgiveness and easily forgotten, which I believe it will be demonstrated to be.

This has mutated into a Matt Parrott thing again which may only feed his paranoia – “I am chasing him all over the internet” when in fact I do not give him a second thought for months on end. It has really been my concern to explain my combativeness with other WN at times – viz. that it almost invariably coincides with difference from Hitler advocacy and aplogetics. E.g, if The Political Cesspool so simplistically implies that Hitler was on the right side by saying that America was on the wrong side, I will take occasion to be critical of some of the Political Cesspool’s shortcomings. I singled-out Matt here because he is the one case where, at least to begin, I was not up and directing acerbic venom at someone otherwise unprovoked but for coincidence of that reason.

Regards,

DanielS

Posted by Huh? on Fri, 07 Nov 2014 12:27 | #

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5DqTJz9zFk

Saint George & The White Whore is 1 hour 14 minutes and 51 seconds, all about Mexican imposition on White America (well done, very good) until the last moment - 114:28 in fact, Lana Lokteff adds (and where the hell did this B.S. come from?) - “Hitler tried to take back lands in Poland that were annexed by the Soviet Union and what happened? The world descended upon innocent Germans with bombs.”

Is that an accurate depiction of the historical sequence, Lana?

Posted by voznich on Sat, 08 Nov 2014 11:27 | #

Why must WNs argue among themselves at all? Must we resolve all the finer points of disagreement? I don’t think nationalism needs to be a complete philosophical paradigm in order to make real world progress.

Whites are being exploited in their own countries by blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, Asians, and Jews. I think constantly calling attention to these outrages in order to awaken our people is enough. The issue is to get moving with things, as Jimmy Marr does, though maybe not in the most popular way, and “generation identitaire” with its great videos.

The central task is to make ordinary whites understand that we are exploited. Instilling white pride, a concern for heritage and the future, and so on, will come later.

We need to have a nationalist ideology in place and making progress before we have a fully evolved philosophy. That is a point we can learn from the fascists and Nazis, who were more concerned with getting power than with being the smartest people in the room.

Posted by AlterOfPragmatism on Sat, 08 Nov 2014 12:53 | #

Personally, I could agree with most all of what you said here until the gratuitous tip of the hat to fascists and Nazis for what could have, in fact has been said just the same, e.g., by pragmatist philosophy.

That tripped the alarm, however, causing the saying on behalf of GW, that MR does not sacrifice on the alter of mere pragmatism.

Posted by G.JohnsonNationalism on Sun, 09 Nov 2014 13:54 | #

Greg Johnson on “The New Right, Ethnonationalism & White/Muslim Alliances”

http://nonalignedmedia.com/2014/11/new-right-ethnonationalism-whitemuslim-alliances/

Posted by Matt Parrott on Sun, 09 Nov 2014 15:56 | #

I AM TOTALLY NOT OBSESSIVELY FIXATED ON MATT PARROTT AT ALL.

SERIOUSLY, GUYS. I CAN STOP THINKING AND TYPING ABOUT MATT PARROTT AT ANY TIME. I JUST HAPPEN TO BE RAMBLING INCOHERENTLY AGAINST MATT PARROTT IN AN OFF-TOPIC COMMENT BECAUSE MATT PARROTT DISAGREED WITH ME ON THE INTERNET A FEW YEARS AGO AND HE CONTROLS THE SPICE AND IS THE CHIEF ELDER OF ANTI-ZION AND MATT PARROTT ABSOLUTELY MUST RETRACT AND REVISE HIS DISMISSIVE OPINION OF MY ESSAY I WROTE A FEW YEARS AGO OR I WILL NOT STOP STANDING HERE AND PLAYING THIS JUKEBOX ON MATT PARROTT’S FRONT LAWN.

Posted by DanielS on Sun, 09 Nov 2014 16:59 | #

Are you really so arrogant as to think that I, or anyone for that matter, would be obsessed about you?

Typical straw men of you Matt.

You were an exception to a rule that I was illustrating. You were someone who irritated me enough without Hitler (at first) and no, it wasn’t about my essay, it was about your obnoxious essay.

