Identity Politics

The podcast I did on the Dissident Right turned out to be a hit, so I have decided to make the single topic format a regular feature. This being a holiday week and a very slow news week, it makes sense to take another swing at the single topic format. Doing something like this, it is important to keep an eye on what works for you. My style, disposition, tone of voice and so forth will work better with some things and not so good on others.

One of things about doing a single topic show is it forces me to think a little deeper about the topic. This week, for example, I found myself a little stumped on defining white identity politics. Doing some research, I did not find a lot of easy answers either. I did the best I could for this show, but I will be revisiting the topic in the future. For that alone, I’m enjoying the single topic concept. If there is no struggle, there is no progress.

This week I have the usual variety of items in the now standard format. Spreaker has the full show. I am up on Google Play now, so the Android commies can take me along when out disrespecting the country. I am on iTunes, which means the Apple Nazis can listen to me on their Hitler phones. The anarchists can catch me on iHeart Radio. YouTube also has the full podcast. Of course, there is a download link below.

This Week’s Show


  • 00:00: Opening
  • 02:00: Negative Identity
  • 12:00: Positive Identity
  • 22:00: Progressive Identity Politics
  • 32:00: Conservatives and Identity Politics
  • 42:00: White Identity
  • 52:00: The Road From Here
  • 57:00: Closing

Direct Download

The iTunes Page

Google Play Link

iHeart Radio

Full Show On Spreaker

Full Show On Odysee

50 thoughts on “Identity Politics

  1. Excellent podcast. A defining characteristic of white identity is competence hierarchies. Everything else flows through that. The orderliness the trust the timeliness it’s all from knowing that people in their different positions are competent most of the time

    It’s a Jordan Peterson term. If he’s come to grips with white identity he has not said so yet. And honestly I can’t blame him. I’m sure he doesn’t need to fire bomb his career just yet

  2. I believe that the issue of creating a sound basis for understanding identity politics can best be addressed by looking at the science of anthropology. Anthropologists tell us that humans (and primates in general) have certain universal traits. In-group identity is one of those human universals. It is a biological inevitably, although it has times that it is stronger or weaker.

    One of the better overviews of the subject (admittedly dated), was done by Desmond Morris in his various books such as the Human Zoo, the Naked Ape etc. Ultimately, it comes down to associating one’s own interests with the group. A threat to the group is seen as a threat to oneself. Habituation and benefit also plays an important role in continuing a constant identity. The risk-aversion of the average non-committed person can be utilized by authorities to avoid dissolution as well.

    Given that in-group identity is a biological fact, then it comes down to how the group identity gets formed and maintained. The issue is not whether or not we have an identity, but who gets to define what that identity is. That is what politics is all about. In fact, I would argue that all politics is ultimately identity politics (if you don’t build an identity, then it is just membership in an arbitrary club; you can go somewhere else if any problems arise). The cuckservatives always want to stress identifying with their version of the “American” identity and their mores. Some identities will form spontaneously while others are maintained by authority. Morris posits that group identity is strongest under threats and weakest under prosperity. That is why various Jewish groups must constantly re-iterate their victim status and highlight the boogie-man of the day; it reinforces Jewish identity. It is also something that we can use.

    So, I think, four major aspects to identity exist: habituation/normalization, benefit, self-preservation and risk aversion.

    Identity, to be maintained, must also be useful when threats do not exist: it must be beneficial even in the absence of threat. High culture brings great social benefits due to its efficiency at bringing benefits to many. This is why I have tended to use the word “positivist” as an approach to developing the habituist/beneficial aspects. Positivist means to state what you are working FOR, not what you are against. People will attach themselves to groups when a threat exists, but they will drift away if it is not positivist, beneficial and habitual.

    The leftists/sociologists/post-modernist academics have developed strong theoretical understandings on the formation and maintenance of identity. Their approach defines it in a highly cognitive manner. It is worth understanding their arguments although it is hard to wade through the leftist BS/ideology. Some of it can be re-framed for pro-White interests.

    Ed L

    • Hi Ed, thats a very interesting post but you’re really leaving us hanging at the end, particularly with the reference to newspeak. Are there any particular ideologies, theories we can use. To quote Ellen Ripley in Aliens We don’t have a lot of time here…..

      • Regarding theories to use, there is one basic approach : build our own and discredit/disempower our opposition.

