Morality Versus Reason

Note: The regular Monday post is up at Taki. This week it is a take on history possibly repeating itself. There’s a review of the movie After Earth behind the green door. For those who like the podcast, there is a new feature behind the green door. This is a short Sunday podcast on news items from the week. If you would like to buy the hardest working man in dissident politics a beer, you can now do so here.

David Hume observed that there is a difference between statements about what is and statements about what ought to be. Hume’s law or Hume’s guillotine has become an axiom of philosophy ever since. That axiom is that you cannot move from descriptive statements to prescriptive ones. Put another way, there are things that are true based on observation like the movement of the stars. Then there are things that are true based upon a set of rules, like ethics or religion.

Despite the fact–value distinction, people tend to conflate factual truth with moral truth, especially in politics. For example, you could make a solid economic argument in favor of slavery in certain areas of the economy. Your reason could simply be to make a larger point about economics or maybe labor in that field. That would not stop people from condemning you as a heretic. The moral rule says that any mention of slavery must be in a spasmodic condemnation of whiteness.

On the other hand, given the direction of American morality, you could probably cook up an argument for assessing everything in blackness. Since America was built on the backs of black labor, everything should be valued in those terms. It is ridiculous as a matter of fact, but the present morality would probably be receptive. Taken to its logical conclusion, we could very well end up denominating all goods in Africans, because the moral framework has sacralized black people.

No matter how rational and logical the argument, it cannot overcome morality, but moral claims can easily overcome factual objections. In the example above, the facts about labor markets and the reality of servitude will never make a dent on public opinions regarding slavery, because being opposed to slavery is a central part of the moral framework of the current age. On the other hand, if slavery can be recast to fit within that moral framework, then it will be eagerly embraced.

This is the central problem of politics within a liberal democracy. The spring of democracy is morality. The popular will always bends toward the general morality, even when it goes against public interest. In fact, the public is more easily persuaded to do things against their interests than in their interests. The reason is sacrifice is always a part of morality. Asking people to sacrifice in the name of some moral cause turns their sacrifice into piety, which is the coin of the realm.

This is why liberal democracy seems to be shaking itself apart. In theory, liberal democracy is supposed to be a representative government constrained by the principles of liberalism. These principles are enshrined in a constitution or a body of laws that limit the actions of citizens and the government. Since everyone is equal before the law, everyone has the same rights and privilege. Free speech and freedom of association, for example, are inalienable rights of everyone.

In reality, that spring of democracy easily overrides the principles of liberalism, always in the name of same great cause. You see this here in a post from someone calling himself a conservative. He writes, “Racism was such a dark chapter for our country that, in striving for its extirpation, we adopted anti-discrimination, public-accommodation, and even affirmative-action provisions that are in tension with aspects of liberty and the principle of equal protection under the law.”

The word “tension” there is a gratuitous assertion. There is no tension between the moral orthodoxy regarding race and liberal principles. The former overrides the latter and even so-called conservatives celebrate it. He finished that paragraph with “The prudence of some of these provisions is debatable, particularly their effectiveness in achieving their lofty aims. We’ve maintained them nevertheless as a sign of commitment to a society that is repulsed by racism.”

What is the logic behind reorganizing society in such a way that the world knows we are “repulsed by racism”? There is no such argument. There cannot be a rational argument against racism, as racism itself is a social construct, something that only exists within a set of rules created by current society. It is a devil created by progressivism a century ago as one justification for their cause. As God slowly receded from their moral framework, he took Old Scratch with him, so they invented racism.

In a democracy, even a liberal one, “is” must always yield to “ought” because morality is the organizing principle of a democracy. That morality is defined by and expressed as the will of the people. If the people are convinced that Africans are sacred people, they will conjure unlimited arguments in defense of the notion, despite the objective reality around them. To stand against the majority, even one conjured by the mendacious, is to stand against accepted morality.

This is, of course, why various forms of conservatism and libertarianism have all failed to make a dent in Progressivism. In a democracy, you must win elections and that means getting the majority to agree with you. You can do this my changing enough minds to win the election or you can lie convincingly to enough people so that you win the election. Put another way, you can organize people around new moral arguments, or you mobilize people with some version of the old moral arguments.

Obviously, convincing people that their old beliefs are in error is a lot more difficult than flattering them in some new way. Inevitably, conservatism takes the latter course and comes up with some way to flatter people’s existing sense of morality. Their promotion of Tim Scott, for example, is a way to flatter white people on race. The result of this is the people who claim to oppose the Left end up reinforcing the moral claims of the people of the Left and are assimilated into them.

This is why bourgeois objectivism is no match for left-wing ideology. The cold reality of being correct can never overcome the warm satisfaction of being right. Those descriptive statements about reality are cold, while the prescriptive statements about what ought to be are warm and comforting. People will sacrifice everything for the warm glow of self-righteous certainty. The only antidote to the morality of liberal democracy is an alternative moral framework that promises more than sacrifice.

The crackdown by the oligarchs on dissidents has had the happy result of a proliferation of new ways to support your favorite creator. If you like my work and wish to kick in a few bucks, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar subscription and get some extra content. You can donate via PayPal. My crypto addresses are here for those who prefer that option. You can send gold bars to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. Thank you for your support!

Promotions: We have a new addition to the list. Havamal Soap Works is the maker of natural, handmade soap and bath products. If you are looking to reduce the volume of man-made chemicals in your life, all-natural personal products are a good start. If you use this link you get 15% off of your purchase.

The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.

Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link.   If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb.  Just email them directly to book at

174 thoughts on “Morality Versus Reason

  1. “Their promotion of Tim Scott, for example, is a way to flatter white people on race. The result of this is the people who claim to oppose the Left end up reinforcing the moral claims of the people of the Left and are assimilated into them.”

    I don’t see how this follows from the rest of the piece. As you noted, factual truth is morally neutral and doesn’t imply an ethic. One might say, “You see? Even a black person thinks that Biden & Co, are full of crap. And if a black person thinks so, me being not black, that fact bolsters my identical conviction.” So flattery. But if “assimilated” means “being coopted,” I don’t see the connection. You’d be saying to the Leftist, “Granted I’m asserting my point within the framework of your moral discourse for the purpose of dialogue and, ideally, persuasion, but though I may share your language out of convenience, I don’t subscribe to the viewpoint that follows from an application of your values.”

  2. “Obviously, convincing people that their old beliefs are in error is a lot more difficult than flattering them in some new way. Inevitably, conservatism takes the latter course and comes up with some way to flatter people’s existing sense of morality. Their promotion of Tim Scott, for example, is a way to flatter white people on race. The result of this is the people who claim to oppose the Left end up reinforcing the moral claims of the people of the Left and are assimilated into them.”

    The Republican Party is so stupid (and effectively dead) that someone in its braintrust thought Inky !Jeb would bring back all the MAGA vulgarians. There’s a better than even chance that a third to one-half of those people never vote again. Because, obvious.

      • BREAKING NEWZ: Kevin McCarthy’s backside has been taking that sweet, sweet circumc!sed c0ck from (((Frank Luntz))):

        If you can’t laugh at shiznat like that, then there ain’t a personality transplant in all of God’s creation which can give you a sense of humor.

        Personally, I see a trip to Fort Marcy Park in Tucker’s near future.

        And once Tucker has been eliminated, it’ll be so much easier for us Playaz to have our way with those gorgeous scandinavian daughters of his.

        I’m sorry Tucker, but I’ll be sure to plant the seed of myriad beautiful Carlson grandchildren in your memory.

      • Yet another absolutely bizarre blue screen software fiction of Tater Joe [with Dr Jill Eggplant, Jimmah, and Rosie]:

        This shiznat is so blatant that it’s getting really weird.

        I guess the Frankfurt School is just laughing at us now.

  3. “people who claim to oppose the Left end up reinforcing the moral claims of the people of the Left”. I dont see a black conservative proving that america is racist in any way, but it does show that the GOP likes to rebut objections, whereas the left just ignores objections. The left have a lower IQ and more emotional base, so facts and truth don’t mean much to them.

    But i will agree over all, Leftism has become a religion, and only christianity is powerful enough to fight it. Even then, latinos and blacks, while mostly christian, apparently care more about the free gibs than they care about voting for a party in direct opposition to their spiritual beliefs.

    • David: Black and latinos’ “spiritual beliefs” /= classical Christianity. Try animism and Santa Muerte for $1000. Case closed.

  4. When everyone looks back at this era in 20 or 30 years (white people) I think this will be the following theme: Everyone thought they had too much to lose. Their health benefits. Their 401Ks. Their pensions of various kinds. Their houses. Their own lives to some media spun virus. They became perpetually frozen in a world collapsing around them. It was only after it was all gone did they realize how little time they had left. Even if they didn’t believe the lies, their bills were paid by them, so there was no regenerative spirit that would stop the inevitable.

    • And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

      Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956

      • And what if that innocuous nobody that no one pays any attention to suddenly does something totally unexpected and it happens in the dark so no one even knows where it came from? The bolt from the blue can be as powerful as the memetic hammer now being unleashed upon us, but in a different way.

