Majorityrights News > Category: Political Philosophy

EBL 31: Michel Foucault “The Birth of Biopolitics” (with Alex McNabb)

Thamster WitNat
2.96K subscribers

The EBL crew is joined by special guest Alex McNabb for a discussion of Michel Foucault’s 1978-79 series of lectures titled “The Birth of Biopolitics”. The crew examines facets of neoliberalism in the light of Foucault’s classic treatise

I stopped reading Foucault after the first book of his that I read, The History of Sexuality: The Use of Pleasure.

I was intrigued by the title, which indicated a classical Epicurean inquiry, a worthy avenue it seemed to me. However, except for the provocatively useful, but un-elaborated upon term, “bio-power”, there wasn’t much that i found to be of use in the text. On the contrary, I found him coming back repeatedly to the idea that (some) ancient Greeks (allegedly) considered homosexual pedophilia normal as transparent justification for his own predilection among this contextual relativization of history.

Even so, the term “bio-power” provides a clue as to an angle that can be used in inquiry and warning as to how it is that Africans can be a danger, i.e., not merely antagonistic, but having capacity, dangerous capability ...e.g., as a people some 200,000 years evolved prior to and thus compared to the precarious 41,000 years of European evolution.

There are several advantages to this angle which I will not elaborate on, but only add that it helps to mitigate against the Nazophiles who try to minimize black antagonism, looking upon themselves and their singular concern for the J.Q. as the ultimate in sophistication (and not naivete).

It also goes to show that sometimes a book a thousand pages long can be justified by one term or even the title.

While I had always meant to read Foucault’s most important books, Discipline and Punish and Birth of the Clinic for the provocative angles that Foucault takes on social problems, I never got around to it having been turned off enough by Foucault’s pedophilia apologetics and having read enough people quoting the texts to get the idea…

Josh Neal, Alex McNabb, Jefferson Lee and Thampster have a discussion in and about Foucault having apparently been provoked by the same term - bio-poltics/bio-power - and finding the same thing, the Foucault does not elaborate.

However, they have a decent discussion in and about what Foucault’s lecture on bio-politics does talk about - neo-liberalism…

....“the market (and its infamous ‘magic hand’) becomes the space of truth.”

....while the panel ventures some into Birth of The Clinic and Discipline and Punish.

Again, I’m not endorsing Foucault but he does provide provocative angles, prompting ways to think about power relations and their historical context in the determination of how social problems come to count.

Amon Göth’s daughter, a tragic figure.

Sometimes they cling to the right wing elements that allow for backdoor vulnerabilities through straightforward identification as rightist, at other times they don’t admit their right wing foolishness explicitly by saying “neither right nor left”, “national socialist” but lately there has been a gathering among the “dissident” right around the idea of “Third Positionism” ...which does allow for the admittance of Jewish influence by means of Christianity and where not directly, then by maneuvering of reactionary scientistic rigidity, like Uncle Adolf….serving reactionary elitism as such, it has young boys clambering for the leader in “truth, nature, god and foundation”, has the puerile girls getting all right-wing and wet as incitement of will to power in genetic competition will instigate the next round of genocide and leave a new breed of sociopaths on top for them to breed with, no matter whether they are Jewish, black or Mulatto, no matter if most and maybe nearly all of our European people get destroyed in the “inevitable, objective” process….

Greg Johnson discusses Carl Schmitt and The Concept of The Political...

The right wing being what it is, holding such rules as “no punching to the right”, is ripe for catastrophic exploitation in its non-corrective rigidity.

Among the reactionary positions that its proponents have been maneuvered into - duped - into taking, is that “sociology is Jewish.”  ...not that it is a neutral instrument that has been abused and weaponized against Whites by Jewish academics; no, right wingers take the position that sociology is Jewish and thus its unit of analysis - the group - is to be dismissed as so much skulduggery rather than what the group unit of analysis is - the most relevant to our cause.

You see, we European peoples, all of us, are being attacked as a group - a race is a group, and anti-racism is primarily aimed at the disorganization and destruction of the group that is European peoples along with our subgroups.

But the right wing position and its rational blindness to social accountability serves the elitism, secrecy and snobbery of some would-be leaders….

As their rationally blinded snobbery and elitism discriminates vertically instead of horizontally and fundamentally on the basis of qualitative niches, they also become naive, easily duped into entryism and maneuvering by our enemies.

Greg Johnson is only now saying what I have been saying explicitly for over a decade, that Jewry is organizing groups against us in anti-White coalitions, that we are under attack as a group and thus have to defend ourselves as a group.

