|
|
|
What British nationalism can become This is an essay written for PA’s site. It is a first attempt to shift British nationalism towards a genuine nationalism of ethnicity ...
BASE ASSUMPTIONS 1. Our people are dying by the hand of our own political class and the corporate and banking interests which they serve. It is, then, not a natural death, or an inevitable outcome of jet travel and the will of poor peoples around the world to improve their lives. It is not a political mistake, or an act of stupendous negligence. It is not a “pay-back” from history. It is a political assassination, and the assassins know precisely what they are doing, and want to do it. It is their chosen course for us. It is a true genocide by Article 2 (c) of the 1948 Convention, for which they confidently expect not to have to answer. The two principal methods the assassins employ are: a) Endless, colonising and replacing migration of populations from elsewhere in the world. b) Psychological warfare, also known as culture war, on the natural role and character of Man and Woman, and on our ethnic person. But beneath these lies an array of deep-seated causalities acting upon us from the history of events and from the history of ideas, the sum of which presses us to the inevitable conclusion that “a serious assault on the citadel of Western elitism and political power” must mean a revolution on no mean scale. A simple change to national politics alone will, in the longer term, be constrained and, finally, erased by the continuing effect of these foundational forces. Many, and quite possibly all of them, have to be swept away, too. The following chart of these forces, including those striving for control of the future of all humanity, supplies a relational form to them, be they historical or historiographical, or even futuristic! I am still astonished, when I gaze at the totality of it, at just how much harm for our precious people there is in this world. Heaven knows, there is room for some good.
In addition to them, the system prevailing in Britain today, which is liberal modernity, is buttressed by several other powerful factors, the greater part of which nationalists will be only too well aware. These vary from the lockstep behaviour of the legacy media to the closed nature of the two-party system, and from the adaptability and survival instinct, not to say duplicity, of the Conservative Party to the licence of the malign activist-left. Working peoples’ fear of debt ... the tendency for a large majority of people to simply obey authority ... the tendency of women to vote for “just getting along”, and possibly even for mate competition ... difficulties abound. We have to overcome them all if we want our people to live. 2. Those corporate and banking interests mentioned above have themselves undergone a revolution of method and purpose. Global elitism has always been something of a hybrid endeavour but prior to the development of the internet in the early 1990s, and certainly prior to the Big Bang in 1986, the model was heavily Judaic in inspiration, with a debt-based, supra-nationalist programme. Today’s model, however, is futurist in inspiration, with a hard-asset based, 21st century technological programme. One can confirm for oneself this shift from one elitism into another by comparing the respective intellectual vigour and policy engagement of the World Economic Forum with, say, Bilderberg. 3. Effectively since 22nd October 2009, when Nick Griffin was defenestrated on the BBC’s Question Time, British nationalism has been conducted without an electorally functional party organisation, and the only real contender for a new one is being blocked out of hand by the Electoral Commission. 4. The movement as it existed from the 1950s failed not just organisationally, under the assault from the Establishment and the hard-left, but also ideologically. The dominant ideology of the movement, drawn from the fascist misreading of Friedrich Nietzsche and embroidered by counter-Judaic, anti-immigrant, anti-Islamic elements, and Catholic social thought, does not appeal to our people, and cannot be made to do so. It is another barrier, actually, and no basis for a popular revolution. This has to be recognised. It is the first step on the road. 5. Griffin’s attempt to brand the BNP as “ethno-nationalist”, and thereby escape the “fascist” label that had been effortlessly applied by the anti-racist left for decades, never involved intellectual substance. The reason is all too simple. There was no founding thought on ethnic nationalism that did not first exclude European-descended peoples from its aegis. Even the term “ethno-nationalism” was coined by a non-nationalist American academic, Walker Connor. Needless to say, Griffin’s label had no political effect whatsoever, but it did lead the nationalist horse to the ethno-nationalist pond, even if it was dry; and a certain thirst developed. 6. Today, in consequence of all that, while not a few older hands in the movement are still wedded to Bowdenesque thinking, the broad movement is now operating from raw instinct ... from our nature as natives of a colonised land. Nativism, as it inheres in our demand for the life of our kind - amounts to one-third of ethnic nationalism’s true ideological range, as I’ll explain below. Of course, we need the whole thing. 7. British nationalism is the only life-line our people possess. We cannot go back ideologically. We cannot stay where we are. Ergo, we have to move forward and, together, create a real politics of ethnicity ... a nationalism of the true peoples of the land, but this time including our land and our people. WHAT IS A POLITICAL MOVEMENT ANYWAY As a rule, serious socio-political movements, especially revolutionary movements, do not form around some inchoate popular cause and rise among the mass of uneducated people merely by the efforts of one or two firebrands. For example, with few exceptions the leading Chartists were publishers. In Wales the movement was guided by a solicitor. The fathers of the cooperative movement were men of substance and education. Even Keir Hardie, the sine qua non of the working-class political hero, was always a man apart from his fellow-miners; learning to read and write as a small child, then to write in shorthand, and finally attending night school. He yearned to put the physical labour of minework behind him, and by the age of 23 he had succeeded in doing so, working as a trade union organiser and preaching in church on a Sunday. The political class is necessarily drawn from the educated class; and, in so much as British society has had a meritocratic component for a hundred and fifty years, resulting in ever-growing social mobility, the educated class is substantially drawn from the middle-class. A movement today which does not trouble itself to speak to the middle-class will have to dine on very thin intellectual pickings (moreover, a movement focusing on ethnicity is doubly bound to see as one all the men of the tribe). A political movement, then, may be defined as a body of concern articulated by a well-educated cadre to an instinctually-guided, less educated mass. In practise, one can readily distinguish five stages of articulation. They are: a) Pure philosophy: the conceptualisation and communication of new and significant insights into the life of Man. For there to be a revolutionary politics, the pure philosophy must address an especially great and pressing question about the human experience arising from the times. b) Political philosophy: the propositional application of those insights, and related principles and values, to the organisation of national life and the conduct of power therein. c) Political analysis: the methodological interrogation and/or critique of the existing political system from the standpoint of the above political philosophy. d) Policy-making: Practical and programmatic correctives to the existing political system, or aspects thereof, according to the above analysis. e) Politics: The promotion of b ,c and d above and, perhaps, the