    • That said it’s starting to feel like I have less to lose. I’m realizing that I will most likely lose my job at some point if I refuse to take the science vax. Unfortunately even skeptics are starting to crack and only the most redpilled are still holding out

      • I can’t say how I know this without giving too much away but in Oregon interest in the vaccine effort has almost completely vanished. Because of the way it’s been rolled out, it’s only been quite recently that younger, non-terminally-ill people have been eligible for it and due to the massive incompetence of OHA (Oregon Health Authority) even many of the older people haven’t gotten it yet. This means that interest in getting an armful of Dr. Fauci’s Wonder Tonic is VERY low among the younger people and dropped off even among the old recently. The turning point seemed to be the revelations about the weird and lethal side effects of the J&J shots. This is also probably, on the whole, a more pozzed and “virtuous” state than even California due to the population consisting overwhelmingly of White shitlibs with relatively few minorities. So I take this as a small white pill.

      • That said it’s starting to feel like I have less to lose. I’m realizing that I will most likely lose my job at some point if I refuse to take the science vax. Unfortunately even skeptics are starting to crack and only the most redpilled are still holding out

        This is why we lose.

        Now be a good little goy, head on home to the domicile, swallow half a bottle of Viagra, and see whether you can still get it up whilst watching Day-Shaun’s massive ebony member splitting wide open the back end of your White wife’s digestive tract, as she moans and begs and pleads for Day-Shaun not to stop ramming her.

        PS: Melinda Gates filed for divorce today…

      • I’m in the same boat.

        I feel I have a small window of opportunity to get to the deeper red states.

        Not sure how useful my main skills in radio electronics and IT will be going forward. Once upon a time I was a decent gardener and okay with a fishing rod. I’m able to do light home and vehicle repairs.

    • The myth of the normie and the 401K.
      For the TL;DR crowd:
      Top 1%: 52.7% of stocks
      Next 9%: 35.6%
      Next 40%: 11.1%
      Bottom 50%: 0.6%
      It’s not much better with “Healthcare.” Once you weigh the monthly premiums and deductibles, no regular person can afford it. That brings us full circle to slavery.

      • Trying to buy solo health insurance is a complete waste of time.

        With basic plans for one person you’re looking at $400/month, with a $6000 or $8000 deductible prior to 100% coverage for office visits and normal diagnostic/preventive services.

        Yeah, no.

  5. “Asking people to sacrifice in the name of some moral cause turns their sacrifice into piety, which is the coin of the realm.”

    Re-reading Hoffer’ The True Believer
    Chapter 2 describes a related aspect: People with meaningless lives prefer a fake group morality to avoid responsibility for being losers. This seems like a very handy cudgel. In fact, it is THE handy cudgel.

    Zman- “The only antidote to the morality of liberal democracy is an alternative moral framework that promises more than sacrifice.” and add that thought to the Is/Ought argument…

    Again, Hoffer paraphrased: Cults are where losers, the lazy and frauds go to find absolution. Doesn’t matter rich or poor, they will just as easily join BLM or the Klan, the Commies or the Nazis. The cult doesn’t matter, just that it be a cult. That is the IS.

    The Ought is in teaching that a little bit of responsibility goes a long way to building meaning in a life. I’m not religious, but I’m pretty sure that is what all of the non-pedophile/warlord religions have been teaching for 10,000 years.

    ZMan rightly keeps on the morality subject. Anyone who even partially attempts to keep faith through responsibility will have a hard time understanding the desperate need for external morality, absolution through a cult membership, Nihilism. And so, we keep arguing rational policy, pointing out cognitive dissonance and the like.

    No, the bat to beat them over the head with is “Only stupid, lazy losers join a cult to keep from doing what they “spoda be doin”!
    Pop their morality balloon, don’t argue with it.


    • Agree, execpt for one thing:

      Anybody who can look at the Nuremburg Rallies and call that greatness “losers”, well…

      Reflect, then, on that the post-war victors turned Nuremburg into a death camp.

      (And the Klan “owned” everything from the Mississip to the Atlantic.
      Weird how so many places were so livable back then. Another case of Chesterton’s Fence.)

      • Alzaebo, Yes, there are many variations in the quality of people who get into cults. Nuremburg in particular makes my case, however because of what happened in Germany between the wars. The German people were crushed by the war reparations and they all felt hopeless. They were, in fact, losers.

        But my point is instead to make it clear that every cultist has a very vulnerable Achilles heel. They FEEL weak and alone, whether they be a rich Hollywood nutjob or pampered university coed, or any other “canon” fodder libtard. The purpose of the cult is always to provide refuge from this alienation, (at least, if I understand Hoffer correctly). I realize that all people feel this way some of the time, but traditional morality provided a path through it.

        The cult does none of that, but rather makes them dependent on the fake morality of which ZMan writes. This makes them easy prey, separate them from the herd and they are easy to take down.

        We can stop playing the sheep with the arguing of policy and start being the wolves with a very vicious attack on their personal failings.

        Someone here quoted Solzhenitsyn, and rightly so, with regard to not cowering as the door downstairs gets booted in.

        But this we can do now, easily, with words. I wish I’d known it decades ago, but we always had this tool.

        Losers join cults.

        This was posted here by someone. Worth re-reading:

  6. I had the distinct pleasure this weekend of interacting with a NWL (Nice White Lady) from Z’s home town of Lagos.

    There is truly no saving these people. They are so deep in the ideological weeds no amount of reality will bring them out of it, so it is better to simply leave them to their own devices and minimize their ability to do damage / poison others as best you can.

    She was saying how her even more lefty sister is afraid to drive past the suburbs because she is one of those middle aged cat ladies with the bumper stickers all over her car. She is afraid the ebil ‘white supremacists’ you hear all about will try and run her off the road, and has tangible anxiety about it. BTW, this shitlib sister also lives in Baltimore…

    So, let’s recap. One of the most dangerous cities in the US where nogs will rob, beat, and murder on a whim– afraid to drive 20 miles out to farmville because… white people. What do you do with a creature that ideologically poisoned?

    The NWL- same deal. She says she looks for certain ‘behaviors’ in people she interacts with attempting to suss out if they are a Trump voter or (in her words) ‘a proud boy’. These are your Junior Stasi League Middle Aged Childless Shrikes. Can you imagine interacting with a creature like this in daily life?

    The kicker is, after spouting every CNN talking point and platitude, repeating every lefty conspiracy theory, she then goes on to complain how awful it is that you have to guard your language so much now because everything is perceived as a microaggression and that zoomers/kids are bubble wrapped against any danger, contrary opinions, etc.

    They literally can’t connect their own outlook, voting habits, worldview with the downstream effects which is why you get CA/NY natives fleeing the states in droves from the effects of their own stupidity to land in TX/FL and then proceed to fuck up and destroy the new place they arrive. There is a solution to this problem that nobody wants to talk about… in minecraft. I see no other way to curb this problem when the rot is that deep.

    • To be fair, if I saw one of my neighbors force her off into a ditch with all those stickers on her car I would pretend that I didn’t see anything.

    • They can only wreck TX/FL/ID if the locals let them which has been the problem all along. You must never let them get political clout or you are screwed. That’s how they wrecked CA.

      All you locals can do is make their lives so miserable that they pack up and leave. That means pulling up the welcome mat, shunning them socially and economically. Let them know they are despised. When they run for any office, fight them. Get mean, get nasty. Because your way of life will be destroyed if they get their way,

      • The social “activists” are far better at organizing cadres of self-righteous whiners, and they relish petty power over others. Most folks just want the local gov to pick up the trash, control the druggies, and otherwise leave them alone. But they seldom organize effectively to defend their interests, so the socialistas soon take over the local offices.

      • Much as I hate to say it, Ronald Reagan was the one who wrecked CA & handed it to the Dems on a silver platter with his signature of the 1986 “Immigration” Bill.

        Ronny man, how could you?

    • Yes, they will never be on our side and that’s why I don’t get too stressed over the declining white % of the population. A large portion of whites are simply insane and it’s time to cut them loose. Don’t talk to them, don’t interact with them, and don’t let your kids be taught by them.

      A good example is the white people freaking out over churches or other events taking place and calling the police. No person of colour cares whether you have more than 3 people in your bubble at a time.

      Focus on connecting with like minded people, having lots of kids and building parallel communities.

    • It’s hard for me to avoid thinking women just aren’t meant to be in charge of their own lives, let alone voting and influencing society. They seem obsessed with causing their own extinction.

      • I love it!
        One of the funniest quotes I’ve heard recently was from Jack Donovan’s book Becoming a Barbarian. Referring to making your own horde, “…a group of Men, unsupervised by women.”

    • My policy here in a very pozzed part of Oregon is that I just won’t talk to White women (of any age) at all. I assume they are ALL snitches and will latch onto any idle remark or gesture as a way to curry favor with The Manager.

    • They literally can’t connect their own outlook, voting habits, worldview with the downstream effects which is why you get CA/NY natives fleeing the states in droves from the effects of their own stupidity to land in TX/FL and then proceed to fuck up and destroy the new place they arrive.

      Insula >>> Amygdala.

      The Muh Feelz shout down and completely silence the poor beleaguered voice of Common Sense in their heads.

      There is a solution to this problem that nobody wants to talk about… in minecraft. I see no other way to curb this problem when the rot is that deep.


      It’s genetic – all the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in the known universe can’t fix the underlying flaw in their neuropsychiatric wiring – that existential darwinian weakness which the Frankfurt has been playing like a fiddle for several centuries now.

      PS: Moar L’il J Jrs -> White Ovenz!!!

