Posted by Old Raven on Mon, 11 May 2009 20:43 | #

Yet, at the end of the day, you are supposed to always hand the simple-minded man an index card with the main points underlined. Except we never seem to get around to doing that around here.

Right on the money HC.  But just who should this task fall to?  As a daily reader, seldom commenter, and not-yet-poster, I don’t feel it’s my position to allocate tasks.  Even so, I have been working on a “Taxonomy” of “Snappy Comebacks”.  When that series of posts first began, someone suggested this.  If such a taxonomy, with examples, comes to be, where will it “live” on the MR site?  How do I present my ideas OUTSIDE of the usual comments?  Is there a “hermetic circle” where that type of document could be passed around and massaged until it’s “fit for print” as a MR document?

Hard to disagree with your point that most of the collective wisdom produced here is not worth much “on the ground” until it is distilled into “Action Points” which can then be parcelled out individuals or groups who can make use of them.

Can GW suggest a concrete “Next Step” towards using the resources of MR to “train for virality”?

Thanks for the germane post!

Posted by GR on Tue, 12 May 2009 00:29 | #

I come to bring not bullet points but bullets.

Well, so far you’ve given us a pig drawing, a lame riddle, some other forgettable shit, and that YouTube video where you’re reading to some Brits and look really nervous. So much for elitism. I think you just take yourself too seriously —-  the guru-type. I’ve seen the elitist strain in CaptainChaos too, but he at least has things to say; nothing profound, but always sharp and often memorable in his asshole-aphoristic style.

Believe it or not I don’t come here primarily to “snipe”, but to let GW’s ideas and extraordinarily fine English wash over me like a cool shower. GW builds me spiritually. He reminds me of what the English language used to be, but applied to what concerns us: for me a ne plus ultra in litteratura. Snappy comebacks? No need: merely study everything the guy’s ever written on the net. Out of it one could build a perfectly serviceable “narrative” to meet most occasions, and indeed, a very solid one on which to construct the philosopher’s stone of methodology you all think you need to chase at this point. He has his pet poetic nebulosities—- Dasein popping out of nowhere, with no real place for him in the ideological scheme, but it gives a bit of gravitas, a faux-depth to the thing and there are worse (pigs, riddles, Aryans on the moon, etc.) GW brings me “something I can give to the man next to me” ..... not that he ever wants it, so I store it up for myself.

I hope other people with things to say—I ain’t one (IQ-120!)—and namely GW, respond more thoughtfully to Cracker’s underprivileged post.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 12 May 2009 00:32 | #

HC,

GW divides human sentience into three parts: sensation, emotion and intellect.  It is the intellect, that which associates representations (memes) of the Real, from which we derive our vulnerability to racial disintegration.  What we can cogitate via the intellect is very simply not what is Real, it is a representation of it, therefore we cannot have a more true experience of our racial being by thinking about it than by sensing and feeling it.  Heidegger describes Dasein as being that is not object, defined by its consciousness, but aware of its transience in time.  It is more than mere scientific objective description (consciousness) because it is also sentient, it senses value, or not, in its continued being in time.  Its being is an ‘issue’ for it in that it can dissect the worthiness of its being, with a thrust towards affirmation or negation of said, all the while aware that but for its being it could not contemplate.

So, The Question, How do we get our people to become of aware of their being in time, now precariously transitory, in a way that affirms their being, that projects their being foward with affirming momentum?

Posted by Hear Hear on Tue, 12 May 2009 00:37 | #

Have to say for all the occasional light that Soren brings there’s a fair bit of pseudy grandstanding. Funny little dude.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 12 May 2009 01:05 | #

GR, you seem to want nothing more than parasitic titillation from the peaks of cultural achievement of European Man, without the sacrifices that may be asked from you to secure his continued existence, which you would gladly do as only your duty if you loved him, and not merely what he does for you; get you off.  But, and you must know this, if he ceases to be, the music and the words will stop.  That is very Jewish, which begs the question.

Posted by GR on Tue, 12 May 2009 01:28 | #

That is very Jewish, which begs the question.