popular acknowledgement of some or even all of each. This chain of transmission is how historical change to the polity typically occurs. As a rule, the higher the intellectual antecedents extend, the more potential there will be for far-reaching change. Similarly, the more extreme and anti-natural the existing system has become, the more far-reaching can be that change. Conversely, the more historically established an existing system is, the more it will be resistant to change from without, and the more revolutionary will be the ambitions of those who desire it. At this point, my question to you, dear reader, is: do we, as a movement, currently possess the kind of philosophical, ideological, and political heft that is required to meet nationalism’s appointment with history? I think the answer is clear. I think part of the solution is also clear. WHAT ETHNIC NATIONALISM IS, AND IS NOT ● Ethnic nationalism is a philosophy of ethnicity, and not the flimsy elthno-nationalism of the British Nationalist Party from the turn of the millenium. ● It is existential and Heidegerrian in its intellectual parentage, not moralist and Nietzschean, not idealist and Hegelian, not Catholic and economically distributist. ● It is new and unwritten in any formal, academic sense, and although its ontology and general structural form can be divined today, its detailed substance awaits the creative hand of the intellectually adventurous nationalist. It is not, therefore derived from fascism or National Socialism or Third Positionism. It is not the politics described as ethnic nationalism by post-war sociologists like Gellner, Anderson, or Smith, or artistes like Goodwin and Hazony in the present-day. ● It is exclusively ethnic and, therefore, universal to all peoples, not race- or class-based, not social or civic. Its universalism is the universalism of the truly human and gloriously diverse. It is the universal gift of Man’s evolution. ● It is naturalistic in its fundamentals, not socially-constructed, not a work of ambition or fantasy. It is not an order to the youth to be martial and heroic and pursue the life of glory. It knows that the water that is in the rocks will flow regardless, and such heroism that might flow with it will do so likewise at its due time. At that and every other time it will commend what is ownmost and true, and never a whit more. ● It is authenticising in a coming age, if the technocrats have their way, of frightening human artifice. So it privileges nature and proffers nature’s dignity where the tech boys proffer the hive mind. ● It is essentialist and identitarian. It does not dictate identity, or even describe it. It privileges the experience of it. ● Likewise, it is structurally emergent. It does not require authoritarian imposition on the people. It opens their own path to this precious estate of living freely and out of their nature and consciousness, and implicitly trusts their footing. ● It is, accordingly, liberational. It speaks of that awakening which all nationalists know as the gateway to their Weltanschauung. Its one human right is the only one contingent on Nature, which is the absolute right of peoples to defend their life (derived from Nature’s sole imperative to transmit genes for fitness unto the morrow, in the teeth of Time and Entropy). ● Being a nationalism of ethnicity it is differentiating and discriminating, and does not brook a single loss to the Other. ● It is nativist and defensive in posture, not imperialist and aggressive. It offers respect to other nations, and demands the same in return. It commends the people’s natural love of the land of their arising, and their singular claim to it. ● It is cohering of all the interests among the people, as all true nationalisms must be. For the people are a single organism in place and time, famously and quite properly described by George Orwell as “an everlasting animal stretching into the future and the past”. Such we are and such we must remain. ● It is radical. Like all forms of nationalism, it stands outside liberalism and against liberalism, and all the things of liberalism. It is a hostile competitor to it. It has no derivation from within liberal thought, and it does not occupy a place on either of the liberal ideational axes. It has its own place between pure nativism and tradition on the axis of the European nationalisms. ● Confident in the creative talents of the people, it is conceptually positive and optimistic in its philosophical framing and its political offer. It is not reactionary. It is not pessimistic in the Spenglerian sense. ● Its ultimate gift is a future upon which the people may freely assert themselves and destine, making what they will of it by their own hand and howsoever they may. If we succeed in the mission of making it whole and taking it to our people it must form the basis of a new and total system enworlded for future generations. This is, therefore, a vast undertaking intellectually and practically, with the highest imaginable import for everyone in this country, actually. Let us do the work together of making it our political reality, and a reality, therefore, of the forced decision taken by Griffin and Co all those years ago. It is time for us to have a philosophy of our people’s particular being and identity and a politics of our very claim on life. As to what ethnic nationalism might look like on paper, well, we are still some way short of setting that out, even provisionally. For my part, frustratingly abstract for some as it is liable to be, I’m working onward from the ontology to the basis for a structure of parts and principles and processes. The principles, which I won’t set out in detail now, are currently looking like this table below, and there is a link in the text above to an article at my site introducing this:
IN CONCLUSION I do not know whether this little table will last. It’s quite an abstract presentation. It has no explanatory text. It is a tentative gesture, like everything I am doing. It could be replaced tomorrow if a better formulation arises. It’s just one table. But that isn’t the point. It exists. It’s already an advance on all the deceitful and wrong collective work of the liberal academics who have gone before, none of whom will speak of our blood and our eternal place in this world, or our absolute right in Nature ... the right common to all peoples under existential attack ... to defend both of these. Yes, we can shout from the rooftops about that right. But moving the historical wheel takes much more than that. It takes foundational thought, and it takes everything that then flows from that. It is the work of not one mind or ten or twenty, but of thousands. It is the work of everyone who, by their own cognitive processes, takes ownership of what will, in time, take ownership of them. When I survey this movement, I sense an almost feverish desire to make common cause ... to cooperate on projects ... to be doing something. It is understandable, no doubt, and brave and admirable too. But it is not nearly enough, as I have sought to explain. Political activism is a downstream phenomenon. It will go to waste if we never attend to the great void which exists where philosophy, be it pure or political, should be. Neither is anything that past generations of British nationalists have claimed as philosophy remotely adequate to this task. They never even imagined that Power would be talking about the obscenities it talks about today. We are in a new world hurtling towards another, still more uncertain and threatening, and perhaps only a decade away. The point is, you and you and you are the only ones who can do anything about it. So what do you think? Comments:2
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 03 Feb 2022 01:52 | # It is certainly overly complimentary to refer to GW as one among “fellow philosophers” when he certainly does not merit being considered a philosopher. And if he truly merited that moniker, he would not have been remotely as dismissive, antagonistic and dishonest about the things that I’ve been saying (he will/would have to continue to gaslight and strawman in order to continue to try to justify that). Where this post is any good, there is no conflict with anything that I have said; never has been a necessity or good reason for him to try to dismiss, “sweep away,” in his obnoxious metaphor, what I’ve been saying. ..and, when you say,