        Therefore, we must consider what is necessary to build and promote our own ideas, on the one hand, and to denigrate and weaken our oppositions’.

        One good place to start is in understanding framing theory [ ].

        In many ways, I think our side is getting better at “framing.” The various meme wars that have been waged for the past two decades or so are important examples. However, I think that it is not sufficient to be tactical, one must be strategic in ones approach. We must define our own frames and impose them on our opposition as they have been doing to us. We must be powerful strategic “memers.”

        As our opposition has sought to “deconstruct” our culture, we must deconstruct theirs (and reconstruct ours). As they have developed “post modernist” thought, we must develop “post liberal” or “post globalist” thought which builds on the ruins of liberal and post-modernist thought. When these ideas are good, they will displace and replace our opposition.

        One example of this approach is one I call “Critical Globalist Theory.” Starting with Critical Race Theory [ ] and reframing it in terms of pro-nationalist thought, it becomes “Critical Globalist Theory.” Here’s how I define it (the reframing being obvious from the wikipedia source).

        Definition: Critical Globalist Theory
        Critical Globalist Theory is a theoretical framework in the social sciences that uses critical theory to examine society and culture as they relate to globalist ideology, law and power.

        First, CGT proposes that progressive liberalism and liberal democracies are maintained over time, and in particular, that law may play a role in this process. Second, CGT work investigates the possibility of transforming the relationship between law and liberal power, and more broadly, pursues a project of advancing national emancipation and anti-subordination.

        CGT recognizes that liberalism has become engrained in the fabric and system of European socities. The individual gloablist need not exist to note that institutional globalism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CGT uses in examining existing power structures. CGT identifies that these power structures are based in egalitarian thinking and non-white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of white nations.

        This requires that we understand the arguments and ideas of our opposition and build beyond them.

        Personally, I think that the means to accomplish that can also be reframed from a theory known as “prefiguration.” From wikipedia [ ]:

        Prefigurative politics are the modes of organization and social
        relationships that strive to reflect the future society being sought
        by the group.

        Prefigurative nationalism is the manner in which I believe that we can advance our interests. Ultimately, it means that we Whites organize ourselves into the society that we want to attain starting today. We must reject all of our opponents’ authorities and re-establish our own. Our scope must be towards a whole new society.

        I think that Z-man stated properly what must be done in this latest edition of the Z Blog Power Hour. It’s all about organizing ourselves. So, another theoretical place to start is Social Movement Theory [ ] and reframe it for nationalist interests.

        These are a few theoretical ideas developed by our opposition for their own interests, which we can reframe for our own common good. Whenever you encounter any of our oppositions ideas, ask yourself how you can reframe them for our own interests. In doing that, we build on their foundation but we build something new for ourselves. This is like sacred buildings of one religion being built on the ruins of the previous one.

        However, having theories is not enough. We must turn these ideas into weapons. That means using these ideas to guide us in our own organizing as a community and as a polity.

  3. Congratulations on #50. Hit the nail on the head with the “imports” vs. “domestics”. First saw that starkly almost twenty years ago with a close colleague from Nigeria, who had survived the Biafra wars as a child, was sent to a boarding school out of the war zone where the kids basically had to grow their own food and maintain the premises in return for an education–not exactly Exeter. Came to the US for college and that was where his “WTF?” journey began. The firm kept trying to drag him into these various diversity committees, working groups, mentoring programs etc. He’d basically sit down on my office and go off on rants about “what the fuck is wrong with these people–they have everything handed to them and they do nothing but bitch and whine”. Wanted nothing to do with it and took the first opportunity to transfer out to Asia-Pacific–basically to escape the extracurricular crap. Now sits on the management board of one of the largest global reinsurers. Saw something similar when one of my kids ran AAU track around here. Often one of a handful of white kids, so I ended up spending a lot of time with the Caribbean peeps. Track was a religion for them. But most of them also kept their kids in track clubs to keep them the fuck away from the domestics–oh, and oddly, most seemed to come from two parent families. Imagine that.

    • Biafrans, uniquely so far as I know, bred themselves up from the standard Bantu copy.

      • We never got too far into that. Dude was in the top 10 smartest I’ve ever met category though.

  4. OK, I’ll take one swipe at the casual statement that the Civil War had much to do with saving blacks. Perhaps in some small end result, the “Court Historians” cling to this BS. Perhaps it was about Trade in the south with cotton, tobacco and other items. The south was getting wealthy (ok, and so slaves had a part in this result) and most importantly, NOT PAYING TAXES to people in the north. The tax, even in those days would have been enormous. Things being traded out to other countries and all the profit stayed home in the south. Hmmm, no that didn’t bother anyone?

