Note: The Taki post is up. This week it is a discourse on the modern partisan and the impact it has on our politics. The Sunday Thoughts podcast is up behind the green door for subscribers.
The term “New Right” is one of those phrases that has a long life but has never had much meaning in American politics. Bill Buckley was a member of the New Right when he got going in the middle of the last century. Later, various efforts were made to create a New Right as an alternative to the Buckley Right. As conservatism collapsed over the last decade the term has become a popular one with failed alternatives. Members of the alt-right even tried rebranding as the New Right.
The long life of the term in America, without much meaning, says more about the overall state of politics than the various efforts to create an alternative. In Europe, the term New Right has meaning, because it is a real school that has been trying to create a new politics that reflects the current age. In America, the popularity of New Right reflects the fact that there has never been a genuine Right. What passes for the Right is just a foil for the prevailing orthodoxy of the ruling class.
That reality is clearer now that at any time in the history of the empire, but there are those giving the term another shot. There are several groups competition to be the new Right to replace the rubble that is mainstream conservatism. There is a lot of interest in the mainstream in these projects as the prevailing orthodoxy works best when it has a foil to operate as a gatekeeper. Channeling popular frustration into a sterile alternative is the secret to maintaining order.
The least promising of the alternatives is whatever Curtis Yarvin, known as Moldbug, is calling himself these days. Yarvin got famous blogging as a neo-reactionary who criticized democracy in various ways. He would write awfully long essays criticizing liberal democratic system from the perspective of a royalist. His style was something like a stream of consciousness while playing an on-line role playing game. It was elite condescension for those who imagined themselves elite.
After a break from his Moldbug character, Yarvin is back, but playing himself, a retired software developer, who has a lot to say about the present order. Instead of demanding the creation of a monarchy, he advocates a rejection of politics entirely. According to his analysis, any participation in politics ends up supporting the system, so the only way to oppose the system is to drop out entirely. His approach is not much different from Rod Dreher’s Benedict Option, just without the religion.
The basic argument Yarvin makes is that participating within the rules of the system supports the system. If you organize a new party, for example, you are legitimizing the party system and the rules that govern it. On the other hand, if you protest against the system, your protest is either crushed or permitted by the system. Either way, this legitimizes the power of the system, because the system only acts in ways that add to its power and legitimizes its power.
While there are bits of his critique of liberal democracy that are accurate, his alternatives are best described as incoherent label shopping. He has tried out “clear pill”, “grey mirror” and now “deep right” as marketing phrases. None of which mean anything on their own. Instead, they work like insider language for his fans, a way for them to feel like they have special knowledge. Yarvin writes in riddles, so these secret phrases can mean whatever the fan needs them to mean.
A more robust option in the New Right talent contest is the pan-Zionism offered up by the Israeli political scientist Yoram Hazony. He is probably the most complete of the alternatives and has the best financial support. The oligarch Peter Theil has been backing him for a few years, primarily by financing his conferences on nationalism in America and Europe. These have become networking events for the people hoping to win the New Right lottery.
Hazony’s argument, put forth in his book The Virtue of Nationalism, is that the West needs to re-embrace nationalism and reject empire. His argument for nationalism is pretty much the argument for Zionism. In fact, his case seems to be more of a defense of Zionism than a genuine case for European nationalism. In his book, he goes to great lengths to argue that things like fascism and apartheid are not nationalism, which of course are claims made against Zionism.
The problem for all nationalist movements is the elephant in the room. Once you make the claim of exclusivity, that is a people has an exclusive right to determine their composition, it means certain people can be excluded. For European nationalists, this brings obvious comparisons to unfortunate incidents. For Zionists, this offends the donor base which lives primarily in the Global American Empire. The solution is a watered down and exception-riddled nationalism.
In both of these efforts, what plagues them is an unwillingness to address the core defects of liberal democracy directly. The crisis in the West stems directly from the anti-human notions of egalitarianism and the blank slate. This is what underpins multiculturalism, universalism and globalism. Without addressing the twin tap roots of liberal democracy, the critic is left to whack away at the leaves. It means these flavors of the New Right are doomed from the start.
Another entrant in the New Right derby is what is sometimes called common good conservatism and sometimes called integralism. This reflects the two camps that operate within the movement. One camp takes a secular view of politics, primarily focused on the law, while the other camp is explicitly religious. The former seeks to reform the law in order to achieve their ends. The latter is a revival of antidisestablishmentarianism from old Europe.