It would bespeak a paranoid streak of libertarian reaction - at least in regard to anything that I maintain - to highlight this as especially important to elaborate, as it is not my motive to control individual liberty and take away the resources of individuals when, in fact, it is the borders in regard to the make-up of citizenship membership that needs to be controlled. 3
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 03 Feb 2022 12:04 | # James,
You’re right, and I will try to do something on that. It’s just that for my present purposes it has been enough to point out the failure of the old ideas. Actually, a complete critical history of late-20th and 21st century western nationalism needs to be presented. WN and the European New Right, as well as trad British nationalism, merit a cool and detached examination, because literally everything has gone off like a damp squib. The only successes, which could scarcely be described as even near-nationalist, have been the National Conservatism of Orban and of the recent Polish governments (which are probably closer to the traditional Christian conservatism of Marine Le Pen’s politically estranged niece, Marion Maréchal, than to us). Daniel is very well positioned to produce work on the bulk of that. I doubt he would consider a cooperation with cross-posting. But it’s a good thought. On “the tripartate magisteria” I thought I had gone some way to questioning the monarchical model in the five-part engine of articulation which is a functioning movement. However, if one focuses solely on the textual articulation, and insists on adding a third layer, then at first glance I would have to say that the division between self-publishing internet creators and interested recipients could only be supplemented by interpreters. The problem is that, ultimately, everyone is an interpreter, a democratised consumer or non-consumer of ideas, depending on his or her taste. Breaking into the minds of the vast mass of the disinterested is currently impossible due to this democratised condition. In our “state of war” ... that is, the western elites’ war on our race ... the elites occupy all the high ground, as evinced by the historia and futurum, and by the systemic disadvantages also alluded to in the essay. The default for “taste” is thereby established. Democracy is a sham. People are fatally suggestible. The system is self-reinforcing at multiple control points.
The only tool I have been able to suggest is the nascent “water in the rocks”. This, actually, is the central issue in my contentions with Daniel. If the modus is “specificatory structures” marking boundaries, then “taste” ... a dictated thing, a thing from history, as we see ... will out, and the whole enterprise will collapse. The Canadian truckers, and the massive upwelling of support from ordinary Canadians, show that on the occasions when they are sluiced the waters of freedom require no academically specified conduit. What they need is permanent expression, and for that most fit purpose I do believe that the people must, as far as is possible, own their philosophy. That’s about as much as I can suggest at this point. 4
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 03 Feb 2022 14:53 | #
As ever, a false either or and a strawman. That is to say, where I would observe the truckers unionizing and acting against misdirecting hermeneutics and instead with hermeneutics aligned in their interests, it is, according to GW, a purely emergent phenomenon, purely inborn self interest, having nothing to do with “social stuff” like language and the additionally distinctly human capacities beyond pure nature, such as analysis, conceptualization, learning and agentive change (again, having no requirement of diagnosing misdirection in the hermeneutic realm, such as red capes), nor should an academic have a go at offering an idea about how the negotiation of such unionization in a social interactive give and take of specificatory structures might work; nor that an “ownership” of these specified boundaries could be established with warranted assertabiliy and operational verifiability. No, my perspective, for the convenience of his autobiography, must be a “confected” top down academic imposition rather than an embracing of hermeneutics alignment with authentic and coherent emergent interests ..and how those boundaries come to count in their reality, for the liberation, functional autonomy and sovereignty of our peoples, genus and species.
5
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 03 Feb 2022 21:33 | #
Yeah, the missus came ‘ome from the butcher’s only this mornin’ an’ said what a lovely bit of semiotic analysis ‘e ‘ad in the window. Only she didn’t ‘ave the readies for it, so she got a pound of exegesis instead. I fed it to the cat cuz he’s got a doctorate in methodical contemplation. 6
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 02:59 | # As if unionized organization and class action is stuffy, impractical academic stuff, just a product of “the left” that Whites (genus and species - English natives being a species) are not supposed to deploy in our interests because the kosher folks have framed the matter for everyone, including the common folk, that “the left” is the enemy (how kosher, how convenient) and does not deal with reality, nature, objective truth and facts (when in fact, reality, nature, objective truth and facts are, in the proper worldview of ethnonational interests, looked upon as invaluable feedback, but feedback to the calibration of our group, e.g., native English, systemic homeostasis, thus autonomy and sovereignty). 7
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 03:03 | # Googling “specificatory structures” yielded 5 hits before the Google AI presumed the rest (of the 72) to be somewhat redundant. But at least I discovered the website dnanations.com which has a “Special Terms Dictionary”. That’s always a good idea and, indeed, the various proponents of their respective TOEs (Theory Of Everything) are so unwilling to talk to each other that I set up a domain name and website called toesettast.one in an attempt to encourage folks to de-Babelize the field. It used to be “ctmu.info” until I was threatened with a lawsuit over the use of “CTMU”. I had originally set it up to try to get folks who thought they understood the CTMU to come up with a minimum length description of the CTMU that could then be used for exoteric outreach. Here’s the way I stated the process as I envisioned it:
And, quoting Kurt Vonnegut on writing style (excerpted I believe from a book titled “Pity the Reader”):
Minimum description length reducible to the vernacular is a heuristic to what Vonnegut admonishes the writer to achieve. 8
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 04:56 | # Vonnegut , a writer whose work I admire , should have stuck to fiction and eschewed coaching. His advice is to writers is almost as banal as “write about what you know.” 9
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 12:48 | # Daniel’s lexicon of lexical lexiconality, Part 6,822 Union: Daniel’s woolly and unnecessarily abstract generalisation for a people 10
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:54 | # Al, don’t begrudge my ad hominem rhetoric. Banal writing habits are a step up for many who might, simply because they are admonished by an admired writer, adopt them and thereby take pity on we who are subjected to them. Certainly MR has suffered the torments of the damned long enough. 11
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 16:49 | #
Totally stupid. Union is my term for the establishment of group boundaries and membership; which may of course be applied to an ethnonation.