A question posed by you and Scrooby, approximately. An easy groupthink way to deflect internal criticism. I think most are by now tired of the aimless Jew-finding, however.

without the sacrifices that may be asked from you to secure his continued existence,

Point to where I can really sacrifice myself, and I’ll stand with you. Until then you’re making it up. To reach back into my very limited store of Latin apothegms, impossibilium nulla obligatio est—- with no field or opportunity for any kind of sacrifice, it is impossible to live up to the heroical rhetoric you employ; so another question is begged: Why do you rely on it?

But, and you must know this, if he ceases to be, the music and the words will stop.

a- I don’t believe he, i.e. any European hominid, will ever cease to be, nor even dwindle to numbers where he would appear as an exception (you share this delusion with Silver);
b- I believe he, i.e. the exponent who gave us the words and the music, ceased to be long ago—the Jew killed him, the paradigm passed. So in any future state of affairs, more desperate than this one, we’d be doing precisely what we are now: feeding on text, on cultural artefacts which buoy us inside. Here again the rhetoric is impossible. No “sacrifice”; no “ceasing to be”; only just what we have, indefinitely worse.

parasitic titillation

That’s one way of looking at it. :/

Posted by Old Raven on Tue, 12 May 2009 01:28 | #

Soren, was your gratuitously snide comment above referring to my comment, or to Happy Cracker’s post?

Posted by q on Tue, 12 May 2009 01:41 | #

Ironically, our biggest, most corrosive enemies happen to be leftist-whites. Whites such as those in the DNC, RNC, NOW, GLADD, ACLU, Banai Brith (if you consider Jews white) etc. And, oh yeah… little anti-Christ punk atheists such as Al Ross too.

There, use that as talking points!

And btw, Soren is a positive force in our cause.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 12 May 2009 02:15 | #

Why do you rely on it?

To inspire the feeling of necessary sacrifice.  It is however no lie, it is necessary.

No “sacrifice”; no “ceasing to be”; only just what we have, indefinitely worse.

If the Jew succeeds in taking from us our solar masculinity, the source of our greatness, we will have ceased to be great, we will no longer be ourselves.  We can only become our better selves again through struggle.  The struggle has not yet really begun, be patient, and don’t give in to defeatism, which is what the Jew wants of you.  Screw the Jew.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 12 May 2009 02:17 | #

“I think most are by now tired of the aimless Jew-finding, however.”  (—GR aka GT)

Not as tired as they are of your brainless sniping, GT.  Gone off your mood elevators?  Ask your doctor for Wellbutrin or Lexapro, they’re way more popular nowadays than Prozac.

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 12 May 2009 03:17 | #

GR: “Point to where I can really sacrifice myself, and I’ll stand with you.”

Well, you could help with EAU:s agricultural projects and help their organization in similar practical projects. But you will not do it. Fingernails might become dirty and you float so high in overconfidence that they are of course in every way beneath you. Then there is of course the sacrifice where one jumps from high bulding without a parachute.

http://www.europeanamericansunited.org/

P.s. My standing (and jumping) is done here in Finland.

Posted by weston on Tue, 12 May 2009 03:31 | #

Well, you could help with EAU:s agricultural projects and help their organization in similar practical projects.

Outstanding suggestion, Finn.  EAU are the fine folks behind the outstanding Western Voices World News. 

http://www.wvwnews.net/index.php

All Euro-Americans should consider supporting EAU.

Posted by GR on Tue, 12 May 2009 04:51 | #

Well, you could help with EAU:s agricultural projects and help their organization in similar practical projects.

All I see is some dude I don’t know and never will know blogging about his garden. It isn’t “EAU”, it’s one guy—one guy, blogging about his garden. If this is the face of white revolution, permit me to laugh in it; sooner contemplate the mysteries of Dasein than have faith in web façades.

Fingernails might become dirty and you float so high in overconfidence that they are of course in every way beneath you.

Oh you got me. I’m so elitist.