The secular camp is best represented by Josh Hammer, who is busy creating what he calls common good jurisprudence to replace originalism and textualism. His critique, like many on this subculture, starts with the dissident observation that conservatism has never conserved anything. He repeats the century old observation by Robert Lewis Dabney about conservatism being yesterday’s progressivism. He then proposes an alternative he calls common good jurisprudence.
On the integralism side, the face of that wing is a Harvard academic named Cornelius Adrian Comstock Vermeule. He advocates for a robust state that will act in the best interests of the common good. The common good is largely defined by the teachings of the Catholic Church. He wants a return of throne and later rule, in which the state, however composed, is unconstrained by individual rights. In other words, he wants the current system to be guided by medieval Catholicism.
Like Yarvin and Hazony, the various figures flying the common good conservatism banner have no interest in taking on egalitarianism and the blank slate, even though their hierarchical worldview should demand it. A state that acts in the common good requires someone with the power to decide what is the common good. There is no room for a monarch or an enlightened despot in a world where all men are equal and their equality must be respected by the state.
The problem with all of these attempts to create a New Right is they are limited to a critique of the present order. They refuse to ponder the central questions of all political morality and that is “who decides?” and “by what authority?” The one who comes closest is Hazony and he stops at the water’s edge for obvious reasons. Otherwise, the New Right is pretty much a social club of people who are unhappy with the present order but cannot face the reality of it.
That may be what is preventing a New Right from forming up and taking the place of Buckley-style conservatism on the big stage. The specter haunting the West is demographics, which is animated by those two central questions. There is little need for a New Right unless it is willing speak to demographics and everything that flows from it. When the only question that matters is off the table, everything else is idle chatter that makes for a fun conference, but not much else.
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 sales@minterandrichterdesigns.com.
I want to congratulate Z for a possible milestone. Today’s episode has clearly had the participation of “Stephanos Xytegenios,” who has been denounced as a plant or troll, perhaps working from a script. I’ve been a frequent paying particpant here for years, and this is to my memory the first time that such a talented provocateur has been in a debate. Z, your blog must be gaining a lot of traction if the pros are starting to target it. As others have said, if you are getting a lot of flak, it means your bombs are hitting target. All to the good!
Plato wrote widely about sophistry and rhetoric, two discourse skills highly valued for swaying opinion using flowery speech not necessarily supported by facts and logic. So to a certain extent, honor is due to Stephanos for carrying on a very old profession at which he is clearly quite competent.
Beware of Greeks bearing opinions.
It was becoming a closed circle jerk of opinions in the comments. Someone had to spice up the debate.
My own take is that political parties are a waste of time. But organizing a White Guy Labor Movement is not.
Reality check — even if all immigration were halted tomorrow and all illegals were deported magically, White people would still be the minority in their own country. That’s as true for Ireland as it is here, or New Zealand, or the UK, or Switzerland. There is no place to run to. So we as White men hated by all (and we will ALWAYS be hated) must adjutst to our being hated and discriminated against and use what labor power we have to gain concessions.
Not every occupation is fertile ground. Medicine has enough replacements and people comfortable enough with foreign mediocre doctors to have us already replaced. Tech replacing diagnoses and treatment. But not even the most hard core DIEversity person wants Dkembe at the controls of a 747. Not flying over their house nor flying them. We need to pick places and organize and strike, in conjunction with other areas, and our goals should be min quotas. A floor for White male employment, in places where it is very hard to replace us and we are needed. Picking the target is of course, requiring of much research. This is not glamorous, nor an instant solution. It requires much sweat for likely little payoff for years. But it is a solution. One that all the big shots can’t stop.
Not even the Polish Military and USSR could stop a Lech Walesa strike.
Does anybody here know where to find the “manifesto” posted by the Buffalo gunman? The news media talks about it, but never says where to find it!
It is not worth reading. It was copy/pasted from the one by the New Zealand guy. My take: the dude was mentally ill in HS with repeated incidents. He just wanted to A. Be famous (see Mark David Chapman, John Hinckley Jr.) B. Kill people. You will note he did his stuff in a non death penalty state.
Crazy, stupid people are not worth bothering about.
