|
|
|
The left poisoned and unpoisoned Exactly how did elements of the left - the white gentile left, that is - ever get themselves in the position where they cheer on our genetic destruction for the sake of “defeating racism”? I imagine that all politically free-thinking European men and women have pondered this mystery. I can only offer the most cursory explanation - basically, a three-word answer, the first and second words each being of three letters (the second being “and”) and the third “religion” ... what Tom Sunic identified in his Homo americus as the seemingly imperishable Puritan tendency in our racial psyche. There are quite a few answers put forward in the thread to a piece in the Telegraph this morning written by Brendan O’Neill. His subject matter is the contempt exhibited by two white middle-class Unite Against Fascism members for a woman “guilty” of supporting the English Defence League, conveniently filmed by one of them and posted on YouTube. O’Neill ascribes this behaviour to class-hatred, but that ignores the single most apparent fact about anti-racism: it is a system of moral punishment. A commenter on the thread named Manxman got the point:
Here is the offending video. See what you make of the psychology of these people.
Or, indeed, this “ghastly piece of filth”, speaking to the Conservative Party conference in 2009. He is a founding signatory of UAF. None of this self-hatred belongs in our politics. It comes from outside. It comes from an ancient and visceral contempt for the life of the European gentile, and from nowhere else. The triumph of this bastard child of Jewish verbal prolixity has its ironies, for the psychological roots of the left’s two, never reconciled pursuits – our European individualism and altruism – exist to keep us independent and whole as a people. Alas, only nationalism can cohere them. Liberalism in its Christian essence is already too Jewish for that, and moral conflictedness comes naturally. Easy, then, for those skilled in such manipulation to raise the moral bar to the matter of our existence. If this poison had never flowed – and it flowed first with Spinoza, and flowed through Marx - the left might love. For, the social democratic wing of leftism is derived from the quality of altruism, and our altruism exists to bind us to ourselves, never to racial aliens. If the poison had never flowed, the left’s love might be pacifist and might be socialist. But if that loving left had awoken after a long century’s sleep to our situation today, it might also sound something like this:
Or this:
Or this:
I should explain that an odd thing happened at the Mercury Music Awards the other night. The Kowalsky arm of the Jewish pop business did not manage to award itself the big prize. That went, for the second time apparently, to a strange and strangely beautiful nightingale from a corner of the county of my own birth. Her name is Polly Jean Harvey - PJ Harvey for short. She’s the wrong side of 40. She has a scratchy, mewling, utterly unpoppy voice. She is intelligent, articulate, poetic and an artist in human emotion. She is also given to undeniably leftish political sentiments, and quite possibly labours under the misapprehension that NATO’s war in Afghanistan is all down to her own country. She is certainly fixated by our history of war. But she avoids direct political statement and strives instead for ambiguity, and it is through that one might sometimes catch a note of pain and longing that arrests the attention and makes one wonder, and would cause a great gnashing of teeth in UAF’s outer darkness.
Comments:2
Posted by Graham_Lister on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 03:41 | # GW - very interesting and thought provoking. PJ Harvey is rather good and about a million times removed from the ‘typical’ pop singer/act. For me the heart is a little to the left. However, I am not an ‘internationalist’ - far from it. I don’t wish people in say, Ghana, any harm but I feel I have no substantive duty to be in solidarity with them. This issue was really brought home to me by the growing literature on the trade-off between social-capital and relative social coherence/equality and multiculturalism/diversity. One can have high social-capital and more social cohesion OR much lower social-capital, increased social fragmentation and a much less coherent or cohesive society (but wonderfully ‘diverse’). The key factor is really the extent of ethnic, religious, linguistic, etc., homogeneity. I am rather a fan of the Nordic social-democracies and think that social model is very good in producing societies with high social-capital and much lowered social pathologies – it just need to be reconfigured minus the excessive hyper-liberalism. OK I know some of our American friends think they are ‘socialist’ hellholes but please spare us the Palin/Limbaugh talking points please (and perhaps visit North Korea for the real thing?). However, I repeat the one key factor in the Nordic models has been very high levels of homogeneity (equally see Japan). The modern left is profoundly dishonest on this subject (community versus diversity) and is only one particular manifestation of the left, which in my view is a left which is formulated through the lens of liberalism, as indeed most of the contemporary right (Hayekian liberalism in drag) has been. I guess one of the issues is that the roots of the left does contain different impulses and draws on different concepts and ideas, much as conservatism isn’t simply one tradition but rather a group of ideas and concepts that have a family resemblance, but can also significantly and subtly differ from each other (Roger Scruton is not David Cameron is he?). But across the modern political spectrum liberal theoretical assumptions and values are, and have been taken, as foundational for a very long time even within the self-described ‘right’ and ‘left’. As for the UAF/SWP types, from my own dealings with them there seems a mix of well-meaning ‘useful idiots’, people engaged in a pseudo-moral ‘economy’ of self-aggrandizement (the payoff derived from self-perceived moral self-righteousness for being so ‘progressive’ etc.), and finally radically misanthropic, almost psycho-pathological, individuals full of self-loathing projected onto others and society at large. Interesting I recently spotted an interesting article on the sources, variations, and different tendencies of egalitarianism and if it is a more a value of liberalism or of the non-liberal left - including the role of utilitarian political philosophy in modern formulations of egalitarianism. It is called “LEVELLING OUT” concerning something the author describes as the ‘egalitarian plateau’- don’t worry it has quite a bit of Nietzsche in there too lol. I’d recommend it to you GW. Much of the bizarre hypocrisy and confused position of the modern liberal-left seems to derive from this leveling out ‘problem’ or rather the failure to acknowledge that it is a serious issue (it’s related to the ‘tragedy of the commons’ issue). Ironically, in the article examples involving ‘little green men’ are used, as I have also used them in posting here to illustrate various topics! Just as an aside, I LOATHE that scumbag Peter Singer (an example of the genuine insanity emerging from within the paradigm of hyper-liberalism). For example, Singer wants to allow for widespread infanticide but give non-human primates substantive legal ‘rights’. What an utterly insane ‘intellect’. 3
Posted by PF on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 04:21 | #
You’ve uncovered the fashionable lie of one ruling cadre during one brief span of human history - and you really intend to make it hold the whole weight of your Weltanschauung, dontcha? I dont dare to think what sort of massive reverse engineering of the entire flow of events of the last 80 years sits upon this little sliver of cleverness. I also dont want to know the extent of the carnage that would be greenlighted in the reversing of these perceived historical mistakes. Perhaps it would unleash enough carnage to make all participants realize that the way humans deal moralistically, contains a truth and a lie - but the consequences of irresponsible behavior, such as causing harm to other humans - are inescapably real, and consequences of this nature spring from any ideology which contains a contingency clause allowing escape from responsibility. Your idols’ philosophy takes such a contingency clause as its Grundsatz. Something like how I imagine all the talk about Great Germany must have sounded in retrospect to a man sitting in a trench or a bunker, having just received news of his family having died. “Germany is going to resist the Anglo-Judaic tentacle. Congratulations, your family has just died.” Now sit like an observant bird looking down through a window into that man’s heart, and attempt to square the circle of how reality must appear to him. Are the images of Hero and Enemy vivid enough to replace the real people we sacrifice to them? The man in the bunker knows - and what a painful misery his final hour must have been, unable to escape from the nagging possibility. If he was thick-skulled enough to die without feeling the encroaching uncertainty about the axioms underlying his actions, he was lucky. If only the shell of cretinism was thick enough to insulate us from the shudders that call us to an awareness that what we have countenanced was wrong - that our suppositions and hastily-taken decisions were wrong - if only that shell could be thickened infinitely. If only we could grow cruder, crasser, less sensitive, duller and - thus -stronger. If only. But it did not work. Things being what they were, I highly doubt the decision to kill oneself stemmed from a dedication to National Socialism. Thats a secret which the highly irresponsible and zealots get to find out right before they shed this mortal coil. How it feels to go to one’s grave over a set of ideas, one’s submerged integrity all aglow with the suppressed warnings that we may have prematurely reached a decision about the nature of reality that will not be born out by our experience. I wonder how many of us think we understand reality, think we have sussed it - would we bet our lives on it? And the coldness and reality of that situation is like a medicine that has to be applied again and again - each time it would reveal something more, in the face of death each time a layer would fall away. Thank God for cold, hard reality - which wont succumb to our schemes. It will find you, and lay its hand on your shoulder and say: Pay up, faggot. God cannot be entrapped, even by the very clever. It found those English liars, and it will find the one-quarter Kraut American crouching in his basement, justifying all manner of schemes as revenge against some imagined upper class WASP delinquent nemesis. This is why you have to seek out Truth. A poet once said: The Truth is great and shall prevail: when none cares whether it prevail or not. For each of us who live our lives by some set of lie-besotted ideas, there will be a bunker, and a bullet, and a last-minute rapprochement with reality, and we decide by our conduct in life how grievous a reckoning that needs to be. 4
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 04:41 | # Of the two in the top clip, one will be a Jew. You see the same thing on the left all the time directed at the upper classes. A Jew will make disparaging comments and others will join in. High trust individuals don’t notice Jews being blatantly racist all the time because they don’t notice they’re Jews. It’s not always a Jew, in the British context it can be Irish/Scots/Welsh individual with a historical grudge who wants to attack the English as a whole but compromises with attacking one segment. (I’m not criticizing that before anyone jumps up. Obviously a smaller country next to a bigger one is going to have historical grudges. I’m just saying what underlies it, a disguised racial attack.) The switch to demonizing the working class as well as the upper class started maybe 15 years ago as part of the ongoing stealth genocide. Obviously if you’re planning a genocide you need to subhumanize the target. (The other thing to note of course is the people who attacked the girl weren’t arrested but all the EDL were when they got off the bus to help her.) 5
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 04:55 | #
I think CC is basically right although i don’t think it’s uniquely English i think it’s a product of out-breeding leading to a need for idealogical unifiers as a supplement. In a society like that a traitor is someone who is a traitor to the unifying ideals so to the brainwashed White segment of the antifa the EDL are the traitors not them. The implicit foundation of the unifying idealogy has to be the greater good. Obviously if it’s not true the lie is easier to maintain with people from comfortable all-white areas. The recent riots opened the veil somewhat and the oncoming economic strife will do it more. I doubt there will be many White kids in UAF/antifa within 10 years. By the time that point was reached i think the other side’s dream would have been of Jewish officers and their non-white infantry hunting down whitey but i think by then Jews and Muslims will be in a state of more or less open warfare so not likely, at least not in countries where the majority of immigrants are muslims. 6
Posted by anon on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 05:21 | #
One has gone over all that with Captain before. But you’re almost as unfair as I was, going on that way. His observation was meant to deflate GW’s Sunic-derived rhetoric. And it was meet.