      Muh. White. Brutha.

  7. Z, thank you for treating the is-ought dichotomy. I’ve often commented upon what is a closely related idea: that ethics, religion, morality, indeed any sort of human standards, are just that, human standards. Any assertion that there is a “universal” or4 “absolute” standard is, in my opinion, fallacious. Everything is relative. You may think your standard is right, and perhaps it is. But again, egotists that we are, we often fail to realize it’s OUR standard, by which we judge other standards. Much to the dismay of the religious, this even holds true if you claim a holy book as your “standard.” You are taking someone else’s standard, and claiming it is an absolute, when in fact is merely your own benchmark. I can’t understand why people have difficulty grasping this simple concept, but they do. Now, before you call me the evil relativist, let me allow that morality CAN serve useful ends. We couldn’t have civilization if there weren’t shared ethics, moralities, laws, call them what you like. I guess my point in this long-winded paraphaph is simply to assert that any given morality is purely a mental creation, having no more substance than Einstein’s Theory of Relativity or Newton’s Laws of Gravity or your grocery shopping list, however much use they might have in manipulating or interacting with the real world.

    The problem is not so much “the warm satisfaction of being right”, rather is that the Idealist can make up any ridiculous idea he likes and believe it is the gospel truth, and if in a position of power, he can coerce others to parrot his beliefs.

    A related problem Hume raised was in his essay, I think called “On Miracles.” His observation, in his tortured 18th century English,was simply that when a person asserts that a miracle occurred, that is not susceptible to proof or verification by scientific means, one must ask the following question: Was the witness deceived or deceiving? Stated another way: which is more likely: that the witness claiming a miracle is either deluded or lying, or that he has accurately reported phenomena, and that the laws of Nature have been violated? This is simply a cousin of Occam’s Razor: what is the most reasonable explanation for a set of facts? Alas for the religious, typically the most reasonable answer is that someone is deceived or deceiving.

    None of this is to say that there can’t be varying opinions, interpretations, of events. For example, a white cop shoots a black teenage girl intent on plunging a knife into the belly of another girl. By old-fashioned White standards, this might have been called justifiable use of police power: The cop had to use deadly force to stop an attempted homicide in progress. In this case he guessed right, I would guess, acording to the instant replay, so he may have avoided the risk of a murder convction had his timing been even slightly off. Another interpretation is heard by the chorus of the Blacks and their enablers: No , the cops were too violent? Why wasn’t a social worker on the scene? In this second case, in my opinion, they are laboring under many delusions and other disabilities. Their point of view may be logically incoherent, but it remains a world-view just the same, and guides behaviors.

    But judgment is subject to multiple errors. Nature could care less whether you think the flowers in your garden are grown by elves and gnomes, or perhaps by a more complex explanation involving biology and other sciences. The flowers grow just as well either way. But, returning to the above points, the explanations are entirely the province of a human mind, having absolutely nothing to do with the workings of the universe. At best, the ideas will be models that accurately describe and predict the operation of the real world. At worst, they are just errant fantasies, either for entertainment, or at worst, leading to disastrous real-world mistakes.

    The conviction of Derek Chauvin recently is a good example of that. Regardless of whether you think his conviction was just or not, surely the multiple verdicts are illogical. How can a man be guilty of both deliberate and accidental homicide, in the same event? The judge will have some sorting-out to do when the sentencing date arrives.

    In perhaps unrelated content, I’m currently enjoying “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (or “Learned Elders”, many versions exist). Thanks to whomever mentioned it. I approach it as a work of fiction, of satire, rather than proof of a world Jewish conspiracy. It is highly entertaining, and even so, has insights into how the real world works, even if it’s not, or in any case couldn’t be proven, to be a secret cabal’s doings. But there are some laughable points there, for example, the claim that “Nietzsche-ism” is “socialism.” (“Protocol 2 Destructive Education”)
    As someone who just completed reading substantially all his works, I’m quite familiar with what he did and didn’t say. Nietzsche was many things, but to call his ideas socialist is laughable on its face. His greatest criticisms were directed precisely at “slave religions,” liberal democracies, and related weaknesses (as saw them) of modern civilization. His hero is the Zarathustra, the man who casts off the morality of others and does things his own way. If that isn’t the antithesis of socialism, I’m not sure what is.

    Having said all that, “Protocols” may be a parody, but it sounds very plausible about how a group could — perhaps did — infiltrate institutions and manipulate events in their favor. Machiavelli would have approved wholeheartedly! While the ADL wishes no one would read it, I encourage people to read it for what is likely is: an entertaining satire, a fictional account of how the real world may actually work sometimes. This is one of the great values of fiction literature: it’s an expression of the “what-if” or the fantasy side of the mind. “Don Quixote”, one of the West’s great works of literature, was of course itself fiction, but its recurring theme was idealism vs. pragmatism and the results — good/bad, hilarious/sorrowful — that can arise when one confuses the two.

    Actually, that above quote is a good example of a discrepancy between a claim and what’s true, and doubly so, since it is an abstract concept (a social-political system.) It makes no difference that the source text is propaganda, fiction, satire. When you think about it, the bulk of everyday discourse, especially in politics, religion, and so on, isn’t far different.

    Returning to one of Z’s themes today, the race issue is a perennial problem of dogma vs. reality. The idealists, once in power, can mark into the abyss, and they can sometimes even force march unwilling victims (equivalently: lead innocent sheep) into the abyss, perhaps thinking the abyss is the promised land. But the abyss remains the dark hole and jumping into there is oblivion, not salvation.

    Z is no doubt right that cool rationalism is no match for ferent idealism. “Facts don’t care about your feelings” goes a popular saying. But this never has stopped the Idealist from trying to impose his feelings upon the facts. However, Reality can take all the blows the Idealist may try to thump him with and he’ll suffer no damage, although plenty of innocent bystanders often do. But when it’s Reality’s turn to deliver the blow, the Idealist can’t wish it away.

    The truth is a scarce commodity, and half the time we recoil from it when it appears!

    • “…Any assertion that there is a “universal” or “absolute” standard is, in my opinion, fallacious…”

      How can you be sure about the truth of your own assertion? What standard have you applied to arrive at this conclusion? Just asking.

      “For Nietzsche, there is no objective order or structure in the world except what we give it… The nihilist discovers that all values are baseless and that reason is impotent…”

      • I’ll fall back on Hume: If it’s true that you cannot derive an “ought” (a moral claim) from an “is” (a statement of fact of the real world), to me that means that an absolute morality is unattainable.

        I can’t be certain of the truth of my claim, but I accept its truth provisionally, absent some proof of it being false.

        I disagree with the Nietzsche quote. Change “what [meanings] we give it” to “what regularities we recognize in it” and it’s closer to correct, I think. To me, the first statement sounds like the ego trying to impose its wishes upon the real world (delusion); the second is closer to science — letting Nature be the teacher and drawing a lesson from that.

        Of course we recognize truths in Nature. We can even say “this is good (for us)” or “that is bad (for us)”. But doesn’t that contradict my claim that we can’t derive a moral claim from the real world? It shouldn’t. If I stick my hand in fire, I’ll be burnt. The fire isn’t at fault; it’s certainly not “evil” for having harmed me. It was my own action that brought a consequence. That same fire might warm my home in a cold winter, keeping me comfortable, or even alive, and cooking my food. I’d call those qualities “good.” Note in both these cases it’s me deriving my “morality” (sense of good or bad outcomes) from facts of Nature I can’t change. I won’t fare very well if I say “the fire is good to me in so many other ways, it should let me touch it too.”

        If lightning strikes and burns down my house, that is an impersonal act of Nature, not some divine judgment from the Gods. I may view the outcome as “evil” since I’ve been hassled through no fault of my own, but again, Nature is indifferent; she’s just obeying her own laws and that’s where her laws of electromagnetism said to send the current. It’s not Zeus pissed off because I didn’t offer a good sacrifice.

        The Nihilist (or indeed anyone) will be disappointed with baseless values. Lacking what base? Some anchor, some link to the real world! Where is reason impotent? When its axioms (base assumptions) are wrong, which right now let’s say means at odds with the real world.

        To return to my fire example, if my values were that fire is hot, my reason will work fairly well (for heating and cooking). However, if I had the baseless value (delusional) that the fire is whatever I wish it to be, and that I can stick my hand in it, my reason has failed.

        It is nature that sets the absolutes, the ultimate standards. Man can use his intellect to model the real world and operate in harmony with its laws, as much as he can. Or he can make up a pleasant make-believe world with rules incompatible with how Reality works. The latter won’t work very well in his interactions with the real world.

    • Ben,
      A well thought out post, thank you. Addressing your first paragraph, I have a different perspective on morality.

      I don’t think it’s rational at all. I think it’s genetic, and is very old. It predates human language by eons. We “know” what is immoral, as does every animal. Everyone follows biological rules. Serotonin, dopamine, etc. run the show.

      Since the printing press and “enlightenment” where we traded the ability to understand for the ability to think, we have been operating on variations of “Any assertion that there is a “universal” or “absolute” standard is, in my opinion, fallacious.”

      A few years ago I decided that the definition of Rationalism was “The dropping of context until one’s BS doesn’t stink”.

      Not that rational thinking is useless, not at all. Great for science, engineering and the like. Law, sometimes, other uses. Great for arguing on this blog!