There! Right there! This is exactly what I would have expected from the Ministry Of Truth! The worldwide media is doing the same thing! “We” can read it and judge it, but “You” can’t! Take our word for it, the guy’s crazy. Don’t waste your time with it. Besides, it might give you ideas.
Funny you brought up Hazony. I first took note of him trying to infiltrate our political system with his nationalism conferences a few years ago.
Just the other day, I ran across this from 2015, denying the reality of overseas Israelis in our politics:
“Applying for citizenship under the Law of Return “is a formal procedure which you could expect normally to take a number of months except under emergency conditions,” said Yoram Hazony, president of the the Herzl Institute, a Jerusalem think tank. “There is no such thing as receiving Israeli citizenship without submitting a formal request to the Israeli government.”
Hazony, an Israeli who studied at Princeton and Rutgers and who has written widely about both American and Israeli politics, said he’s not aware of any American lawmakers with Israeli citizenship. “In fact, it is common for Jews who are dual U.S.-Israel citizens to renounce one or the other before serving in official government capacities,” he said.
Politifact (Poynter Institute) June 11, 2015 sourced on politifact.com 5/11/22
I love both Z’s articles and the comments that follow. Even though my family would be regarded as “conservative” in the Buckley sense, I feel much more at home with the dissident right which I came across about 15 years ago. A number of names have been brought up in Z’s article, one of them being Hazony. I believe it was sometime around the Charlottesville debacle that I first became aware of him. Now, as an avid reader of Kevin MacDonald, I could not help but feel as though Hazony was trying to blindside those who ascribed to the dissident right by claiming something like a common cause. It doesn’t take much to know what Zionism is all about. Many Zionists are very up front in regards to what they believe. Because people like MacDonald and many of his regular contributors definitely expose Jewish power and other similar topics, there’s a part of me that felt Hazony went public in regards dissident right politics and ideology as to deflect Jewish power, real or imagined, from being called out. As a European descended person of Christian heritage, I have no desire to make common cause with a philosophy that intrinsically despises everything I am about. Myself and Zionism are not compatible.
I would recommended reader Lawrence Auster’s back and forths with Moldbug on Auster’s blog. He had Moldbug’s number back in 2008. (He’s was both more Jewish than Moldbug, as a pureblood, and less Jewish, as a convert to Christianity).
Catholics should limit political agitation to things like the pro-life movement and maybe acting as a neo-Legion of Decency. There simply isn’t a comprehensive Catholic perspective on a whole host of issues. A Catholic can be an open borders nut or Pat Buchannan, a social democrat or a libertarian or a third-positionist, etc. The history of Catholic political thought and Integralism is something best left for academics to study, not political action, as Vermuele would want.
Both Integralism and Moldbug’s neo-monarchy schtick is a way of arguing for an alternative to the present order without touching the 8000 elephant in the room: the only alternative to Western-style liberal democracy in a mature industrialized society is some sort of single-party fascist/Leninist state like the PRC, a military junta, or a regime that pretends to be democratic but is a dictatorship in practice like Russia or Venezuela. None of these options are very appealing to the average reader, but in 2022 if you throw out democracy something like this is what you are getting, not a king.
It seems that the task of adopting a new politics requires sailing between the Scylla of gnosticism, which drives the overproduction of elites (in the sense Turchin developed), and the Charybdis of egalitarianism, which drives the mob toward Idiocracy as prophecy rather than farce.
Perhaps we need to restore the central idea of organizing society for the common good. That does not imply the necessity of liberal democracy; but it certainly recognizes that true freedom seeks human flourishing through ordered liberty rather than in individual license, which is really nothing other than the unbridled liberality that undergirds the utopian project of the current globohomo elite. At its root, their selfish individualism only works if there are far fewer humans to share resources amongst and the majority of those embrace, or at least acquiesce, to the life of a bugman: living in the pod, eating the soy and owning nothing. No matter how you slice it, conveniently premature death or starkly antiseptic urban squalor are not the underpinnings of human flourishing.
Wolves fight or flee; cows placidly enter the slaughterhouse. Now is the time to choose your totem animal.