Wandrin,
As the Athenian delegation said the Melian: “Ha! Bend over already.”
Graham, I agree with you re Singer, but I appreciate his approach to abortion:
Though of course he is obliged to condone the mass-destruction of prenatal life:
One of our most widely acclaimed Jews, Michael Pollan, deconstructs Singer in his Omnivore’s Dilemma — whilst eating a steak. 7
Posted by Trainspotter on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:31 | # There is a sick malevolence to these types. When I was a kid in the 70’s and 80’s, it was common to hear comments about liberals such as “their intentions are good, but…” or “they mean well, but…” I more or less bought this at the time, and further bought into the response that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I find it very difficult to buy today. Their “puritanism” has become so perverted and warped that it has dead ended into a sickly and sinister, almost demonic, form of hatred against whites. Their intentions are not good. They do not mean well. Instead, they mean ill, and they mean harm. It should also be noted that the racial liberal of 40 or 50 years ago faces a very different world than the anti-white zealot of today. Back then, most of the problems that we currently face were merely theoretical. A liberal back in the 60’s may have legitimately believed that the dire warnings of the segregationists, or those who opposed non-white immigration, were misplaced. It’s just a matter of simple fairness, right? Nothing more, everything will be fine. But everything is not fine, and it’s not going to be fine, at least until we remove this madness from our midst. As the massive amounts of rape, murder, displacement, degradation and destruction are well known and easily observed, can one still reasonably claim such a naive blindness? I don’t think so. What we are seeing in this video is a different sort of critter, the real flotsam and jetsam of the human spirit. It is disturbing to think of what kind of warped, perverted soul lurks behind that white face. Or, is there anything resembling a soul in there at all? Creepy. In a prehistoric hunter gatherer group, it is likely that a creepy and hostile (to his own group, no less!) person would have been run off. They didn’t have prisons, they didn’t have detention centers. The Greeks had ostracism, the Amish have shunning, and regular European communities had the concept of running a person out of town on a rail. This is a natural human tendency, to drive off the creeps and the subverters of one’s community, the “human” version of vermin and cockroaches. I’ve increasingly come to the conclusion that a healthy community/society/nation must drive away this sort of filth, for if it doesn’t, then community and connection loses meaning - which of course is where we are today. Probably one of the most tragic mistakes that European society has made is viewing jail, or even execution, as the standard punishment for pretty much all remotely serious offenses. By doing so it has internalized the problem, and made it a given that every cretinous piece of filth has some sort of “right” to live in a particular community, even though he may (or may not) be severely punished by said community. We insist upon keeping the poison within our system. To which I say, the rail is better. We must make it clear that such types are not ours, they are not us. They are botches and deformities, they are something other. They are poison, a contaminent that must be removed. A healthy society does not seek to imprison, reform, rehabilitate or even execute such filth (tempting though that may be). It just wants them gone. In contrast, our society of today is incredibly out of tune with our essential nature. 8
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:39 | #
Indeed! Free travel to the vibrant destination of their choice. Sorry, no return allowed. 9
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:58 | #
Simply not true. Just switch off the internet for two weeks and only rely on what comes out of the MSM. People who get their information off the net can forget how disconnected they are from people who get their information from the MSM. I grew up in and spent many years working in the middle of that “rape, murder, displacement, degradation and destruction” and i had a few conversations over the years with relatives who lived only a few miles away from it and they had no clue what was happening and more than that precisely because what was happening was so far removed from what they saw on the TV they couldn’t believe what i was saying. It was literally the big lie in action. They couldn’t believe the media would simply censor the reality i described to that degree. Occam’s razor made it much easier to believe i was making it up. (Which again comes back to the point that you have to destroy people’s faith in the media and ruling elites.) Talk to anyone who grew up in a majority black area. Most of them never talk about what those areas are like because they’ve found out from previous experience that people won’t believe it because the gap between the actual truth and the TV truth is too big. It’s the Big Lie effect. 10
Posted by anon / uh on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:03 | #
It is the singular magic of Jews to have so worked us over that we’re the creepy set to be run out of town. Which doesn’t prove much that wasn’t proved over and over by religious dogma. The feeling of communal threat can be detached from the community itself, very easy when it’s a diffuse out-bred nation-state, and applied to those actually working in the community’s interest. Whitey sacrificing himself on the same old altar of abstracta. I do like your use of the word “creep”. Good co-opt. We ought all to use that routinely to transfer that sense of foreignness & threat to those doing the shaming.