Not that I am going to be given credit or even a hat-tip by these right-wingers for purveying that among an array of significant ideas that go into making it happen.. but as they are trying to spuriously bolt better grounded thoughts to their elitist positioning, let me point out that they are still clinging to their right wing, elitist positioning -

As I have observed before, Greg Johnson’s snobbery, that is, his vertical as opposed to horizontal discrimination leaves him with a bias that has him discriminating against some who are loyal and sincere while perhaps without pedigree, while favoring at times some who are clever, accredited but dubious in their will for our people (in the most relevant example, Greg banned me from Counter-Currents when I expressed suspicion in regard to Mark Dyal, whom Greg sought to curry favor with).

But here again, Greg’s elitism is served by Carl Schmitt’s concept of the political, though its “friend and enemy” distinction wound-up being drawn on catastrophic lines as it dovetailed with Schmitt’s dubious concept of “the exception” [exception to social accountability and regard for national boundaries] in his endorsement of the Nazi regime and the person of Hitler…and, well, what could go wrong?

Granddaughter, daughter and Amon Göth

For reasons most everyone understands, I have shifted this audio/video to Bitchute.

Curt Doolittle’s Propertarian Constitution vs Jim Bowery’s Sortocracy

James Bowery 12 May 2020:

Sortocracy purports to be an upgrade to the Treaty of Westphalia.  The Propertarian Constitution purports to be an upgrade to the United States Constitution.  Sortocracy, takes the form of a declaration of the conditions of peace between sovereign nation-states, as did The Peace of Westphalia.  It upgrades the notion of a nation-state as recognized by other nation-states . As such it does not take the place of the of a constitution.  Its philosophical foundation is aligned with that of The Declaration of Independence rather than the US Constitution.

Sortocracy is described at http://sortocracy.org/

The Propertarian Constitution is described at
https://propertarianism.com/revolutio

Joel Davis, Richard Spencer et al. in a recent podcast (not the podcasts referenced in this article).

Or would they prefer to take it up the ass?

We have long followed the Jewish op called “the Alt-Right”, a stewarding of Whites reacting to Political Correctness and its hyperbolic activist groups and coalitions deemed “social justice warriors.” Though these “social justice warriors”, themselves, were an anti White orchestration by Jewish academia, that is a fact glossed-over in this stewarding of Whites by contrast, broadly conducted along the crypo kosher devised platform of paleoconservativsm, but spearheaded pointedly by Paul Gottfried; who saw the need circa 2008, to head off the intersectionality of a necessarily growing consciousness that Jews were not exactly a downtrodden group, but to the contrary, occupying elite niches in society, often unjustly and wielding that power unjustly. Hence the need, from a Jewish perspective, to divert that nascent awareness, the logical counter of White unionization (a leftist thing) and coalition building; and to promote instead a characterology of “The Left” as the enemy, “Social Justice Warriors” its deluded minions. ... we don’t want any of that social justice now that Jews are on top (in more hegemony than ever)  ...along with any scummy Whites who are willing to sell out to Jewish interests, now do we?

No, this un-kosher intersectionality could be headed off by moving Whites from false Jewish opposition number one - NeoConservatism - and reviving false Jewish opposition number two - Paleoconserativism - updated 2.0, to appeal to a younger (and naive) audience to include a broader variety of reactionaries, not trying to fit all right wing reactionaries under one tent, but rather create a tentosphere, a loose coalition divide and conquer juggling act that could allow for Christians, Jewish right wingers, neo-Nazis and the scientistic generally, along with nutty conspiracy theorists. Membership seemed to require at least one socially stigmatizing attachment - then you could be a minor e-celebrity, arguing against “the left” and “social justice warriors”, equipped directly by Madison Ave marketing firms with memes and narratives to absolve you (and YKW) from responsibility and accountability, narratives provided for the “Alt-Right”, of pure scientific objectivity, facts of nature as the sole reason that you are on top and the sheer natural injustice of the world, the reason that you are not accountable, “the reason that things are not equal, like THE left character always unnaturally insists upon.” 

Richard Spencer is apparently happy to go along with the Jewish misdirection to promote the “SJW’s are the problem” meme ...take the bribe and pay off of this Jewish, Madison Ave marketing campaign, where it originated, focusing on the vastly distorted, hyperbolic anti White “social justice warrior”, really a Jewish academic creation, and talk about it instead, as if it is an organic phenomenon stemming from religious origin, ether, in order to divert Whites from organizing themselves and pursuing their social justice; which would bring into full view Jewish elite niches, their injustice along with right wing/liberal sell outs - seeing them clearly as out-groups:

The Religious Origins of the SJW, NPI Radix 28 April 2020

Is it really necessary, Richard, to go along with memes convenient to (((them))), a meme like this having obviousy been put out by (((their))) Madison Ave. marketing machine? Sure, let’s be against Social Justice now that (((they))) are unjustly on top of everything and right wing sell outs like you, Richard, are perfectly willing to sell out ethnonationalism; contributing to the marketing of this meme, taking (((their))) hyperbolic, anti-White coalitions as being The thing that social justice is about, whereas “reality” and White advocacy can supposedly have no part in social justice. But then, I guess it is convenient to a blue blood like yourself, one with no character. Typical right wing, anti-social bullshit, treacherous, sell out.

