|
|
|
The road to revolution, part one Notwithstanding its factual omissions and its very tiresome liberal bias, Wikipedia does have its occasional uses. For present purposes, one of those is to keep a running record of the political parties registered in the UK with the Electoral Commission, and even a record of those parties which have been de-registered and are now defunct. Immediately below, then, is an abstract from that record, showing the registration status of all the nationalist and like “right-wing” parties. Below that is a table logging the fresh-dug graves of nationalists’ electoral dreams. Together they comprise decades of history of political nationalism in all its ideological forms, and provide a telling snapshot of how ordinary men and women, but extraordinary dissenters, have attempted to make politics in the name and for the cause of our people. One notable name missing from the log is Patriotic Alternative. Mark Collett’s repeated attempts to prevail upon the Electoral Commission to register Patriotic Alternative have thus far met only with obfuscation and delay. One might assume at this point that the Electoral Commission will require to be served with a court order to cease discriminating against PA, as appears to have been the case with the now-registered but deeply forgettable Britain First. Perhaps the EC is calculating that working people, which nationalists typically are, tend not to be able to afford lawyers’ fees. Perhaps it is right in that. Perhaps, anyway, it is driven by government’s interest in hardening its grip on the electoral process as the enterprise which is the Age of the Covid and the enterprise which is the Climate crisis progress, and the political, social and economic environment itself becomes more extreme. In any case, here are both logs:
Even allowing for Wikipedia’s oft-times risible labelling of national ideologies, the logs demonstrate that activism from across the whole spectrum has been applied to the problem of our people’s survival and continuity. Culturalised models of nationalism have suffered the same fate as neo-fascist models. Limited objectives have bitten the same dust as those of the national model. Although with their success in the 2009 European Parliament elections the BNP’s membership broke into five-figures for a brief time, neither that party nor any other has grown to anything remotely resembling a critical mass. None has made British nationalism’s spectacularly righteous and implicitly popular cause the political cry of the people. None has produced any change in the polity whatsoever, except that the Establishment has developed ever more effective and oppressive counter-measures; and today the legal climate is tougher for nationalists than ever. Free speech has all but joined free association on the body-pile of “diversity politics”. The corporate techno-state is transforming into an algorithm-driven panopticon. We do not know if the government’s drive to jab the population, while ignoring inexpensive, effective early treatments, is for pharma profits or for some darker purpose, or why it has embarked upon a programme of building mega-prisons. We do not know how far government will go to reduce living standards in the name of Sustainable Development. And is it only living standards? Does sustainability imply a furtive and unspeakable ambition to reduce population size? We do not know. Would a reduction in population size effectively mean the gene-killing of racial Europe? Again, we do not know. We do know, however, that the foreignisation of our home continues apace, and our people’s dispossession, replacement and dissolution with it. Whatever government intends for overall population numbers, its intent towards us is quite apparent in the growing institutional hatred and debasement of “whiteness”. Emboldened as time goes by by their increasing visibility, number, political power, and by government’s insouciance, the haters are only going to become more brazen. Something terrible is being prepared for our children. In the midst of all this foreboding, it is difficult to believe that our party-political future will be any improvement on the past, or that the necessary breakthrough is imminent. So how, as a movement, are we to respond? Do we just acquiesce in our political impotence and hold to the hope that worse is indeed better, when all the evidence is that it’s only worse? Do we try to defy that and hold the line with “white community-building”? Is that even remotely possible given the power of the modern state and, anyway, what does it do to address the problems of power, globalism, and foreignisation? So, how about the de Benoist strategy of marching Gramsci-style through the institutions? Can you really see thousands of nationalist sleepers flooding into the government machine, the Third Sector, journalism, the unions, the think tanks, the education system, and so forth, and instituting revolutionary change via the political and civic culture? Or do we accept that there is no feasible alternative to once again sifting through the ashes of past political failures and false hopes to see if there is some unexplored way to lead our bothers and sisters to the voting booth? Maybe Mark Collett and Laura Towler will yet furnish us with such a possibility. Of course, there is always a temptation to say “What’s the point?”, throw up our hands, and write-off electoral politics entirely. It is, after all, a rigged game designed to prohibit any minor party, not just our parties, from ever