Trouble is they go elsewhere and keep at it. Our America is what it is owing to this restraint in dealing with the enemy. Either you blindfold & shoot like the Communists or you create pockets of festering resistance. 11
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:05 | # CC: The technical term is English Moralism. But, using witch-burnings as an indicator of “moralism”, look where the heavy numbers were: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_the_Early_Modern_period#Numbers_of_executions 12
Posted by Bill on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:25 | # Wandrin on September 11, 2011, 06:58 AM
Exactly! A few months ago I lost my ISP for 10 weeks, it was then I was beamed up into the alternate real life world of the BBC. I experienced exactly what Wandrin describes above. It was a gob smacking realisation of what was happening to us as a people. Upon my return to the virtual world, I posted here what a massive evil fraud is being perpetrated on millions of unsuspecting decent people. What is taking place is a brainwashing exercise on a whole population with the specific aim of implanting the subliminal suggestion of acceptance and co-operation of their own suicide. Talk about cognitive dissonance! It is a few years now since I first posted that in order to understand the real world we had to visit the alternate virtual world of the Internet. Last night, after spending most of the evening perusing the comments in the Telegraph’s O’neil piece, I rejoined my other half who happened to be watching the BBC’s last Night of the Proms from the Albert Hall in London, I understand the concert was also being linked on the big screen to a packed audience in Hyde Park. To our guests from across the pond, I suggest that such a gathering among their midst is most unlikely, (but I really don’t know) this one is strictly for the English. The BBC is a multi headed hydra, one among them being of immense creative talent. The annual traditional concert of the Last Night of the Proms being a superb example. http://www.bbc.co.uk/proms/whats-on/2011/september-10/85 The concert is of quintessential (quirky) Englishness and wholly peopled by quirky quintessential upper/middle class types, many of whom would fit the profile of GW’s white middle class gentiles. Yet here’s the rub, by this stage of the concert’s proceedings, this delirious flag waving throng were lifting off the roof by belting out such patriotic oldies as Land of Hope Glory, Rule Britannia, Jerusalem and many other supremacist numbers. Again I say, talk about cognitive dissonance! Am I missing something? 13
Posted by Bill on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:56 | # I suppose I should have included this comment in my above, (9.25 AM) it is a comment I have intended making many times before now, but for some reason have always forgot. The existence of the present working class (or non-working class as it should be) is the direct result of the manipulations and social engineering of the liberal classes themselves. These are the self same liberals who now vilify their own wilful creation. What an upside down insane world they have created. The subhumanising of the white non-working class really is a dangerous (intentional?) road to travel, as we all know where it leads. It is now evident in USA politics this vilification now includes all incorrect thinking whites, eventually (or sooner) it will explicitly apply to all whites. But it’s no use telling the useful idiots, is it? What’s their game? The EDL. Why cannot the EDL be regarded by nationalism as the the enemy of my enemy? Are the EDL of any use to nationalism or not? I think they are, at least they are highlighting a problem only if is only half the the problem. Half a loaf is better than no bread at all. 14
Posted by anon23 on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:43 | # If you (we) don’t fight back, this kind of thing will continue. The Left increasingly employs the language of hatred and violence against Whites, most recently in several examples involving Tea Party groups in the US, in what is clearly an attempt to incite violence and terrorism against White people. Where is this Hate-Talk leading them? What is the end-game? The problem with the EDL, and Nationalists in general, is that they still fight in the open. Find out the name and contact details of this POS and wait for them. Hit them hard and fast and leave them wondering WTF was that. Time to get off your clouds and stop justifying and intellectualising what, in the end, will turn out to be crude, vulgar, bloody gang warfare. We’re moving to the next stage of the struggle, and it’s not going to be pretty. 15
Posted by Trainspotter on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 12:40 | # Wandrin: “Simply not true.” I beg to differ, it is quite true. For example, almost all whites know that an influx of blacks and browns will degrade the local schools. That’s why it is said that whites now shop for school districts as opposed to houses. This is widely known. Ever heard of white flight? Similarly, virtually everyone understands the higher crime rates of non-white areas, which is why property values are so low in them. If you were correct, and people did not broadly know what is going on, we wouldn’t see these and many other trends. It doesn’t matter how many schools and neighborhoods are destroyed, the anti-white fanatics want more. The anti-whites aren’t clueless as you suggest. Your line of thought paints them as innocent, naive waifs. They aren’t. Those pieces of filth in the video above know exactly the harm they wish to cause whites, and they no doubt relish it. I’ve never met a white that didn’t understand this. Even the anti-white liberals know it, and for the most part choose their schools and neighborhoods accordingly. When is the last time you saw a white liberal middle class family in a black or brown neighborhood? I’ve known plenty of liberals, and none of them seemed to be blind when it came to house buying and school selecting. Funny how that is. Wandrin: “Just switch off the internet for two weeks and only rely on what comes out of the MSM. People who get their information off the net can forget how disconnected they are from people who get their information from the MSM. I grew up in and spent many years working in the middle of that “rape, murder, displacement, degradation and destruction” and i had a few conversations over the years with relatives who lived only a few miles away from it and they had no clue what was happening and more than that precisely because what was happening was so far removed from what they saw on the TV they couldn’t believe what i was saying.” Uh huh, sure. Go into any city, and basically everybody knows where the bad areas are, and they know that race is a pretty good marker for whether an area is good or bad. Market prices reflect this, it’s no big secret. Learn to look at what people do, not just what they say. Wandrin: “It was literally the big lie in action. They couldn’t believe the media would simply censor the reality i described to that degree. Occam’s razor made it much easier to believe i was making it up.” Remarkable that they managed to survive all these years, while being so clueless? Kind of makes you wonder, huh? Wandrin: (Which again comes back to the point that you have to destroy people’s faith in the media and ruling elites.) Well, we agree on one thing. But the broad generalities are known, as is reflected in people’s choices and market prices. Hell, if it were not for the race factor, there would be real estate steals all over the metro area where I live. Funny how people don’t scoop up all the “great buys.” A real brain teaser. Wandrin: “Talk to anyone who grew up in a majority black area. Most of them never talk about what those areas are like because they’ve found out from previous experience that people won’t believe it because the gap between the actual truth and the TV truth is too big.” You’re wrong. Many people do in fact talk about it. Of those who don’t, it’s largely because they have been trained that you simply don’t talk about such things. There is no real upside to it, only potential sanction. But again, look at what people do and the choices that they make, and a clearer picture becomes apparent. Wandrin: “It’s the Big Lie effect.” Only in part. In far bigger part it’s simply the out and out suppression of politically incorrect speech. Plenty of people have been visibly and publicly punished for running off the reservation. This creates a chilling effect on almost everyone else. After this chilling effect has settled in, it begins to bleed over into a seemingly different dynamic, that of status. Once it’s established that a person of importance “can’t” talk a certain way, and then you DO talk that way, then by definition you can’t be a high status male. If you were important, you wouldn’t talk of such things. Therefore, why should anybody listen to you? That’s pretty much where we are today. But there are other dynamics in play, and some of those are starting to work in our favor. We are currently experiencing just a snapshot in time, not the full movie. 16
Posted by Trainspotter on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:07 | # Anon: “It is the singular magic of Jews to have so worked us over that we’re the creepy set to be run out of town” At a certain level, but not really. The normal white guy on the street is not looking to run us out of town. I talk about racial issues with people all the time, from all walks of life. Rarely do I get a bad reaction. “Trouble is they go elsewhere and keep at it. Our America is what it is owing to this restraint in dealing with the enemy. Either you blindfold & shoot like the Communists or you create pockets of festering resistance.” Different world, different situation. Dumping the Jews to work their perfidy on nations that, at the time, were pretty much all white and relatively healthy was, to put it mildly, not a great idea. (though if those nations were truly healthy, they would not have accepted the Jews into their lands, much less allowing them influence). But today? If, for instance, we were able to establish a White Republic on the North American continent, what would be the harm of kicking the refuse to the curb? The United States is already hopelessly corrupted, what are a few more creeps like those in the video above going to do? You might make an exception for the most talented and egregious of our foes, but for most of them? Just send them back to the great cesspool, maybe with a traditional flogging on the way out. It’s sort of like the difference between dumping your garbage on a clean carpet as opposed to putting it in the garbage bin where it belongs. 17