      The alternative to rational thinking I’ve heard described as metaphorical, narrative or story, music, art. This is what our brains are biologically adapted to. We understand immeasurably more than we can ever articulate verbally. The old phrase “a picture is worth a thousand words” is not trite.

      So, I think the arguments that holy books are either factually set in stone or merely one’s opinion are both flawed. They stand the test of time (work in people’s lives) because they accurately describe how our biological psychology works in the real world, through story. A guy named Dr. Paul Dobransky was the first to explain this to me through and analysis of the Greek myth Ariadne’s Thread. Not the logic method, the actual story.

      I found the article, though it seems to be more recent than what I remember. Here it is:

    • That fact that so many people gave your post the frown, proves how many people can’t distinguish belief from fact or unknown..

  8. Excellent piece. I have long diagnosed moralism as the White Achilles’ Heel, but you made it clear that liberal democracy is fundamentally moralistic in such a way that the crazed Red Guard hysteria and the centrality of anti-racism are the very likely outcomes of it and that reality is no defense.

    Gee. It’s worse than I thought! Thanks!

  9. If I can plump for my former profession for a moment, historian Herbert Butterfield wrote (quoting from memory) that the greatest threat to world peace today is huge, organized forms of self-righteousness.

    He wrote that in the 1930s.

    The difference between then and now is that we’ve completely eliminated hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue, as I think Snoop Dogg said, and the coin in which it was paid is cognitive dissonance. Back in Butterfield’s day, there were cases of old hardcore Lefties being so distressed by the Molotov-Ribbetrop Pact (or other of Stalin’s contradictions) that they abandoned Leftism. That would never happen now, as cognitive dissonance is no longer a thing.

    I got to see this firsthand, way back early in my ivory tower days. The moron Leftists of College Town, being moron Leftists, decided that what College Town needed was more Diversity. So they imported every ghetto banger they could catch from the nearest major metro (it helped that some of them were good at football, though of course they’d never say that). When the bangers’ “cousins” all arrived, as was inevitable, the faculty redistricted the school system… and lo and behold, some of the faculty’s kids ended up zoned for vibrancy.

    The sonic boom from the White Flight could probably be heard in Timbuktu. Not only that, lots of them admitted that that’s exactly why they were moving — openly, indeed brazenly. They didn’t even wince. In some way I just can’t grasp, they built a big beautiful wall in their heads, that completely divorced their self-concept from their actions. And you of course know what happened next: The minute their kids landed in their shiny, new, safe, 100% lily White schools, the faculty started nagging the school board for More Diversity.

    I knew right then that Western Civ was toast.

    • ” Back in Butterfield’s day, there were cases of old hardcore Lefties being so distressed by the Molotov-Ribbetrop Pact (or other of Stalin’s contradictions) that they abandoned Leftism. That would never happen now, as cognitive dissonance is no longer a thing.”

      This is an excellent point. Not only is cognitive dissonance dead, as you say, but perhaps more important, so is shame. When one’s zeitgeist is balled up entirely in the notion of transgression–all AWRs are trannies in this sense–then there are no limits to what one may do. There is a mad rush to the margins of the human psyche. The only shame is in not going far enough.

    • “Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue, as I think Snoop Dogg said”

      Laughed out loud at that one. Very good. Thanks.

    • Plumb perhaps sev? Of all rank stupidity i see from our elites, allowing sub Saharans entry is the most distressing. To what purpose? I can almost understand some mexicans. They are hard working and generally a pleasant people. Setting aside malicious intent who could possibly believe that it is a good idea. I dread when the inevitable famines and wars hits africa and the chain immigration really cranks up.

      • The answer is as horrifying as it is simple: They don’t see Blacks as people. They really don’t. This isn’t some “DR3” nonsense; it’s a fact about their behavior, as any prolonged exposure to them will easily confirm. I call it the “My Black Friend” phenomenon. You meet a middle-class Black, and he might as well legally change his name to “My Black Friend;” that’s the only way people refer to him when he’s not around.

        It’s the one area where I actually feel sorry for them. How the hell can you know what you are, if that’s the world you live in? Was Dr. Huxtable really first in his class at Harvard Med — and prom king, and voted most likely to succeed, and student body president, and all that jazz — or was it just My Black Friend rearing its head? How can he possibly know?

        It must really put the zap on your head. I can, and do, blame them for avoiding the zap (insofar as possible) by going all in on the Blackness, but that doesn’t mean I don’t sympathize. Nobody wants to be someone else’s pet, and they’re nothing but someone’s pet.

        • There was a blog called Stuff White People Like that really poked at this trope of white leftists, as well as other tics they had. Their lives were basically hyper-conformist around the trappings of their social symbols, yet each one is convinced of how unique he is. Consequently, they all are lacking in self-awareness to such an extent that it could be said they have buried their heads so far up their own asses that they’ve become acclimated to breathing methane.

          • Part and parcel of the syndrome is the virtue signalling oneupmanship. As living people to dox and cancel, or statues to topple and books to ban or burn become harder to locate, they must go to ever more ludicrous and desperate extremes. My current favorite for silly award: the successful (!) renaming of a bird, (McCown’s longspur, named for a Confederate General (Horror of horrors!!!). It’ll now be known as the thick-billed longspur.

            Just like BLM and Antifa assaulting, rioting, burning and looting, I fail to understand how that will help American Blacks.

        • I read it decades ago, but I remember Ralph Ellison’s novel ‘Invisible Man’ as organized around this very point: That, as a black man, you are not permitted – either by the brothers or by the ‘goodwhites’ of the era – to stray from ‘being black’.

          I also recall that Ellison’s favorite American book was ‘Huckleberry Finn.’

    • Speaking of diversity, Boeing has promised to make it’s workforce 20% black in the next 3 years. Mostly by firing white workers.

      Sadly the only way our side can handle these insane whites is by being as mean as rattlers to them and making them unwanted in their new lily white neighborhoods or anywhere they put down roots.

      They are more like a virus that kills their host than anything else. I saw what they did to my state of CA. Don’t let them to it to other states.

      • Like Z Man said on the podcast the other day, they hate us — we need to learn to hate them back.

        I keep suggesting that the old labor union movement has much to teach us. A modification of the “work to rule” strike, for instance, would do wonders. Since badwhites dominate the trades, just… take your time. You can’t actually come right out and say “I’m refusing your business because you’re a Leftist;” that would get the whole coercive power of the State brought down on on you (“bake the cake, bigot!” can just as easily become “change the oil” or “fix the pipes” or whatever).

        However, it’s quite easy to make it clear what’s happening and why, while staying in full compliance with the law. “Gosh, gee, golly, I’d love to change the oil in your Subaru Outback, Mx. — if that’s how you identify; I can’t really tell from all those “Hate has no home here” bumper stickers — but as you know, the Biden Administration has just mandated that all new cans of motor oil have to have at least fifteen parts per million of unicorn piss, and I just sold the last can in compliance. I’ll be getting some here in the next month or two… I hope… but I hear the regulations might change again, so you may have to check back in November. We all have to do our part to save the planet!!”

  10. The US was an officially racist country in 1945 with official segregation and official racism in large parts of the country, not to mention a segregated military.
    By around 1965, a single generation later, the US was officially an “anti-racist” nation with anti-racist laws and policies.
    It’s no real surprise this was the first generation to be raised on both TV and radio and the rise of “youth culture” and putting kids on a pedestal.
    This was a pretty remarkable feat and shows the folly of allowing foreigners any influence whatsoever. This also marks the first time a generation came to identify and have an internal identity as being that generation.

    It is pretty remarkable that the morality of the nation could be turned on its head in such a short time.

    • Yes, memetics is a very powerful weapon. This is because it’s impact is largely insidious and it appears on the surface to be simply a benign communications vector rather than a brain cancer.

    • The very term “black community” implies a separation based on ethnic differences. When the blacks had their own schools, churches, shops, and other organizations which enforced community standards, they were better off.

      That community structure has now been destroyed by 60 years worth of failed “liberal” social policies. All groups have suffered as a result — except for the elites which have profited greatly from the chaos, division and demoralization.

      • i’ve always hated this argument regarding blacks being victims of liberals, no one forces them to vote democrats & no one forbade them to create black only schools, shops etc.
        Also, Jamaica, Haiti, etc. proves they’re just a bunch of miserable people incapable of holding a complex society together.

        In reality whites back in the day were way more aggressive, africans were scared of them, this fear suppressed the tendencies of their heritage, just like with a dog. Every white migrant neighbourhood had a boxing champion, white gangs would beat the shit out of any sub saharan who attempted anything shady in their area. Blacks knew it was dangerous to fuck with whitey.

        What I’m saying is that africans turning feral was inevitable, cause their iq cannot grasp higer concepts. The fact that some whites elevated the africans a tiny bit don’t mean squat cause at the end of the day western values are just as foreign to them as they are to retarded white people.

        • This, they are quite cowardly and even submissive when faced with somebody stronger. The main issue today is that whites are softer and no longer fight growing up, and also would feel racist beating up a jogger.

          They understand a punishment system like this:
          – theft, cut off a hand
          – assault, cut off an ear
          – rape, murder = automatic death penalty.

          The African on white crime rate would drop to 0 in a week if this system were enforced. Unfortunately they are treated like spoiled children by our gynocracy and rewarded for acting out.