breaking through, let alone winning. The legacy parties, the mainstream media and social platforms, the security state - indeed the whole weight of government at every level - the judiciary, the cultural Establishment, the educational system, the banks … absolutely everything is against us. It is delusional, the argument goes, to think we could ever make political progress against such devastating and total hostility. Indeed, all that is undeniable. But consider for a moment what politics actually means for a dissenting, indeed revolutionary movement, but a movement that is revolutionary because revolution is the only means of securing the very life of the people. Like a shark, that movement has to swim forward. It cannot retreat. If politics is written-off because the power and tyranny of our enemy is too great that leaves only one means of redress. As John F Kennedy stated in a speech in March 1963, a few months before his assassination, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” Just so, there will arise a significant number of men who know they have absolutely nothing left to lose and who will find it possible, indeed necessary, to contemplate violence. They will not be discouraged by the reach and sanction of the state. For is not their cause the most noble on the land, while that of the state machine is genocidal? They alone will be able to say, “We nationalists never sought this, but we have been given no other way to secure the life of our people.” So they will not question the morality of political murder or of any act of terror that conceivably advances their cause. They will join any army, fight anywhere, use any method, slaughter anybody to secure their sacred goal. Existential wars are total wars. But it is a total war that waits at the end of our renunciation of politics. Let’s be aware, then, what it means to cease to believe in the value and potential of political change. Let’s not give up on politics just yet. But rather than hope for a political miracle against all the evidence, let’s strip away everything and think afresh about this revolution we are seeking to create in and for the life of our people. The place to begin must be with ourselves. As the record shows our failure has been generational and it has been complete. There can be no avoiding that conclusion. There is an element of cowardice in trying to wriggle away and attach blame elsewhere. We are no different to any team in competitive sport. If we can’t attract fans, if we can’t win matches, if we can’t perform well enough, then talking only of the appalling strength of the opposition or their dirty tactics, or the sloping pitch, or the bent referee or the unfair rules or the abusive press will change absolutely nothing. The only real influence we can exercise is over ourselves. Nothing, then, can be above questioning; not our reading of the condition of the people we would save nor of the way by which they came to that condition, not what we believe nationalism to be, not who the potential friend is and who the enemy, not our methods, not our language, not our personal abilities and motives. Whether it will be enough is another matter. But unless we are ready to walk away from politics, with all that implies for the future of our struggle, we have to do everything useful that we can do to succeed politically, and leave nothing undone. Comments:2
Posted by Manc on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 18:50 | # The British public rejected both Communism and Fascism in the first half of the twentieth century. During the 1970’s the National Front gained increasing support and harboured hopes of success in the 1979 General Election but it only took Margaret Thatcher to appear on ‘World In Action’ and express concerns about the country being “swamped” to bleed support away from the NF. In 2016 Farage boasted of “destroying the BNP” through the success of UKIP. The Labour Party were humiliated in 2019 under Corbyn’s far left leadership. Yet in 2016 more than half the electorate decided to ignore most of the political establishment, the BBC, foreign heads of state, the MSM, Twitter and virtually all the “experts” on the planet by voting to Leave the EU. What can be deduced from this is so simple even Nigel Bruce’s Watkins could work it out. The British pubic are not as hypnotized by progressive liberalism as many seem to believe but they will always reject extremism. There’s a large market for nationalism but buyers of second hand or damaged goods will be few in number. 3
Posted by Manc on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:20 | # Speaking of extremism
Silwood was also banned for life by West Brom, although given the way West Brom play, that might be a blessing in disguise. Eight weeks for that.... 4
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:36 | # This from an article written over a year ago; the trend isn’t going in the direction that would lead to an ethnic-nationalist revolution. On the contrary. Excerpt: Public opinion The second big change since the referendum has been in public opinion. In 2016, immigration was the most important single issue for British voters. But even before the Covid-19 crisis, it had dropped to ninth and has now disappeared from the top ten altogether. This fall in the salience of immigration has been accompanied by a parallel change in attitudes towards immigration, with an increasing proportion of the population regarding immigration as positive, both from an economic and cultural perspective.