Now, I like gardening. I like the idea of self-sustenance. I admire any of us who is living it out. What I do not like is when someone sets himself up as an organization because he figured out some classy HTML, and I especially do not like that white nationalists are gullible enough to “have hope in” such egotistical façades. Is Euro-Americans uniting a bad idea? No. Reification of that idea into an organization-front for a vagrant ego is bad. Is tending your garden in an effort to opt out of ZOG a bad idea? No. Reifying that idea as a “project”—in which no one else is really expected, or offered a place in, to participate—is bad. See what I mean, here? Kievsky did the same shit at VNN years ago—actually asked people to email him about participating in his agricultural endeavor. What is Kievsky doing now? Driving his daughter to & from school. I don’t fault him for it; that’s life. The problem is the urge to “reify”, or abstract as a “project” or an “organization”, a perfectly valid idea for the personal sphere. And of course the reason white nationalists do this is l’idée fixe communautariste: nothing is valid if it is not viewed under the aspect of “the group”, which doesn’t exist in the real state of affairs confronted daily by the purported (almost bullied, threatened) members of that group. Going it alone? Tantamount treachery; you’ll be hung with the rest of them.

Let me just say this again. I told Asphodel over accidentaldissent the same thing, after he promoted this EAU bullshit: IT’S ONE DUDE BLOGGING ABOUT HIS GARDEN PRETENDING TO BE AN ORGANIZATION.

This guy has his garden, and a website that makes you think he’s an organization, an action group what’s gonna change da world;
The Jews have ................. everything else.

GARDENING GOOD (the individual exists and must find a way to live equably in the kwa).
REIFICATION BAD (the individual trespasses beyond the sphere of his being, abstracting his being into a group, masking his powerlessness as ego with HTML make-believe and communitarian rhetoric, etc.)

Yea, so. Honest elections and death to the Fed.

Posted by BGD on Tue, 12 May 2009 13:02 | #

One thing that helps here is the general education regarding the current situation. From there perhaps this site helps us to make other people aware of options, arguments and ideas outside of where they are currently, whether on web forums or face to face.

That helps but it only in small, localised part.

The taboos that exist are firmly in place and sadly it is not a game of ‘it’ where we touch somebody and deliver a meme that swims through the body of the population and is transmitted widely.

As that’s not the case it means reaching large numbers of people in a short time frame and that is a hard ask. Hopefully some momentum might build (i.e. if the BNP win seats in the European elections maybe, just maybe it will be more difficult to wholly keep them from the airwaves). Whether the BNP is up to the job though takes us into another ‘what it’ situation..

In the reaching people category how about a page for MR visitors to list various online discussions on relevant topics? People can look it over, click and make their POV known and move on..

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 12 May 2009 17:37 | #

GR, EAU has many members and they can be called group network.

Nice to see how your thinking collapses with a few chosen words.

Posted by tc on Tue, 12 May 2009 19:53 | #

I like this site, it is useful, interesting, challenging, but I’ve long ago lined up behind Linder’s: No jews - Just right. It is simple and effective.

Gardening is also useful, as long as you are aware of the fact, that your harvest can be picked by anyone, your cellars can be swept clean, and you yourself declared a hoarder. Been done.

As to where do we go from here?

To war.

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 12 May 2009 21:18 | #

It has to be mentioned that I don’t support things like these and some others found on EAU news site. Civil war there might be, but the two quotes make it sound like it is desirable and the only choice:

http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=7112

“*ETHNIC CIVIL WAR: Only the outbreak of such a war will resolve the problems created by the current colonization, Africanization, and Islamization of Europe…Only with their backs to the wall is a people spurred to come up with solutions that in other times would be unthinkable. [130]

*REVOLUTION: The violent reversal of a political situation that follows a profound crisis and is the work of an “active minority”…A true revolution is a metamorphosis, that is, a radical reversal of all values. The sole revolutionary of the modern era is Nietzsche…and not Marx, who sought simply another form of bourgeois society…We have long passed the point of no return, where it is possible to arrest the prevailing decay with moderate political reforms. [210-11]

*ARISTOCRACY: A true aristocracy embodies its people’s essence, which it serves with courage, disinterest, modesty, taste, simplicity, and stature…To recreate a new aristocracy is the eternal task of every rrevolutionary project…The creation of such an aristocracy is possible only through war, which is the most merciless of selective forces. [60-61]”

Posted by Red Mercury on Tue, 12 May 2009 22:35 | #

Those two quotes are from Guillaume Faye. They aren’t particularly objectionable. The discussion on ethnic civil war should be seen in light of the ‘wars of liberation’ waged by Africans and Asians on White colonials throughout the 20th C. In order for Europeans and European-descended Whites to free ourselves from colonial domination, it will become necessary to wage similar wars of liberation today. Again, I don’t think this is a radical idea. Though, it’s understandable if some Whites lack the stomach for such a fight.