With all due respect, Zman, I think that your critique of the Integralists is a bit simplistic. From what I’ve read by them (Crean and Fimister’s “Integralism” and Jones’ “Before Church and State”) it seems that if a citizen, no matter his skin color, did not live up to his end of the bargain, he would be punished, even if his demographic group were overwhelmingly represented among the criminal class. So, if tomorrow Louis IX resurrected and became King of the United States, it would not matter one iota that blacks are punished way more than whites if the blacks are the ones doing the crimes. Perhaps I am missing what your critique of the Integralists are, but from a skin color perspective, I don’t think they would agree that we give unsavory minorities a pass just because they are an “oppressed” group. If you’re a criminal, you’re a criminal, full stop, and you will be punished. Indeed, I think they would punish the crimes they do even more harshly, regardless of skin color (death penalty for rape, etc.)
Something tells me the demographics of St. Louis IX’s France was nearly 100% European and much smaller in scale. The Integralists would not dismantle the managerial state which means that you would be burned at the stake by Fr. James Martin SJ for not baking the gay wedding cake.
This is where ideology loses me. When people start thinking ideas are more real than reality, that’s insanity in my book.
Westerners think too much, myself included. I know Christians are prone to self-doubt and Socrates said the unexamined life isn’t worth living, but with age I’ve come to think there’s wisdom in simply trusting your instincts and acting accordingly. It’s the most direct way to figure out who you are, I suspect the only way. Then you can start writing it down.
I agree. I think all the knowledge we have gathered has simply allowed us to cherry pick the data to our own ends, especially when the data is divorced from grounding in reality. When one is tied to reality, instinct and folk wisdom probably provides greater evidence of Truth than abstract reasoning. And this is coming from someone whose favorite past time is thinking about abstractia!
There’s some truth to that. A well-calibrated BS detector is a far better apparatus for navigating reality than the entire output of the Governmedia, for instance.
I’m currently “studying” Nietzsche’s “Beyond Good and Evil,” using outside criticism or study guides. Especially the first section of it, which I’d say are his most forceful claims, some of the most important he makes in any of his books, I believe.
He’s no fan of Plato, blaming him for the idea of the “good as such”, and several other crimes, including fathering Christianity 🙂
But relevant (?) to your last comment: When he analyzes “the prejudices of philosophers”, his claim is more or less: A philosopher, through what he thinks is conscious deliberate thought, constructs his dialectic (his framework) usually with the goal of establishing or proving The Truth. But actually, the philosopher is largely guided by his instincts; his framework establishes a “proof” of what he subconsciously wanted in the place. This does not necessarily mean the philosopher’s work is in vain, but he deludes himself that he’s found The Truth, when in fact all he’s obtained is a new perspective upon Truth. We are not “allowed” to access The Truth, or the thing-in-itself; all that is available to us is differing perspectives.
I can’t speak for the Christians, but for those who study Nietzsche and similar thinkers, you don’t need to be a theist to be surrounded by doubts! In fact, this book opens with a series of leading questions such as: Why should we not prefer untruth over truth? He opines that man may NEED falsification in order to even live (e.g. that we need certain “wrong” beliefs to ground our general views of reality.) He gives some of these examples (elsewhere), that might support such a claim: Consider that the Earth moves (and everything upon it), that what we think of as solid matter is anything but, etc.
Elsewhere I learnt that even many basic tools of the sciences are “wrong” (Nietzsche would say “false”): Euclidean geometry, Newtonian physics, for two. They have in fact been superseded by Einstein’s theories and probably many more I’m unfamiliar with. But even being “false,” those centuries-old (indeed, millennia-old in Euclid’s case) are still in everyday use, because they are such a good fit to reality that you don’t need the newer theory until you are working at relativistic speeds or very small or very large scales.
Ironically, Karl Marx is the greatest Christian thinker of the last hundred years. Not because what he said was Christian, but because Christianity died during the 19th Century industrial/scientific revolution and was rebooted as a dour, socialistic middle aged woman with penis envy. CS Lewis, sadly, came out of that esthetic wanting the real thing, only to find this out. His writings were a thoughtful reaction and last stand, from a former atheist, of something that already passed.
I reference Lewis’s essay “Willing Slaves of the Welfare State” with frequency. His work (I have only read a small portion) strikes me as wonderfully thoughtful.
Industrial capitalist elites work 80+ hour weeks fueled by cocaine and hookers. They are hostile towards Christians by nature. Socialists were on the right track in predicting revolution against these dirtbags, but instead what we got is demographic collapse and replacement by lumpenproles.