Source: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/long-read/immigration-between-the-referendum-and-brexit/#:~:text=The hard reality is that the British government’s,provisions of EU law relating to free movement. 5
Posted by Manc on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 23:02 | # I wonder if anyone at the BBC will be prosecuted and jailed over the activities of its license fee funded BBC Arabic broadcasts? https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/exclusive-bbc-arabic-accused-of-normalising-jew-hate-1.520780 6
Posted by Manc on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 23:18 | # The most recent YouGov poll says immigration is the number one concern for Conservatives and the fourth most important for the general population. 7
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 03:03 | # Thorn , you know as much about West Brom as Daniel S does about Etruscan hieroglyphics , so your nonsense re WB’s form is about as genuine and likely as my amusing the customary Singapore Cricket Club expat barstool clique with the conversational opener ” How about those Knicks ? “ 8
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 05:21 | # Mea Culpa , Mea Maxima Culpa. It was not you Thorn . It was someone else who referenced the West Midlands football team. I pray this never happens again. 9
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 10:57 | # Thorn, On your 140 IQ lady there can be no surprise that she is content for a mixed-race humanity sans Europe’s peoples. She does not understand your words although she hears them. She does not attach your meanings and values to them although she acknowledges those meanings and values in you. This is not simply because, pace our old, dead friend Fred Scrooby, women just don’t see race. They can look straight at it, describe it to themselves, be correct factually, and yet just not see it. Being high IQ, she naturally has a secondary tendency to structure the world in thought, absent of feeling, which tendency compounds her sex’s evolved predisposition to ditch her own tribe’s defeated males for the victorious tribe’s males. Such is woman. It is man who primarily selects on the basis of adaptive physical traits. Woman primarily selects on the basis of status. To talk to a woman about race means talking about cost and benefit to her personally. I’m sorry to say. Throw in the high IQ and it’s an even tougher ask. 10
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:18 | # Re immigration resulting from Brexit. The number of immigrants migrating into the UK from EU countries dropped, but the increase of immigrants from non-EU countries are making up the difference. Of course most immigrants from non-EU countries come from South Asian and Sub-Saharan Africa. From ethnic-nationalists’ POV, Brexit is backfiring. Thanks to the UK’s traitorous ruling-class, Brexit is resulting in the hastening of the white-genocide process. 11
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:32 | # Brexit is working: The shortage of HGV drivers is not just down to Brexit. There have been years of petty-fogging control measures of the industry, and all the status and freedom that once attracted men to the job has been taken away. That, alongside constantly reducing wages, has driven out thousands of drivers - a situation that was hidden by the flood of foreign drivers and is now exposed. Also, it’s worth noting that Covid regulations discourage the foreigners every bit as much as the Brexit rules. 12
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 12:11 | # ”...women just don’t see race. They can look straight at it, describe it to themselves, be correct factually, and yet just not see it.” GW, In my experience I find that white women, generally speaking, see race and racial differences as clearly as men do. Given that, I think another dynamic is at work with white ppl. What I see is white ppl have been conditioned to have a great need to prove to the world they are not racist. They understand in the “anti-racist” (read: anti-white) enviornment we live in, being labeled a racist is cause for being “canceled”—being rendered down to a social pariah! Also there is a class status attached to demonstrating you are color-blind. That helps explain why virtue signaling has become so prevalent—especially surrounding the subject race; whites go to great lengths to project themselves with a race-neutral image. It’s a class thing. In the mind of the status seeker, authenticating one’s color-blindness and-or “anti-racism” adherence is an indicator which separates the upper, more “sophisticate refined” classes, from the crude uneducated “racist” lower-classes. It’s all a bunch of pretentious BS, I know, but that phenomenon has spread wide and deep in our culture. Back to women not seeing race: For decades I’ve worked with, for, and supervised blacks ... and believe me black women see and understand race —and racial differences—clearer and deeper than black men do. 14
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 13:31 | # Conservative party conference: what’s the future for post-Brexit Britain. UK in a Changing Europe will be partnering with ConservativeHome to bring an in conversation event with Anand Menon, Director of UK in a Changing Europe and Liz Truss MP, Foreign Secretary. Date and time: Tuesday 5 October, 3pm – 4:30pm. Location: ConservativeHome marquee, Conservative Party Conference, Manchester https://ukandeu.ac.uk/events/whats-the-future-for-post-covid-post-brexit-britain/ 15
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 14:30 | # The 140 IQ woman may not be reachable for any of a variety of reasons, but drop this bomb on her “theory” that race mixing will have her predicted effects, vs her Enlightenment model of knowledge, ontology and ethics, as I did yesterday in a twitter thread on a neocon apologist. Do it just for the fun of observing the external symptoms of the conflict between her hind brain and her indoctrination, if not the prospect of snapping her out of it:
16
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:11 | # The simple answer, James, would be that genocides are not experimental and therefore do not require the check of a control group. Anybody on the thread respond accordingly? 17