Posted by GR on Tue, 12 May 2009 23:05 | #

GR, EAU has many members and they can be called group network.

What does “many” mean, and can you prove it? I won’t ask for names; I will take on good faith, if it’s all you have, a claim to acquaintance with these many members.

What has collapsed is the illusion that EAU, and all similar, are real organizations with “many” members—so you fall back on the internet term “network”. EAU is then at best an obscure social networking site. And if possessing “many members” is your criterion for success (or offering the possibility of “sacrifice”, and we are sure gardening is sacrifice?), why isn’t Stormfront politically successful?

You’re a sharp fellow but you have too much faith in nationalist facades. You must learn to distinguish between what is real (AIPAC) and what is play, unreal (EAU).

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 01:13 | #

OK, now I will answer, to the best of my ability, the charges levelled by HC that were left unmet by my Reply post, and tomorrow morning I’ll answer the other commenters here, too.

First, HC, I’ve endeavoured to explain in my Reply why I am pessimistic about the starting point of very nearly all nationalist thought in the arena today.  I say very nearly because JWH’s championing of Salterism was a different animal.  EGI theory is as near as anyone has come to First Cause.  But it is also one of those reducing agents that critics of empiricism love to mock.  And they have a point, because EGI simply does not travel.  To give of its political potential it has to inform some other body of nationalist thought, for which JWH settled upon Yockey.  How this marriage has worked out none of us is entitled to know.  So the EGI question is moot and looks likely to remain that way.  It’s a loss.

JWH took a pretty dim view of “the movement”.  As I recall, it was “a joke” ... the American scene was populated by groups who, for one reason or another, were pursuing failing strategies.  I think JWH held the view that far too many of the men in control of those groups were content just for the donations to flow.  They were cynical about the real prospect for action and change, and he was cynical about them.

I don’t know if JWH was wholly right about that.  But it is impossible to measure the nationalist effort in America against the goal of salvation for the most creative, industrious and beautiful race on this planet without experiencing a sharp emotional dissonance.  There absolutely has to be a better way.  True to my “type”, as GR says, I’ve gone back to raw philosophy ... to the only point where we can start over.  For the first time in my intellectual life and almost five years after the blog launched, I’m standing on the first square of the game.

Now, this little knowledge-hobby, which will certainly also involve our friend Dasein, needs to be kept in perspective.  It is not the sole focus of my blogging, and it is certainly not the sole function of this blog.  MR remains a sounding board for all manner of ideas and analysis.  For many, it is too eclectic in that respect.  But I’d rather it errs on the side of eclecticism than narrowness.

Whatever I do here, I am only one writer.  Everybody who contributes, including those like David Hamilton and yourself who remain off the official slate, is free to make of the medium what he will.  It belongs equally to us all, and to all the many more who contribute so much in the debates.  We all take new thinking and new ideas away with us, and it is an extraordinary privilege to be involved in that.  Personally, I can’t think of a better way to use the particular talents I’ve been given - not at this point in the European story.

So don’t undervalue yourself or your contributions to this community.  No one else does.  Be patient with our infirmities.  If we don’t live up to your expectations, give us time to do so.  Above all, keep speaking your truth.  You are extremely intelligent, and that is the obligation you owe our people.

Posted by menueq on Wed, 13 May 2009 09:30 | #

Fred, I think GR is the latest incarnation of Monitor-Gorbudoc. Christianity was merely a wedge for M-G, the real motive was to instil defeatism and division. It’s interesting that like Monitor he’s clearly been a reader/participant of WN sites like VNN for many years but does not use a handle that would identify himself to any veteran online WN.

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 13 May 2009 10:09 | #

I think The Monitard is legit, he’s just a bit a of slippery little pussy who feels guilty about being a RACIST because that makes baby Jebus cry.  LOL!  Plus, I suspect he believes a WN revolution would compromise his position in what GT (or whatever sock-puppet he’s using this week) calls the “judeoeconomy” which makes The Moniturd a “judaic piece of shit” in GT’s opinion. 

His regular digs is here:

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/index.php

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 13 May 2009 10:31 | #

At Original Dissent The Monitwerp describes himself as a “gentleman theologian.”  What a prissy little dipstick.

All those who do not give their daughters over to Sambo will not enter Heaven.  LOL!