Not true. that is Guessedworker’s unnecessary specification because he has a stupidly phobic reaction to metaphor; and therefore must render a strawman where I am NOT talking about “the being of a people.”
Organization is my term for organization.
Not sure how you can even pretend, when I have been clear that I refer to European peoples as a genus and their different kinds (“ethnicities” “ethnonations”) as species of Europeaan
No it can’t change and it is an entirely appropriate term following taxonomical rules.
No, they have dictated the framwork that you need in order to maintain your autobiography as the slayer of the dragon, i.e., chaser of its (((red capes))).
You are not even a clever liar; can’t even cover up your narcissistic personality disorder and your endless need to gaslight.
Feedback is feedback. I’m looking upon it as necessary, both positive and negative, both in agreement and elaboration and in questioning and correction.
Calibration is calibration. Existentially speaking, if we care about our people, our group interests should provide boundaries/borders, which calibrate, thereby structure our outlook and gauge feedback
Homeostasis is homeostasis, i.e., self corrective systems.
...whereas I might have once thought that Guessedworker was more intelligent and honest than Clair Khaw (I can no longer give him the benefit of that doubt).
Guessedworker’s desperate terms “communicationism” “communicationist”, in attempt to prop up his autobiography, as slayer of anyone who has a good idea, especially if he thinks they have learned something from academia, thus terms to gaslight and strawman concepts that I use, that do not serve his ego project, though the terms and concepts that I use are not hard to understand, are important, necessary and which I can explain to anybody who has a question and an honest desire to understand. That’s not Guessedworker. And perhaps not Bowery inasmuch as he might try to make “specificatory structurers” into the “all” of how I might refer to profound systems, warranted assertability and operational verifiability thereof, rather than attention to an agentive process of negotiated agreement over working hypotheses and then theoretical satisfaction. 12
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 17:28 | # A persistent “arguing past each other” drain on psychic energy arises over the definition of the words “artificial” and “natural”. Please, I beg of you, don’t start that argument here again. I’m merely pointing out this hemorrhage of life essence as an easily recognized case of people trying to claim territory when they should merely be willing to reach some kind of mutual accommodation as offered by “Jim Bowery” in the following exchange with those who want to portray the genocide of Euroman as natural selection in action: Jim Bowery: “Culture is artificial selection.” 13
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 17:31 | # The question is not whether difficult language is employed per se, because sometimes ideas are just difficult and recondite, and that difficulty may have to enter into their expression. The question is whether difficult language obscures ideas that are not actually difficult in themselves at all. Because we are talking in this place about life-issues and the life-politics of nationalism, the language should, wherever possible, be accessible to the majority of our folk. It is, after all, their nationalism. They are its owners and actors, and beneficiaries. Clarity of expression is the second linguistic goal, behind precision. Neither should be beyond any of us. 14
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 19:20 | # I find it notable that DanielS emphasizes the word “warranty” in a way reminiscent of Curt Doolittle’s use of that word—as a means of “accountability” (another of DanielS’s keywords) for utterances/testimony. I have no idea, and am not much interested in, whether there is any cross-influence between their respective argots, but given that Doolittle identifies with east Europeans if not their intellectuals (I have a particularly vital relationship with a theoretic group in the Ukraine myself) and that DanielS may share this affinity, it may be more productive for DanielS to interact with Doolittle than MR if, for no other reason, than their respective affinities. At one point, I considered including Curt Doolittle’s Theory of Everything among other TOEs at toesettast.one but my request that he include the most essential Propertarian words in his Propertarian glossary were ignored. While I consider Curt Doolittle to be a menace due to his “social theory” that war was a means of “domesticating” Euroman—selecting out of the gene pool traits that are inconsistent with civilization—he’s at least a potential ally if he can be prevented from imposing his “artificial selection regime” on all of us—and he has at least put a lot of work into his glossary (even if it leaves out his most basic concepts and his website isn’t even accessible execept via archive.org for some reason). 15
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 04 Feb 2022 21:29 | #
In fairness to Daniel, his instincts are right. Accordingly, he is right about a lot of things, and more so than many a “comrade” I could name. He knows how very similar his worldview is to mine. It is perfectly reasonable that he should want to do good work on his own account, and through that to contribute. But for him that means carving out an ideological corner and then presenting it as the ideology, indeed, the answer. Or, if not the answer, then something very close to it, something very valuable. Of course, everyone wants to think that they are contributing. But people like Daniel and like me, who are fighting to reform the movement so that it might fight to reform the polity, have to confront the deeply ingrained ideas of fellow-nationalists who probably don’t have the capacity to question what they, in turn, automatically assumed were viable answers to the other great and pressing questions in their lives. They don’t want to give up their treasured conclusions, even if they know, really, that those conclusions lock them away from their own people. Daniel does not understand why his thinking is rejected by people who should be his allies ... why he is included among the ranks of those who must be reformed. He is outraged to be considered alongside the Hitlerians and SJCers among his fellow-WNs who he would reform like a shot, if he could. He assumes it must be all just a madness of the ego. The one question he and they never ask is of themselves. 18
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 00:26 | # A proponent of the Single Jewish Cause of everything. 19
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 02:04 | # GW, you know how some ppl lack the “faith gene”? Same goes for most white ppl vis-a-vis the preservation gene. Most whites lack that preservation gene. I hate to say that, but all the evidence indicates it’s true. 20
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 05:10 | # They lack a self-preservation gene… the way the cricket lacks a self-preservation gene. 21
