|
|
|
The Compleat Anti-Racist How to expose the racists for what they are By I. Bismuth Introduction Here is a little collection of all the answers you will ever need to expose the racists for what they are. I’m sure most of us had imagined that by now exposing racists would be as unnecessary as ducking to avoid low-flying pterodactyls, but sadly we have a long way to go before all citizens are fitted with a complete set of acceptable attitudes. Even in our age of dynamic tolerance, unacceptable attitudes can be heard every day of the week. They can come out of the mouths of work colleagues, relatives, passers by, bus passengers, and persons leaning out of heavy goods vehicles. Unacceptable attitudes can indeed on occasion be heard coming even from those who have dedicated their lives to Anti-Racism as the ultimate calling. Not even they can be sure that in some secret corner of their psyches they are not harbouring a larval vestige of the greatest evil, a swelling enemy within, awaiting its moment to burst messily through their shirts and ruin their careers. The demands of Anti-Racism are non-negotiable. They are also without limit in time and space. Anti-Racism must guide society’s every syllable, every fear, every friendship, every seating arrangement, every laugh, every blink, every blush, every breath, every birth, every deglutition. And although this is understood by all decent people, there are amazingly still some true racists out there, not merely Anti-Racists who suffer a momentary lapse of sensitivity and need to be sent on a re-education course, but genuine accepters of the unacceptable, and it is these leftovers from an age that should be bygone who must be our priority cases. So first we have to ask: how do we identify a true racist? Sometimes someone says something that sets off our alarm bells and we find ourselves asking: ‘Is that person just using careless language or am I in the presence of an evil one?’. And for the inexperienced Anti-Racist it can be hard to answer. Perhaps the best way to find out is simply to ask. Invariably, when challenged, a racist will say, ‘I’m not a racist’. This is the giveaway. ‘I’m not a racist.’ ‘I’m not a racist.’ ‘I’m not a racist.’ True racists tend to repeat this phrase over and over again as a kind of mantra of hate. In fact, given the proper encouragement, many will say little else. If they do say something else, this can also be revealing. Remember that racists are characterized by extremism, and their extremism is bound to show itself in their style of thinking. Listen carefully to known racists and you will notice a fixation on logic, an obsession with consistency, and a neurotic compulsion to cite verifiable evidence - their appeal to rationality is as extreme as racism itself. You are a thoughtful person. That is why you now have before you the final solution to the Nazi question: the world’s most comprehensive collection of Racist-Exposing Killer Answers, all of them endorsed by The Royal Institute of Chartered De-Whiteners. You know how to watch the pennies too, for it is ideal for those needing to improve tolerance on a restricted budget. With it the thrifty can equip themselves with the full Anti-Racist skillset of their dreams as surely as if they had splashed out on a team of professional inclusiveness consultants. As you work systematically through what follows you will learn how to handle any encounter with a suspected racist. Remember, when you have the confidence to challenge racist insinuations in social contexts and in the workplace, you will be offering onlookers the chance to boost their own blood levels of rectitude and to show their contempt for their inferiors as they witness Racist Exposure in action. It is important that you read each Racist-Exposing Killer Answer aloud to aid memorization and to hear its power, precision, and necessity. If we never let the racists have the last word, then one day they will never have the first word. Once you have completed the course print out the appended certificate of achievement and sign the declaration confirming that you are now a proud and fully self-certified Racist Exposer. Carry the certificate with you at all times and do not wait to be asked to show it. Tests prove that if it is kept in an accessible and dedicated pocket, it can be whipped out, unfolded and held the right way up under anyone’s nose in less than 1.4 seconds. The Racist Insinuations are set out in increasing degrees of virulence, and each is followed by the appropriate Racist-Exposing Killer Answer. RI: We are a people.
This is to certify that ________________ Has earned the title of Fully Qualified Racist Exposer And is empowered to expose racists for what they are at any hour of the day or night anywhere on, under or over the planet and anywhere on, under or over any body of water thereon. Signature: Comments:2
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:41 | # Is that person just using careless language or am I in the presence of an evil one? Evil, baby, evil every time. I agree that Mr Bismuth has a natural talent for satyr. I hope we see some more of it. 3
Posted by Andy Neather on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:53 | # Sorry to be pedantic but the word is ‘satire’. 4
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:13 | # You are right, Andrew. But there is a certain poetry in the error, yes? 9
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:17 | # An emerging approach: RI: We are a people. 10
Posted by Dan Dare on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:16 | # I’ve just realised what it is that Bismuth’s dialogue brings to mind. It’s Life in Hell. Quite apt really. 11
Posted by Frank on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 19:55 | # “RI: We are a people. They took away your guns - that should frighten. The US feds won’t persecute its citizens as readily because we’re still well armed. 12
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 30 Apr 2010 23:47 | # Frank writes: The US feds won’t persecute its citizens as readily because we’re still well armed. Something you should pay attention to is the increasing infringement on the right to keep and bear arms by an increasing variety of “crimes” that are used as a pretext for permanently depriving you of that right. Basically, all that has to happen is for a couple headed for divorce to get into an argument and for the wife to find a man hating social worker—which is really easy. BINGO: No more 2nd Amendment rights for the husband the rest of his life. 13
Posted by Gorboduc on Sat, 01 May 2010 13:37 | # Bismuth, this is bloody BRILLIANT!!!!!! Pedantic censurers: No, the Satire/Satyr link was believed to be there in earlier days. The minor Elisabethan poet William Rankins printed his Seven Satyres in 1597: he was attacking ‘the worlds ridiculous follyes’, and each poem is placed in the mouth of one of a group of ‘shaggy Satyres’ who leave their woods to come and marvel at human stupidity. Etymologically speaking, WR may have got it wrong; but his apparent misunderstanding gives extra point to his verses, as in: “Lord, what fools these mortals be!” Some people relate the word to satura, Gk. for ‘a full plate’: I expect the sainted Friedrich had some notions about it There’s a compendium of mythological learning here; http://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/Satyroi.html - sorry, lady readers, about the “erect members”. I expect that all that’s really meant is, they flock to hear impostor Jack Straw (and if he DOES get back in, can we all call him Jock Strap?) when, although standing up, he makes a lying speech in the Commons . . . 15
Posted by Gorboduc on Sat, 01 May 2010 21:10 | # Happy May Day Brits will remember with shame and disgust therecent lily-livered display of racial masochism and self-hatred by the pathetic halfwit GREG DYKE who described his own BBC as “HIDEOUSLY WHITE” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-is-hideously-white-says-dyke-702583.html I HOPE YOU’RE READING THIS, DYKE! Here’s something to make you squirm, DYKE, you little turd-eater - WHITE folks enjoying themselves! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_YmKdcSZDw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzNfTIKwK90&feature=related Folks, watch as many videos of the great and ancient May Day (or Furry Day, or Flora Day) celebrations from Helston, Cornwall, as you have time for. There should be some vids up on Youtube for this year’s celebrations by now. The day is spent singing, drinking and and dancing - sometimes quite formally, (toppers and tails, see the second vid, but I believe this bit is intended for those who were born there) and two Obby Osses (pagan origin, doubtless!) make highly ritualistic appearances, as do St. George and the Dragon. Seriously folks, the sheer bloody WHITENESS of the first Helston film brings tears to my eyes! Dyke would probably rather go off to the Notting Hill Carnival and get knifed! 16
Posted by PF on Sat, 01 May 2010 21:30 | # beautiful videos Gorboduc.