Posted by danielj on Wed, 13 May 2009 10:49 | #

Despite the fact that it might be a bit negative, this: You’re a sharp fellow but you have too much faith in nationalist facades. You must learn to distinguish between what is real (AIPAC) and what is play, unreal (EAU). is certainly true.

Posted by danielj on Wed, 13 May 2009 11:05 | #

I mean for all of us, not necessarily that it is primarily a fault of GW as the interlocutor was implying.

We got nothing on AIPAC.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 12:41 | #

Old Raven,

I’d certainly be interested in seeing your “Taxonomy”.  MR is open to all offers from friends.  Just contact me through the button under the header.

The suggestion was made on one of the Snappy threads that the eight posts plus any more than materialise should be pulled together on a single page.  At the moment they are gathered, along with much else, under the Activism category which can be accessed under Practic, top left.  I would like to see whether your idea could incorporate the Snappies or would be additional to them, and the whole be situated in the Practic list under its own heading.

There is also The Little Lexicon which could be cleaned up and expanded, and given a home there:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_little_lexicon_revisited/

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 13:14 | #

Soren,

You only vaguely understand GW’s writing? No shame in that. It gets a bit easier after two or three years.

“If we existed, power would not reside with the beast.  That’s my point.  And that’s the big money point about (non-palingenetic) nationalism.  See?”

Maybe the mission of MR is to bring bullet points to the sheeple.

To the nationalist aristocracy, more like.  (I know you meant that!)

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 13:52 | #

GR,

It would be interesting sometime to have some clarification on the Monitor-Gorbudoc issue and even more on your ultimate interest in these matters we discuss.

I hope other people with things to say, and namely GW, respond more thoughtfully to Cracker’s underprivileged post

I’m conscious of that need.  Means and purposes, though, is a much larger subject that that one post.  It requires thought, and thought requires time.

Posted by GR on Wed, 13 May 2009 15:52 | #

Fred, I think GR is the latest incarnation of Monitor-Gorbudoc. Christianity was merely a wedge for M-G, the real motive was to instil defeatism and division.

Gorboduc’s a cleverer writer than me. Monitor I don’t even know. I have nothing to do with Christianity. Other handles? Of course.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 16:04 | #

CC.

GW divides human sentience into three parts: sensation, emotion and intellect.  It is the intellect, that which associates representations (memes) of the Real, from which we derive our vulnerability to racial disintegration.  What we can cogitate via the intellect is very simply not what is Real, it is a representation of it, therefore we cannot have a more true experience of our racial being by thinking about it than by sensing and feeling it.

I am staggered that you have put that together, and so economically.  I’ve obviously grown too resigned to what I say coming out all obscure.  You, at least, have had the patience to push on past that.  Thank you.

I’ll add something to it, though, because you are falling away a bit in the second half of that comment, and perhaps relying too much on representation .

From what I can see, there is a structural weakness in associative mentation, which is its fluidity or instability.  It is very easy for external influences to re-pattern associations.  This is how white ethnic nepotism, for example, transmogrifies into “white privilege”, racism, xenophobia, etc.  It need not be done every time by design.  A change-agent need only be designed once and released into the stream of unconscious “life”, like a computer virus on the net.  Accidentally occurring agents retain all their re-formative power.

Dawkins came close to this idea with his replicating “memes”.

This weakness needs a name, and mine is “suggestibility”.  It is central to the sad reality of the sovereignty we ascribe to ourselves as individuals.  And what is true at individual level becomes true also in the aggregate.

Heidegger describes Dasein as being that is not object, defined by its consciousness, but aware of its transience in time.  It is more than mere scientific objective description (consciousness) because it is also sentient, it senses value, or not, in its continued being in time.  Its being is an ‘issue’ for it in that it can dissect the worthiness of its being, with a thrust towards affirmation or negation of said, all the while aware that but for its being it could not contemplate.

That is a long way ahead of where I am right now.  On the surface, it would appear to be a problematic reading - not yours, necessarily, but MH’s.  I’m attempting to look at “being” from a more evolutionary perspective.  As I indicated on the other post, in the present I see a unity of All, no duality, no inner and outer, something separate from the experience of time, in fact, confronting time as a barrier to be crossed.  Hence replication, hence evolution, hence dualism, hence the collective and the personal.  Being is unity and being is dual - that is a condition placed upon it by universal law, or the limit of the possible.