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 09:34 | # Thorn, I was checking on something on the site yesterday and came across an exchange between myself and Leon Haller back in 2013. I replied to a question from him about faith, truth and falsehood with the following:
That’s very much still my view today. The waning will of our people to fight for survival as such is not related specifically to the possession or otherwise of the faith instinct (or, indeed, elbows). Plenty of good Christians are submissive universalists and endless out-group charity-freaks. I concur with James on the third-party scenario, albeit, as I have set out in the (obviously imperfect) chart of histories and historiographies above, my third party is about as far as far can get from James’s “brain-parasite” in terms of generality. But then he’s one of Nature’s scalpel-wielders while people like me throw the kitchen sink at it. 22
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 11:47 | # GW, I, too, think JB makes a good point @20. But if we use the gordian worm as analogous to white ppl being vulnerable to succumbing to anti-racist/woke ideologies, why are some whites—such as myself—not at all vulnerable? I can only attribute that to a built-in/born-in instinctual self-defence mechanism. When confronted with the proverbial gordian worm, race-realist whites reflexively repel it, kill it, then properly dispose of it. Apparently most whites don’t possess that attribute. Or, as I suspect, in many cases they do, but, for whatever self-defeating reason, they fight against their own survival instincts. Peer pressure is a major contributing factor in the “anti-racist” sickness. Fear of being socially ostracised plays into how and why whites behave the way they do. The overarching anti-white smog that now hangs over Western civ. is exerting great pressure on whites to prove they are not racists. That helps explain much of the ethnomasocistic behavior ... and it’s all too obvious that that toxic anti-white behavior is especially pronounced amongst our educated/ruling-class. 23
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 13:53 | # I can agree with every word if you insert “some” in front of “white ppl being vulnerable”. They say 80% just go along with authority. Any authority. Nothing ideological about it. That’s practically all women plus a little more than two-thirds of men. This is not, however, political conformism in the vast majority of cases. In the “ordinary” majority it’s just a mix of self-focus, intellectual limitation, wanting an easy life and not wanting to hear bad news, etc. About 15%, maybe 20% of that 80% are politically-motivated conformists, and these will include people damaged by upbringing, religious people who can’t connect to formal religion, and ambitious psychopaths. Others will be intellectual prisoners of the system I laid out in the historia/historiography graph. One way or another we can explain them all. In that regard, my life-time goal has been to argue that these and all the rest are all our people, and it is the content of the graph which has to be changed for something vivifying and true (which would also protect against the gordian worm). I do not agree with MacDonald that an innate individualism (or two innate individualisms or one individualism replacing another, or whatever) is responsible - or, indeed, an excess of out-group altruism. I am sure that gordian worms can exploit what they are themselves evolved to exploit. But when I look back at my father’s (wartime) generation I don’t see a fatal individualism at work. I see a vertiginous decline in our circumstance from the early 1960s onward. 24
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 14:26 | #
I agree. In large part, on the right side your flowchart under Historiographies starting with Jewish activism down to and including anti-racism, relativism, LGBTQ, second, third, and fourth wave feminism clearly illustrates the pathway towards the decline. 25
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 05 Feb 2022 16:33 | # The first time I made a public statement on race that sacrificed my highest level professional connections, it pertained to the relatively high level of indoctrinability of whites—particularly northern European whites. That was in 1992 and I haven’t changed my mind about that, and took issue with KMac when he first published CoC regarding the issue of how indoctrinable Jews are. It was my contention then, and remains my contention, that the “genetic defect” Thorn alludes to is precisely the heritable characteristic that made it practical for JudeoChristianity to overtake Europe. Jews are heritably more “morally nimble” than whites—which is why they can indoctrinate us and then with amazing chutzpah parade their hypocrisy around as though there were something wrong with us for noticing. The aphorism, “Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man,” attributed to Aristotle and the founder of the Jesuits, reflects this indoctrinability. However, there are other stages of “imprinting” during neurophysiological development available to the “brain parasites”, particularly delayed sexual maturation till the age of 19, as is attributed by Tacitus to the Germanics. This is one of the reasons the sexual revolution was made to coincide with higher coeducation in the 1960s, and is one of the reasons higher education is so incredibly “brain damaging”. Immunization to brain parasites takes place when one’s intelligence is high enough to overcome indoctrination. But don’t get me wrong: There are people with very high IQs that are permanently enslaved by brain parasites. No, the way immunization usually happens is the indoctrination is of a form with enough obvious absurdities that more mediocre intelligence can overcome the indoctrination. That is what I think happened in my case, having been raised in a fundamentalist Zionist JudeoChristian denomination. Also, part of the resentment toward people who are immunized is that they are “cheating on the test”—they are operating without the mental handicaps required of us by the moral zeitgeist’s brain parasites and are therefore properly cast as moral pariahs. 26
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 06 Feb 2022 01:44 | # In answer to James, I do not use the word “warranty”, I use the word warrant. My use of the word (term) Warrant, as in “this is warranted” does not come from Doolittle, at all. I have nothing to do with Curt Doolittle, have in no way been influenced by him and am not interested in his stuff. Nor do I have any especial affinity for East European intellectuals. I do not care to interact with MR. I come here only with a cringe, knowing that I may have to clarify gross misrepresentations of my input. Thus, as it may be your wish to keep my presence here to a minimum, you might want to keep to a minimum your renditions of what I bring and have brought to bear. That applies even more-so to the businessman in strawman manufacture that is GW.