  11. That Michigan version of Tim Scott, John James, never made it. His mask slipped. He made some too thinly veiled anti-white comments during the campaign. It took the air out of his candidacy with blue collar Miller drinking whites. The thing about these well moisturized lawn jockeys is that, much like Candice Owens, they’re very well aware of this con, and know they’re playing a part. They get what every brotha wants. ready access to money and top shelf white women. All that’s needed to down them is one person with a cell phone set to record at just the right time. Suddenly, when off-stage, the white affect is dropped, and the real personality comes out “awww sheeeit, these crackahhs be trippin’. Where my white woman!?” Actually, Tim Scott would want a “white boy.”

    • That’s exactly why I pay no attention to conservative joggers or jews. When push comes to shove for real, they’ll back their tribe 99.999% of the time. It’s just poor old Whitey that can’t see the forest for the trees.

      • I agree but I was struck by one conversation I had over at Frontpage that, just as there are whites who would do so, there are also Jews who would throw every one of their own people under the bus if it meant that the promise of Civic National religion came true.

    • Same with churches, the blacks who attend white churches are generally just on the prowl for white p*ssy. In this case NABALT, tbh, but it’s certainly at least 60% of the time.

  12. “On the other hand, if slavery can be recast to fit within that moral framework, then it will be eagerly embraced.”

    Hm. White slavery, mayhap? Sounds crazy, but then we live in a country that is fundamentally deranged.

  13. If the people are convinced that Africans are sacred people, they will conjure unlimited arguments in defense of the notion, despite the objective reality around them.

    Nevertheless I categorically refuse to genuflect in the.presence of Holy Negro. Nope! Nope! AIN’T DOING IT!!!!

    T-shirt I’d like to see:
    (What a concept!)

  14. The French Revolution attempted to replace morality with reason thusly:

    Eliminate God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit with “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”.

    20 years of terror and intra-continental war was the result.

    The Chinese tried to replace Confucianism with “The Four Olds”

    Destroy “Old Ideas, Old Culture, Old Habits, and Old Customs.”

    Result: Massive repression and death.

    Modern America will now replace our traditional moral system with:

    “Diversity.” “Equity”. “Inclusion”. (DEI, or DIE, as Sailer puts it)

    This will not end well.

    • Were any of these movements actually rational or reasonable? All of them are blank slatist which general observation of reality and science (behavioral genetics) show its irrationality.

      • “Were any of these movements actually rational or reasonable?”

        Yes. They started with the axiom that humans are inherently good and proceeded rationally & reasonably from there.

        The fact that humans often don’t want to do what they should or even what is objectively in their best interest, is the fatal error of all humanism. It’s why their favorite tactic for combating dissent is “more education”. Can you not see that you are rocking our boat?

        • The assertion that humans are basically good (said the Humanist) or evil (the Christian might say), is itself a moral assertion against Nature, and therefore is (in my opinion) an erroneous claim. I know you guys don’t like to hear the argument, but “good” and “evil” are moral standards having no referent in the physical universe. I refer to today’s topic of “is” vs “Ought.”

          Man IS, to an extent, a “blank slate” in the sense that he is shaped IN PART by his environment. At the same time, there is underlying hard-wiring (Man’s nature, his genes if you like) that make him what he physically is.

          Our “nature” is largely out of our control. As a human being, you share perhaps 95% and 50% of your genes in common with a dog or a tree, respectively, yet you are quite different from those two other living beings.

          It’s wise to avoid a false dichotomy, to insist that it must be all or nothing: as if it has to be Nature or Nurture. It’s almost always some blend of both.

          • Black And White thinking is a huge problem that many people have. And Black And White thinkers are the ones who can’t comprehend your point here.

    • “Our call of ‘Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity’, brought whole legions to our ranks through our unconscious agents, and these legions carried our banners with ecstacy. In the meantime these words were eating, like so many worms, into the well being of the Christians and were destroying their peace, steadfastness and unity, thus ruining the foundations of the States…”

  15. there is a lot of noise here about anti-whiteness, but not much mention of the fact that white is in fact the most desirable color to be. and the most desirable personal traits. ZMan talks about groups boiling off certain of their group, to maintain sincerity of mission in the ranks. Well, the white race is in the process of boiling off its underclass. At the same time, many (young) whites are merging with Asians and Latinos; that is white men are very desirable to the women of these groups. And these groups are immune to the progressive siren song. White women of course have gone rogue and are rarely fit to marry now, but even the PAWGS are very desirable to mud men. And here is the thing, only two white people can make another white person. So pure whiteness will become more and more valuable, as the breeding pool shrinks. Already Danish sperm is in high demand for IVF treatments.

    Our genes will find a way to survive and thrive – assuming they deserve to – even if our culture and history don’t.

    • “many (young) whites are merging with Asians and Latinos; that is white men are very desirable to the women of these groups. And these groups are immune to the progressive siren song.”

      Is this merging happening on a large scale, enough to produce a new race? Or are the offsprings of these people gonna mix with other mud people till the white gene gets diluted?

      • If whites were more than 7% of the world’s population, had a strong birth rate, and didn’t live in countries with open borders, this would be true. Unfortunately we don’t, so every mixed race mutt is just another white family line down the toilet.

      • “The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will disappear… The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.” — Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, “Practical Idealism” (1925)

        Kalergi was the founder of the “Pan-European Movement” which led to formation of the European Union. In 1950, he was the first recipient of the EU “Charlemagne Prize” for his work.

        • Yes, that was even a topic in Spanish Lit. In 1925 José Vasconcelos (Mexican) wrote a short essay “La Raza Cosmica” (“The Cosmic Race”) in which he rather optimistically posits a super-race, admixture of the indigenous, White, Chinese, Spanish, etc. that would dominate the world. We’re still waiting. Alas, due to birth rates, they may win by default 🙁

      • in my experience here in socal it is massively common. there are websites where asian incels rail bitterly about asian women preferring anglo-men. you see tons of upper middle class males with asian GF’s and wives. you also have a lot of Mexican girls that are super into anglo boys. even in my 60’s I get Mexican ladies in their 40’s flirting with me. as for a new race, I see a ton of white/asian couples with kids; the guys are marrying those women for a reason (and kids are just a side effect).

        I don’t know know enough about genetics to make an authoritative statement on diluting, but if a particular gene confers an advantage to the organism carrying it, that gene tends to be kept around. you tend to see a ratchet-white effect though, because the other side is always drawn in that direction. blacks are always going for the lightest skinned black they can, if not an outright white person. same with asian mix; the offspring looks more white than asian, when the mix is 50/50, and asians being how they are, they are going to want the partner with a higher white content too. you will start to see people bragging about how much white they have in them – once the boil off is finished.

        • Well, there are 1 billion Chinese and 1.4 billion Indians, and what, 12 million “Anglos” in California? 2 million men in childbearing years? 1 million upper middle class?

          Just means the best white men are throwing away their genes. The genes are a drop in the bucket globally.

          Plus, and old white guy and an old Chinese women looks really gross together lol. Once the lust of youth wears off I’m not sure it’s actually a good partnership.

        • karl mchungus: “Miscegenation is the future. See, White genetics will survive and thrive as increasingly small, recessive percentages of Mestizo and Hapa genetics. And never forget that Obama was half White!”

  16. “People will sacrifice everything for the warm glow of self-righteous certainty. The only antidote to the morality of liberal democracy is an alternative moral framework that promises more than sacrifice”.
    Other antidotes: hunger / starvation; physical violene on ones person, or loved ones (at least one might assume so).

  17. “It is a devil created by progressivism a century ago as one justification for their cause. As God slowly receded from their moral framework, he took Old Scratch with him, so they invented racism.”
    Progressivism is communism, but with white=bad, black=good framework instead of proletariat = good, bourgeoisie = bad framework, same people behind it as well.
    They tribe uses old propaganda tactics to make whites look bad and to radicalize the nigerians.

    I do agree progressivism/communism is christianity without God. J*uws love making a mockery out of christianity, it’s their greatest fetish: to twist religions and to subvert the values of any society they are allowed to enter.

  18. “The only antidote to the morality of liberal democracy is an alternative moral framework that promises more than sacrifice.”

    Yes, there are many things that we can do on the ground, but, ultimately, we need to win the hearts and minds of a good-size number of Whites. But that alternative morality is achieved in steps. You can’t just hit Whites over the head with ethno-state right off the bat.

    Here’s some ideas for creating an alternate morality at each stage.

    Hardcore Colorblind CivNat:

    – Racism is wrong so why are Whites the only group that you can legally discriminate against?
    – Shouldn’t there be equal rights for Whites?
    – The Supreme Court allows discrimination against Whites in college admission. How can we trust our institutions if they go against the Constitution?

    Colorblind CivNat starting waiver:

    – To believe that the different races are identical, you have to throw out the Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection. Is that what you believe?
    – Look at the crime statistics. Blacks are seven times more violent than Whites and always have been?
    – My children are minorities for their age group. Whites will be a minority in the United States soon? I hope Mexicans and Africans have the same love of freedom that Europeans do.
    – Whatever happened to freedom of association? If a black guy wants to live in a black neighborhood, what’s wrong with that?


    • I’ve been trying, when in conversations with DR-curious types, to use “Africans” instead of “blacks” or “African-Americans”. It subtly brings home the alien aspect of that race.