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:16 | # Thorn, I have some sympathy for the position that Black Pigeon enunciated a few years ago now in his video about why women destroy civilisation. Obviously, the term “civilisation” narrows the demographic focus. 18
Posted by Manc on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:20 | # @13 The author of the article you have linked to is Jonathan Portes, so I take it that you don’t know anything about him ? Briefly, Portes was the deputy director of the Performance and Innovation Unit, which was a small team of civil servants set up by the Cabinet Office during the Blair years to assess some of the long term challenges facing the UK. The unit produced a report on immigration that Portes presented to Tony Blair and the then asylum and immigration minister Barbara Roche, who were so impressed by it they, in the words of former Labour MP and spin doctor Peter Mandelson “sent out search parties” for immigrants to “rub the Rights nose in diversity” according to former Blair advisor Andrew Neather. Interestingly, despite being a personal friend of Portes, Dave Miliband refused to support the report on the basis that the political blowback from increasing immigration would out way any benefits. Younger brother Ed wasn’t enthusiastic either, believing high levels of immigration would drive down wages. As it transpired both Miliband brothers were correct. Portes was regularly wheeled out by the BBC to explain to the public that immigration was good and any lowering of wages, if it was happening at all, was no more than 2%. As is now widely known, the actual figure for the unskilled and semi-skilled Brit was at least 10%. The millions of EU nationals you moved to the UK, followed by the spectacle of marching columns of “refugees” entering Europe produced considerable political blowback for both Labour and the Conservatives. The people voted Leave. For Portes this should feel more than a little ironic, however he doesn’t seem to have changed. He likely has wet dreams about the (highly unlikely) prospect of millions of Hong Kongers moving to Britain. May he rot in Gehinnom already. 19
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 15:59 | # GW, obviously everyone knows in their heart of hearts that the object is what is called “white genocide”—the evidence everywhere abounds—but the layers of rationalization of this genocide laid down in the popular psyche do not permit it to be called out as such in “polite” society, so, no, no one stated the obvious as you did. For those so-inclined, it may be fruitful to do some careful digging in the dirt to discover the archaeological horizons of these psychic layers. A few spring to mind immediately: 1 I have to remain silent because I may be next. That’s just off the top of my head, you understand, but I doubt R. D. Laing could do much better at analyzing the Gordian Knot (to mix a metaphor with my “sentimentary” layers—a metaphor that may, unfortunately, lead us away from the political and back toward the sword). 20
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 16:01 | # @ 15 If I said something like that to her she’d abruptly end the conversation by saying “I don’t have time for that” ... “I’ve better things to think about.” Then she’d go back to her iPhone or to reading a book from the NYT fictional best seller list or flip on the TV and watch Dancing with the Stars or some other such entertainment. She and most of her friends are either in the teaching or the legal profession. They’re all smug liberals who’ve placed themselves above racial politics. They’re unreachable. @17 That reminds me of a Camille Paglia quote: “If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts.” Generally speaking, women aren’t suitable for leadership positions. They’re too emotional.
Thanks for the info. The reason I post articles by the likes of Jonathan Portes and Liz Truss et al is to highlight the fact public policy is, to a great degree, guided by ppl like them. 21
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 16:23 | # GW, my Gordian Knot did neglect the context of the conversation which involved not just any old person but a 140 IQ woman, so to remedy that omission starting deep in her hind-brain: * Men around me aren’t beating the crap out of the invading men, so I obviously need the genes of the invading men for my children to survive. And so forth… 22
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 16:56 | # Of course, as usual, I will continue to posit that all of this is secondary to the primary organizing principle: A gradient of heritable individualism to heritable collectivism arising from tens of thousands of years of evolution in a gradient of population densities, resulted in subspeciation because of natural restrictions on gene flow (mainly environmental adaptations and male intrasexual selection preventing migration of men). This subspeciation gradient is sent into disequilibrium by civilization thence technological civilization. A feeding frenzy ensues upon the bodies, both politic and flesh, of those with less heritable, instinctive collectivism—collectivism not requiring thinking about it… Just: continually, relentlessly, ruthlessly, amorally, remorselessly, without concern for the very enabling civil and technical infrastructure feeding feeding feeding… 23
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 18:59 | # “This subspeciation gradient is sent into disequilibrium by civilization thence technological civilization.” If demographic trends continue as is, earth eventually will become a negro planet…. 24