I do understand it.
I understand that as well.
Basically true, though I am not inclined to use the term “single Jewish cause” (a pejorative term) as I take it to be prone to abuse by people would try to de-emphasize and divert from the J.Q. (like Collin Liddell and his cohorts at Affirmative Right; e.g., Brett Stevens) and to not give (((it))) its proper weight and turn of attention (1A or 1B) alongside our own systemic vulnerabilities.
No, I don’t assume that. I recognize that problem in you, GW, indeed, but I see and offer many other explanations for the misguiding and misguided others. Your projection game does not work on the honest. 27
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 06 Feb 2022 02:23 | # One minor clarification here,
While maintaining land based borders is crucial, of course, what I meant here, when speaking of borders, is as much about boundaries, and as usual, it tends to be necessary to do a double entry - borders/boundaries - as speaking of borders alone may (especially here) be taken too literally, be reified, as if what I mean by group membership and accountability thereof means strict constraint to land based borders, whereas boundaries corresponds more to accountability with citizenship, passports, birth certificates, marriage licenses, social security cards and the like. 28
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 06 Feb 2022 13:29 | # @20 “Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man,” —- And that’s what many white parents are currently doing: giveing over their own children to the proponents of white-genocide—be it unknowingly or knowingly. In way too many cases it’s the latter. (After all, in the Western world, ‘Wokeism’ is a fast-growing religion.) Case in point: DC School Makes Masked Kindergarten Students March With BLM Signs While Chanting Black Lives Matter (VIDEO)
29
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 06 Feb 2022 16:31 | # And those parents were, themselves, indoctrinated to believe they should ignore the single most important concept that I’ve presented here at MR over the years—and that MR still hasn’t figured out is essential to the health of any ecology, artificial or natural: The evolution of virulence via horizontal transmission. Continue to discount the importance of this message at the peril of all you value. 30
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 00:30 | #
Not knocking your thesis, Jim, (it’s well thought-out) but very few outside of MR readership has ever heard of your “concept”. Give ‘em a break. 31
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 03:03 | # Thorn judging any thesis written by a powerful intellect like James Bowery’s is like Billy Connolly’s evaluating an elocution competition. 32
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 03:40 | # I’m always entertained when a ranking member of the hierarchy of Trolldom mentions me. This time being Al Ross, AKA the Ungoliant Cockwomble. 33
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 03:53 | # Away with you , you silly wee monkey. You do not know how to compete in a Man’s game either of Wit or Wisdom. 34
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 04:05 | # Al, your impressive vocabulary is a thin disguise for your dim intelligence. Just so you know…. 35
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 05:08 | # Vocabulary utilization is meant for peers. People who find it “impressive” are not the target audience. 36
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 09:56 | # Is your “target audience” aware of the abundance of fava beans and nice chianti you have stocked up in your pantry? 37
Posted by Al Ross on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 11:20 | # Fava beans ? Well , I’m not a vegan but I do eat ‘Bos taurus’ and they’re vegans. As for Chianti, you may believe that “Chiantishire” is a ’ Succession’ original, but well - read people credit the late John Mortimer ,QC , with the term. It is from his novel ’ Summer’s Lease’. You may recognize the title as being a fragment of a Shakespeare quotation, but probably not. 38
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 13:02 | # Thorn note: I think Dr. Khanna may have his races mixed up. Given the world’s current and projected demographic trends (i.e., the population explosion in Sub-Saharan Africa concomitant with its massive migrant outflows), it’s more likely than not the entire planet will eventually become negrofied. Posted on February 4, 2022‘
39
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 14:35 | # Succession A side splittingly hilarious series. Can help but wonder if Greg aka Gregory (lol) will wind up becoming Logan’s successor. 40
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 07 Feb 2022 14:36 | # A better wording:
As usual, we see Israelis are way out of front in the 2021 paper “Non-vertical cultural transmission, assortment and the evolution of cooperation”, while we sit around bickering. Israeli Jews are subjected to invasion by deeper cultures but, unlike Europeans, are not as hobbled by their own virulent mind parasites—hence are catching up with (if not surpassing) my offerings here. CAVEAT: That paper uses a degenerate definition of “horizontal transmission” which, while it may serve their limited purpose, is easily mistaken as advocating horizontal transmission as biologically adaptive for the organisms subject to it by associating it with “the evolution of cooperation”. I haven’t read through the paper to critique it, but this is reminiscent of the controversy over “altruism” ignited by the paper “The Evolution of Eusociality” in which Nowak and E. O. Wilson (no less) explain the extreme “cooperation” manifest in eusocial species as resulting from what is, in effect, parasitic castration of offspring by their own mother. Here’s a pertinent sentence from that paper:
Reproductive specialization is the sine qua non of eusociality according to E. O. Wilson—its defining characteristic. So, for instance, in eusocial insect colonies, “siblings” are charged with parasitically castrating each other by their “queen”. This, in the argot of the paper, is “horizontal transmission” of “culture” in the developmental sense of cultural transmission. However, “oblique” transmission (in the paper’s argot) could be from, say, an old-maid elementary school teacher to her students—encouraging them to become more “cooperative”—or from, say, a Jewish movie executive portraying Jewish men as the romantic lead rescuing the buxom shiksa from an abusive Aryan Chad so that the blond boys viewing it are sexually humiliated while on a movie date with a shiksa.