    I’ll present an excellent writer on the subject, Tom DiLorenzo, who is famous for attacking Lincoln revisionism and almost anything having to do with his atitude toward the “Slave Issue” in his time. Very illuminating stuff.

    • When was Lincoln’s birthday made a holiday, I wonder? The bitterness must’ve lasted for decades, as lots of family was dead. Who wrote the official version we learned in school? (Since it’s also been thrown under the bus, I hear)

    • The South was not getting wealthy, they were poor and getting poorer. Slavery cast labor itself in a bad light to whites and made them stupid in the process, while their northern countrymen regarded labor as a religious virtue. These peculiar unintended effects of slavery were no secret in the South and not a few people were fearful of them. They had a tiger by the tail and didn’t know how to let go.

      • Wrong on its face. The rest of the Union did not reach the GDP of the South until 1850. Without tariffs powering Northern industrialization, the North would have lagged behind the South for many more decades. I’m not defending slavery, by the way. But it was definitely profitable in the pre-industrial South. Today, machines do most of the work blacks used to perform. And thank God for that. Today white Southerners enjoy the highest standard of living in the nation, in spite of the presence of large numbers of blacks. It has been a startling turnaround. There was a time when white left the South in order to find opportunity. Those days are over.

        • Whatever wealth is made through a feudal plantation system is little recirculated to the citizenry. The southern citizen lacked not only wealth, but energy. The majority of new businesses were started by northern transplants and immigrants The value of land in the south was one-ninth the value of land in the north per acre. Slavery made them stupid and lazy, although the summers and tropical diseases didn’t help.

  5. Isn’t this about the first year anniversary of your oral oeuvre?
    If so, congratulations, if not congratulations anyway. There’s usually food for thought and pretty much always cause for mirth concerning Afro and Gyno Americans. (though it seems likely that the Beaners and kinfolk will increasingly get their time in the sun)
    Keep the single topic pieces coming.

  6. Ventured into Detroit today for some contract work. Lived a good length of time but it still doesn’t get any easier working in the environment. Either I get an indifferent look or stare when approaching them, asking if I have any work for them, or on my way driving out dealing with the bums with signs (if that). Yeah, they aren’t going to leave us and don’t want us going anywhere either.
    Oh, I am talking about blacks by the way.

  7. It’s funny how clear it’s becoming why so-called conservatives always lose on various cultural skirmishes. They’re utterly clueless on matters of race and sex. They obsess over their abstract theories and principles and “universalist” standards, never realizing that identity politics is based on BLOOD and hardly traffics in theories/principals. The idea that you can appeal to Blacks and Hispanics with nuanced philosophizing is preposterous. Call it White Delusion. And libertarians (who often qualify as conservatives with a stronger anti-government edge) exhibit much the same inability/unwillingness to grapple with identitarian realities. How can these libertarians not look around and notice that virtually all of their partisans are white males? Shouldn’t it be obvious to them that the only way to establish and sustain a libertarian order is to have white males running things? White Goyem better realize soon enough that Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Jews, and Muslims all see themselves as members of separate tribes — as in, separate from Whites. “Universalism” is the ultimate lost cause.

    • Addendum: EGALITARIANISM is the real culprit in regard to White Delusion. Mainstream conservatives love to bask in the notion that everyone is the same, that “race is just skin color.” Of course, that such notions clash with the “individualism” a lot of conservatives pretend to champion seldom if ever registers. But Blacks don’t believe they’re the same as Whites. Neither do Hispanics or Asians. Members of those tribes only clamor for “equality” when it’s in their best interests. You’ll never hear them complain about situations that unevenly favor their groups. How can Whites be so blind?

      • Whites have been brainwashed through decades of 24/7 anti-white, pro-multi-culti propaganda, approved by our leaders and implemented by our media, schools, institutions.

        • True enough. Yet, some of us have managed to out-think the propaganda. What’s wrong with the folks who haven’t out-thought it? To one degree or another, they’re oafs, as far as I’m concerned. We shouldn’t give them a pass for being such dupes.