agree. our folk celebrations are moving to watch. actually I think what we’re adumbrating is precisely one of the things which GW would like to name, and give a presence in philosophical discourse. To show moments where the nation apprehends its own existence, and experiences itself. Presently these moments are intangible in terms of language, we dont know how to define them or what they mean. But they are very essential for us, thats for sure. 17
Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 01 May 2010 22:56 | # Kurtagic has a plan at Alternative Right. Yup, you guessed it, palingeneticism, teleology and marketing.
http://www.alternativeright.com/main/the-magazine/wanted-something-to-dream/ 18
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 02 May 2010 00:17 | # Thanks, Gorb, for those fine videos. I smiled all the way through the ones from Padstow that I watched, just to see such comity and unguarded enjoyment. Wonderful. Thanks also to PF for his percipient remarks concerning the power of standing, on occasion, in your own white shoes. In contrast, Tom Sunic is writing at OO:
And, of course, young master Kurtagic is treading the same unawares path (thanks CC). Fascism is a mule of a philosophy, a stubborn and wrong-headed beast. It has to be intellectually sidelined, because it is a waste of our precious time. Gorb, when you look at those videos, I bet you are watching tradition, aren’t you? But to me and to PF that is precisely the way of looking that is “dangerously reductionist”. Even so, your tradition is better than Evola’s spirit of race because it, at least, refers to something that is or was once real. 19
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 02 May 2010 00:57 | #
Perhaps Kurtagic hasn’t received the memo that “hyper-masculinised militarisation” and the “kingship of the marshal virtues” despite being ostensibly masculine are in fact “girlish.” And of course respecting the right of niggers to have access to English women and facilitate their “legitimate gene flow” sans “Nazi race laws” is the height of manliness. It all makes perfect sense, the word just hasn’t gotten out. 20
Posted by PF on Sun, 02 May 2010 01:29 | # GW, I see you pointing out two viewpoints that people often fall into, when trying to quantify this enormous phenomenon of a nation and people: 1) We are our Kitsch. 2) We are my grand dream. We are our Kitsch is the belief that costume, folkways, and the expressions of our life, are somehow set as equivalent to that life itself. This happens innocently, by using symbols to represent the life of the nation, one fuzzies up the understanding that the living entity (the nation) is not defined by any part of its external livery. There is an essence that precedes all expression. The kitsch is a pointer to collective being, but unless it is realized to have that meaning, it serves no purpose. We are my grand dreams means that someone, “in the dusty recesses of his mind”, can fancifully imagine all sorts of things about the world, history, destiny, grand accomplishments, but being rooted in his feeling for his nation, he will baptize the works of his imagination in the waters of his loyalty and pronounce them sacred. This is Kurtagic’s “Romanticism”, most likely. What we are watching in these videos is a natural phenomenon precisely like one would see on the Discovery Channel. Like a star being born, a waterfall, or millions of flies hatching on the surface of a pond, we see a human group, related by blood, performing an annual celebration according to old custom. It needs to be treated with the respect of these other phenomena; the understanding of it cannot be a playground for the employment of novel, experimental analytical techniques idiosyncratically employed by adventurist thinkers like Sartre and Derrida. Western discourse does not understand nor respect the existence of that entity portrayed in the above videos. In fact, western discourse accommodates many thinkers whose theories would intentionally or unintentionally bring about the end of this entity. Any attempted defense can usually be defused, because it can only be articulated as 1) or 2) above. 21
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 02 May 2010 01:34 | # CC, I know you don’t really believe that masculinity can be inspirited. In genuine firefights soldiers don’t run around insisting on their Spirit of Man thing. It’s just for posing bondage boys. Forget it. 22
Posted by PF on Sun, 02 May 2010 01:56 | #
Not girlish, but shallow and imaginary. Why? Because its just a pose. Being angry, wanting revenge, desire for retribution and to realize conflict, these are things a healthy person in our circumstances feels by turns. I felt them yesterday upon reading some piece of liberal bloviating about Austrian economics and the harmlessness of hispanic immigration to the US. Some people feel this way all the time, and I think that poses a problem for the person. But in apotheosizing these “marshal virtues” (in effect, the above-mentioned psychological states from which these actions spring), we set up a status hierarchy in which whites who signal these states are given de facto legitimacy over others, which is not right. You may be more pissed off than I am, and ready to kick ass, and that would make you better than me in this system. Who knows if you can think more clearly or actually realize strategic imperatives better. None of that is conveyed in the aping of this martial mask on which the whole “kingship of marshal virtues” is predicated. You’ve no doubt become aware by now that weak-minded people are quick to follow the lead of others. Once a status hierarchy is established on a strong commandment like this, there is no way to stop the flood of simpletons who are eager to dress up in whatever mask Daddy proclaims right. They will be tougher than you, and you will have to vie with them, if this culture you are envisioning actually comes to fruition. Joachim Fest described it thus:
Not to say I think military solutions aren’t necessary. But that they carry within themselves the seeds of their own corruption, which only a certain understanding can properly countervail. Therefore an ideological advocacy of them that doesn’t countenance these facts, is bound to end badly. 23
Posted by Gorboduc on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:08 | # God almighty, folks, good job this one’s filed under HUMOUR - I’ve gone and confused HELSTON with PADSTOW!!! As Samuel Butler said “I don’t mind lying, but I hate inaccuracy”. Too much clebration, I expect. And thinking abt. Dirty DYKE didn’t clarify my mind. Plus I’d been watching a blood-boilingly silly Billy Bragg vid, (but you don’t want to know about that, do you?) and the high pressure in the skull was starting to tremble and give at the seams. Never mind, that means there are TWO traditional British festivals that Dyke must hate, can’t understand, and won’t be attending. “The back of my hand to that old chimera!” as carlule remarked of the then Pope. Sorry: Obby Osses is PADSTOW, Furry Dances is HELSTON. Notting Hill is HELL. @GW: Don’t know that it’s just about TRADITION. I get the same way over Gregorian chant, because it’s beautiful. and godly. Sursum corda. I’m not sure that you are agreeing with PF on this one. I think he’s more of my way of thinking. I think the anthropologica/scientific approach is the reductionist one. Haven’t you ever danced, revelled, thrown yourself into a sheer Nietzschean (can’t be too bad, I think I’ve spelled THAT one right) Dionysian Corybantic orgiastic revel , getting down with Bacchus and his leopards? (I don’t say the gents in toppers and the ladies in the jolly hats are QUITE doing that) or would you prefer to don a white coat for a dignified perambulation round the lab. with a couple of Petri dishes while the assistants rhymically tinkle pipettes and test-tubes?