41
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 02:51 | # Thorn’s gleeful Herald reference has anti - White schadenfreude built right into it. The Herald is owned by the American company Gannett , notorious purveyors of perpetual poison to plebs. Drink your own hemlock , Shabbos Goy. 42
Posted by Al Ross on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 06:34 | # Thorn will be saved , though , from the White / Black post - mortem celestial dichotomy as a result of his unshakeable belief in Old Testament myths. Having had the OT dinned into him by stupid American Christians , Thorn imagines that , in a supernatural ethnic transmogrification , he is a conquering Israeli and not a dispossessed Canaanite , robbed of milk and honey. 43
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 12:32 | #
I, for one. figured out the essentiality of it. I’d like to give a shout-out to you, JB, for your GOD Hypotheses; I particularly found the section titled Mind Control edifying. The info contained therein is particularly germane to the discussion on this thread. 44
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 13:01 | # Extrapolate from this what you will. (Dovetailing on my comment @ 38)
45
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 16:31 | # To be clear, my “better wording” changed “single most important concept” to “single most urgent concept” because “Race, Gender and the Frontier” is what I then called a “good first-order description of reality” (extrapolated ~10 years later in The GOD Hypothesis) relegating the Evolution of Virulence to a second-order description of reality. So in terms of priority, RGF/GODH is more important but the exigencies facing us promote the EoV to greater urgency. In this respect, RGF/GODH explains why there is a south to north gradient in susceptibility to mind control and EoV explains why that mind control turned particularly virulent. 46
Posted by Thorn on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 18:22 | #
Understood and absolutely agree. Not only has anti-white virulence become intense, the infection has become entrenched, or is in the process of becoming entrenched, in virtually all of our institutions. For example: Back in Sept. of 2020, President Trump signed and executive order (EO) banning “diversity training.” The Left immediately took legal action with the intent on overturning the EO. Well, to make a long story short, one of the first actions the Biden administration took was to overturn President Trump’s EO. Biden Reverses Trump Executive Order Banning Diversity Training The takeaway is the Left has wrest control of everything. OTOH, our power to control, thus far, is illusory. To say ‘we have our work cut out for us’ is, of course, an understatement. 47
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 22:50 | # Ha ha ha! “It’s ‘The Left!” (blood curdling scream). ...meanwhile, Gottfried frantically tries-out re-writes of paleocon script. 48
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:52 | # This essay has now been posted by PA’s site editor: https://www.patrioticalternative.org.uk/what_british_nationalism_can_become 49
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 11 Feb 2022 03:50 | # 50
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 14 Feb 2022 01:37 | # @47 If/when we begin seeing insane leftists hunted for sport, then we’ll know things are getting better in the world. 51
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12 | # The last time someone had the idea of hunting the left we ended up with the hunting of nationalism. Maybe something a little more reasonable, to say nothing of legal, might work. 52
Posted by Thorn on Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:58 | # Of course you’re right, GW. Allow me to rephrase my comment: Insane leftists should be sought out and when found, be subject to a good talking to. But can leftist ideologies be reasoned with? Do you think you can reason with Carol Adams? Carol Adams: “Meat is Racist!” (Woke Highlights) - Beyond Meat Debate - Oxford 54
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 14 Feb 2022 17:19 | # There must always be criteria for treating an adversary’s “fallen state” in a manner that recognizes its “mechanicity”. You don’t fix a broken clockwork showing the wrong time by pretending it works and adjusting its setting in the expected way. You take it apart, analyze it, figure out which gear, spring or jewel is broken and fix the component. Only then can you “communicate” with its display of time via the time setting mechanism. There is, however, a point of declension where it makes no sense to try to fix it and to, instead, treat it as a mere force of nature. At such a point, the word “hunt” may come in to play but only as part of “by any means necessary” to win the de facto war against this force of nature. Lawfare? March through the institutions? CRISPR-CAS9? Mass media indoctrination? Nuclear bombs? Fentanyl addiction? Subversion? Bedtime stories? The choices are endless in the war against a force of nature. 56
Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 16 Feb 2022 04:28 | # GW , the Left / Right is often Tweedledum / Tweedledee. A proper, Monday Club Conservative , the late Alan Clark , Eton and Oxford, found temporary , anti - EU common cause with the loony Leftist Tony Benn , saying : ” I’d vastly prefer to be ruled by my fellow Brits , socialist or not , rather than by a bunch of fucking foreigners.” 57
Posted by John Baillie on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:08 | # Ethno-nationalism, racial-nationalism, civic-nationalism - it seems to me that they overlap each other. Some of our leading sports stars are black or brown but we are pleased to call them British. There is no agreed philosophy on race and nationality on the so-called far-right. Every sane person wants immigration control but only the dreamers cling to repatriation. We are where we are, but European culture and civilisation still predominate and it’s the duty of nationalists of all kinds to defend it. I think nationalists are dancing on the point of a needle. Forget the intellectual posturing and accept reality. Yockey was right, races make cultures but cultures also make races. 58
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:44 | # John, we are a dying people, ethnically and racially. It is not a natural death. No people can survive the endless foreignisation of its home. So we find the means to repatriate the colonising populations or we will spiral down into a rump population in a one-time homeland filled with people who have been taught to hate us. Don’t, then, be defeatist. There is no other way but to fight. Yockey’s feverish notions of the spirit of race and the soul of culture, and his pseudo-Nietzschean underpinnings are precisely the kind of material which has held us back from championing the truth of Man and European Man. His racism and anti-Semitism cannot be made politically viable. The race question and the Jewish Question, therefore, have to be approached by us in another way. There are three other difficult things we must accomplish. First and philosophically, we have to shift from the creaking and outmoded Nietzschean moral analysis, with its emphasis on idealism and power, to a developed Heideggerian analysis with, in my view, an emphasis on essence (which opens to identity), survival and continuity (blood and ethnicity), and home (nativism). Second, our heavy and restricting emphasis on a fundamentally critical and negative analytic, be it racial or of the liberal system, or just of the exercise of power in this world, has to give way to a positive, propositional story we could actually speak about to another human being. Third, we have to get in the game. In crude terms, the old-school British nationalists and WN-ised Jew obsessives and everything they put forward, and have put forward for six unsuccessful decades, have to go. Those two battles have to be won so that the third step might perhaps be made, and the real fight commenced upon. 59