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 02 Oct 2021 22:32 | # You’re on fire, James. There is something about the (presumed heritable) individualism ↔ collectivism axis which has been bothering me for some time, namely that evolutionary theory dictates that living organisms advantage adaptive traits over maladaptive ones, and in Homo sapiens, as in all species, the repository of adaptive traits is the haplogroup. Hence, as J Richards explained to us here long, long ago, the ideal of female facial beauty consists in the bringing together in one face of average features for the group. In other words, fitness advances from the centre of the group, and not from its outliers. It is a deepening process and not a spreading process. The group refines ever more as its most perfect self. So, what is collectivism in this context? If it is really just a word for the consequences of in-group selection then we can speak of those consequences in terms of group-membership naturally organising members as individual beneficiaries of said selection across the group. Collectivism is natural organisation and anything more “social” than that does not belong to heritability. It belongs to environment. If it is proper to ground collectivism in the above manner then we may, as suggested, also split it from all associations with social organisation, and shunt those associations into environmentalism. Accordingly, individualism as a fitness trait in Europeans then takes its place below, so to speak; as part of the deepening process of the group becoming ever more perfect as itself. Again, everything of individualism which is associated with social organisation is shunted off. Will the trait of individualism be equally distributed in the group? No, but it will be focused at the centre, like average female facial features. It will be the group norm. The outliers will be less individualistic and more conformist. If a group is made sick in some way, such that maladaptive choices are increasingly made by its members, then one would expect to see an upsurge in conformist individuals who will likely display other maladaptive traits. A glance through antifa mugshots should convince on that score. One might even measure the evolutionary health of the group solely by the frequency of such traits. This line of argument dumps the greater part of individualism ↔ collectivism into the social sphere, and therefore disinvests it of lasting and real import. What is real is love and belonging ... technically, ethnocentrism. To recap, if we are going to talk heritability, then individualism is not a polar opposite of ethnocentrism. Its place is elsewhere. 25
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 03 Oct 2021 13:45 | # 26
Posted by Manc on Sun, 03 Oct 2021 18:11 | # A synopsis of the Pandora Papers. Could spark a few revolutions… https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-58780465?at_campaign=KARANGA&at_medium=RSS 27
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 03 Oct 2021 20:57 | # GW, ethnocentrism and speciation are on a continuum reflected in the geography of genetic correlation structures—the most clearly defined of which is the male chromosome (Y in the case of many species such as humans) if not those defined by ecological features that limit gene-flow such mountains, oceans, etc. Indeed, limitation of geneflow is necessary for speciation to occur, which is one reason I attribute the Cambrian Explosion to the advent of individual male intrasexual selection in the evolution of sexual reproduction. Ever since, male intrasexual selection has been at the forefront of speciation and therefore of subspeciation hence natural bioethnocentrism. So I don’t have any disagreement with the importance of ethnocentrism but one must recognize that when expanding into new ecological ranges, selective pressures are profoundly different than they are in the middle of the ecological range. Moreover, with human capacity for imitation comes a profound danger to human cognition as adaptation: Creativity arises from very different cognitive faculties than does imitation. Advances in the theory of artificial intelligence have feed back into, and refined the philosophy of science to better formalize the profound distinction between knowledge that is useful for synthesis (creation) and knowledge that is mere memory. Indeed, the most rigorous definition of “intelligence” is that it involves, as the passive, observational component, the simplification of observations by comprehending them in lossless compression as the form in which they are “memorized”: Occam’s Razor formalized. This applies to the gradient I posit in the following manner: An individual at the periphery of his species ecological range is more likely not only to be more isolated from his subspecies’s center, and not only more isolated from his hunting group, but he is more likely to encounter novel phenomena that impose great costs and/or benefits to his genes. Thus, he is genetically driven toward creative cognition as a component of total individual integrity. As described in my initial post here at MR linked above, Hamilton touches on the deadly consequences of this but only does so within the context of hybridization between the peripheral male creativity and the “mercantile thoughtfulness” of the centers of civilization. The danger? Imitators benefit from the “genes for creativity” due to civil panmixia, but they have always so-benefitted, likely going clear back to the first stone blade and before. As for utilizing female attractiveness as the touchstone for selection, I seriously question the position that this is defined on a per-ethny phenotypic centroid. International standards of beauty favor our women which is yet another reason we are so viciously attacked as men. 28
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 03 Oct 2021 23:24 | #
Get a grip, James. The vast majority of white women hook-up with and marry average white dudes. They, as well as most average white men, desire to build a life - meaning building a family life which includes producing kids. Anecdotally, nearly all of my friends I grew up with—both young men and women—got married and raised a family. They had nearly zero problems finding a mate. It all came naturally and easily—albeit oft times clumsily—social misfits notwithstanding. The basic biological roll is women are naturally attracted to testosterone and dudes are attracted to estrogen. That’s nature in its most basic dynamic. 29