Posted by Leon Haller on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:09 | # The white race will not survive unless it chooses to do so. Even with a White Republic, it will not survive through time unless the WR is a teleological Racial State, one whose entire existence is bound up with a permanent mission of saving the race. This will affect every aspect of life (that is, all political and social decisions must be subordinated to the overarching goal of racial permanence). In this sense, the Racial State will somewhat resemble medieval Christendom, in which boundaries of action (at least in theory) were contained within Christian metapolitical parameters. Christianity is compatible with this vision. Freedom as it is understood in the contemporary West is not. 18
Posted by anon / uh on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:22 | #
Have seen those numbers before, but I’ve had the thought that the greater incidence of witch-burnings in the German lands may have come from the German ... imagination. Consider the different types of fairy-tales entertained by your peoples; English went mad for faeries for a while, while regions such as Bohemia and the Black Forest gave us vampires, trolls, goblins and so on. In a word, the Germans were spooked; the “ghost” is a German creation. If you’ve ever walked through a German forest at night, you’ll understand what I mean. So it may not be far-fetched to speculate that it had as much to do with religious fervor & punctiliousness as bohunk illiteracy & fear. These were mountain-dwelling folk. What was the incidence of burnings in northern Germany on the heath? Likely as low as or lower than incidence in the Isles and colonies. 19
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:13 | #
1. People, in general, will always live their lives via the path of least resistance. Hence, they will go along with the prevailing sentiments/dynamics of the masses. In this case it’s “anti-racism”. How those prevailing sentiments/dynamics became part of the culture is another topic. 2. Racism and hate always were and always will be a part of the human condition. It’s how racism and hatred are managed that matters. Up until WWII, white racial supremacy and anti-semitism was commonplace and generally accepted as a matter of course. There was nothing unremarkable about it. Of course that all changed after WWII. Now it is whites who are the target for racial hatred and discrimination. Thus my theory goes along these lines: Whites, as all people, need an outlet for their hatred, so they invert their racial hatred or racism onto their own race simply because it’s socially acceptable to do so. Perverted? Yes, but it is now perfectly acceptable, even commendable by many, to display animus towards the white-race - especially white-Christians. Whereas to promote the interests of whites will manifest in all sorts of negative results. Hence whites, for the most part, are taking the path of least resistance. Moreover, I beleive this type of behavior is strongly rooted in plain ol’ cowardice. 20
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:31 | # Trainspotter 1) Time. 2) Age. 3) ethno-centric vs ideal-centric 4) ethno-centric vs ideal-centric (2) 5) “Your line of thought paints them as innocent, naive waifs. They aren’t. Those pieces of filth in the video above know exactly the harm they wish to cause whites, and they no doubt relish it.” Some of them literally are. Some of them are the archetypal Bishop’s daughter who thinks everyone is nice underneath. Some are simply middle-class student types who like the excitement of any kind of street violence and turn up to anything that might be like that. Then as you say there are the other kind. The two in the video are obviously the other kind. They are usually people from some white minority group who have a grudge against the majority: minority national or ethnic sub-groups, homosexuals, people with some kind of physical disfigurement (this was very common among early non-Jewish socialists as well). And Jews. I have no doubt that at least one of those two was a Jew. They’re vicious like that all the time. The target varies depending on what identity they’ve adopted at that moment but it’s the same really - disguised ethnic hatred. 6) Big Lie effect 21
Posted by MOB on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:42 | # CC: The technical term is English Moralism. GW: But, using witch-burnings as an indicator of “moralism”, look where the heavy numbers were: GW, the chart you offer as further evidence of German barbarianism needs some detail, such as this, also from Wikipedia, besides which, the estimate seems reminiscent of the 11 million: The Witch trials of Trier in Germany in the years from 1581 to 1593 was the perhaps biggest witch trial in Europe. The persecutions started in the diocese of Trier in 1581 and reached the city itself in 1587, where it was to lead to the death of about three hundred and sixty eight people, and was as such the perhaps biggest mass-execution in Europe in peace time. This counts only the executed within the city itself, and the real number of executed, counting also the executed in the entire witch hunts within the diocese as a whole, was thereby even larger. The exact number of executed have never been established; 1000 in total have been suggested but not confirmed[1] The witch trials In 1581, Johann von Schönenberg was appointed archbishop of the independent diocese of Trier. Schönenberg greatly admired the order of the Jesuits in which he was “Wonderfully addicted”; he built them a college, and as a part of his efforts to demonstrate his convictions, he ordered the purging of three groups in the society; first he rooted out the Protestants, then the Jews, and then the witches: three stereotypes of nonconformity. He was the one responsible for the massacres of Trier which, because of his initiative, support and patronage, became “of an importance quite unique in the history of witchcraft.” 22
Posted by anon / uh on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:53 | # Wandrin, Excellent analysis as ever. Let me add just one thing.
Not only. There is “tend-and-befriend”. Mightn’t it be that as feminism, very broadly speaking, has taken over the national psyche (England or America I would think), and more as possibilities of fighting or flight have become greatly narrowed, this “strategy” has become the default mode for whites? Observe how whites handle riled blacks much as white parents handle misbehaving children; they try to be their “friend”. All this earns them is more abuse. I don’t actually agree whitey is “more ethno-centric underneath”, because one ought to question this “underneath”. We should be seeking more of an operational definition of white flight than relying on easy essentialism. Whitey’s hamster may be off in the right direction but it misrepresents the reason not simply from fear, as that would imply he has challenged himself with direct questions and pushed it from consciousness; in reality whitey lacks the concepts or words to properly understand his flight, so you should be wary of ascribing him an identity consonant with ours. White flight could be called “functionally ethnocentric”, but “centric” is misleading — we must not for any reason pretend the normal white guy in the street, as Trainspotter charitably phrases it, or his wife or their neighbors are on our side, even if they tell gay jokes and so on. White flight is not default ethnocentrism. It is responding to a danger in a given environment. 23
Posted by anon / uh on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:59 | #
Huh. That seems more apposite: punishing non-conformers. Though the witches ought really to be in quotes! 24
Posted by Bo on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:34 | # A lot of this has to do with the ability to engage in public debate which urgently needs to be developed and modeled for the other diverse white Americans and Europeans and Atlantic Islanders. For some reason, white defenders are stuck in a mode of speech that is easily mocked and attacked on the level of the speech, not the level of the ideas. It is most likely that we allow the others to set the terms of debate (ideas versus name-calling) and the labels for categories of discourse. Here’s an example. It is clear that pluralism (or whatever it is called in England) commenced to become a national doctrine in America around the beginning of the 20th Century, and that it morphed into multiculturalism in the mid-20th Century, and has now morphed at the beginning of the 21st Century into multi-racialism which features a kind of war of all against all. [Multiculturalism was just an effort to demographize every little group or tendency and organize them to undermine white-inspired culture.] So commence discourse by claiming that multiculturalism is dead (reminiscent of the claim that God is dead) and has been replaced by multi-racialism. If we own the label, we can dictate the content to be unpacked from it, but just the label itself will serve to awaken some sleepy white peoples. Who knows where things like this could lead? And there are hundreds of ways to re-constitute our modes of discourse. Our contemporary notions of public discourse are largely an expression of inauthentic white speech which lacks white centricity, and thus lacks traction or legitimacy in today’s world. Model white speech in a white-centric context, and you’ll get some startlingly positive response from the sleepy. 25
Posted by NV on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:39 | # The man in the video is called Anthony Richardson. http://www.anthonyrichardson.net/contact.html Perhaps you might like to message him. 26
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:42 | # anon
Interesting. I’ve seen that in practise but hadn’t seen any research on it. Females have a different average approach to conflict. If the average male response was x and the average female response is y then the feminist shift moved the response from x to (x+y)/2. Makes sense. This can be used of course. Mainstream White females are much easier to influence with stories of bad things happening to White children in inner cities than males are. .