      • The alternative moral framework is a point Zman has (correctly) circled back to over the years. It is extremely vital to our movement’s success. I was reading this article ( and was a bit surprised to realize how well the left understands this. A couple of excerpts:

        “Cultivating “ideals of civic nationalism” while preventing the spread of “exclusionary forms of nationalism” are vital to the ability of any multiethnic society to succeed…”

        “No recent politician has done more work to promote civic nationalism, or, if you prefer, a civic national identity, than President Barack Obama.”

        Get about halfway through the article and they admit their greatest weapon against dissident thinkers is Civic Nationalism. It is THEIR weapon against White America. It is the true dividing line between the left and the right, not “conservatism” vs “liberalism”, not “republican” vs “democrat”.

      • I suggest using the terms “Afro-American” and “Euro-American” instead of “black” and “white”. For instance: Why do Afro-Americans deserve preferential treatment compared to Euro-Americans or other ethnic groups?

        • That’s not accurate because every other ethnic group besides Whites, do get preferential treatment.

    • Grant lefty’s argument that things like math, reason, and indoor plumbing are white things. How do you separate ideas from the people who have them, as if ideas have a life of their own? We talked of westernizing the globe for centuries, of teaching or forcing the nations to emulate us, whether or not that was a good idea.

      Therefore, righty’s cherished principles are tied to whiteness, so whiteness needs to be defended to defend his way of life. Righty makes it harder than it needs to be, trying to oppose lefty on everything.

      • Time to call out all these “persons of colour” and their apologists for “cultural appropriation”. Do they own an automobile? Refrigerator? Indoor plumbing? Basketball shoes? Nearly everything they enjoy was created by Euro-American civilization, not theirs.

    • To believe that the different races are identical, you have to throw out the Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection.

      T-shirt I would like to have:
      If “races” are merely a social construct
      why do they breed true?

    • That is unlikely, since political affiliation is a social construct that shift from generation to generation. Yesterday’s liberal is today’s conservative. We have loads of examples of political liberals becoming conservative over time. Reagan, for example. Belief, however, is hard wired and seems to operate on a spectrum. At one end are fanatics and at the other end are skeptics. In a democracy, the fanatics drive the moral center toward greater fanatics. In personal rule, fanatics join the church.

      • Regan changed political parties, not his underlying politics :). He had a pretty famous quip about it. We know out personalities are fixed by about 7 years old (Jesuits also had a famous quip) so changing political “identity” later on would indicate to me an individual who was for one reason or another confused (i.e. on the wrong track and not knowing it). that was certainly my situation; my personality/principles never changed but my interpretation of the world (from a political perspective, et also) changed radically.

        I just found this guy, and he has been studying current neuroscience with a lot of interesting thoughts (he’s a software engineer by trade). I recommend him to you, because I felt some of his writing resonated with yours. you will know in 5 minutes if you like him or not. 🙂

    • karl mchungus asked, “what if political affiliation is hard wired?”
      Anonymous Conservative’s work “The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans” argues that to a degree it is. You can get it on Amazon here:

      Warning: quite heavy reading. I had to stop every so often while reading it in order to ruminate upon and so digest what I had read. If this and “Erectus Walks Amongst Us” do not red pill the hell out of you then you are well and truly red pill proof.

      • On an anecdotal level we have the various twin studies and people who discover previously unknown siblings after doing one of those DNA heritage tests discovering they share
        all sorts of interests and attitudes as well physical traits.

      • yah, I read him regularly. his main thesis is pretty interesting, and a useful model to view present day world through. but the guy is bug shit crazy, or does a damn good imitation of someone who is.

    • Personality type, which strongly correlates with political affiliation, is strongly heritable. Believing otherwise is just Blank Slatism. You’re not going to convince the Left of anything, even through appeals to morality, because their cognitive functions are fundamentally different on a biological scale.

      You’re wasting your time trying to find some flaw in the Enlightenment or the Reformation or whatever past event to explain the situation in the present. This thinking is common on the Right, even among supposed dissidents. “If only the Enlightenment had gone differently.” But is that explanation likely? I don’t think so. Culture matters, but biology always asserts itself and overpowers culture over time.

      There is a simpler explanation than Blank Slatism: there is a social personality type, genetically determined, that exists among the Western population, “the Left”, which causes those people to reject stability in favor of novelty seeking and risk taking and to display negative self-identity (preferring an outgroup to an ingroup). This shows up in modern politics where conservatives are literally conservative, choosing safe professions and eschewing activism, and preferring their own kind to an outgroup (liberals have greater interracial marriage rates).

      This explains why Leftists are more likely to be journalists and actors. Both professions appeal to those willing to take a risk, which is genetically determined. Liberals are willing to throw their lives away waiting tables in order to seek the next big Hollywood role, with some succeeding, while conservatives, adverse to risk taking, choose safer professions like accounting. It’s similar with journalism: leftists are novelty seekers and the news, unlike that accounting job, always has something new to fret about. Since the left controls the media as a result, they make the rules. That’s a much better explanation than “something went wrong starting with The Enlightenment.”

      There is a strong evolutionary mechanism for this personality type: risk-taking often leads to larger rewards; negative self-identity can also be used to trick conquered subjects, in any context, into submitting to their rule because, since you hate your own kind, the thinking goes that you’re less likely to oppose the interests of the conquered party — a people, a business partner who is a member of an outgroup, etc.

      That’s why Leftists are so big into attacking “White Supremacy” these days. Leftists are merely liberal Whites advertising against their own interests in order to justify ruling Non-Whites and gain minority support for doing so. “Elect us, and we’ll attack the Whites you hate.”

      Search Western history starting with the Enlightenment to the present day and you’ll see similar patterns among the Left, regardless of whatever superficial ideology they spout in the present (which is always just an excuse for one’s behavior rather than sincere belief): allying with an outgroup to the detriment of the established, conservative, power.

      The emerging merchant class of France, for example, used peasant dissatisfaction with the ruling nobility to overthrow them, establishing themselves on top … even though many were well-off men themselves who later committed the same crimes. That took novelty-seeking, preferring outgroups, and less aversion to risk (“off with his head”), which characterizes the Left.

      It’s the same with the Civil Rights Era and the current Reign of Terror in the United States. There are countless examples. Philosophy isn’t the problem here. It’s biology. Although Asians are not immune to Western pathologies, they are less susceptible to them. Japan is still pretty much the same as they were in the 1980s. This is also true of most Asian nations, even the ones that superficially adopt policies to appeal to their Westerns protectors:Taiwan has legalized gay marriage under American pressure, but you’ll notice they don’t allow their island to be flooded with non-Taiwanese; the Japanese were trying to sterilize transgenders a few years ago and were actively discriminating against female medical school admissions. What explains that? Culture is one. Biology is another, and we know culture flows from biology. Asians evolved under different circumstances, so they lack a substantial Leftist population of self-haters, and they are better off for it.

      Here’s a source that beings to touch on the subject. Liberals and conservatives differ biologically, to some extent. As a side note, this is why I support separation. We can never reach an accommodation with these people, so why not isolate them in their own country? Afterwards, we’ll end up like Japan — stable forever with no more Leftist insurgencies because that population is long gone.

      Red Brain, Blue Brain: Evaluative Processes Differ in Democrats and Republicans

      “Consistent with the findings of structural differences … significantly greater activation was observed in the right amygdala for Republicans and in the left posterior insula (near the temporal-parietal junction) in Democrats when making winning risky versus winning safe decisions”

      • I submit that the left only takes risks because the hive will protect them, the right is risk averse because we’re individualists.

        The risk-taking individualist is a quintessentially western figure. The technological hive mind has imposed a homogeneity on us that will never work for us, because it is unnatural to us. Hence the ascendance of the left and Asia, the decline of the west.

        • Although I have to admit, having lived through the free internet, it’s not the tech, but the control of it.

  19. Speaking for a few sentences on the proper view of Christianity.
    The Bible does not condemn slavery period.

    And both the writer of the book of Genesis and the apostle Paul in the New Testament wrote.

    “It was the woman who was deceived”
    “ I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man”

    Seems to me in looking at my world around me objectively the woman in progressive society and progressive Christianity is part of the cabal giving us the morality that distorts and destroys social order by women exceeding and operating outside their proper roles.
    It’s not all of our problems.
    But it’s a piece.

    • One of the preachers up here said that when the devil attacks us, he does it through the women first. Whether I am prematurely retired or long term unemployed… I know longer have to take any shite off women and I am not shy about letting them know it.

      Their reaction is telling. You’d think they’d holler and bitch about it… but they accept it… and they usually seem almost relieved. Neoliberalism is loud and proud about destroying its men… but they go silent as church mice at the declining worth of their women.

      • When Satan had the opportunity to take all of Job’s stuff away, he took everything except his wife.

        Just sayin’.

        • More just sayin’:
          Jobs wife had what might be some of the worst advice ever recorded.
          Adam went along with Eve’s suggestion.
          Job did not.

          • Now Lot, there was a man with a good wife. In fact, she was the salt of the earth. 😏

        • An interesting question, but one that has been discussed among the sages previously. Their conclusion goes something like this: Satan was prohibited from taking Job’s life. Job’s wife and Job were “joined” in marriage. In the old days, it really was considered “one” and “inseparable”. To kill Job’s wife would have been to kill Job. Hence Satan backed off and we are forever “blessed” with Job’s wife’s sage advice to Job—“…curse God and die…”!