Possibly.

So, The Question, How do we get our people to become of aware of their being in time, now precariously transitory, in a way that affirms their being, that projects their being foward with affirming momentum?

Now?  Honestly?  I don’t know.  That is still ahead.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 13 May 2009 16:13 | #

BGD,

it is not a game of ‘it’ where we touch somebody and deliver a meme that swims through the body of the population and is transmitted widely.

That is how it works, though.  It’s just not the case for us.

Hopefully some momentum might build

It’s pretty evident from Simon Darby’s increasing media load and from Martin Wingfield’s exhortations to Party members not to have to high an expectation that some momentum is indeed building.  Where it will take us we shall just have to see.  We are passengers who hope to be beneficiaries.

how about a page for MR visitors to list various online discussions on relevant topics

It’s very rare that discussions survie onto the second page, so the normal process of checking the the top half-a-dozen or so posts and latest comments should suffice.  Hope so, anyway.

Posted by AD on Wed, 13 May 2009 18:35 | #

a- I don’t believe he, i.e. any European hominid, will ever cease to be, nor even dwindle to numbers where he would appear as an exception (you share this delusion with Silver);

It’s not a delusion, it’s biological fact.  A surprising number of people have inordinate difficulty understanding this most fundamental point (in your case apparently because it would upset your repose).  (A point so fundamental, incidentally, that’s it the driving force behind everything I say about race; its eventual effects so disastrous—think India, not Brazil—I’ve been able to think of little else since realizing it, despite the inconveniences an effective reaction to it would create for me).  At some point the founding populations (for want of a better term) will be so reduced due to immigration and mixing that no easy political solution will be possible (think present USA). After that tipping point is reached, it’ll be a slow decline, perhaps even many thousands of years long, but since escape is essentially impossible, eventual genetic submergence and extinction is assured.

Posted by a. clay-more on Wed, 13 May 2009 18:54 | #

Nonsense. Don’t be such a defeatist. Use your imagination. Extinction is not inevitable. There are any number of possible scenarios that could impact our demographic future, including migration, global war, civil war, pandemics, forced/voluntary population transfer, bio-engineering. In Brazil, even after 500+ years of living in a multiracial society, Whites still comprise 50-60% of the population there.

Posted by GR on Thu, 14 May 2009 01:29 | #

(in your case apparently because it would upset your repose).

You’re just being sloppy.

Use your imagination. Extinction is not inevitable.

They need to believe it is; it gives them a feeling of dire urgency, which is supposed to be politically motivating. If Europids won’t really go completely extinct (the absolutist error of the escalation scenario), then there’s no cause for the pretense of urgency and “activism”, which kills their ego-ideal. Above, Silver twists it around, very cheaply, by suggesting I deny total extinction to preserve a “respose”—as though I haven’t given proof enough of a thoroughgoing nihilism. It couldn’t be that his logic is faulty, that all WN rhetoric suffers from these fundamental blindspots. WNs rely on specters of inevitability to stall internal criticism of their belief system. They need to believe Europids will become extinct, even at the ludicrous cost of extending their concern over “perhaps even many thousands of years”. And that, in itself, will probably happen .... but so what? is it normal to obsess over what people will be doing “many thousands of years” from now? isn’t that a little “nutz”?

—think India, not Brazil—

What am I supposed to think about India? that the beautiful Aryan god-men lost their precious biological distinctiveness in the swirling racial chaos of the Asian subcontinent? Sorry, didn’t go down like that. But it’s funny how these huge countries—India, Brazil—exist in the WN mind only as exemplars of its fears. The Vedic Indians had their prophecies of decline too:

??????? ???? ??? ????? ???????? ? ????
    ????? ????? ???????? ???????? ????????????

Whatever’s coming, Silly, you can’t stop or change it in the least detail. Perhaps it’s up to you to explore your own subjective blindness rather than make facile ascriptions to me.

“There is no reason for amazement: surely one always knew that cultures decay, and life’s end is death.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 14 May 2009 01:57 | #

GR is a troll and a nullity.  I would say he should not be encouraged to hang around here.  He’s scum.

Posted by BATTAILE ('BATTLE') on Thu, 14 May 2009 03:36 | #

GR wrote:

  (in your case apparently because it would upset your repose).