I’m only really aiming at the tabloid version to be honest so it probably is over-simplified. It came out of arguing with people and analyzing what approachs worked better or worked at all e.g Bob Whittaker’s Mantra idea. I realised the path of least resistance i’d been drifting into revolved around attacking and weakening their faith in their priesthood first and only putting an alternative after i’d weakened that resistance. Hence deciding there was a split between biological instinct on the one hand and group cohesion through unifying idealogy on the other and that for most white people unifying idealogy was dominant. I call it ethno-centric versus ideal-centric for tabloid reasons. It’s a shorthand that gets the idea across. Other people can do the academic version 27
Posted by NV on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 19:12 | # He looks like the sort of guy that would have been on the phone to the GESTAPO to report his neighbours. There is nothing to this kind of turd. He is just interested in being on the winning side. Wanker. 28
Posted by Trainspotter on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 20:25 | # Wandrin, I don’t disagree with many of the individual points that you make, so there is really no need to address your post line by line. Nevertheless, there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that the broad white population is well aware of racial differences, at least at a general level. White flight, the search for “good” (read mostly white) school districts, and lower property values in black and brown sections of a metro area provide ample evidence of this. The market reflects this broad situational awareness. If people really were as oblivious as you suggest, literally tens of thousands of whites would be slaughtered every year, as they blindly wandered into the non-white sections of town at all areas(hey, it’s no different here than in my own lily white neighborhood!). People know better, again, at least in general terms. I don’t understand why you try to downplay this, given the overwhelming evidence in support. Market outcomes alone tell the tale, regardless of what personal anecdotes one wishes to tell. None of this is to say that the brainwashing hasn’t been enormous and often effective. It has indeed been effective, particularly in convincing whites that blacks and browns are just a fact of life; they aren’t going anywhere. For example, it is rare to see a commercial in which more than two whites are pictured together. In any group of three or more people, there is ALWAYS a non-white. More and more often, whites are pictured as the minority in a largely benevolent non-white world. It’s all good! Again, the message is that non-whites are just a fact of life, and it would be unnatural and perhaps a bit sinister for any scenario to be all white. This leads to one of our biggest problems, namely that most whites don’t see any way out of this mess.They’ve never heard of, much less contemplated, the idea of the white ethnostate, which is the only real solution. Even if they have heard of it, such an outcome seems like pure fantasy for the time being, and in any event is saddled with baggage such as the holocaust. White preservation means naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. The propaganda campaign has been extremely effective on that point. So in the meantime, it’s best to simply keep your head down, do your best to move to a decent neighborhood (read, few blacks and browns), and try to muddle along as best you can. To speak out means nothing but punishment and sanction. Ironically, the person who speaks the truth and is punished is more likely to have to live in a black or brown infested area, simply because the economic penalties imposed upon him mandate such an outcome. By not rocking the boat, he increases his chances of living in a decent neighborhood and sending his kids to good schools. Think about that for a moment. If people don’t see a way out of a particular problem, then it makes sense for them to try to make some sort of an accomodation. So they do. This is one of the reasons why they get so excited about a non-white who actually seems to take their side, such as Walter Williams, Sowell, or Cain - or even someone like Obama who can, wonder of wonders, pronounce “ask.” This excites many whites because, given that they have been effectively taught that multiracialism is a given, such people offer the promise (shallow and empty though it may be) of a better accommodation. Maybe this won’t be so bad after all? (Ha!) What can I say? Unrequited love is a bitch, but that doesn’t make it uncommon. Some whites get angry with a person who is “pro-white,” because there is the sense that he is just rocking the boat and will, so to speak, bring the heat down while accomplishing nothing positive. “What, are you trying to get me in trouble or something? What’s wrong with you?” The status dynamic which I mentioned above only exacerbates this problem. Current white behavior, deplorable though it may be from our perspective, makes a certain sort of sense under the status quo. In any event, some of the take home points: 29
Posted by PF on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:09 | # This letter attempts to explain Being, the same difficult endeavor GW took upon himself so many times. The jist of it is: we are all imprinted with a negative emotional imprint in early life. Our subsequent thinking and doing arises out of a desire to control and sedate these surfacing emotions, which arise in us cyclically and never go away. Motivating each of our behaviors is a negative emotional signature - however we have deliberately shut down feeling and externalized our awareness, so we may be totally unaware that this is what is driving us. By feeling that signature, we integrate it. John Lennon wrote in one of his last songs: “Feel your own pain.” and this is the essence of the practical advice contained in the letter. Out of an emotional body that is integrated, the realization of being arises spontaneously - whether as mental clarity in a situation where one’s judgement was previously clouded by anger, or as something more powerful and less susceptible to verbal description. This frees us from circuitous externalized intellectual analysis of reality and allows us to interface with and eventually impact our real life condition, bringing movement to where before there was only stuckness. 30
Posted by NV on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:29 | # Robert Reis, The activities you see depicted in your little montage are not British cuulture in its entirety. They are a stale caricature of it. Shame on you for attempting to defame an entire race of people because a tiny minority of white people drink to excess. Idiot. 31
Posted by MOB on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 22:08 | #
He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence. (Blake) 32
Posted by FB on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 22:28 | # Conservative pol Cameron illustrates the limits of electoral politics for ethno-nationalists in a racially heterogeneous country where all democratic parties must pander to “newcomers” to get elected. He’s just an opportunistic pol like everybody else who play the democratic game of numbers and nose counts. 33
Posted by Wandrin on Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:37 | # Trainspotter
Cross-purposes maybe. An analogy might help. Everyone says adultery is wrong. Everyone says racism is wrong. In the above case adultery - or lust generally - is the instinct part. Religious strictures on adultery are the idealogical part. You wouldn’t say that because everyone commits adultery that would neccessarily mean they would say in public that adultery was ok. There’s much more likely to be a public virtue, private vice, attitude. It’s the same with race realism. While people accept the multicult religion every time they move away from black people the more publically race-liberal they’ll become. It’s like someone committing adultery going to church afterwards. If people on our side don’t recognize this then you get the last 40 years of people waving the equivalent of Color of Crime in people’s faces and not understanding why they’re not getting anywhere. The color of crime is great work and should be waved in people’s faces but for it to be effective you also have to bring down people’s belief in the mainstream RELIGION of the multicult. And you attack a religion by attacking the priesthood. The reason i go on about it is because it leads to more efficient tactics. (Secondarily because i understand the different types i can go into a left-wing forum and weed out the bishop’s daughters from the kind represented in that video but that’s not relevant here.) .
There is no British culture. There was a British culture in the 50s but since then it has been systematically and deliberately destroyed leaving Sodom & Gomorrah. The point is not to preserve anything - hence the problem with people who are naturally conservative - the point is to overthrow the current poisonous culture and replace it. 34
Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:16 | #
It kinda proves CC’s point. “We did not behave ignobly towards our Je… er witches.” LOL 35
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:02 | # Your angst-ridden projection and womanly hand wringing is certainly pointed in the wrong direction, PF. Not that your aim was ever much good, still I expect better. 36
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:41 | #
Yet if we pay attention we find that this Moralism finds its most perfect expression in the English and their Northern European extended phenotypes. This is hardly bad, indeed much to the good, when kept within certain bounds. I mean within the bounds which forfends the use of this Moralism (by the English and their Northern European extended phenotypes) as justification for the genocide of its very adherents and against those that its adherents regard as moral reprobates; for instance, as justification for the genocide which the English verily committed against Germans. 37
Posted by Foundation on Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:08 | # She (PJH) is indeed a one-off eh, GW. Though she be of a different class she be from Dorset, like me. My end of nationalism is a far more emotional place and because of that we, my English brothers and I, have managed to infiltrate both the UAF and the EDL. Neither group is real; not real in the sense of knowing what one would die for, and live again for, and die and live, a thousand times. Though they do inspire deeds bring results that words can only imagine. Thank you GW, for the inspiration that words bring. You articulate so well what really matters. You have that duality about you. I go by gut instinct, which serves me just as well as your intellect serves you. To survive takes brain and a lot of brawn. We therefore fight on two fronts my friend. Things are about to get very nasty all over Northern Europe and we will be right in there, in the thick of it. The second half of this decade will be the decider, of that I’m sure. 38
Posted by Foundation on Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:03 | # Forgot to say GW the bloke who shot the video is indeed a middle class bloke called Ben Tonge who went to Shrewsbury School (as did Charles Darwin) and later Goldsmiths, University of London. The other bloke talking to camera is his mate, Anthony Richardson - or possibly Ben Melchiours as they’ve been outed on the web and are back-peddling like mad denying any involvement with either the UAF or ‘politics’ in general. They are both with the UAF. 39
Posted by PF on Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:25 | # CC wrote:
Your proper place in the universal hierarchy is that of glorified customs official. The task most in line with your natural inclination is: scaring the shit out of unfortunate passers by. You aspire to join the ranks of the criminal and gangster classes, who are legitimated into soldiery during times of war. In your eyes, the reckless self-endangerment of he who has nothing to lose is equated with bravery. Your philosophy contains a secret emergency exit, code-named ‘deathwish’. If you were to accede to power, the fanatical gleam in your eye would cause many Brutii to ponder how they might make you say Et Tu. People with a developed sense of intuition will sense - however vaguely- that your presence endangers them. Women and children will distance themselves from you naturally. The only reason I engage in ongoing sparring with you is because I currently have unresolved issues relating to WWII. 40
Posted by Mr Voight on Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:32 | # Just as an aside, I LOATHE that scumbag Peter Singer But without Peter Singer and his Animal Liberation we wouldn’t have had Morrissey. Or Bridget Bardot. How many WNs would publicly say that ‘you can’t help but feel the Chinese are a subspecies’? Don’t underestimate the racial insensitivity of the animal rights left. Wasn’t just uncle Adolf who had a soft spot for critters. There’s a definite convergence between extra-species empathy and intra-species hostility. 41
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:01 | #
I think you’ll find that Uh is better equipped than I to aid you in clearing the bats from your belfry, PF. The only advice I can offer you is that the next time you feel the urge to shit your pants in public, you ought resist it as best you can. 44
Posted by Lurker on Tue, 20 Sep 2011 05:29 | # The man in the video is called Anthony Richardson. http://www.anthonyrichardson.net/contact.html Perhaps you might like to message him. Attempting to follow that link it would appear that Mr Richardson has, for some inexplicable reason, opted for a more low profile online presence. 45
Posted by Clare on Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:18 | # I’m a vegan but I disagree with Singer because his moral framework has no use in the real world. You can kill someone painlessly in their sleep, and sleeping people are only potentially conscious because they only waken up if they’re not killed in their sleep. Does anyone see the parallel to abortion here? For his ethical framework to protect the lives of sleeping humans, he would need to modify it in a way that would protect unborn children (and unborn animal) as well because their DNA defines their potential for ‘personhood’ when conscious. But of course he’s right that animal abuse is wrong, even Aquinas said so wilst denying that animals had soulss. Vivisection was almost unheard of in traditional civilisations, and that was for a reason. But utilitarianism doesn’t work anyway, virtue ethics is the only moral framework that consistently works. 46
Posted by Robert Reis on Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:00 | # Mob Rule at the University of Wisconsin But Anti-Israel Protestors Convicted for Disrupting Speech Posted: 17 Oct 2011 11:00 AM PDT Yet another example of the intolerance of the left was enacted at the University of Wisconsin when a mob shut down a press conference put on by the Center for Equal Opportunity (“Studies Show Severe Racial Discrimination at University of Wisconsin,” by John Anderson, Youth for Western Civilization). This is a truly amazing example of the power of the left to shut down public debate when the interests of Whites are being compromised. Demonstrators knocked down employees of the hotel and shouted down the speaker to the point that he simply left.