    • Roughly 2500 years ago, Aristophanes wrote the Assemblywomen. This was a satirical play about what would happen if women took over Athens. The first thing they did was get rid of personal property. They also passed a law that required handsome men to sleep with homely women, thus foretelling modern feminism.

      I’m fond of saying that modernity seems to be a time when we forget everything we knew about humanity and painfully relearn it.

  20. Well, we could come up with a better morality, but I don’t see us selling it very well. You spend some time saying that Jim Crow America is being replaced by Jim Snow. What if we just accept that, and say we will take that deal.

    We, meaning white trad Americans, will settle for our separate schools, living conditions, and live under our own customs. We also get to keep our own money, as I don’t recall blacks being required to pay for much. The left can tax the white liberals and big woke corporations, who have all the money anyway.

    After all, the left has objectively won. They’ve got 50 percent of the votes and are fixing it to get more. They hold the commanding heights of the culture and economy. So, I’m serious about this. We, as the DR, offer a deal. We get freedom of association, and the left gets rid of us, and the blacks can tell themselves they’ve finally gotten revenge.

    • Besides the reality that the Left needs Whites for our actual economic production, i.e. slaveowners don’t give up their slaves if only because they need them to tend the fields., Progressives also need Whites as the object of hate and the devil that the Left can fight to feel good about themselves.

      Goodwhites and Jews desperately need Badwhites both from an economic and psychological perspective.

      • To really sell the idea I would do it from the anti-White viewpoint:

        ‘The White Supremacist, KKK, Natzee, Haters are beyond redemtion and too dangerous to allow to roam free in ‘civilized society’ any longer and should be exiled to their own lands. They should not be allowed to ever associate with POC’s due to the obvious danger they pose’.

        One of the biggest opponents would be normie-cons…as usual.

    • > We, meaning white trad Americans, will settle for our separate schools, living conditions, and live under our own customs.

      How will we ever survive without diversity?

      • This comment brings to mind a comment I read recently on UNZ. It goes basically like ‘one of the things that makes the right perpetual losers is that they even argue about things they agree on!’

  21. > For example, you could make a solid economic argument in favor of slavery in certain areas of the economy. Your reason could simply be to make a larger point about economics or maybe labor in that field. That would not stop people from condemning you as a heretic. The moral rule says that any mention of slavery must be in a spasmodic condemnation of whiteness.

    Always had good fun with my mid-wit Catholic friends whenever they said slavery was ‘intrinsically immoral’ whether prison labor, the draft, or taxes were also intrinsically immoral. Most of these clowns never extensively read anything before Vatican II.

    The sad part is reading any religious document written today from about any religious organization outside the is steeped in progressive poisons that would have been unheard of in more sane times.

    • That is the interesting thing about modern morality. It has no authority. The Bible has nothing to say about racism, for example. You can cherry pick some passages and conjure an argument that racism contradicts Scripture, but those claims end up sounding anti-Christian upon examination.

      • It’s actually biblical to be racist in a narrow sense.

        Jesus said it was not right to give the food meant for the children to the dogs to the Canaanite woman. He obviously had a preference for his own people. Obviously he did not hate the woman, but she was an outsider.

        Listening to the mental gymnastics of people trying to fit this passage into modern morality is always a treat.

        • The “racism” of Jesus (Canaanite Women) in Matthew is contradicted by Mark. Early Christianity as we get in Acts and other sources is multi-racial, you have apostles and disciples of the apostles going to southern India, Ethiopia, North Africa, France etc. If we take what Jesus said in Matthew to Canaanite Women at face value then Jesus is a totally insular figure not a universal messiah (that’s why they traveled all over the world).

          • Being a universal Messiah and putting his own people first is not a contradiction.

      • That was something that surprised me about Gab. I didn’t realize that there was such a large Christian CivNat contingent. I was used to the Patriot CivNats and even the tiny Sailer HBD-aware CivNats (a fascinating group, btw), but I’d never really come across the former.

        They’re a tough nut to crack. I suppose that you could try and have a passage fight but not sure that’s going to change any minds.

        • “I didn’t realize that there was such a large Christian CivNat contingent.”

          We’re running out of places to congregate – both on and off the Internet.

          • That comment dovetails nicely with Zman’s Takimag article about the rapidly emerging Stasi state in the US.

            There’s a reason that even the hard wired law-and-order Germans are constantly suing Facebook and Google. They know what a police state is like, and don’t want any part of it.

            The US, unfortunately, will have to learn the same lesson the hard way.

        • The patriot CivNat believes in something that is demonstrably false and it seems like they generally disappear, or apparently, mute everyone but Billy Mitchell and his cheering section. The Christian CivNats believe in a twisted version of their faith which require “redirection” rather than falsification (“really, Jesus told you to love people who hate you and want you dead?”, etc.); however, I leave this comment since my experience has been that a lot of those commentors aren’t quite as “Christian” or “Patriotic” as they let on, if you get my drift.

          • Yeah, I would say that a lot of those commenters seem to say almost scripted type lines.

      • There was the part in numbers where aaron and miriam spoke against moses because they didn’t like his ethiopian wife. Yet from how God reacted to it it sounded like His beef with the two had more to do with their presumptuousness regarding His favor of them than any racial prejudice.

        Then there’s the part, I dont recall exactly where, Paul talked about there being no difference between Jew or Greek, but I think a lot of people gloss over the explanation that they are brothers IN CHRIST.

        Then there’s all the genocidal warfare of the old testament. And the God of the OT is the same as the God of the NT.

        • There’s also the simple fact that if God cared about racism, there would be some mention of it. Further, he would not have created different races and placed them on different parts of the world. The modern Christians who cherry pick verses and torture them into being antiracist are engaged in a vanity project. They also turn God into a trickster.

          • Lolz Z, your comments are better than your post today. Pace yourself man. Between the Taki column and the extra podcast I’m frankly surprised you have time for the day job. Speaking of which; if any of you cheap bastards that are regulars aren’t subscribing to the subscribe star… well let’s just say you should. Z is developing the language and moral framework for whites to begin advocating for their own interests. Interests that are under full-on assault in case no one has noticed. The despicable quisling cucks at national review sure as hell aren’t stepping forward to do the job. The GOP is worse than useless. Like Carthage, the GOP-NR complex must be destroyed.

          • One interpretation of the Tower of Babel story would be that it’s better for populations to separate than to be at each others throats all the time.

          • @RoBG

            I was pointing that out the other day on gab. God confused the language of the people and caused them to separate and spread out over the Earth. Now the globalists want to mix everyone back together again, and make everyone into interchangeable cogs in their new world order. They are trying to negate the identities of the nations that God created so that everyone is the same.

            It’s also apparent when the Apostles go out to spread the gospel that they aren’t inviting the world to where they are, they are going to them. There is nothing that I see in the Bible that says we have to bring in the entire world in order to save them, either spiritually or from their material poverty.

            The Lutheran scam “charities” that import muslim somalis are in no way following the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. If they were, they’d send missionaries to them, instead of bringing them all here. But the government won’t pay for it if it has anything to do with telling people about Jesus.

        • “And the God of the OT is the same as the God of the NT.”

          But is He really the same God?

          • Mathematically. In both the OT and NT there is only one true god so whoever is the one true god at whatever point in the story is the same god as the ones at other parts of the story. Because there is only one and not just one at a time. Duh!

          • The Creator is unchanging. The priests of Judah who wrote the OT created their own tribal, self-serving interpretation. Jesus called them out as hypocrites, liars and sons of Satan who had ensnared the people and led them astray.

            Not much different today, except that the “synagogue of Satan” is mostly made up of Humanist / Socialists who reject the concept of a Creator, universal morality, etc.

    • Funny (odd, not ha ha) thing: When the Apostle (St) Paul sent runaway slave Onesimus back to his master, Philemon, he nowhere ordered Philemon to manumit Onesimus. He just told him to treat Onesimus right. Makes you wonder . . .

      Another funny thing: St Peter (considered by some to have been the 1st Pope and to whom was given the “keys to the kingdom”) commanded husbands to treat their wives as “the weaker partner”. Never heard a preacher expound on that passage where SOMEBODY (usually a female) didn’t object! For the record, I was raised in a VERY conservative, Bible is word-for-word perfect group. Don’t think I ever heard an exposition of 1 Peter 3 that didn’t rile somebody up.Course I didn’t hear all that many sermons PREACHED on the subject; come to think of it. 😁😙

      • Women are the weaker vessel. That’s why Satan went after Eve instead of Adam. The only pastor I’ve seen expound on this is pastor Steven Anderson. Pastors are reluctant to point this out, even if it is what the Bible says. Many Christians have internalized the tenets of feminism, even if they may consider themselves to be devout otherwise.

  22. A New Tomorrow (cont)
    In a nutshell.

    Throughout history, weapons have been a force multiplier used to influence human affairs. Tyrants use them to keep the boot on the neck of their subjects, and freemen use them to rid themselves of this tyranny. That was then, this is now.

    In the modern era, the tyrant’s weapon of choice is memetics, and mass media is used to convert people into sheeple; or failing that, sow visceral division & discord and have the plebs slaughter each other as distraction. And should a Spartacus arise, they will either be bought off or taken out. And it’s working. Close to half the population are now dependent true-believers who can only survive via parasitism, and their numbers are growing. That cannot last forever; and the longer it takes to hit bottom, the deeper & more painful it will be the eventual reckoning.