Posted by Thorn on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:24 | # @58 Well said, GW, and I agree. But I think it requires a lot of prior knowledge and experience to fully grasp what you said. The average white person isn’t familiar enough with the causes of the malignant genocidal situation he/she faces. IOWs, the defence of white people, on the surface, is a simple concept; but put into practice it becomes extremely difficult and complicated. We are up against a devilishly clever and immensely powerful enemy. Thus far, an enemy that has outmaneuvered us in just about every encounter. Of course, and as you’ve spelled out, our losses are mainly due to self-defeating strategies. 60
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 23:59 | # I agree that the direct statement of our existential condition does not have the straitening effect on recipients that I have long assumed it should. Perhaps you are right that it is too far ahead for the “normal guy” to really grasp its import. If that is the case, then the question becomes: what is the stepping stone? 61
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 11 Feb 2023 05:59 | # GW , “normal guys” , in today’s middle class sense , often have to choose between defending our capital or our race, I elected to choose the former in order to hope that my racist ideas may have adhered to my expensively educated offspring. So far so good. Some progress with offspring spouses, despite STEM ,PhD presence. 62
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 12 Feb 2023 00:53 | # Perhaps the normal guys, Al, will be ground down by the forces arrayed against us to the point where defence of the one is only possible through defence of the other. We seem to be heading inexorably towards that. 63
Posted by Thorn on Sun, 12 Feb 2023 15:00 | # “what is the stepping stone?” Maybe an aim is a better term? Given the people who practice the “woke” cult have become our ruling class (they’ve succeeded in their long march through the institutions - they now rule the roost) we now must form a strategy aimed at simultaneously accomplishing two main objectives: 1) The deconstruction of the “woke” ideology then subject it to the obliterating process of critical theory; i.e., expose it as the devious vile ideology that it is. 2) Spread the anti-woke message - first and foremost within the Eurosphere—via the MSM and the educational system. Of course that’s wishful thinking. A real turnaround will probably take effect due to an unplanned event cascading into a series of events which, with a lot of luck, dislodge the smug “woke” ruling-class. One thing we’re observing is the phenomenon in which it’s much easier to brainwash white people into becoming anti-white than it is to enlighten them to the fact that defending their own race is not only in their best long-term interest, it’s a matter of survival. It’s no secret that here in the USA whites are being set up to be the proverbial Tutsis, whilst non-whites - along with anti-white whites - are fast becoming the inflamed homicidal Hutus. Amazing how many whites are aiding and abetting the proverbial Hutus. Virtually the entire managerial-class along with those in their sphere of influence—which includes most in the middle to upper-middle classes— are, to one degree or another, ‘woke’ thus embrace CRT. It almost makes you want to through in the towel and say FUCK IT!!!, it’s not worth the time and effort. The power and influence of the woke religion is fast causing whites to become hellbent on committing racial suicide. The ideological architects of wokeism - and its core tenet CRT - know how to incite white genocide and they are exceptionally good at it! Amazing how talented they are! Mainly it’s bc they control the language. Control of the language allows them to control ppls thoughts. Moreover, in order to suit their narrative, they keep rewriting the definitions of words. Post a comment:
Next entry: Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, 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 James Bowery on Wed, 02 Feb 2022 22:11 | #
“Is vs is not” is good pedagogy as well as good philosophy. The two cohere not just for dissemination of revolutionary thought to the masses but for clarification to the philosophical school arising from its inchoate necessities. In particular, elaborate this item for the benefit of your fellow philosophers:
As for those around whom revolutionary movements may arise, prior to the Gutenberg press, the “publishers” were those capable of supporting professional scribes. Then that monopoly suffered a technological disruption resulting in the Treaty of Westphalia’s nation state after hellish warfare. We’re still in the midsts of the Internet’s disruption and unlikely to escape hellish warfare at some point. While I’m sympathetic to the worry that precipitate action will, at best, be a terminal euphoria without a philosophical revolution, my effort to provide what I call a “backstop” to a historic rhyme with The Thirty Years War for religious freedom from the supremacist quasi-theocracy now rendering humanity a travesty should not be lightly dismissed as merely futile since it guarantees at least land (under rule 3) in service of:
The Treaty of Westphalia only approximated such a guarantee with its Cuius regio, eius religio—failing to reapportion land value according to a census, with the resulting wars for territorial reallocations/accessions/secessions.
Finally, another word on the “publishers” necessary to popular pedagogy flowing out of your philosophical project:
The tripartate magisteria aka “castes” so foundational to our people’s traditions are poorly represented in the 2-level division. Plato suffered this same fault with his notion of the “philosopher king”—combining the top two castes into a single social category. Ultimately, a state of peace requires fully integrated individuals—integrated not only within their tripartate nervous system but with their land’s ecology. However, until that state of peace obtains, the state of war persists in its demand that we specialize into the war machine’s superorganism with well understood duties and loyalties. In this respect, the “publishers” are like “kings” and must receive their inspiration from the higher caste. The present urgency of war makes all would be “kings” on the Internet focus on gathering “influence” over as large a cadre as they can… action being called for to make even brain-dead corrections that improve on the present hellish conditions. This puts them in a state that is not receptive to others as they perceive those others as threatening their ability to acquire more followers.
I’m not sure how you’ll overcome this problem, but it is central.