The issue at the University of Wisconsin (my alma mater) is that the highest-scoring Blacks and Latinos score below the lowest quartile of Whites and Asians. As the YWC article notes, The odds ratio favoring African Americans and Hispanics over whites was 576-to-1 and 504-to-1, respectively, using the SAT and class rank while controlling for other factors. Thus, the median composite SAT score for black admittees was 150 points lower than for whites and Asians, and the Latino median SAT score was 100 points lower. Using the ACT, the odds ratios climbed to 1330-to-1 and 1494-to-1, respectively, for African Americans and Hispanics over whites. For law school admissions, the racial discrimination found was also severe, with the weight given to ethnicity much greater than given to, for example, Wisconsin residency. Thus, an out-of-state black applicant with grades and LSAT scores at the median for that group would have had a 7 out 10 chance of admission and an out-of-state Hispanic a 1 out of 3 chance—but an in-state Asian with those grades and scores had a 1 out of 6 chance and an in-state white only a 1 out of 10 chance. 47
Posted by brain on Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:25 | # A great outery was raised in many American publications about the disgraceful defection of American prisoners to the enemy. However, the percentage of American who actually collaborated with the Communists or really experienced any basic change in their beliefs was quite small. A study of 235 Air Force personnel who had been imprisoned by the Communists in China and Korea revealed that attempts to indoctrinate them had been largely ineffective (Biderman, 1957). Only about 15 per cent of all American prisoners of war capitulated, usually without realizing how greatly they were aiding the enemy’s psychological warfare campaign by so doing. While only 5 per cent were courageous enough to refuse any capitulation or cooperation, the vast majority (80 per cent) managed to maintain their own beliefs by cooperating as little as possible and sitting by, trying not to arouse enemy antagonism but at the same time not giving in (Segal, 1957). 48
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:15 | # - enjoying this post and the comments.
Regarding the use of the term, “left”, it really isn’t much of a theoretical hurdle, as I’m not really speaking a different language from ethnonationalists but rather adding a few words to the vocabulary that make for articulation as to where our people are otherwise misdirected into an overall liberal framework; viz. a White ethnonational left is importantly different from Marxist international, anti-national left and Cultural Marxist anti-White left (Graham Lister suggests this distinction in comment #2); with the added consolation that those who have been criticizing “the left” in good national faith, are understood as criticizing the international, anti-national left, which are indeed acting as liberalizing factors against our borders and bounds; whereas a White ethnonational left, its unionizing factor, is a bulwark against such liberalism (and its uncorrecting - for minimal social accountability - susceptibility to runaway disaster); including the liberalism and other no-account foolishness headed for disaster that would gain entry or steering by means of the no account, anti-social right wing elements snuck-in by “third positionism” or as Keith Woods so aptly pronounces it “turd positionism.” A few very recent examples of people preparing the way for the Jew harvest: In his podcast, MARKS, SIGNS & SIGNALS WARFARE, “Semiogogue” admonishes “anthropocentrism” and all the stereotypes of “the left” that ((the Madison Ave.))) cottage industry can muster in favor of what? Well of course, natural fallacy. IN EBL 29: Myths of Revolution, Part 2 (with Cultured Thug), Josh Neal presides over a doltish group extolling turd positionism, as it affords a re invigoration of Hitler/Nazism and Mussolini’s fascism, which they maintain can and should be applied only more forcibly and emphatically this time. As if this epistemological blunder won’t provoke inter-European conflict, the kind that yields vast Jew harvests. PF in comment #3 makes a beautiful statement against this (though not explicitly), entirely consonant with my own arguments. There are others shepherding a younger crew, Lords of the Flies style, like Patrick (name withheld), who insist on third positionism, yes, for that reason - introducing Hitler. When I noted that this right wing element of third positionism was introducing pernicious and catastrophic natural fallacy, Patrick tried to deny it, could only suggest that I was being too academic. However, my first example of destructive, no account right wing positions being introduced by third postionism was Christianity. Patrick castigated me for not being well versed in fascism, saying that I should read more Gentile, then I’d supposedly know that third positionism rejects Christianity. But this is the typical kind of frustration and tedium one is confronted with by right wingers (or third positionists, apparently). They are riveted on basic, catastrophic errors that would take a minimum of honest inquiry in service of European peoples to rebut (Gentile considered himself ideological Christian). I tried to explain to Patrick the loyalty and fervor that he admired in leftists which he decried as lacking in rightists; viz., the union (leftism) upholds social accountability, compassion, respect and honored place for those not at the top of the game in a particular moment, whereas the no account “that’s just the way it is” brutality of right wingers is prone to breed fear, conflict, disloyalty and disorganization (or catastrophic, over the top reaction). Thus, in fear of the right wingers lack of compassion and social accountability and the compassion and social accountability that they experience of their left unionization by contrast, they can transcend cynicism, manifest loyalty and passion to fight for a coherent position. Patrick just talked over me. I must let him learn on his own (and hope that he does). Keith Woods is big on de Turd Position. The kid got 20,000 views for his foolishness. And Woods is under the wing of the Regnery/Gottfried circus masters, its German Jew triangulation juggling act, of adherent White reactionaries, Richard Spencer and Ed Dutton. The McSpencer Group Live: “Spiteful Mutants” and the BLM Religion. They all go along with the Jewish misdirection program, e.g.,see here. Dutton consumes the characterology of the left in utter credulity - see here, this article was as much, if not more apropos to Dutton than Spencer. Wandrin and Trainspotter make fantastic comments, but Trainspotter unnecessarily argues against Wandrin, where Wandrin is observing a step in process that would be experienced much more in Europe (denial of the reality of blacks and more convenience to go along with media disinformation about them). What excellent insights they both provide, what a great site that Majorityrights is and fantastic it would be for the likes of Wandrin, Trainspotter and some others to re-appear. Looking forward to MOB’s and Dasein’s comments… And patting myself on the back for having gotten rid of Haller and Thorn. 49
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:50 | # These YouTube guys probably don’t understand that you have abstracted left and right from the liberal system - thereby treating it as a universal paradigm - and then processed the result through a sufficiently social (or sociological) filter to find zero gravitational force on “the right”. Perhaps the way to talk to these people (who very likely mechanically perceive all nationalism as being right-wing) is to find it in you to grant “the right” the same racial redemption that you grant “the left”. After all, this is the case when blood, the lingua franca of ethnic nationalist discourse, is the only or prior consideration. I expect your modernity/postmodernity analysis catches them out too, if they even know that postmodernity means beyond the point of ontological transition. I think, also, that while they may have a finessed conception of modernity, they may not consider it interesting or necessary to characterise the future-world they want to see in the terms of this other narrow philosophical label. As it is you, Daniel, who is imposing these interpretations on the world of their struggle, it is also you who must treat them with all consideration (while still slaughtering the Hitlerism, of course). 50
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:24 | #
I have not merely abstracted these terms, I’ve followed a depth grammar which makes sense cross contextually. To say that I find “zero gravitational force on the right” is not accurate. The right tends toward objectivity, quests for truth, principles and nature irrespective of human subjective and relative interests. As such, it provides indispensable feedback. The left tends toward social group accountability. As such, it provides for indispensable calibration. As such, if the right is to have relevance, be of true value, and not wind up being vulnerable to having its borders and bounds (including national) transgressed and being maneuvered into catastrophic reaction, its findings must be gauged against the group systemic interests of praxis - where social accountability, thus correctivity, systemic homeostasis by contrast to runaway may be established. The concept of anthropocentrism of world view structured through our group unionization tends to correspond with the left in common parlance, along with social accountability, along with attendant conscientiousness of social indebtedness and correctivity. The descriptiveness and prompt for attendance as such does two good things: it turns off people (the anti-social if not psycopathological) who are not thinking deeply or well about our predicament and our requirements and it gets our recovery into motion, gaining trust, reason to be loyal, will to fight, transcending cynicism and bringing aboard the responsible and the intelligent.