  You’re just being sloppy.

  Use your imagination. Extinction is not inevitable.

  They need to believe it is; it gives them a feeling of dire urgency, which is supposed to be politically motivating. If Europids won’t really go completely extinct (the absolutist error of the escalation scenario), then there’s no cause for the pretense of urgency and “activism”, which kills their ego-ideal. Above, Silver twists it around, very cheaply, by suggesting I deny total extinction to preserve a “respose”—as though I haven’t given proof enough of a thoroughgoing nihilism. It couldn’t be that his logic is faulty, that all WN rhetoric suffers from these fundamental blindspots. WNs rely on specters of inevitability to stall internal criticism of their belief system. They need to believe Europids will become extinct, even at the ludicrous cost of extending their concern over “perhaps even many thousands of years”. And that, in itself, will probably happen .... but so what? is it normal to obsess over what people will be doing “many thousands of years” from now? isn’t that a little “nutz”?

  —think India, not Brazil—

  What am I supposed to think about India? that the beautiful Aryan god-men lost their precious biological distinctiveness in the swirling racial chaos of the Asian subcontinent? Sorry, didn’t go down like that. But it’s funny how these huge countries—India, Brazil—exist in the WN mind only as exemplars of its fears. The Vedic Indians had their prophecies of decline too:

  ??????? ???? ??? ????? ???????? ? ????
  ????? ????? ???????? ???????? ????????????

No everyone can read Sanskrit. Please Translate :

??????? ???? ??? ????? ???????? ? ????
  ????? ????? ???????? ???????? ????????????

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 14 May 2009 04:34 | #

GR is a piece of excrement.  I wonder if he isn’t the “Exiled” of the following comments:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/warren_the_coming_collapse_of_the_middle_class/#c72757

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/warren_the_coming_collapse_of_the_middle_class/#c72798

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/warren_the_coming_collapse_of_the_middle_class/#c72850

(Of course with certain creeps changing their pen names all the time you can’t keep track of which piece of excrement is which — which is why they do it.)

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 14 May 2009 09:00 | #

GR,

The word “extinct” is disingenuous.  The definition of genocide in the 1948/51 Act does not specify extinction.  Being overwhelmed by the fecundity and endlessness of the Third World because our rulers wish it so is enough.

You set the bar too high.  If your case against WN can survive the lowering of the bar to a level we all find realistic, then by all means make it.

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 15 May 2009 17:48 | #

We must begin with First Principles. 

1.  Life’s only purpose is the transmission of itself through time.

2.  Man is of Nature, and his Nature is tribal.

3.  It is part of our Nature to, when given to believe what is life giving, understand that not only is their a natural aristocracy amongst men, but also amongst peoples.

4.  The ineffable majesty of the achievements of European Man could not have been wrought but for is unique genetic endowments.  Western Civilization is only, ever, the extended phenotype of him.

5.  If his blood is destroyed so too will be his civilization.

6.  For him to live, he must have the necessary conditions to sustain his collective life, and to project it into the future, in perpetuity.

7.  He must have the indispensable guarantor of his continued life: territory; a literally life affirming philosophy that sanctions his thoughts and actions as liberalism in all its incarnations does now; elites that are of his own people that occupy the positions of power that determine his collective life; to cease to be self-estranged to his true interests - which is to forever be.

8.  European Man enjoys a life that is his own, exclusive and inviolate.  His civilization, his homelands, his people are his own, exist in and for their own right, and not merely as fodder to serve the ethnic interests of others.

9.  All peoples have ethnic (genetic) interests, and all of what they do, vis a vis us and them, comes down to that in the end.

10.  Those of the Third World that have been brought amongst us must be repatriated.  It is a necessary condition for the continued life of our people.  If was Power that brought them here, it will be Power that sees them leave.  We cannot shed too many tears for the disaccommodated, their people will not perish as a result of it, but for it, ours will.  The interests of individuals, cannot ultimately trump those of peoples, for the interests of peoples in being is greater.

And all of that is really just a recapitulation of GW’s own thought, but it deserves to be repeated.  It is something to build upon, from the first.

Posted by PF on Wed, 27 Jan 2010 02:03 | #

Wow, did I write this in another life?

talk about ‘absence’.