And about philosophy student, Joel Davis, with whom you do philosophical hangouts now…

He is the one who necessitated a rebut from me for his conversation with Josh Neal. I believe the discussion between Josh Neal and Joel Davis is off line (I’ll try to find it), but Joel Davis was saying unequivocally that “Israel is our friend.” ...not that it is some kind of supremacist cluster fuck trying to extend its reach over the whole world as “the shining beacon” to the “down trodden masses” - downtrodden because the tribe blends us down and grinds us down.

Joel Davis, who for some interesting reason keeps speaking of Mencius Moldbug (((Curtis Yarvin))) as if he someone authoritative to refer-to, to look up to, when in fact, Yarvin is clearly operating in Jewish interests, misdirecting Whites with his Ops, “Dark Enlightenment” and into “Neo Reaction” etc., ops focusing on co-opting STEM types especially, those who tend to be naive about the machinations as opposed to proper uses of social sciences and the humanities.

Here is Joel Davis in the chat of a Paul Gottfried stream, apparently very interested in getting in with Gottfried:

First, I will give you the excerpts of Joel, followed by the whole chat:

joeldavis
Cotto, where do you think institutional support could possibly come from for a legitimate paradigm shift to occur away from the Neoliberal/Neocon binary?

We’ve already established Right Ruminations inclinations, viewing Gottfried as someone we should be grateful for. Joel is chatting with Right Ruminations here:

Right Ruminations
My point is that you can’t understand to how Catholics deal with this history until you understand the particulars of Catholics doctrine. A term applied to Mary may be historical but that “Star of the Sea” is not doctrine.

Ohm 7
Is Christianity invented by Jewish Elites of Old Time or a development of Old European Religion?

orabell
invention of Paul

joeldavis
According to this analysis, wouldn’t that render Protestantism to be a ‘de-paganization’ of Christianity?

Ultra Testosterone
Protestant is closer but it still depends on gospels

orabell
yes.. it moved them farther away from their pre-Abrahamist , pagan, roots..

joeldavis
Cotto, do you believe Christianity will remain culturally dominant for the forseeable or have we passed the point of no return?

joeldavis
The dissident right’s inability to find coherence seems to be a consequence of a lack of religious convergence as much as anything.

joeldavis
Good call Imperius, as long as we remain alienated (post)protestants we lack the ability to build coherent moral language.

Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis hey joel loved your chat with keith woods

Ultra Testosterone
Cotto should do stream labs so he gets more of the money

Oswald Spengler
also john david ebert

joeldavis
@Oswald Spengler thanks man, would love to get on this program or have these guys on my channel sometime as well.

Oswald Spengler
that’d be great

joeldavis
I tried emailing Gottfried recently, but no response this far, i’ll keep trying.

Ultra Testosterone
Gottfried is a good guy but he didn’t get some of top tier scholarship jokes

Ultra Testosterone
Cotto is more aware of the jokes

Brando Calrissian
The demographics look pretty good for non-mainline-Protestant churches. Kaufmann’s book, Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth, and the religious anthropology/population studies work of Ed Dutton

Ultra Testosterone
Different generation

Brando Calrissian
suggest that religions with high TFR and high retention will outbreed moderate religions and nones even in the developed west.

joeldavis
i’d love to get their thoughts on building institutional support for the cutting edge ideas spinning out of the dissident right particularly.

Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis you should hook up with justin murphy too

joeldavis
@Oswald Spengler i’ve been on his channel already once before, i’ve been trying to organize an interview with him on my channel recently, hopefully we can organize that soon.

Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis sent you an invite on FB, i’m “joseph ducreux”

Luke Avedon
@Cotto-Gottfried When is @Right Ruminations coming on by the way?

Right Ruminations
@Luke Avedon I am well. A sub of mind just made a new channel - Terminal Philosophy - and had me as his first guest. I think he his channel has promise for the Rumisphere as it were.

Schizo Ric AKA Quantrell Bishop
@joeldavis is the MAN!

Oswald Spengler
@Cotto-Gottfried would it be a good thing for economics as a field to be destroyed by intersectionality?

Schizo Ric AKA Quantrell Bishop
@Cotto-Gottfried get @joeldavis on your channel for an interview

joeldavis
Cheers Schizo, i’d love to.

Curious Cretin
Are Mormons pagan?