Is it a heresy to value white culture as well as white genes? There’s more to culture than Hegel and Wittgenstein or was it Heidegger? If so, make sure evolution doesn’t turn you into a speechless and songless tribe of angry Morlocks with immaculate white hides!! Apologies for the folkloric fantastic fandango, and vote BNP. And has anyone noticed this? http://www.nationalia.info/en/news?p=8&tematica=6# Apologies for the folkloric fantastic fandango, floreat Maia, to hell with Dyke the Disaster, and vote BNP. 24
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:09 | # You’d need more details to know whether “hyper-masculinised militarisation” and the “kingship of the marshal virtues” are feminine or masculine. A queer posing as a spicy soldier is a queer looking for a good time. A soldier serving God and country - putting his people and God above his life, his ego, and his happiness, and his pleasure: that is a true man. Though as I’ve said before it can be best for a nation to put family ahead of nation, e.g. feeding one’s child via theft from one’s state or one’s nation…, because this is simply the best system for man. However, treason is of course always wrong even if, say, one’s child is being held hostage.
There’s nothing wrong with thinking through such values and deciding what is truly ideal, as opposed to living the moment and being susceptible to emotional influence (ie. someone could design a situation to have you act in a certain manner). 25
Posted by PF on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:11 | #
Imagine the poverty of a white person being seduced into a vision of Romanticism by Kurtagic… being brought into an imaginary bundle with this Croatian (?) with whom one is now ethnically united in a dream of ... whatever. Self defense, or grandeur, or grandeur-for-the-purposes-of-self-defense, or self-defense-for-the-purposes-of-grandeur. Next imagine one of those young lads in the video, one of the handsome british boys strolling out of that pub in Padstow. His parents are from there. He grew up there. He chases girls and plays soccer there. His life is there. One of these characters lives mostly in dreams, the other mostly in reality. One is susceptible to teleological nationalism, the other is an unknowing exponent of ontological nationalism. Currently, only the former can speak and say anything ideationally sensible. (Although, refuted and discredited, as Dan Dare noted). If we can arm the second of these men with words to defend himself, nationalism will no longer be the province of estranged, violent dreamers. 26
Posted by PF on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:15 | #
Had a few drinks, Gorb? Happy may day! 27
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:19 | # You can think of it best this way: a true man serves his idols (race being one of them and not necessarily in conflict with God), be they true or false is for another discussion, and his attachments (family & friends being one of them). It’s through service one embraces the spirit of the master race. It’s the other races who so quickly worship their own egos and destroy all that made them great and gave them joy. If anyone has a better example, let him speak. - Marse Robert: “Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less” “Obedience to lawful authority is the foundation of manly character.” “A true man of honor feels humbled himself when he cannot help humbling others” “You cannot be a true man until you learn to obey” “My trust is in the mercy and wisdom of a kind Providence, who ordereth all things for our good” - “I cannot trust a man to control others who cannot control himself.” “The gentleman does not needlessly and unnecessarily remind an offender of a wrong he may have committed against him. He can not only forgive; he can forget; and he strives for that nobleness of self and mildness of character which imparts sufficient strength to let the past be put the past.” - Taken from a Rainbow Confederate site that promotes what Marse Robert very strongly opposed, to the point of wanting blacks deported from the South: race mixing. Half the damned Confederate groups these days seem to want race mixing. All they are is false marketing to get us to sleep with blacks - a partial antithesis (the South was more) of being Southern. 28
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:27 | # Well said PF. Society needs to be on a human scale. What’s apparently called third position ideology in the US or distributism is the true ideal I believe. 29
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 02:37 | # I would go a step further with regard to mixing Croats with English: the two are very different. It’s not only social ties, but the two have very different idols. Mix Australia with England, and you’ve changed little, not that I want to combine the two. Relative to a subSahara African, they’re similar; but uniting the two is destroying the two to save components of both. Genetically the two are not identical either. - We need a strong cultural tie of unity to unite white states while remaining politically separate and genetically mostly separate. If any race can achieve this balance, it’s whites. 30
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 02 May 2010 03:16 | #
I understand Kurtagic hangs out in your neck of the woods, GW. See if you can’t convince him of the virtues of stoic Northern European manhood that doesn’t countenance riding crops and leather boots when no horses are involved (although who knows, horses may be involved). “What happened to your arm there, bloke, it’s missing?” “Oh, it’s nothing, mate. Just a scratch. Caught a bullet from one of those dastardly Krauts. We’ll teach them.” 31
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 02 May 2010 03:37 | #
How to achieve that without white ethnicities siding with non-white outsiders against other white ethnicities? I was reading a Scottish nationalist guy the other day, I got the distinct impression he was happy for England to be destroyed in an ethnic sense, he welcomed it. How is Scotland then to escape the same fate, guess what - not explained. Probably doesn’t care, doesnt want to be a racist etc etc. The attack on whites is global after all. If its a choice between mixing Croats & English vs total destruction. We might have to accept the compromise survival solution. 32
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 04:02 | # Lurker, I’m hopelessly proud of my race. I couldn’t accept the mixing, would rather die fighting it. The word CC once used is “Nordicist” and it fits me in more than merely attachment: I like the mythological origins even. I’d have to be exterminated or at the least suppressed, though I can’t say how many there’d be like me. But, I do sympathise. I curse the Marxist puppets frequently (an example of nationalism being used for Marxist ends, they actually understand power politics unlike us), and Southern nationalism is similarly used. The cultural defence would need to be strong to unite the factions, but overcentralising we might find ourselves with a new set of problems. - You’ll hear Southern WASP activists praising their love for Negros, Jews, Amerindians, and Catholics - and their hatred for Northern WASPs. I’m not trying to refight the Reformation by mentioning Catholics there, but they tend to favour immigration and simply must be mentioned for so doing. They’re loyal to the Pope, and the Pope doesn’t care for America. Their tradition might defend order derived from race, but their institution doesn’t. My cursing of the South and Celts in the British Isles one day led me to exclaim Celts are not Africans! We are not white monkeys! I like the ring of that and think it should be used when they exclaim their hatred of the English, and in all truth most Celtic nationals have no mind of their own. The strongest national parties in the UK and Ireland, excluding the BNP and possibly the UKIP, are all Marxist. The members are little more than monkeys. 33
Posted by PF on Sun, 02 May 2010 04:15 | #
What are these dialogues between imaginary Englishmen in your mind meant to prove? Here’s two palingenecist dreamers having a conversation in my head: “All this talk about philosophy, don’t they know its all a wash without the power of THE FIST?” “Indeed, the weak-kneed Anglo ‘intellectuals’ will tremble, when the cock crows, and TRUE MEN stand up to storm the ramparts and take over the castles of Leviathan!” “Is it not in their nature to be hypocrites, these mealy-mouthed, convenience-minded ‘ontological nationalists’, who cultivate cowardice in themselves by all manner of clever rationalization and doublespeak?” “Why, indeed it is in their natures. I was having a conversation with one of this type just the other day, and he said that martial virtues were the posings of wanna-bes.” “Has he forgotten the GREAT MEN who built our GLORIOUS NATIONS, usually using liberally the power of THE FIST?” “It would seem so. If a nation is not undergirded with STEEL, by which I mean to designate a continuous preparedness for all types of crazy violence, how can that nation resist the onslaught of its enemies?” “Will you take a picture of me holding this sword aloft?” “Sure, let me get my cell phone.” 34
Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 02 May 2010 17:14 | # PF,
Only intended as a demonstration of my love for the English idiom. Frank,
There are potentially many who can experience love for their Nordic people in a spiritual sense. I think it is something to be encouraged. 35
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 18:57 | # CC, there are always factions about. Whether Europe will or will not survive is only one question, another is whether it will survive as it is or become a new experiment. At TOQ I’ll occasionally see a comment that Nordicism is “dangerous” - dangerous to whose dreams? You’ll also see Nordicism and transhumanism as well as probably something queer and otherwise perverse… Regarding nations being prepared for war though, I’ll have to second that they ought to be prepared. The Swiss are a fine example. Plato declared a primary purpose of the state is war, whereas Aristotle said it’s to allow for the good life - I’ll have to agree with both. And a people are not happy if exploited by foreigners due to a lack of power, though too they won’t attract the attention of foreigners if they can do as the Basque or Swiss and make conquering them too unappealing or troublesome. There’s a difference between throwing everything to power and taking prudent precautions though. There’s a different spirit between community oriented peoples and a centralised state. And just the same, there’s a difference of spirit between pure blooded peoples and more mixed peoples. In addition to greater purity though, the Nordics have a purity of heart and character that isn’t found elsewhere. They’re fully capable of sinning, but you can see perhaps that while other peoples have evolved for thousands of years struggling against other people, Nordics have evolved while struggling more with people against nature. Southern Europe especially has a different character - eastern Europe might be more the same as northern though at least genetics seems to reveal a difference if character and appearance don’t reveal much. Regarding war in general, the nature of war is to bring a conflict into terrible ferocity, total war, and with the advent of nukes that is legitimately dangerous. We should very much fear total war among nuclear states. Wisdom is found in Sun Zhu when he says it’s better to only fight if you have to or if victory is certain, meaning I wouldn’t want to gamble my nation unnecessarily. - I’m very much a provincial. I don’t only revere the South, but I revere my nations of origin and my local area of the South and my family etc. The groups just continue to get increasingly exclusive, and I value them all highly, thinking them the best though I realise this is not an objective view. Perhaps my sentiments ought to be moderated somewhat. If outsiders left my state alone, I’d be back to conflicting with the different regions of the state… And such conflicts can again grow to total war, though ideally they ought to be balanced. One of the reasons Southerners today hate Northerners so, why Germans hate the English, and why Celts hate the English is: the terrible deeds that were committed. Plato proposes with his polis state that Greeks in general cease “warring”, and if they do conflict these must be called quarrels not wars. He develops a state ruled by an ideal elite, and yet this state doesn’t act as a parasite towards other city-states, at least of his own nationality. - And regarding the queers and nationalism: the Greeks apparently didn’t always value the nude, that was something they picked up from another civilisation, which was then aped by the Romans who are now aped by us. According to the Greeks, I could find this later, they as well as barbarians (e.g. the Nordics) find it natural for man to wear clothes. I present as a partial defence against the queers that a return to a less corrupted but still civilised life is to put our clothes back on in art and on beaches and these proposed “public baths of supermen”... and so regain our dignity and hopefully some of our sexual restraint. It’s all well and good to value the healthy human, but we don’t have to see him nude to do this, surely. 36
Posted by Frank on Sun, 02 May 2010 19:28 | # But just to be clear, the best steward of England are Englishmen, just as the best stewards of Greece are, well, I should use another example: the best stewards of Serbia are Serbs. There’s some implicit sense that if English, or in my case a part English American, want Serbia out of England that the English somehow hate them. Serbs simply don’t belong there, at least not in large numbers. There’s something wonderful about being from a place and having ancestors there. In South Carolina, there’s an old house people go to look at and in another state some other houses, and I’ve got land where my folks farmed for several generations and a family graveyard, some books by and about them - it’s great. My grandfather built his house himself and offered to give it to me, though I dunno that I want to remain among the blacks, and etc. etc. the usual native’s tale. My folks aren’t all that special, but they’re who I am. And Europe has even more, though it’s worth noting I can trace back ancestry into Europe and so know much of where I came from there… (so America is not a “new nation” as Europeans call it - how stupid we’re simply a part of Europe, don’t they know?) I might not live on the same land as Europeans, but we both trace back for thousands of years into an exclusive, distinct area. By living on the same land, I acknowledge they’re somewhat higher on the hierarchy too, of course - or at least they will be for however long they can remain pure and distinct. If they mix, they fall like Rome below those of us who haven’t mixed - in my traditionalist mind that’s how things are anyway. There are values in this world by my mind. If the English become Croatian-English, the northwest European English-Americans become more English than they, as do the Icelandics and everyone else. Croatia is very different from England relative to Norway from England. 37
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 03 May 2010 00:11 | # Haven’t you ever danced, revelled, thrown yourself into a sheer Nietzschean (can’t be too bad, I think I’ve spelled THAT one right) Dionysian Corybantic orgiastic revel , getting down with Bacchus and his leopards? Gracious me, Gorb, what are you putting with the absinthe? Not a lot, by the sound of it. Today, the problem is that to know the meaning of the “thing” that PF is trying so hard to describe to you, CC and others, and its qualitative difference to all other reports of the life of men, including that Bachanalian life or whatever it is that you think signifies a living person from a dead gene scientist, you have to somehow encounter it full in the face. Try as we might to, as PF writes, “show moments where the nation apprehends its own existence, and experiences itself” it cannot be done because the mind insists on taking the words and processing them in same old way. So the moment of apprehension and experience is subsumed into comfortable, known quantities like culture or tradition, and the opportunity is lost. It seems to me, there are only two ways to escape the trap. One of those is through metaphysical psychology, if one has the appetite and the sheer luck to see the patterns of light in the Rorschach. The other is ontological philosophy in the Heideggerian style, if one has the motive intellectual power. Through either it is possible to find this essential moment of collective self-discovery and habitation, though in very different ways, obviously. My impression is that, depending on which method one has become acclimatised to, the other method is always perceived from it, and never quite in the fullness of itself. One is a metaphysician - a practical man - or a philosopher, a master of and perhaps slave to word-models. I suspect it is impossible to stand with an equal footing in both camps. Here, anyway, is what we are talking about. “It” is the moment of shared being. “It” is a moment that has no beginning nor end, and what we share is us and us alone, our life as one. There are no word models to buff and burnish, no extraneous focus for our feelings. This ... now ... is, and it is us. 38
Posted by Dan Dare on Mon, 03 May 2010 00:53 | #