          • Unfortunately, the hard lessons they will learn will involve us suffering, too. But without the mainstream media bullhorn in our corner, we will have to work hard cultivating the dissident right messages to help lift the veil for others. In this, Z Man is a huge blessing! Don’t know how such a cornucopia of ideas can emerge from just a single, marvelous mind. Thank you, Z Man!

          • Z is a bloody lifesaver- I knew there was so much wrong with “conservative” thought, but didn’t have what it took to escape the clutches of “the only other alternative” to liberal lunacy.

          • So much common sense & wisdom in your posts. I’m an unabashed admirer. Please start your own blog.

    • Eww, he’s a product of the grievance industry and anti-white brainwashing. (((They))) give him a large platform from which to spew his propaganda so it’s a good thing he’s so boring.

      • I haven’t seen enough Trevor Noah to make a fair judgment. However, from the little I have seen, he strikes me as an Affirmative Action comedian. If he was a white guy of similar talent level, he likely would have never made it past Amateur Mic Night. Only a suicidal society prioritizes diversity over merit. Sometimes I wonder if the craze for diversity that’s currently sweeping the entertainment industry isn’t at least partly a cover for the fact that Hollywood routinely churns out dreck that can only appeal to the very lowest common denominator.

        • Trevor is Liebowitz-“Stewart”‘s Obama clone heir. I can guarantee you The Daily Show has been the liberals’ #1 source of news since it’s inception, when it replaced Talk Soup.

          Plus John Stewart and Trevor Noah have a staff of 100 writers. Minitrue with a smiley face.

          • The material for the Right-wing Humor Squad is endless and growing.

            Laughter, snark, and mockery wash the pill down easy and assure one they’re on the better side, since the Left is all about pissing off the squares and flipping Daddy the bird.

            But where it’s really gonna hurt- where the conversions begin- is not a focus on just their tactics, but on their end-goals.

            Is that really what you want, cat-lady? Is that going to be better for you, soy-boy? Are you thinking this through, perfessor?

          • Alazebo: “Focus on their end goals…Is that really what you want, cat-lady?”

            So true. I have an attractive Lefty female friend down south. She’s gotten much worse since Trump, but she’s not one of the crazies, yet. When she gets high & mighty with me, I’m tempted to say, “You do realize, if things REALLY start going your way, you and your daughters are gonna be raped mercilessly.”

            Yeah, I’d say it because it feels good to zing a Lefty. But also because, like you say, they need to be shocked into the reality of how this could end.

            When it comes to turning people Right round, we need to take a cue from the advertising world and tend to the women. Crazy as they can be, they’ve still got that protective instinct.

    • I don’t get my political analysis from literal paid clowns on the Comedy Channel for the same reason I don’t get it from WWE wrestlers.

      • I wasn’t kidding when I said it’s the #1 news show.

        So we can accurately recalculate the targets.

  8. Spectacular presentation Z. I sat out on the back porch with my dogs this morning, smoking a good cigar and listened to the lecture as the mutts drained themselves before work. I enjoyed it so much I was almost late for work! Helluva great way to start a Friday!

    • The big reasons Americans are not having children are related to lack of money. The reason Americans lack money (as compared to their grandparents’ generation) is because we’ve flooded the country with 10s of millions of migrants over the past 50 years, which drove wages down for all Americans. Bringing more migrants in the manner we’ve been doing, i.e. unskilled, low-IQ people from incompatible cultures, makes us poorer and poorer as a country. Also dumber. And uglier. Comprende?

      • To support Ursula’s point, blacks and browns will have endless offspring under even the worst conditions (they are the “r” in the “r/K theory”). In contrast, whites, who are genetically programmed to plan ahead, don’t want to have kids if the local schools are terrible and they can’t afford private school. If we keep importing more of the people who make conditions terrible, whites will have still fewer children. Restricted immigration will engender a white baby boom.

        • Who are these whites that you know? Peers? Have you ever rubbed elbows with low-class whites? Newsflash – they are not genetically wired to “plan ahead.” Read “Hillbilly Elegy”. I think that book makes the most realistic argument … that the offshoring of manufacturing and industrialization of agriculture has removed all opportunities for low-class whites, so they end up resorting to working at Dollar Store and Bargain Hunt. But shoot, these whites do not plan ahead and have zero interest in their school system.

          I’m not on a rant in favor of immigration, but it IS important that we whites see ourselves as we are, not making broad generalization based on the few people we know.