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 05:03 | # Get a short term memory, Thorn. The context was the 140IQ woman that held the quasi-religious belief that race mixing will fix the worst of our ethnic conflicts. Now, agreed, I was imputing characteristics to her based on a statistical type, if not stereotype, but to thereby impute to _me_ that I was applying this stereotype to “The vast majority of white women…” is a bit of a stretch, now that you recall the context, don’t you think? Or did you forget it again already? Whatever the cause, your theory regarding the “desire to build a life”, let alone your anecdotes, are worthless in the face of the demographic collapse of whites—quibble about the fine points of “intent” regarding the definition of “genocide” with someone else—demographic collapse preferentially taking out the most economically valued characteristics from each generation as the economy outbids the family for the fertile years of young women. Whatever their “desires” it is clear that too many choices among competing “desires” can have consequences inconceivable were those choices limited to, say, one. Talk to a rehab center about junkies who “desire to build a life” sometime. 30
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 11:14 | # “Get a short term memory, Thorn. The context was the 140IQ woman that held the quasi-religious belief that race mixing will fix the worst of our ethnic conflicts. Now, agreed, I was imputing characteristics to her based on a statistical type, if not stereotype…” I reason I brought her up is to illustrate the point that upper middle-class white ppl place preserving the white race very low on their list of priorities. They simply don’t care about it thus they don’t think about it. Furthermore she doesn’t hold any belief that race mixing will fix the worst ethnic conflicts - so yes, your “imputing” is off the mark. People like her are more interested in class status than racial issues. As time passes on, I’m finding the attitude she holds (namely: not giving a flying fig whether the white race goes extinct or not) more and more typical amongst whites of all classes. The sad truth is White Nationalists’ message is not resonating with the masses of whites. In fact the WN message—no matter how eruditely it’s presented—is a turnoff to them. Believe me, I’m just as frustrated by WN’s lack of progress as you. ‘Der movement’ (as Ted Sallis terms it) thus far has been an abject failure. 31
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 11:55 | # James, My point @ 24 is, of course, to challenge the assertion in evolutionary psychology (and, also, in liberal thought) that there exists a conflict within European Man (European society for the liberals) between individualism and collectivism. I am not comfortable with that. I think it probably rests on a category error; the category for individualism being that of evolutionary fitness traits in behaviour while the category of collectivism could be, and most often is, political economy. To parse collectivism as an organising principle at all from an evolutionary perspective brings us to ethnocentrism. The opposite of ethnocentrism is not individualism. In an objective sense it is atomisation and in a subjective sense alienation. The individual in question has not made a positive choice for individualism. He or she ... most usually he ... has internalised certain disintegrating historical currents in the diurnal world, and has produced them behaviourally. Positive choice, meanwhile, is properly restricted to that tiny space in the identification and selection of advantageous changes at the advancing frontier of fitness. The proper answer to the question “do we have free will” is precisely that. The role of male individualism in that and, therefore, the evolutionary function and fitness gain of it, could do with a proper airing. On your interesting comment @ 27, I would add the following, which (apologies) are attempts, really, at appropriating it ... It is ethnicity which would stand (at an earlier point of, course) in the same evolutionary line as speciation. It is a line of effect, the cause of which, as always, is natural selection. It is ethnocentrism which would stand (again at an earlier point) in that line, which is the same line as morality and the higher emotions like conscience. You write: “As for utilizing female attractiveness as the touchstone for selection, I seriously question the position that this is defined on a per-ethny phenotypic centroid. International standards of beauty favor our women which is yet another reason we are so viciously attacked as men.” I am reminded of the oft-repeated and true if somewhat vulgar comment on night-life, to whit, when a man enters a nightclub he automatically scans the room for the optimum potential sexual partner, but when a women enters she automatically scans the room for competition. The operative word here is nightclub, in which environment the operative female competitive strategy is self-glamorisation. The international standard for beauty is a borrowed glamour (or imitation, if you prefer - an extreme example being that of East Asian women who, in their mad dash after male status, resort to eye-widening surgery). Two things are going on here. Historically, these Asian women sought to snare themselves a member of the occupying American military, and something similar might still apply in places. But in later years it was more that the presentation of glamorous white American women in film and advertising offered an apparent means to defeat the competition in the local night-club. Obviously, such imitation abuses the natural, local ideal of female beauty. But it does not attack European males per se. The attack on us as selectors of a sexual partner is much more from the politically-engineered appearance of African males in our homelands, about which we have all said a great deal which, perhaps, does not need saying again. 32
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 02:58 | # Thorn wrote:
Then wrote:
Well, it’s rather she sees “no problem” with “genocide” because, why? Does she not consider racial genocide to be among (my original words) “the worst of our ethnic conflicts”? Is that because she is toying with the phase 7 refuge from painful reality:
?