Old school industrial proles advanced for centuries before automation gradually took away their relevance. Some similar “x-factor” might eventually emerge that abolishes the capitalists or the lumpenproles.
Interestingly, democratic idealism died in the 19th century too, because even if elites became atheists for some reason (and I say that reason is the 80+ hour work week needed to be a capitalist elite) they theoretically still had to be respectful of the Christian beliefs of the common people. But managerial technocracy replaced both democracy and Christianity.
Nietzsche’s infamous “God is dead” claim meant that, due to the discoveries of science 19th century Europe lost its (Christian) faith. The rise of democratic governments replaced many roles the Church once held, and he argued, faith in government replaced that in the Church. While he doesn’t specifically blame hookers, cocaine and long work hours, many others have faulted increasing affluence for declining spirituality. Perhaps there’s a link.
The problem isn’t even really demographics, the problem is the negroes. Everybody else seems to be more or less capable of sustaining a modern society, and as a result the rest of the world outside of sub-Saharan Africa is well on its way to the same sort of demographic collapse as the West, and if it weren’t for Africa we could all just collapse together in peace. In the long run the world would probably be better off with fewer people anyway.
There would still be problems of course — there is always the issue of dysgenics, and of course most people don’t want their countries flooded by foreigners even if those foreigners aren’t stupid — but the true existential crisis for the world is the unending population explosion among black Africans, the most failed people on Earth. (A massive population of Australian aborigines or Andaman Islanders would pose the same sort of threat, but fortunately we have been spared that). So the primary challenge for the 21th century is going to be keeping the Africans in Africa; if we fail that then nothing else will matter.
So why not kill em all then?
If you control Blacks—as in where they live, whom they interact with—their incompetence will take care of themselves. Heck, Darwinian selection might even normalize them in a millennium or two.
Sub-Saharan Africa was a sparsely populated land until white pathological altruism made its presence felt. Now it’s bulging at the seems with people who are every bit as stupid and dysfunctional as they were 300 years ago.
So why not kill em all then?
1. Because killing people is immoral. (And yes, black people are people).
2. Because statements like that are so repugnant to the vast majority of the human race that the people who make them marginalize themselves and anyone who associates with them. People who say things like that are a gift to their enemies.
A global crisis leading to a collapse would kill most of them, as well as a lot of the surplus on other continents 🙁
There are many (dire) scenarios where they won’t be able to just hop on a plane or float across the Med on a rubber raft and expect to be received with open arms. More likely with “small arms”
If we’d spread the wealth we could help the blacks enough so they’d have less reason to be so angry, and outburst all over the place. I don’t just mean hand-outs. I mean, keep industry in America. Tax the crap out of the upper classes and truly use it to help the poor. Jobs.
But I get you. This late in the game, the problem is almost beyond solution. I’m not virtue signaling. I like blacks. Everyone likes blacks. In the sense that they are literally the most likable people on the planet. It’s just all very sad. Life is sad.
I can only assume this is a troll post.
Frip, maybe you’re saying blacks are very outgoing and some are likable. That’s what I hope you’re saying.
“I like blacks. Everyone likes blacks.”
Yeah. Everyone likes blacks so much they move to the other side of the street when they see them walking in their direction. They like them so much, they don’t live anywhere near them. They like them so much they sell their homes and move away when blacks move into their neighborhood. They like them so much they support abortion because a large percentage of abortions are black. You gotta tell me what you’re smoking and/or drinking. It completely removes you from reality and that’s a plus these days.
Negroes are A problem, but they are not THE problem. There were plenty of polities that had negroes that managed just fine: pre-CW American South, S Africa before 1994, several other colonies. The secret sauce is that the gov’t and people understand that egalitarianism is bupkis and organize their society accordingly.
The ROOT of the problem is perfidious whites of a puritanical descent and the smollhats. They need to be offered a one-way ticket elsewhere.
Without negroes to inflict upon us, life with Karens, Keegans and Finkels would still be quite bearable, pleasant, even. The culture and the aesthetic environment, for instance, would instantaneously be 90% better.
Aesthetic culture 90% better without blacks? Without blacks we’d all be dressing like Mr. Rogers. Without blacks all we’d have for music would be classical, opera, folk, C&W, and Lawrence Welk schmaltz. In other words, no rock & roll, jazz, funk or soul. A sublime soul like Western man had never conceived or encountered before. You’re ok with that? You’re either very old or Swiss.