Hint: blokes don’t call each other ‘bloke’, not even in Blackadder Goes Forth. 39
Posted by PF on Mon, 03 May 2010 02:13 | # GW wrote:
But if it cannot be done… what are we gonna do? 40
Posted by Lurker on Mon, 03 May 2010 02:24 | #
They dont usually, but even as I was thinking that I realise I have heard it said once or twice used in that way, by very old men though. We are rearing a new generation, in London especially, who probably dont use the word at all. They have been enriched by black culture. Listen to this white man (so far as I know): He has even had the blessing of a black style upbringing (so stereotypical that I do wonder about his ancestry):
Chaotic parents, brought up up by grandmother. Academic failure, stabbed, its all there. I mean how black is that?! He wont be using the word bloke in any context. Then we have Dappy OK he is of Greek origin but he has totally internalized black behaviour. Everything, clothes, body language speech, the lot. Nothing Greek (or British) there at all. The death of a civilisation (or two) right there. You’ll note his cousin, the blonde girl, isnt nearly as bad, this Stockholm syndrome seems to afflict boys much more than girls. 41
Posted by PF on Mon, 03 May 2010 03:19 | # GW, Another question. I’ve seen you use “habitation” a number of times, in a way that (of course) I have never seen it used before. Is this used to denote presence? 42
Posted by Extended Phenotype of the East & South on Mon, 03 May 2010 03:51 | # RI: We are a people 43
Posted by Extended Phenotype of the East & South on Mon, 03 May 2010 04:26 | # Now, if the F_st between NW Europeans and SE Asians is 0.20, or heaven forbid, maybe like 0.25, does that mean both partners win an honorary Darwin Award in a marriage? At least I’ll win something in this life… 44
Posted by buijk on Mon, 03 May 2010 04:57 | # God, when will PF quote something besides that chapbook by Fest (and his own posts from three years ago)? Pick up something else already, will you? GW, could you finally loan him that Gurdjieff he’s been thinking about? You probaby haven’t read it since diving into the Jeremy Lott tome Dan sent you, so you wouldn’t miss it and it’d be a nice gesture. PF might appreciate your notes in the margin about the “objective understanding of the Real”, which is how you doubtless got around to defining your “real” England (Henry VII; a particular economic stratum during WWII; yourself). As a matter of fact, I’m sure he’d like that part, since seemingly every other post he’s letting everyone know that certain times during Germany’s history aren’t really representative of “Germany” at all - his objective understanding of the Real has homed in on postmodern, post re-education Teutschland as the measuring stick. You see, he’s lived there for a bit. 45
Posted by PF on Mon, 03 May 2010 06:04 | #
Good summary. I’m as sick of my spiel as you are. Really. The only thing is, its a more genuinely lived-out perspective than the perspective it replaces. The reason why I still give my spiel is because, as sick of it as I am, I am still more sick of easy American nazi apologetics.
Do you mean to say that I should further investigate the issue of Hitler’s culpability in World War II, and the possibility validity of Nazism for us today? Perhaps you could explain to me what the philosophical or strategic interest is in going deeper into these questions.
Germany doesn’t change because of denazification, or post-modern currents in art and literature. There is something deeper than these memetic surface changes, which I gather you take to be of utmost importance. There is a germany that goes deeper than people’s opinions about politics.
I have to speak for them because they would never bother talking with someone like Captain Chaos. The fact is, and its kind of sad and depressing, that Americans are much more notional than germans. Embarrassingly so. This resuscitated spirit-of-the-race Nazism, is extremely notional, even as it claims to be all about Blut-and-Boden. I dont know if I can convey in words to you how your ideas would be greeted in the circles where people have most direct experience of the realities your ideology is based on. You think you can invalidate German opinion by citing denazification and American brainwashing. Its only the current generation coming up now that is really brainwashed, in my view. The older germans are too culturally insensitive and anti-liberalist to even have been much penetrated. Its their viewpoint - their ambivalence about Hitler and Nazism, which is really the superior viewpoint. And its way tougher and more realistic - totally, totally devoid of fantasy and imagining when compared with Anglo views, be they for or against! And when I say Anglo I guess that includes all English speaking people regardless of background. The germans are really good for being realists in this matter. The difference is this: they learned about Nazism from relatives and their society; they know about it as an experience. Westerners learned about it from books. They will sense that you are constructing an ideological edifice based on your imaginings of their history, and will distrust your strange attachment to this period which proved so disastrous for them. Worse, they will laugh at you. Not even outwardly, but inwardly, they will laugh at you in their hearts. Because you are taking the epic life and death experience of their nation and weaving a pissant political story out of it as an outsider, for your own personal benefit. Not all, but the few who know will laugh. Its incredibly embarrassing to experience this role, because it will become clear to oneself in that moment what an ideational fetishist one is, cramming around in another nation’s history, which one cannot know and should leave well alone. One is like a voyeur spying on a married couple: something sacred intruded upon by the profane. Thats why I consider this undertaking precisely analog, although at a different end of the ideological spectrum, to the efforts of those who go to Africa and Afganistan to expose child prostitution rings and prevent war or disease. If you could be honest with yourself for one moment about your own motivations, have the balls to stop using other people as fuel for an ideological struggle within your own mind, you could step closer to the *real* and, for example, live your own struggle. Thats all your attempting to do anyway with this nazism, retrofit it to the present. Nazism is living in Hootersville but not having the balls to defend Hootersville on its own terms. I nobly volunteered to play the part of broken record on this subject so we could clear a space for genuine philosophy to take place. 46
Posted by PF on Mon, 03 May 2010 06:10 | # Side note: Ontological dancer Bettie Page demonstrates the spontaneous arising in audience members of the Heideggerian principle of The Will-to-be-being-inside-another-being’s-Being. 47
Posted by Frank on Mon, 03 May 2010 07:12 | #
Same with Southerners. We’re told how incredibly evil we are when only we know it’s all fiction :p Though, we do believe in the WWII stories, our surviving relatives who actually fought over there might not believe all the tales, but their children and grandchildren do. 48
Posted by Frank on Mon, 03 May 2010 09:59 | # Mudshark’s “white” children are persecuted at an all black school. The government takes her kids away and are all sexually abused. Her son is bleeding from his rear when returned to her… Wow. 50
Posted by Gorboduc on Mon, 03 May 2010 14:49 | # Well, I am a very old man and I have never heard “bloke” as a mode of address, or in the vocative. In the plural, perhaps, as in “Come on, blokes! Whose round is it?”, it’s perfectly possible. Any of that in the old “Brewery Tap” - was it you, GW, who pulled pints in there? A more appropriate term might be “mate” or “chum” or, if the speaker was posing as a Cockney - “Me ol’ china!” [= “china plate”: rhymes to “mate”, but it’s authentic to use only the first portion of the slang substitute, so you just say “apples” for “stairs” [apples-and-pears] or “whistle” for “suit” [whistle-and-flute] or “turnip” for “shop” [turnip-top. “Bloke” is like “Guy”, not heard as a vocative singular. However the usage may be OK in Australia. As I’ve said before, repetitively, and almost to the point of sheer rudeness, NONE of the ontological stuff gets through to my limited understanding. There’s a sense of togetherness - a sense that you’re at home- perhaps the true Irish had it in the old days. http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v;=-mMRMDogu2c&feature=related 51