33
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 04:37 | # Islamic types are given credit for their control of women. Muslim men destroyed Islam by not restricting it ( in the Judaic manner ) to pure Bedouin Arabs , who were certainly , at their upper class level - ( the only level that mattered in any society anywhere in those days ), not Barbarians The four wives rule ( regardless of race ) and the “spoils of War ” copulation customs sanctioned by the Koran diluted the racial presence of the true Arabs. Even today , the BBC and other Leftist purveyors of stupidity, refer to mixed race North Africans as “Arabs” , simply because they can speak Arabic. 34
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 13:27 | # “Well, it’s rather she sees “no problem” with “genocide” because, why?” Because she doesn’t regard race mixing or ethnic mixing as “genocide” per se. When ppl with our race-realist worldview see a white mother with, for example, mulatto kids we interpret it as that woman flushed 100,000 years of evolution down the crapper. OTOH the >140 IQ woman I spoke of would react, or feign reacting, with indifference. What she’s not is an anti-whiteness ideologue ala Noel Ignatov. What she is, however, is indifferent to the fact the white race’s genepool is being subsumed by non-white genepools. From my limited perspective, I’m witnessing her type of indifference becoming commonplace - not just amongst white women but white men also ... and all the other 58 genders too. Can’t forget about them! lol 35
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 17:22 | # This notion that “race mixing” is going on, particularly in the context of a discussion about “genocide”, reminds me of the AIDS pandemic rhetoric of “exchange of bodily fluids” as the cause of contagion. Can you see why this leads me to believe your 140IQ woman is less accurately described as “indifferent” than as toying with Phase 7’s militant ignorance to the point of virulence? Can _anyone_ fail to see the bias in total fertility rates between races, let alone someone with a 140IQ? Come now, Thorn. This is beyond even militant ignorance and evinces a hidden agenda in such women that is quite reasonably imputed as arising from the kind of pathological thinking you think of as evincing me losing my grip on reality. 36
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 19:24 | # “Can you see why this leads me to believe your 140IQ woman is less accurately described as “indifferent” than as toying with Phase 7’s militant ignorance to the point of virulence?” Good grief! I think it’s safe to assume she doesn’t regard the race mixing as genocide simply bc the miscegenation that’s occurring is consensual, not forced. There is no hidden agenda - not “Phase 7” or any other such nefarious motivations. The closest thing to a “hidden agenda” she may be harboring is she might (repeat: MIGHT) be putting on a bit of a phony PC act in order to maintain her social standing with all her sanctimonious upper middle-class progtard friends. But I seriously doubt that’s the case. She’s a genuine, honest-to-goodness, left-of-center lib. 37
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 22:23 | # “Consent”? “Good grief!” indeed! Your inability to conceive of the feminine hind-brain’s evolutionary psychology reaction to the half century during which more than a supermajority did NOT CONSENT to the manifest immigration policy during that 50 year period is all too typical of those standing in the way of devising successful strategies. Thorn, thy name IS “Der Movement”. 38
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 05 Oct 2021 23:37 | # Being that the supermajority (meaning between 67% to 90%) is/was against massive immigration only proves that the oligarchs, plutocrats and-or international corporatists’ power easily trumps the supermajority’s (the masses) power. And who comprises the make-up of the oligarchs, plutocrats and international corporatists? Answer: the “supermajority” —or most of them—are, of course, men. And BTW the consensual miscegenation vs non-consent of massive immigration are two separate issues. There is overlap between the two, obviously, but they are separate issues nevertheless - particularly concerning the indifferent attitude towards miscegenation the >140 IQ woman conveys. And no offence, but you’re certainly not the type of person I take seriously on matters on how and why women think the way they do. At any rate, get back to me when you’ve “devised those successful strategies” you speak of - actually only one strategy will suffice. And by that, I mean strategies—or a strategy—that can have real world practical application. Not some useless esoteric abstruse theoretical abstract gobbledygook. That type of brain flatulating is worthless… Moreover, I promise not to stand in your way. In the mean time, I won’t hold my breath…. or on second thought maybe I should ... just in case your brain starts flatulating. lol 39
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 06 Oct 2021 02:42 | # GW, the terms we use obviously create unnecessary barriers to communication and since our time is at such a premium it is often difficult to decided to make the necessary “capital investments” in time to de-confuse our language that is, after all, under assault from those who enjoy enormous “capital” support to do precisely such violence to us. We did recently make such a capital investment of time, at least insofar as your project is concerned. Something similar would help me a great deal in untangling the morass surrounding terms like “individualism”, “collectivism”, “ethnocentrism”, “atomization/alienation” etc. Having said that, I do appreciate your effort to disentangle these terms. I’ll be keeping in mind your feedback on terminology and how it fits with the vernacular exoteric or, as the case may be, the argot esoteric. But for now, it’s back to work. 40