Sure, we’re being murdered, raped and robbed. And we’re being driven out of the cities built by our ancestors. And we’re forced at gunpoint to pay for the food, clothing and shelter of those who hate us, even as our statues are toppled and our children are taught to hate their heritage and the color of their skin.
But hey, at least we can twerk to some funky beats.
Without negroes, we wouldn’t see idiots walking around with their pants down around their ankles and with tatted up necks. Without blacks, there would be no rap–which is practically the only “music” heard anymore. And we would still have some variety of rock. Contrary to AWR history, it is not a negro invention. We wouldn’t have jazz, but jazz wouldn’t exist without whites either. It is a hybrid music. And if you’re bagging on classical music, you are simply a tasteless clown. But you seem to be okay with this, so I can only assume you are a millennial and/or a demi-Hutu yourself.
Seriously? Any supposed positives are vastly outweighed by the obvious negatives the lumpen negrotariat bring to the table. If you can’t see that in this day and age…
Punk rock has zero black influence (this was by design, according to Johnny Ramone). Thrash metal and all later metal subgenres have zero black influence. Traditional metal (Priest, Maiden) has very little. These genres are played almost entirely by white people (sometimes the Japanese).
You seem to be suffering from an outbreak of oppositional defiance. I fail to see what you get out of this. You can, and sometimes you do, do better than this.
I’m neither .So where do I sign up?
Also the US is also filled with Hispanics too.
I do know one thing. Any solution to the problem that ails the Right that involves any flavor of color nationalism is doomed to failure. The reason why that is the case is that color identity, much like whatever flavors that come out of the sewer that is American culture, has nothing going for it except by which people are considered outsiders. Such negative identity only lends itself vibrancy under persecution of a sort, but falls to pieces once the persecution either gets sever enough, or if a stronger, positive identity comes by and absorbs it.
Whiteness is an amorphous blob that seeks to assimilate all ethne based on color, partaking and glorying itself of the ethnos’ triumphs, while simultaneously divesting themselves of the ethnos’ failure’s. I can see how an American, themself a cultural mongrel, would be attracted to an identity.
“The reason why that is the case is that color identity, much like whatever flavors that come out of the sewer that is American culture, has nothing going for it except by which people are considered outsiders.”
Well, that’s a particularly stupid statement. So what you’re saying is that White people only have a negative identity? Are you kidding? I can’t speak for all Whites, but as for me, I can look around at my culture–the art, music, philosophies, engineering and scientific achievements throughout history–and have plenty to be positive about. In fact, I can envision a future where we are allowed to freely associate again, and our cultures and achievements become great again, unfettered by so many negative influences.
Doesn’t seem like a negative identity to me.
“I can’t speak for all Whites, but as for me, I can look around at my culture–the art, music, philosophies, engineering and scientific achievements throughout history–and have plenty to be positive about.”
Can you name me specific examples of achievements that Whites supposedly did that doesn’t involve steal achievements from a particular European ethne?
Yep, I was right. Stupid and woke (BIRM).
You can’t answer because you have no answer. Being a mongrel, you have no home nor a people to belong to,and so you have to make a fantasy, replete by making every European cultures achievements your own despite not belonging to the culture that made said achievement.
This guy is, without question, the most idiotic poster ever to appear on this site.
I find pride in one’s culture (in the vast sense of a wide-ranging, multi-national group) kind of bizarre. I tend to take pride in a culture fostered out of kith and kin (much more localized). For instance, I take pride my family and I are well above average intelligence, work honest work and pay our own bills, have children that we raise, and the men in the family do not sit down when we pee to appease feminists.
And I would argue that resourcefulness is the ultimate sign of intelligence in a worldly sense. A culture’s ability to properly use available resources and improve upon them makes it their own; this allows for variations in regions. Any invention is typically built upon previous inventions and innovations, so your foolish point on “appropriation” demonstrates a lack of understanding on how innovations manifest in the world.
Let us examine printing. The oft quote is that Gutenberg “stole” Chinese printing (wood block carving). Okay – what about the metal and the screw press method that were also integral. Should we attribute that metallurgy to the Chinese?
Attributing innovations and revolutions to a singular source is typically the hallmark of the NPC mindset.
“Can you name me specific examples of achievements that Whites supposedly did that doesn’t involve steal achievements from a particular European ethne?”