Oswald Spengler
lol^

joeldavis
“i’ve never been called a nerd before”

joeldavis
high-T

joeldavis
response

Oswald Spengler
cotto is 6 6

Ultra Testosterone
lol

Ultra Testosterone
Truth

Oswald Spengler
@Cotto-Gottfried thoughts on the now-not-so-new atheists?

Imperius
There’s way more money we can give. I’ve been hard at work setting the infrastructure. Just let me know the channel where you will get more of it, like PayPal.

joeldavis
Cheers Cotto, i’ll try the outlook address.

Luke Avedon
@Cotto-Gottfried Nice! I will check it out.

Ohm 7
Yo I went to take a bath and missed the answer about if Christianity has descended from Jewish Elites of the Hellenic Times or from the Old European Religion?

Imperius
We’re moving into phase two the end of this year, which is why I tried seeking out Gottfried and found that there was even this Cotto guy, lol. Solid guy.

Luke Avedon
@Right Ruminations I like that he has a Blade Runner avatar. My favorite film of all time.

Ultra Testosterone
Trump 2020

Imperius
So many factions aren’t talking to each other as much as they should. It’s left to younger guys to have less hesitation.

Ohm 7
Cotto, I’d highly recommend having Keith Woods on, he’s one of the most interesting Leftists on the internet right now I think, he’s an Irish Nationalist

Imperius
Keith Woods isn’t a leftist.

Imperius
He’s a folk nativist. Most of intellectual history, leftism has been anti-nativist.

Imperius
Yeah, there’s cross-over, but don’t simply call him a leftist.

Right Ruminations
@Luke Avedon I like that he had set a specific atmosphere from the outset. I am afraid that the atmosphere of my channel had been too haphazard.

Finally, Joel Davis shows how he wants to co-opt the ultimate move of left nationalism, which by his idea would include Jews:

joeldavis
Misconceiving a Nationalist as a Leftist is a symptom of the post-Cold War propaganda hangover. The Right should be unapologetic about subordinating Capital to the National interest.

However, Gottfried man Right Ruminations pushes back, not wanting to share the wealth, of course ..

Right Ruminations
@joeldavis The neoliberals support both globalism and heavy intervention in the market. I don’t agree with the implication that nationalism and economic individualism are mutually exclusive

Right Ruminations
Enoch Powell for example.

READ MORE...

27:10: It is Poland’s explicit policy after 1935 to rid itself of 90% of its Jewish population. Given that there were more than three million Jews in Poland that’s a very large number.  ..but from their point of view, the way to get rid of the Jews was to support right wing Jewish terrorists who are going to make a lot of trouble in Palestine so there could be a Jewish state.

...from the Nazi point of view, anti-Semitism is part of [their concept of] racial anarchy. The Nazi point of view is that Jews are the ones who are in the way of a racial struggle, which is non-political.

The Polish point of view is different. The Polish point of view is attached to the state. They don’t understand that the Nazis are about racial anarchy.  ...the[y think rather that the] way to handle whatever problem they’re defining, even what they see as the struggle against Jews, is by way of states. So, you either negotiate with the British or behind their back you find a way to create a state in Palestine and then you can get the Jews sent off there.

...to emphasize the point that there are different kinds of anti-Semitism, it’s not just a matter of turning up the dial or turning down a dial ..or who is more anti-Semitic the Poles or the Germans.. there are issues of quality here which matter, especially when the quality has to do with the state.  ..but where we’ve gotten to in history is the moment where Germany starts to destroy states. Where this theory of state destruction actually becomes practice.

30:40: Poland is where Hitler finally gets his war. It’s not the war that he wanted; it’s not a war that he had planned; it’s not a war that he expected. But when he made war against Poland it was the first war that he prosecuted while actively destroying the state.

When he talks to his high officers in July/ August 1939, before the war… early September 1939, what he tells them is that this war is not like other wars. It’s not about territory. It’s not about victory. It’s not about seizing a certain amount of land. It’s about destroying Poland as a state and as a nation.

In other words, it’s not just about destroying the Polish army; but about coming into the country, declaring that the civil code no longer functions; the Polish state does not exist; (this is where it gets interesting) the Polish state has never existed.

So, the claim that they make when they enter Poland is basically the same kind of claim that European imperialists made beyond Europe; that the territory we’re entering is uninhabited, at least in the sense of being uninhabited by political beings.

So, Poland is treated colonially in the sense that the Polish state is not acknowledged as an institution; actively not acknowledged. And the people who are thought to represent it, whether they are military officers, whether they are civilian politicians, whether they are Roman Catholic priests, are physically eliminated - killed: in the tens of thousands. That’s not an accident. That’s part of the idea of destroying the Polish state.

Matthew Goodwin | Social and economic origins of populism

UBS Center, 30 Dec 2019

Matthew Goodwin on populism: is it economics or culture?

UBS Center, 13 Nov 2019