Posted by Gorboduc on Mon, 03 May 2010 15:58 | # What with Bettie Page and the poteen I’ve transposed a couple of paras, above: “Saucepan” to “respectively” should be located after “Turnip-top” whch. shd. read [turnip-top] Anyway, more kinship and community here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxEdv_3C-B4&feature=related There are so many Youtube videos of “A Nation once again” - but the high hopes expresssed therein are all dashed, so I wouldn’t try. And WHO introduced Henry VII? Why? Re the hatred of the Irish for the English. True story. Years ago I visited an Irish presbytery in Limerick. There was the parish priest, to whom I was introduced: sitting round the kitchen table were 4 or 5 other priests, colleagues or curates. After a silence, someone said, “Seumas was quoting an old proverb: ‘Can anything good come out of England?”’ There was a sense of embarrassment, but rather than pretend to ignore what had been said, I said that as a fellow catholic I was not to be held responsible for any of Ireland’s troubles of the last 5 centuries - - that too much time had passed to be able accurately to evaluate what had happened between Henry II and the then Pope, but that like themselves I held in exsecration the Reformation, the doings of Henry VIII. Elisabeth I and Cromwell, and the whole dreadful history of persecution, expropriation, settlement and transportation - I shudder to think of what has happened to their country in the 20-odd years since that day. I hope I haven’t offended any of the anti-Irish folks here: but if I have, well, that’s the way of it, and bad cess to you! 52
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 03 May 2010 17:48 | # Frank writes: “The government takes her kids away and are all sexually abused. Her son is bleeding from his rear when returned to her… Wow.” Wow? This sort of thing may as well be standard procedure for white boys “protected” by the government. The only reason this made news at all is her kids just weren’t white enough to be totally ignored. 53
Posted by PF on Mon, 03 May 2010 19:26 | # Frank wrote:
I think its very interesting to think about white southern nationalism, and how it contrasts with northern and midwestern American nationalism. Southern nationalism is much more “real” in the sense that GW and I are trying to qualify nationalism. It is based on an obvious sense of peoplehood. We might want to discuss the reasons why this would be the case… 54
Posted by Frank on Mon, 03 May 2010 22:10 | # The South, what wasn’t burnt during the war, has a more European feel to it. Charleston, SC, and Savannah, Georgia, are two undesigned cities full of beauty and history. We were an agrarian society than maintained a more traditional European feel than the more progressive, merchant and industrial North. I can go to either city, and I find friends (several whose parents / grandparents were friends with mine) relatives and remnants from ancestors, which is wonderful. We’ve also got a dialect, many dialects really (we’re more a collection of peoples than a people in that sense), and we’ve got a cuisine (several varieties of that too). We’re an older population than most other areas of the US, we’re receiving large waves of new, strange white immigrants who annoy us, and the US culture makes us the butt of jokes. This makes us react with pride against such outsiders - you can think of how the Irish pride is often wrapped around being not English… lol. Though sadly, this also might be a last gasp of our nationalism before we’re mixed away. We also suffered total war during the war. Perhaps we were wrong to secede - we should have paid the trade tariffs even if benefiting the North? Regardless, you don’t use total war on someone for that, and both sides, the North too, lost… a breathtaking percentage of its population. Germany suffered more in WWII, but we suffered badly, as did the North though fighting was on our soil. The war was a defence against invasion, not only (though yes this was part) a struggle to preserve slavery. And we’ve been struggling against the blacks ever since they were “freed” on us, or rather I should say they’ve been used against us ever since. At first the North put the blacks in power politically over us, then we took back our power via force (this is after the war). We had these amazing leaders - R. E. Lee is a near ideal gentleman and brilliant general. Our slave owners proved to be very good military generals. We had all the best generals and not enough railroad tracks and industry. Anyway, the South shall rise again. I would personally love to have Yankees immigrate in provided they’re of old stock. For me, though other Southerners might hold different views, it comes down to race in large part. I expect they’d learn how to get along if the racial component were resolved. - I like talking about this because I think there is something special about the South, and I think others ought to hear about it and so learn what they’re missing, learn how they can improve their own nations. 55
Posted by Frank on Mon, 03 May 2010 22:22 | # Just as the blacks have influenced the Afrikaner culture, they and the Amerindians have influenced us too. Our cuisine includes grits and fried okra, neither of which are European. Our culture is also sharply divided between whites and blacks. It’s a highly racist culture that makes us distinct from outside whites who aren’t familiar with blacks. There’s a remnant caste system you could say, and every effort by whites to remove it fails because blacks aren’t capable of much. Blacks are given advantages too… Since their parents are often poor, they need public libraries for computer access and more attention in schools, including school lunches so they’ll have some food. Chaperoning blacks is a part of being a Southern white… We’re not so much their masters as their guardians. Honestly, I’m tired of the burden. My family partook in slavery, but I suspect they all wished out of it. I know Lee was grateful it was finally ended, though he’d wanted the blacks removed too… - Interracial marriage occurred more in the North and among poor whites than between plantation owners and blacks btw because plantation owners could find white mistresses with ease and the North didn’t have the sharp racial divide (think of how in England blacks pair up with whites more readily than in the US due to the sheer numbers). SWB article image backs me up on this. We unfortunately seem to have some Amerindian blood, though I hope that’s more wishful thinking than reality. I do not have Amerindian blood. Why would whites wish they had it? I don’t know… To be more “American”, to be more unique, or for love of the “noble savage” myth? Anyway, there are probably 5% or so of the whites who claim “1/16” or so Amerindian heritage… 56
Posted by Gorboduc on Tue, 04 May 2010 00:02 | # The first video I was linking to shd. be: 57
Posted by Q on Tue, 04 May 2010 00:41 | # Continuing on from Gorboduc, one of my personal old-time favorites: 58
Posted by Gorboduc on Tue, 04 May 2010 12:12 | # Q: Here’s a revival: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGUeqMmKhFo&feature=related And this may be as near to the real thing as can be got… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzOAbekZoOc But you can sing along to this one: Foggy Mountain Breakdown: virtuoso banjo and guitar and - TRADITION for GW - an Elisabethan piece “set to the Consort” by Morley in 1599 - with the same techniques for fast variations (divisions) that Bluegrass players enjoy today! and for something completely different, go to Corsica: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KllK-nAfOog&feature=channel - that was for maximum elaboration, maximum impact, with minimal resources. Dammit, the Europeans . . .! 59
Posted by icr on Wed, 05 May 2010 13:45 | # Germany doesn’t change because of denazification, or post-modern currents in art and literature. There is something deeper than these memetic surface changes, which I gather you take to be of utmost importance. There is a germany that goes deeper than people’s opinions about politics. A people that is so doggedly determined to vanish from the face of the earth as quickly as possible is only interesting in terms of its history. 60
Posted by Lug on Wed, 05 May 2010 21:20 | # I am in agreement with Alex Kurtagic. Those in white-advocacy cricles need to present themselves in a more favorable light. In that vein, I recommend a return to traditional elitist vocabulary. We should co-opt certain words for our use. Here are some examples. Use the following words in their pristine sense:
Gentleman: Someone who’s a white advocate, someone who supports preserving the white race. At a dinner conversation, one might remark, “He’s a gentelman (i.e. a white person who gets the race question and supports the interests of his own race).” White Trash: A white person who procreates with a non-white person. At a dinner conversation, one might remark, “Obama’s mother was complete white trash (i.e. she miscegenated with a non-white).”