    You don’t beat that by storming the gates in a mad rage. A better way is to invert their own strategy against them. Pretend to be sheeple and hide in plain sight. Use your anonymity to move about freely & stay alive. Then you choose the time, place, & circumstances. Opportunism & unconventional is the essence of unpredictable & impactful. Focus. You are not at war with your neighbor. The root of the problem is actually quite small and the number of antibodies can become millions if necessary.

    And the best antibodies are not superheroes. They are the nobodies that nobody ever notices. Don’t get angry. Get serious. Your life may depend on it.

    • Your ability to be simultaneously trite and breathtakingly wrong is truly impressive. I hope you can find a therapist that will help you win the fight with Asperger’s.

      • A serious person would offer specific facts or analysis in rebuttal to what I have written, rather than ad hominem insults.

        • Correct, TomA. My only exception to your posting is, as always, your call for us to be “gray men”. I do not understand where this stops, nor do I think it is helpful without proscribed limitations. I fear it is all too easy for us to fool ourselves, and in such become part of the problem though our inaction.

          • Going dark is solely about staying alive in the coming Brave New World of America, and not a long-term prescription for a life well lived. It took the Russian people 80+ years to rid themselves of the Soviet tyranny through passivity, so NO, I am not recommending that alternative. I think that I have been about as clear as is feasible with respect to the how of active measures that may be needed in the future as hard tyranny descends upon us. Smarter, not harder. And above all, solo, focused & spontaneous.

    • Is this screed a “comment”? Does it relate in any way to the original post? If not, what’s the point? If you want to post a book, you should try instead.

      • The point of my comment is that endlessly cataloging of all the ills in our society is not a solution to anything. Nor is it useful to repeatedly vent about how horrible things are. At some point, you have to do more than just make fun of the Progs by hurling snark at them on a blog that they never read.

        And I don’t believe that we are going to either talk or vote our way out of the mess we’re in. Finally, at the rate that illegals are being welcomed in and parasitism is growing among the Libs, we’re not likely to prevail by community organizing alone.

  23. “In fact, the public is more easily persuaded to do things against their interests than in their interests… Asking people to sacrifice in the name of some moral cause turns their sacrifice into piety…”

    Unfortunately, it’s always and only Whites who do the sacrificing. The piety is so off the charts these days, we’re going to sacrifice (perhaps painfully) ourselves right out of existence.

    • Among Whites, it’s Northern European-descended people who are at the extreme in sacrificing for the moral good. It’s that pesky out-group preference, low ethnocentrism, high-trust thing that the hordes from other parts of the world flooding the West trample on, chew up and spit out along with the rest of Western Civilization

  24. You’ve stumbled onto an alternative moral framework to counter theirs, perhaps by accident. Several times in your podcast you’ve said, “We did nothing to deserve this.” We’ve been told so many times that as white people we’re uniquely evil that even those of us on this side of the divide have sort of assimilated this attitude at an unconscious level. Just to hear someone say, “We did nothing to deserve this,” plants a seed, instills a counter message, similar to what the battered wife hears the first time her friend whispers, “You don’t deserve to be treated this way” after she comes to work at the diner with a black eye, again. Normie needs to hear it: You did nothing to deserve this. White people are not evil.

    It’s up there with Kersey’s “Because we live here.”

    • The “moral framework” of the Progs is just misdirection to fool the rubes. The good, old-fashioned Will to Power is driving their movement, no more and no less. They’ve just used the smokescreen – “anti-racism” – that was handy. And it’s working pretty well.

      While the DR fumbles around for organizing principles, more ground is lost. At some point, I think it’s sufficient for the DR to say “we’re not sure exactly what we want, but it ain’t this”. The detailed manifestos and counter-moral frameworks can come later.

      • I know it is not the current reality but if DR was allowed to organize and operate as freely as ANTIFA and BLM the trajectory of this country could be changed 180 degrees in 5 years

        • if DR was allowed to organize and operate as freely as ANTIFA and BLM the trajectory of this country could be changed 180 degrees in 5 years

          Which is.probably why the left pours so much time money and effort into utterly quashing any dissident voice. They know damned well the only way their way works is in a vacuum. Leftism CANNOT compete – with anything!

    • I might add “our children did nothing to deserve this.” This might help reach normie women.

    • Because we live here was the answer to the question: whats the difference between us and them?

      It was asked in the context of an execution of prisoners – including one of their own, a traitor who had been trapped into turning on their cause by his weakness and that of his father.

      I only mention it because the moral question of what is right in the pressing context of what is required was put to discussion as one of their own had betrayed their cause.

      What was required for their survival was about to cross a line they had previously been able to avoid.

      We are going on three generations in which a growing number of our own have succumbed to the evil massaging – or their own weakness, and have made deals, consciously or not, to serve those who would have us enslaved or destroyed.
      Their desire for comfort being paramount, but we can already see how fear is further animating more of them against us.

      Thus our own moral questions of what is right in the pressing context of what is necessary for our survival are now inextricably bound to many of our own people – our “blood” as much as those enemies operating whats left of our institutions; our “soil.”

      Because we live here may be an answer to a question relating to foreign powers and forces but it has more to do with those borders among our own people.

      Our cause, already being deemed worthy of removal at great cost, risk, and discomfort is righteous, but whats necessary to do so is a line yet to be crossed.

      Something to ponder as we navigate the social landscape.

      • “…but whats necessary to do so is a line yet to be crossed.”

        Deep down I know what I will likely have to do. I hedge a lot, while staying busy with measurable tasks, to avoid thinking about it.
        So many pundits, our guys specifically but even a lot of wokey’s, dance around that line. It’s tiring to read / hear. I think Big Country’s recent take on the catalyst and catalyz-ee rings true. Globohomo, in their hubris, will cross some line that defines IT for someone. And when that happens, it seems reasonable that The Line will become neon bright for many. My prayer is that I have the courage to cross it and affect some minor change in the field for my kids.

  25. It all starts with a utopia. What is ours?

    The orderly beauty of an occidental ethnostate.

    Everything else stems from this. As our world descends into chaos, we might do well refining and perfecting our alternative reality.

    It will become an irresistible dream.

    • I think Anne Coulter said that she watches nothing but Turner Classic Movies when she does actually turn the boob tube on. I understand that those old movies show an idealized version of things, but it’s an ideal grounded in the reality of a European people confident in themselves and setting the tone of society, from the morality down to the fashion. I occasionally go over to my normie neighbors’ house for a movie night, and we’ll watch something like an old Hitchcock movie. We never talk about politics, but that’s because we never have to. A better and whiter world is right there in black and white, beckoning from the screen. I’d hazard that in not too much time there’s going to be a concerted campaign for the cable companies to drop all those old movies (and probably the channels that carry them) from their service. A bit like the Rural Purge:

      • There are a lot of things to like in those old movies. The way they talk, their manners, the way they dress, how not obese they are….Speaking of Hitchcock movies, when you watch something like Vertigo, it’s amazing how beautiful and uncrowded San Francisco is. Los Angeles is also uncrowded (and White!) when you watch the many movies and TV shows filmed there years ago.

      • I haven’t watched TV for a long time, but I was subscribed to the TCM YouTube channel because it hosted trailers for some old movies I hadn’t seen, things to add to my “to pirate” list.

        Late in last year’s classic-media purges, they put out a video belatedly reassuring the libs that although TCM won’t stop showing “dated” movies, they promise to do more (or “better,” was it?) to “contextualize” them.

        So, they’ll stop showing them soon.

        • Nah. They still show them, for now, anyway. They just precede the showing with a lecture. (They’ve shown GWTW within the last month or so.)

          • Genuinely curious as to who voted this down. They did play GWTW, with a preceding lecture. Did I lie? Use a bad word? I’m probably one of the few people who does none of those things.

          • RoBG, if you spoke the truth, why do you care whether you have one down vote or a hundred? It sucks, I know. Don’t let an ill placed down vote bother/confuse you.

      • Since they may purge many of the old movies, it’s another reason to actually buy copies of the ones you like. There’s a big effort to make everything streaming now, so actual hard copies may become a thing of the past.

        • right, I have found rewritten passages in Kindle versions of older books by unwoke authors so now I buy the actual paper copy of the book and make sure the publication date is before 2000, same with DVDs, don’t buy the newer versions because the issuers have actually gone back and “inserted” some faces of diversity-can you believe it!

          • Even if they don’t change the words, they can change the meaning of the words, witness the US Constitution and its wide penumbra. Remember when gay meant happy, when you were free to hate and to whom you could rent out your apartment?

          • Can you provide actual evidence of this? I’m not saying that airbrushing the past doesn’t happen. But what you’ve described would, I would think, run afoul of copyright law. The publisher of a work may not be the owner of the rights.

          • I got a Robery Heinlein book from the library and it had a newly added preface that consisted on anti-raciss propaganda. I tore it out before I returned the book. I kept it though as proof of what they are doing..

    • There never has been nor will there ever be a utopia. That said, for white people, the closest you can come is the white ethnostate. In the final analysis, it is the only true solution.

        • Very much so, Jim, thus demonstrating that being a ethnostate is a necessary but insufficient precondition. You also need a population that believes in maintaining that enthnostate. Whites have shown that they don’t believe that.

Comments are closed.