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 06 Oct 2021 11:09 | # IMHO ‘altruist collectivism’ when practiced by whites across racial lines poses one of the greatest threats to the existence of the white race. Moreover our ruling elites are forcing whites to both accept—and fund with their tax dollars—a comprehensive racially-inclusive ‘altruist collectivist’ system. Here’s a short clear concise essay on that subject:
41
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 06 Oct 2021 14:47 | # James, understood and appreciated. Thorn, Mr Millard may be clear in putting forward what everybody in this movement thinks anyway, but he’s not thinking about what I’m thinking about, which is to rip apart the standard psychology model of individualism ↔ collectivism, which also happens to be the model underpinning liberal axiality as well as the entire second-wave libertarian “case”. I don’t see why we should operate, as Millard does, within this false dichotomy when we could consign it to history or, at the very least, generate a more consistent narrative. 42
Posted by Thorn on Wed, 06 Oct 2021 16:06 | # Best of luck with your project, GW. I wish I could lend a helping hand but I must admit the subject matter you’re delving into is a bit out of my depth. In fact this is the first I’ve ever heard of ‘second wave libertarianism.’ Just finished reading an article about second wave libertarianism. Unfortunately for the SW libertarians they’re now facing the real prospect of living under a Chinese style social credit score system. A system that’ll be administered by “woke” totalitarians. Because of that, second wave libertarianism’s boat is about to be torpedoed. At any rate MR was always and continues to be a learning experience. I’ll try my best to keep up with your latest endeavor as it unfolds. 43
Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 07 Oct 2021 05:22 | # There is , re women , a James Bowery axe not yet fully grinded into the ground . I remember JB’s (2007 or thereabouts ) chagrin at having his asymmetrically involved significant other spirited away by another STEM genius , likely an H1B Visa Brahmin or some such. Still , JB is totally correct about women’s cerebral mechanism . 44
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 07 Oct 2021 15:00 | # @ 43 Ah, so that, if true, explains the bitter demeaner. Such a terrible set of circumstances. So unfortunate. So humiliating. Worse yet, Dr. Jennifer Melfi no longer accepts new patients….. ; -) 45
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 03:28 | # No new patients ? I bet you were top of your class. 46
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 11:51 | # @ 45 On top of her class? Close. I was on top of her classy ass, doggy style. lol BTW, Al, you say “JB is totally correct about women’s cerebral mechanism.” Really?!? Bowery said: “Your [Thorn] inability to conceive of the feminine hind-brain’s evolutionary psychology reaction to the half century during which more than a supermajority did NOT CONSENT to the manifest immigration policy during that 50 year period…” Al, explain to me how the f-ck anything in his statement is correct given the fact the hindbrain deals with automatic / involuntary functions such as heartbeat, respiratory function, coordinating motor activity, maintaining balance and equilibrium, etc. Me thinks Bowery pulled that “feminine hind-brain evolutionary psychology” crap straight out of his own hind-end. Then you unthinkingly jumped right into his ass-crack and swallowed it up. 47
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 12 Oct 2021 02:36 | # OK , let me put it in terms you may understand . Female Christian Prospective Preachers : ” How might we produce an interesting and compelling Sermon ? “‘ The Apostle Paul : ” That’s the interesting part ladies . You don’t .” 49
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:26 | # @48 Hilarious! That helps explain why you’re so easily duped.
50
Posted by Al Ross on Sun, 17 Oct 2021 03:14 | # I am so easily duped that I am silly enough to avoid joining you yokels on Sunday and being fleeced at collection plate time by some shyster TV evangelist Gulfstream owner ( God would hate me to fly commercial ) who has captured your limited IQ discernment with Semitic mystic gabble. 51
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 17 Oct 2021 12:04 | # Wait ... let me guess ... Al joins this guy on Sunday: 53
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 23 Oct 2021 03:24 | # Yup , I really believe in Christ and his Eternal power . I decided to put my immortal soul at hazard in order to give the impression that I am as intelligent as Thorn. Post a comment:
Next entry: The road to revolution, part two
|
|
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 Thorn on Thu, 30 Sep 2021 15:30 | #
I know a woman who’s in her late 60s; she has an IQ in the 140s. She attended a prestigious state college and earned her Masters Degree in Education without breaking a sweat. I explained to her, as best I could, how the white race is being deliberately driven into extinction. I covered subjects such as anti-white propaganda, the effects of massive non-white immigration into white homelands. I explained all the pertinent subjects relating to white genocide - I even touched on how the forces of organized Jewry and Christian orgs are playing a central role. Of course she understood perfectly all the areas covered. Her response to it all was: “Eventually we’re all going to be mixed race and I have no problem with that.”
Unfortunately that’s the prevailing attitude of most in the white upper middle-class. I’m guessing, GW, your experience with upper middle-class / professional-class / managerial-class is quite similar.
BTW both the woman and her husband regard themselves as “conservative” Republicans. They boost about being fiscally conservative yet socially liberal.
I despise such ppl. But that’s the typical mindset we are up against.