- Whites in the U.S. should call themselves ‘European Americans’ and not ‘Whites’. It sounds more UC. - European Americans should create genealogy clubs stressing their European heritage - Above all else, European Americans should do what they can to discourage miscegenation P.S. These are not my ideas. They were gleaned from other sources so feel free to use them as your own. 61
Posted by sddfayu on Thu, 06 May 2010 13:59 | # “Germany doesn’t change because of denazification, or post-modern currents in art and literature.” Hippie talk, and floating in the ether directly alongside the fevered imaginings of Kurtagic. Remember, you’re the guy who can’t define England, so why would it be any different for Germany. I’ve asked time again if you can give me something viable, but there’s nary an attempt. Do you mean the land mass? Sure, that hasn’t changed, I’ll give you that. “You think you can invalidate German opinion by citing denazification and American brainwashing.” No I don’t. Stop using the word “German” as if it applies to all people in Germany, or as if you somehow know all Germans, ontologically or otherwise. For once, just for once, could you say “Some Germans…” or “A portion of Germans…” The old German woman on the beach in South America who said to me, disgustedly, “After the war, Germany just became a little America,” - is she German to you? Is her point valid? Or do you say no, because it contrasts with your ideas of what a German is. “There is something deeper than these memetic surface changes, which I gather you take to be of utmost importance. There is not. Seriously, you’re like some bizarre wizard. How do you think memetic surface changes come about, not just in general, but in this situation in particular? Millions upon millions upon millions of dead bodies. That’s what’s real. Biology. You remind me of some guy I used to live across the street from. He’d been in the neighborhood for years, and both his and his girlfriend’s car had recently been broken into. “Man, what’s happening to this neighborhood?” he asked me, perplexed. You see, it’s the “neighborhood”, not the Mexicans who’d been been moving into the neighborhood. You know, built upon an old Indian burial ground or something. For mystics like you, “crime descends”, like a wispy vapor - it’s never a dude with a pipe bashing your head. “The fact is, and its kind of sad and depressing, that Americans are much more notional than germans.” Again, definitions. What do you mean when you say “American”? It’s a big place…a big multicultural place. “The difference is this: they learned about Nazism from relatives and their society; they know about it as an experience. Westerners learned about it from books. They will sense that you are constructing an ideological edifice based on your imaginings of their history, and will distrust your strange attachment to this period which proved so disastrous for them.” See above. You use nebulous terminology. “Westerner” - some body living in the West, I presume? Why would you presume that there are no people in “the West” or “America” who have any familial connections with Europe? Seriously, why? Who’s right, MY relatives or THEIRS? Ugh. Ridiculous. But even that’s not as necessary as you claim for understanding. I’ve said it before, you invalidate all of historical study by claiming that. All archaeology. All anthropology. Karl May’s rousing books become invalid because he never lived in America, Felix Dahn’s because his immediate relatives weren’t alive during Theoderic’s reign. It’s one of the many mysteries and frustrations of life, as I’d guess you’d feel on your side, that people can’t see your point of view. You, GW, the gang, you just can’t seem to get that when you say things like you do you undermine everything you’re supposedly “working for” (or, in reality, grousing about). Nearly every student of mine would find the things you say on race or GW about “English culture” ridiculous, for the same reasons you give from your side, even if they’re not able to articulate that. Multicult and your disappearance are reality because tens of millions of people believe it, their kin and their peers, and who are you to say otherwise? You can’t, you have no solid ground to stand on, because you apply the same reasoning as they do, just to different circumstances. “...for genuine philosophy to take place.” All philosophy is genuine, pal. In sum, any adequately trained ten-year-old can tell you that Rome of 100 B.C. was something vastly different than Rome of 100 A.D. Some Romans of 100 A.D. felt there was more to admire in the Rome of 100 B.C. 62
Posted by PF on Thu, 06 May 2010 20:53 | # In reply to Constantly Changing Handle:
Reply: I can’t define England? The English nation is a blood-related people who’ve lived together for 10-15 centuries on an island, and prior to A-S conquest, lived together for centuries before that, whether on the island as Celtic-indigenous, or in the Chersonesus in Jutland, or in the north Netherlands and Emsland and Holstein in Germany. Nothing is clearer to me than who belongs to this nation and who does not. I can’t imagine you’ve seriously read my writings and would infer that I believed in the geographic definition of the country.