..the one where you said:

“And even if a tsunami of White Advocates did topple this regime, what would they do afterwards? Instantiate Linder’s cowboy libertarianism inside with a militant force of ruthless militants standing vigil on the perimeters? Add a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to Freedom From Association and carry on with business as usual? The Fourth Reich? Confederate States of America 2.0? LDS theodemocracy (don’t laugh, it’s more likely than the others I listed…)?

I’m working on answers to those questions, which involves reading, pondering, and occasionally throwing an idea or proposition out here or there for feedback and perspective.

What’s been really startling to me, more than the (entirely expected) resistance to the very taboo ideas I presented…was how many people who were capable of verbalizing the stuff about our impending oblivion/genocide would then blink and…do nothing”

Posted by Matt Parrott on November 09, 2014, 10:56 AM | #

“I AM TOTALLY NOT OBSESSIVELY FIXATED ON MATT PARROTT AT ALL.”

That’s right, I am not.

“SERIOUSLY, GUYS. I CAN STOP THINKING AND TYPING ABOUT MATT PARROTT AT ANY TIME. I AM TOTALLY NOT OBSESSIVELY FIXATED ON MATT PARROTT AT ALL.”

Do you see the straw man structure to this? He is going to put words in my mouth

“I JUST HAPPEN TO BE RAMBLING INCOHERENTLY”

No incoherence. It follows an exact sequence: 1) no problem, Matt’s just another guy at VoR; he’s talented and that’s good. 2) then, some bureaucratic defensiveness out of the blue, of people who I was not antagonizing. Including White knighting that I found obnoxious but something I could ignore; nevertheless, its out of the blueness is a bit mystifying 3) He reads DNA nation. I am a bit mystified as to his response (which is very different from KM and others, who seem to think it is good), but figure its just Matt. 4) AND THIS WAS THE ACTIVATING CIRCUMSTANCE: that essay at counter currents where he said he was going to solve all the problems and could not understand why nobody else was doing anything. That is what made me mad. 5) I then wonder if Matt’s bureaucratic personality is having undue influence and obstruction to experiment with a potentially good idea..and test it by making a post critical of him 6) Matt comes with more straw men, says I am butt hurt because he didn’t like essay..and a bunch of other motives he attributes to me…

That is the coherent sequence.

“AGAINST MATT PARROTT IN AN OFF-TOPIC COMMENT”

The topic was no reply. And an explanation as to where I take exception to those who present themselves as WN. Perfectly relevant. You were the only one who irritated me before having the Hitler element. But Ironically, you did adopt that ..

“BECAUSE MATT PARROTT DISAGREED WITH ME ON THE INTERNET”

No, I told you why and you keep trying to say that my motives are something else. Its called a srtaw man.

“A FEW YEARS AGO AND HE CONTROLS THE SPICE AND IS THE CHIEF ELDER OF ANTI-ZION AND MATT PARROTT ABSOLUTELY MUST RETRACT AND REVISE”

Where did I say that? That is not some kind of wacky straw man that you are trying to attribute to me?

Matt, you only make my point. You don’t argue in good faith.

“HIS DISMISSIVE OPINION OF MY ESSAY I WROTE A FEW YEARS AGO”

I told you the truth that that was not the reason I was provoked, but your obnoxious essays at counter currents around the same time which showed in itself and in your response an obnoxious bureaucracy

“OR I WILL NOT STOP STANDING HERE AND PLAYING THIS JUKEBOX ON MATT PARROTT’S FRONT LAWN.”

This is not your front lawn and it is not the property of your straw man factory.

Posted by jrackell on Tue, 11 Nov 2014 07:26 | #

O/T.  With the indulgence of the moderator, this is staggering in its implications:

“The government of UK just issued a renminbi bond, becoming the first foreign government to issue debt in renminbi.” [1]

How does the UK expect to come up with the hard currency to pay off these bonds? 

The UK will become China’s whorehouse. 

England expects every woman to do her duty…

[1] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-10/petrodollar-panic-china-signs-currency-swap-deal-qatar-canada

 

 

 

Posted by voznich on Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:24 | #

Interesting that no discussion is popping up on this site of the US elections. People know that we did have an election that was rather significant, right? Never underestimate the Republicans, but this might have killed off the amnesty, unless Obama goes for his unilateral action, which could trigger major protests. It would surely poison his final two years.

What a jerk.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on Wed, 12 Nov 2014 18:24 | #

A confessor’s confession:

Matt Parrott has made an indelible impression on my activism style.