Again, the right is more like feedback. Of course they can talk about race, genetics, nature, biology, facts etc, with detached rigor…what they are doing is invaluable…however, we do not stay in a detached state of objectivity, we are ensconced in our subjective and relative interests together with those of whom we are interdependent. The right’s handling of the marginally more speculative concept of nationalism is perhaps only a little clumsy but precarious and can really come off the rails into runaway, where they put this correctivity aside for natural fallacy or when Abrahamic religion starts working its universalist (for goyim) speculative chimera.
Well, I’ve explained it; and it is far better warranted than to say that it is just “mine” ..I am certainly not going to go by their “understandings” as it is clear to me that they have been misled.
Fuck them. I have no interest what so ever in Keith Woods “meta-modernity” .. it isn’t finessed enough, especially as it would attempt to ignore a key and brilliant move of post modernity - putting an end to its pernicious charmed loop, punctuating an end to the epoch; further allowing for its better aspects while also having the sophistication to value tradition where it is helpful, but more importantly, to respect and protect inherited biological forms and systems. Fuck “meta modernity”
I am not imposing them and I am not rendering them by myself, this is what intelligent analysts know and understand and what these dupes directed by Jewish interests don’t get (they are getting imposed upon by Jewish interests).
GW, you find it near impossible to take a complement and a gesture of reconciliation. I have acknowleged that those mentally retarded enough to remain dedicated to the Jewish altercasting of right wing or turd positionism can be seen as speaking a common language with me… They (as you) do not have to grovel and undo their prior “analysis and critique” of “the left”... all that has to be done is to insert the idea, making a mental note, as it were, that they are speaking of an international/anti ethnonational left. But what must be done differently, including if you want a sound critique of Uncle Adolf, is that you have to stop trying to trivialize the platform that I’ve laid out. It’s solid. Furthermore, the novelty of the idea of “left ethnonationalism” provides more opportunity for us to define it in our interests: that it is not like Marxism, all about centralized planning; it can have private property, individual liberty, free enterprise, unequal outcomes and so on.. ..and it is certainly not about Cultural Marxism, anti-White, just the opposite. 51
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:10 | #
But that’s not how ethnic nationalism processes European individualism. It’s how liberalism does that, driving a wedge in our life in common. You are, in essence, imprisoning the right in its liberalism but dressing up the left in the characteristics of ethnic nationalism. In truth, ethnic nationalism does not conflict individualism and altruism. It coheres them … makes them consonant. The whole point about my product of the over-arching Ontological Transit AND yours of a prescribed turn to postmodernity is that we are both looking for a way to put the sub-human other-thing into the past, and it is the SAME and ONLY way. But you haven’t understood the universality of mechanicity. As regards postmodernity as an epochal turn away from modernity, I would like to know what aspects of modernity (in its holistic epochal sense, not merely as a general label for the bad stuff) are better than the feudalism that preceded it, and how you propose to hang on to them. For example, how do you hang on to technology yet filter out technologisation? For me the answer is that discrimination for the good in modernity is not prescribed for an entire population but can only be emergent in that population’s life in some form. We strive, therefore, not for postmodernity per se but for the authenticity of the natural identity. This is something a people knows how to do, and wants to do.
We really are NOT a social group, as you know. Ethnic nationalism does not deal in social groups. It does not unionise the socially disparate and accidental, but acts from unconcealed relation and singularity. The best one can say of a social modus is that it has some political use. It is not part of, and does not tend to, the truth of our peoplehood.
The masses don’t much exist in the Western European psychology. Conformism and mutual adhesion are commonalities of Eurasian and, especially, East Asian thinking, and explain the authoritarian nature of government in both. But our psychology is individualistic, and the issue facing us, as nationalists, is therefore one of coherence. This is why the conflict model of systemic liberalism’s left and right is a non-optimal starting point … the wrong thing to preserve ... when we contemplate our way forward.
You have hold of truth here, but your attachment of “STEM mentality” to “the right-wing” is a generalisation and therefore at odds with the “right-wing” individualism you are also at such pains to condemn. 52
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:28 | # Compliments I don’t need, Daniel. On gestures of reconciliation, I have to align your work with mine without my own necessarily having advanced at all out of its search for foundation. That is doubly difficult when you dismiss foundation as such. 53
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:54 | #
The King is was the individual of particular, special warrant. With that, the European Right was processed in line with the individual from its onset. The left was warranted by the group. My concept makes consistent sense. I will continue to use it. You may continue with your bullshit as you wish.
54
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:09 | #
DanielS: You are a fucking jealous liar, I am not imprisoning anyone. You are trying to imprison us to your vain autobiography, trying desperately to get me to fit the stereotype of the villain of your autobiography, with you the hero to the uneducated dolt reactionary, who wants to believe he has common sense whereas, in truth, he goes by a script handed him by Jewry. I am not dressing anything up. I am observing that the left corresponds with social group, and the nation is that. I also observe that the Liberal, like the Rightist, is acting on a premise of narrowing warrant and independence from accountability to social group bounds and borders.