I reply: I was describing the ambivalence vis-à-vis Nazism of the post-war German consensus as I’ve known it to be expressed in many people of different generations. This is quite a unique view when compared with *whatever* view is formulated among westerners, mostly because it refers to real experience and thus is less ideational/notional. There are many variations of this view. Nevertheless for the purposes of expediency I didn’t add all the caveats… implying that I’ve been monolithic in my summary of german opinion is easy, but you have to remember the viewpoints I’m arguing against – uninformed American revisionism. Of the kind that really knows nothing of Germany, past or present. I told my main interlocutor in the course of these discussions ‘You have no real knowledge of the Living Germany whatsoever’ (paraphrase), and he didn’t even object, as this had already been made clear in the course of discussion. This frames the discussion and provides an explanation for why I did or did not qualify the views I presented in the terms you would have wished. For all intents and purposes, when contrasted with this viewpoint, the cornucopia of German views on the subject, be they of whatever wildly varying stripe, do appear monolithic at least in their ambivalence (finding some good, some bad in the Nazi regime) and generally coming out skeptical of the necessity of Nazism. Those are the only particulars of the view that have to be preserved for my representation of it to stick. And it does.
I reply: Allow me to restate what you’ve just implied. According to the above quip, there is nothing deeper in the life of a nation than the consensus they hold on political matters. As far as memetic change is concerned, it works as well through distribution of knowledge as it does through conflict and wars. In fact, I think a historical review shows that ideas don’t tend to diffuse through massacre, but in the slow, dormant periods, of which we are presently in one. Right now, on an unseen level, ideas are diffusing which will inform thinking in future conflicts. The conflicts themselves are not causative for the adoption of ideas. Two generations of peaceful TV watching have done more for the diffusion of (false) ideas than any conflict could. Or three generations of scholars reading books on Darwinism and Nietzsche, also lead to the slow seep of these ideas into previously untouched bodies of thought. You mention whats real, but don’t tackle the issue of perception of the real. Is your mental understanding of biological concepts real, is the political and literalist framework in which you are fixing them real? More real than religion, for sure; and more real than PC theory. Can you think of some ways in which your understanding of biology and history might contain artifacts of perspective, or other distorting influences, which might problematize your claim to have known what is real?
I reply: OK.
I reply: I mean the deracinated white folk – both of racialist, nationalist, and liberal-PC variety – who are for me the main player in the drama presently unfolding. I guess I don’t consider other people to be American.
I reply: I don’t mean to invalidate historical study, but its limits have to be recognized. History can build elaborate and well-informed mental models of past epochs. Literature can use the imagination to build (imaginary) bridges to these epochs, which stir the feelings. These are second-rate ways of interfacing with the nation. Best is to live among them and share their travails, and be of them, and share in their life. I understand we are limited to what we’ve got, but I wish to make the claim that these secondary sources are just that, and they are more for education in youth and then mental masturbation as an adult, than they are for living. That’s my opinion.
I reply: People live in illusion. Its not surprising to me that rarified perspectives are inaccessible to almost everyone. The same is true even in a technical field of endeavor. How many people understand the latest developments in artificial intelligence? Probably 40 men, scattered across Universities in the western world. How many have a second rate understanding of this? Probably 500 men, scattered across research institutions. How many have a third rate, fuzzy, semi-applicable understanding? Probably 2,000 students and programmers. Among those top 40 there are probably 3 who have novel and radical ideas of a tentative nature but are at a lack to express themselves because the requisite understanding to place their breakthroughs in context is so rare that they can be said to effectively be working alone. If one adds the dimension of time, the number of appreciative minds increases, so truthful ideas will have their impact eventually – even if one is long-dead. Whether we deserve this parallel or not, I’ll let history judge.
I reply: We don’t really debate anything about race, and only a little bit about culture. Race is taken as a given based on empirical studies, and I could care less whether your students realize the truth of it and/or are able to apprehend arguments about the trajectory of English national culture. Demonstrate first yourself an understanding of these things and then talk to me about your students.
I reply: We spend long hours breaking down the causative factors of our collective death, which you summarize there in a line. I think the arguments against multi-culturalism aren’t answered by what you’ve said, nor is arguing against multi-culti something that is interesting to me. The argument against it is already manifest.
I wrote: Oh? I think that 90% of the philosophy I’ve seen is redundant, based on arbitrary understandings and misunderstandings of semantics, or non-parsimonious theories that are never subjected to a critical hearing, or spring from a motivation to acquire a degree, rather than a truth search.
I reply: You are presumably defending ideas you have about the ranking of different historical epoches without being able to articulate directly what these ideas are? Yes, I am against this idea, “historical teleology” as it might be called. It has to do with a type of thinking I developed while studying history, which is based on critical investigation of these different evaluations of epochs. I thought it was ridiculous to champion the Greek Classical period over the Greek dark ages and Dorian invasion, since one so clearly laid the groundwork for the other and they don’t constitute entities which can be separated from each other, except in the mind. Their separation is problematic and involves saliency artifacts – such as the lives of 10 or 15 geniuses who are seen as representing and giving value to an epoch. I couldn’t grasp the superficiality of an understanding that allowed a flourishing in art and letters to somehow stand as an indicator that a higher level of being had been achieved. It also stemmed from a study of my relatives, some of whom were rough lower-middle class people from the Midlands. I couldn’t convince myself that my ability to articulate myself in writing and speech many times better than they were able, constituted a difference in our beings. Yet it was clear that I would leave – judging by this literary, expressive-genius-seeking criterion – an “evaluative” footprint hundreds of times greater than theirs. I actually have the gear and the setup to do all sorts of genius-looking posturings in writing and life, for example in literature. But it cannot be that the production of clever and insightful scripts is indicative of real value in a man. The same goes for all variations of this understanding – whether militarist/structuralist, technologist, or what have you. The fact to be acknowledged is that nations have epochs in which they produce different types of men, and to prize one epoch above the other is to do violence to this natural cycle and the entity performing it – which is the eternal nation. Investigate the implications of the teleological way of thinking; it leads one to reject those stages of organic life where the creative power is dormant, or focused on non-salient output. It is artifice and self-deception to believe one can stand outside one’s nation as a critical evaluator; or that a man can critically review the life of nations, which he is sufficiently tasked just to know. One either acknowledges one’s proper relation as a lover and child of this, or one dons a mask of knowing punitive abstraction – which is a worthless historical curiosity consigned to the dustbin within one generation’s span. Its like trying to develop a critically objective understanding of your own mother, useless, and a transient conceit which arises from our predilection for literary arms races. Precisely that notional aspect of white culture, most pronounced in North America, which has so many of my facebook friends quoting piquant sayings and styling themselves as some kind of watered-down latter-day Voltaires while all vestiges of our collective life are washed out and destroyed. They are beholden to inherited perspectives and have to chase the highest form of hype they’ve been able to understand – which is intellectual/critical/literary/historical. They’re determined to make this epoch another golden age, or, like, something, man. 63
Posted by Bizzy to GW on Sun, 24 Nov 2013 13:50 | # GW, please look in your spam folder for message dated Nov 21, 2:31. Post a comment:
Next entry: Nämä viestit lähetettiin, kun olit offline-tilassa.
|
|
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 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 03:24 | #
I LOLed 5 times reading this article.
note to everyone: the certificate looks a lot more authentic when you print it out in Word.
cheers Bismuth.