          • You hit the nail on the head, sir. These whites number in the hundreds of thousands, and would fit the “r” category in the R-K selection theory. A dirty little secret that few dare to admit. But fact remains that the Alt Right views this group as the necessary brawn for the upcoming Civil War, and if they get culled in the process, it’s a small price to pay to save Western Civilization. It’s really about ideology, not identity, as philosophies like race realism and the return to patriarchy, along with policies like whites only citizenship and the prohibition of race mixing are formulated for consumption to the alleged “brainwashed (white) masses”.

      • Indeed immigration and costs are a major reason why blue and middle-class women have such a difficult time time having children. They are forced to work, often in crappy service sector jobs with no set schedules, always kept under 30 hours so they can’t get benefits.

        The other problem is American business fetish for off-shoring and importing foreign workers. The damage that has caused is catastrophic to the social fabric of the country. In terms of wages and employment opportunities it’s been a killer. And is also responsible for the opioid and white suicide epidemic as well. This was absolutely predictable. Take away a man’s hope for the future and being able to support his wife or gf and you kill him inside.

        BTW GOP was largely responsible for this Why do you think they promoted individualism? A country composed of individuals who won’t stick together are really easy to screw over since they can’t organize and resist. The GOP elite loved it.

        • Trump is the only one speaking and acting for us, the American workers. If something happens to him, it’ll be back to the uni-party globalist open borders agenda. May God protect and give strength to our beautiful alpha POTUS. He’s out campaigning to build himself a workable Congress. He has to do everything himself. Godspeed with the MAGA agenda, President Trump!

      • Also, whites are easily annoyed. Children are annoying. Blacks, Latinos, Arabs, certain Asians, are used to big boisterous families/environments. I walk into a discount store like T.J. Maxx and hear one kid screaming and I’m like the guy in a horror movie who dramatically clasps his hands over his ears and slowly crumbles to the ground.

        • The way I see it, whites are incredibly tolerant — too tolerant really. That we don’t like it when people chimp out does not make us “easily annoyed.” Perhaps you’re a little too accepting of the impolite, unattractive ghetto culture that has unfortunately become the mainstream U.S. culture. Not only are we not supposed to notice the downgrade, but we’re supposed to blindly embrace and *like* it.

        • I dunno Frip, you may be speaking for yourself and not whites. Other children maybe somewhat, but not one’s own.

          • David. It’s probably generational. Talking with whites in their 40’s and younger, you’ll commonly hear the phrase, “why would I want a bunch of screaming kids?” That’s just not the kind of thing you hear from ethnics.

      • Lack of money the biggest reason we’re not having children? Come on guys, let’s pick on ourselves (white Americans) for a moment … some genuine introspection. Compared to previous generations we’re wealthy beyond measure in material measures. (I GET the immigration piece which definitely impacts poorly educated whites.) Affluent white Americans (meaning $60K/year & up in my area) are choosing materialism over children. I have 6 kids and its indeed costly, which means my wife & I have to scrimp a bit, keep a modest home, and drive 15 yo cars. Most of my white peers opted for bigger/better material stuff, and it didn’t make them happier because many of them divorced (which costs them a bundle!) But these things are choices. We whites can’t cry “Victim!” on our demographic winter … this is our own doing. Leave the victimhood argument to the whining minorities. I do “comprende” that there are a LOT of low-IQ whites as well, and heck, they’re usually the ones having 6+ kids by 6+ differing partners, and unemployable due to their varied addictions. Affluent whites need to get their act together, marry well, have large families, and intensively forge communities (or enclaves.) And see ourselves as we are.

        Shoot yes, let’s end immigration from hellhole countries, which after 20+ years of deployed duty I learned is most of the world. Meanwhile, let’s not be blind to white culture’s problems or blame them on “lack of money.”

  9. I know quite a few second generation Jamaicans – they want noshing to do with most American blacks and their “culture”.

    • Well, I’m convinced. Let’s import lots of Jamaicans, sounds like a great idea. I’ve heard Jamaica is a very safe place for tourists.

    • Yeah, I met plenty of Jamaicans during my consular tour of hell there. 90% of them want to live in the US illegally; the other 10% want to remain in Jamaica albeit with American passports (for when the local situation becomes too dodgy). Their criminal component is higher than that of American-born Negroes, but because some people find their accents and pseudo British commonwealth airs captivating, they take every word they say as Gospel truth. Jamaica – perfect location to use a neutron bomb.

Comments are closed.