55
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:21 | #
My concept does not conflict individualism with altruism either. But the initial, classic phase, liberal individualism, was a liberalism of class borders, thus altruism toward the full nation. Cross contextually, Liberalism makes sense as an opening of borders and boundaries; and while in England at first, “classic phase”, it was primarily looked upon as traversing these borders by one way accountability from the upper class to the lower classes, eventually the concept was red caped to transgress even national bounds. Thus, the individual acting independently from group bounds is merely expressing their commonality, joining in solidarity with their universal brotherhood of man. You can say it’s the modernists paradox, “be different so that you can fit in.” 56
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:25 | # Daniel, has it occurred to you that there is no architecture universal to all political systems; that these systems are causal, cause dictates form, and forms dictate our approach to analysis? 57
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:28 | #
DanielS: Yes, my concept of ethnonationalism coheres individualism and altruism as well; starting with altruistic concern (accountability) to the full group of the nation firstly (irrespective of former class boundaries) as the full nation becomes the class/union. That functioning, they can consider where concern for out groups is a good idea. 58
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:31 | #
GW, my analytical framework makes consistent sense. Analogous to a keen radar tracking device, it would be foolish for me to drop it simply because it hurts your pride. Please wait for me to shovel through your first load of bullocks before adding more to it. 59
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:39 | #
I observe pattern, I do not purely abstract liberal paradigmatics. If I did, if the hermeneutic circle was not accountable to our emergent nature, it would be Cartesian, in violation of White post modernity’s primary task; and troubling the essential task of coherence, whether through emergence, or its complementary process of hermeneutics. 60
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:42 | #
Maybe you are the one who does not understand that hermeneutic process and emergentism are complementary - both anti-Cartesian and neither vulnerable to reductionism. 61
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:46 | #
By means of thorough enough social accountability. 62
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:57 | #
Off hand, I don’t see a necessary conflict with my thinking here. But with this next statement, I do have a big problem:
Here you do something egregious. You are using the word “post modern” in hopes of a new audience, who has not seen and is perhaps too lazy to look at my sorting out of post modernity proper, its proper function which I call “White Post Modernity” as opposed to the Jewish red caping designed to make people believe this very necessary concept is just so much hyper relative, da-da nonsense and deconstructionism. Thus, you are trying to use the leverage of the vast disinformation campaign of Jewish academia and media, to put aside a crucial concept that Europeans need to negotiate our group survival and instead put it aside for your dinosaur bullocks, the product of your gargantuan ego, the farts wafting up from your armchair which are supposed to replace important ideas because they hurt the gargantuan ego ensconced in your autobiography as slayer of academe (no matter how good and necessary an idea, if it looks to you like it has passed through its halls, comes from there, and not from your armchair…) 63
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:11 | #
One does not have to focus on our social relations, but they are there and unavoidable to some extent. In our case, in the context of your boomer generation’s vast fuck up and misdirection, your stupid selfishness, social attention is an extremely important correction. Even Bowery does not have an excuse to be so put off by the word social with the understanding that we need to be sensitizing accountability to the social ties that we care about, while his aversion to being forced to be “social” in what has become a hyper mixed, proposition nation, with people not of his European ethnie, let alone outside of European ethnie, is perfectly normal. But in your case, GW, there is less excuse to be so averse. Nevertheless, your aversion does stem from your generation, your position, your STEM predilection and reaction to Jewish academic red caping abuse of social concepts, to where you were supposed to be “socially concerned” with everybody but English people. Even so, don’t fixate me on the framework of the social as you will try in your endless will to fix me to a point of “error” and trivialize. Though it is imortant, it is not the only medium by which I examine our plight, though it remains important, despite what your right wing cohorts, egged on by Jewish misdirection would like for you to believe. 64
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:15 | #
DanielS: Yes it does. It might focus for a time on biological aspects, or other screens of investigation but it does deal with social groups, inevitably. 65
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:30 | #
Oh, you are beyond a fucking asshole. You are a the embodiment of obstruction and destruction of the concepts that we most vitally need. If your hokum pokus about unconcealed singularity leads some autists to function in group interests so be it, but the concept of unionization is no rub to their natural affinity. Continue to attack what is important, to straw man it, and I will continue to overcome your horseshit. In fact, that’s what it is like having to deal with you. It’s like being treated like stable boy, every morning having to shovel out piles of your horse shit. 66
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:41 | #
That simply is not true. You are often prone to make claims like this for the mere convenience of your “ontology project”, claims like a dump truck full of dirt loaded onto interlocutors, so that your singularity, in the end, is nothing but you and your sublime armchair farts while anybody who has the nerve to have relevant knowledge, especially if it is important knowledge, is to be buried. 67
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:51 | #
First of all, psychology is your disease. It is not my problem. I thought I heard you extolling the Austrian School/Randian “virtue” of Margaret Thatcher; and now you are only more clearly revealing the destructive bullshit that you adhered to in your selfish interests, while you do not want to face the social destruction of it.
I do wonder why you are so stupid. But it seems to be generational, because Bowery is prone the same vast strawman, paranoic misinterpretation. My platform does not call for conformity. It does call for borders and border maintenance for people who want to remain citizens of the ethnonation. If you say that that is imposing conformity then you simply are not reasonable. GW:But our psychology is individualistic, and the issue facing us, as nationalists, is therefore one of coherence. I deal with coherence all the time, have for years; again, you are banking on new comers coming here and following your suggestion that I am the one who is behind the curve. Furthermore, the whole concept of “paradigmatic conservatism” accommodates the individualistic tendencies of European peoples. I have made that clear.
68
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:01 | #
It is not optimal for your ego project. But the conflict model is optimal where we, as a group, are in conflict with other groups, which is the case. Anti-racism is against our European group(s). Hence, White Left Ethnonationalism is perfectly optimal to hold up against the conflict that we are subject to from other groups. But furthermore, it does not adhere conflict where they are largely under control (it is not permanent revolution as in the Jewish red cape), but rather provides for intra and inter group accountability and group homeostasis is provided; i.e., it can give way to coordination where conflict is not presenting. 69
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:13 | # DanielS: Again, the right is more like feedback. Of course they can talk about race, genetics, nature, biology, facts etc, with detached rigor…what they are doing is invaluable…however, we do not stay in a detached state of objectivity, we are ensconced in our subjective and relative interests together with those of whom we are interdependent.
1) Yes, STEM predilection does tend to gravitate to the right. 2) Liberalism and individualism stem from the same objectivist source as right wingism. But I have NEVER “condemned individualism”, let alone been at “pains” to do do. GW, isn’t strawmanning bad enough… 70
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:19 | #
I don’t dismiss your “foundations” so much as recognize that we have foundations enough to proceed, and indeed must proceed in our defense. Even if our requirements weren’t so urgent, if there weren’t better foundations than there actually are, there would be no reason to brook your misguided, eccentric obstruction to anywhere near the extent you have for the past eight years. 71
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 14:48 | #
Good god, man, where do you get this stuff? We are Europeans, not Jews. We do not hyper-inflate our discrimination for evolutionary fitness to the level of a millenarian supremacism. We do not, therefore, confuse a putative historical turning-point with our shared natural interests. The man on the Clapham omnibus is not, therefore, motivated to seize upon “postmodernity” as his goal, and he won’t take orders from humanities profs and what-have-you about the correct hermeneutic interpretation of the historiography. If you are not actually confusing a proxy beloved of humanities profs with the ways of the blood, you are certainly seeking to make them complimentary when they’re manifestly not. Juvenal might have been a satirist, but his “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” was tailor-made for you. Who decides that your hermeneutically-derived prescription is grounded in emergent Nature, rather than just more human self-estrangement and vanity. Yet more academics?
What foundations? 72
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:39 | # Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:48 | # DanielS: You are using the word “post modern” in hopes of a new audience, who has not seen and is perhaps too lazy to look at my sorting out of post modernity proper, its proper function which I call “White Post Modernity” as opposed to the Jewish red caping designed to make people believe
Where I get it from is your invoking the term without your showing any indication or concern to recognize the vast, important difference between how I’ve shown the term is to be defined by those who would care about European peoples - viz. White Post Modernity - as opposed to the popular misrepresentations. 73
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:44 | #
What a bunch of absolute horseshit that is. Our greatest European philosophers recognize that there are epochal turning points, and wrong turns - Heidegger was among those who recognized this. 74
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:53 | #
DanielS: You may think that you’ve said something good and clever there, chalk one up for your autobiography. But the man, the ethnonationalst, will be motivated by actions, rule structures that he can understand and see are in his interests, e.g., unionization of his people, concern for his interests, by narratives, maybe dumbed-down, maybe not, but he will be motivated. You can try to focus on one kind of thing that I might say to look at a problem on one occasion and try to say that that is the only way that I have to look matters, but it is a lie. This is just you being a jealous, STEM asshole. 75
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:00 | #
How stupid are you GW? First of all, as I have explained many times (though it never gets through)...I am not the one who is confused. I clarify how important concepts are supposed to be used in European interests. Your proclaiming concepts, e.g., Aristotle’s praxis as not complimentary with “the blood” is totally idiotic. You simply do not know what you are talking about. And philosophically, you are not only not worth taking seriously, you are an absolute liability. 76
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:05 | #
DanielS: What prescriptions, asshole? How many “prescriptions” have I made?
77
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:25 | #
DanielS: What prescriptions, asshole? I can think of few suggestions, but how could I ever impose prescriptions on a dolt?
DanielS: I never said grounded in nature…growing from nature as all phenomenon must, but not grounded in subhuman nature sheerly, no. It would not be so inauthentic to distinctive humanness. Rather the suggestions are grounded in praxis, and consonant with human nature, as Aristotle would suggest.
DanielS: So, no, it is not self estrangement at all, it is rather on the remedial, corrective course of human nature.
DanielS: GW, I understand that you have a morbid resentment of academia. The problem is that your autobiography is so intensely against it that you cannot even recognize where I am differing markedly from them for the sake of European interests and moreover, where I have made inferences independent of academia. Do you think that an academic ever told me to use the analogy of unions, for example? That never happened.
DanielS: There are many. For example, Bryan Sykes Seven Daughters of Eve. That we do exist as a people. That it is legitimate to fight for our survival and sovereignty as a people. That there are outgroups who are antagonistic to us, causing us harm… are genus, species and certain precious kinds are in jeopardy… we are valuable in that we have the intelligence and creativity to carry humanity forward…. I could go on, but that’s enough for the moment. Post a comment:
Next entry: Oh ultimorum temporum, oh mores mortis
|
|
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 Captainchaos on Sun, 11 Sep 2011 02:52 | #
The technical term is English Moralism.