National Socialism.
You appear to have some form of head injury impairing your thinking.
Is it the mask? Maybe try taking it off.
All I can hear is barbarian screeching from a monkey.
hmmm, i hate to tell you this but you appear to be mentally ill. try to ignore the “bad” voices…
Oh look, more barbarians. Isn’t there another ass you should be sniffing?
Barbarians
Deplorables
You goofs need to get a new schtick.
Given the effete nature of all those civilized men today, barbarian is great praise .
Gotta say whichever troll farm/ hasbra signed you up did a good job. You almost seem like you fit.
People naturally prefer to associate with people who look & act similarly. Ignoring natural human instincts as a first principle is a fatal error to any social system.
“From a family comes a clan, from a clan comes a tribe, from a tribe comes a culture, from a culture comes a nation.”
Humans have always been tribal in nature, and the attempts by the modern era to erase familial communities results in the sea of mongrels we find ourselves in. Color nationalism is just as bad as multiculturalism in that it seeks to erase familial connections and substitutes nebulous connections based on abstract ideas such as creed or color. Nations have always been about the family.
Take for example the Southerners. They are a legitimate ethnos. They have their history, they have their own language dialect, and they have their own cultural norms and values. They have their successes, and they have their failures. They have their triumphs, and they have their horrors. A color nationalist, like some of the few in this thread, would seek to dissolve the Southerners of their culture, and assimilate it into the White Collective. Said, color nationalist probably isn’t even a Southerner himself, but is jealous of such an ethnos because he himself isn’t part of one.
“Color nationalism” will occur naturally by simply removing obstacles to freedom of association. I think you are conflating nationalism with the USA proper. Perhaps it arrives for the USA as a whole, but that is not necessary. The disintegration of the USA into smaller regional nations would work as well, if not better and inevitable.
Here, you make a valid point. I agree with you. However, I would also suggest that at each increased level of your taxonomy, though the links holding the groups together may weaken (at least ideally – your bond to family should be greatest, then to tribe, etc.), they still exist. And the easiest, most basic links in those levels are “do you look like me and do you talk like me?” Our visual processing is the most dominant of the senses, and should not be simply disregarded as an element of unity. Language is of course a necessity for cooperation.
I’ve made a similar point before. There is no white ethnicity, just as an Ethiopian is not a Nigerian, is not an “African American.” It has to be a common people, with a common look, a common culture, and of course the same language/dialect. Marconi was not a “white guy” who invented the radio. He was an Italian, Bolognese in particular. We have to get away from this blob of whiteness. Canada would be better off without Quebec, Europe without the EU, and all the U.S.should be divided into its particular cultural zones, which do exist.
What is interesting is the culture associated with the English language and the English diaspora.
“The Anglosphere” is a real thing and it had a real culture (Pozzed or not).
An Englishman, a Scotsman, an Australian of Italian descent, a South African of Dutch ancestry, a Norwegian-Canadian and a mutt-American from anywhere in the US can easily play a game of poker, share a meal, read / comprehend/ discuss a work of literature and cooperate on very complex tasks.
We don’t need the American or British Empire to coordinate anything.
White, or European if you prefer, is a race. The various white nationalities are ethnicities. Now I tend to believe that the smaller the polity, rooted in some fundamental identity, the better. EU, bad–the various European nations functioning in utter sovereignty, good. However, if worst comes to worst, whites, whether they be Icelandic or Bulgarian, are capable of forming a workable solidarity because we’re really not all that different. Compare, on the other hand, Norwegians and Matabele, who have nothing whatever in common except being being homo sapiens. In no sane world do those two peoples live under the same political umbrella, yet that is precisely the madness the Left has crammed down whitey’s throat the last 55 years.
That’s basically it Ostei. The mistake being made by “our friend” is ignoring the similarity/compatibility among “White” ethnics. A German is infinitely closer culturally and behaviorally to a Frenchman, or even a Slavic than an African Negro.
If I’m accused of ignoring the ethnicity of Marconi—the *Italian* radio man—it is not “theft”, because I simply don’t see Italians as essentially different from myself and my fellow ethnics. I celebrate his contribution to the White culture I identify with. This is not the same with Blacks or Asians—the other two of the big three.
Precisely. The music of Mozart is celebrated from Des Moines to Melbourne, Winnipeg to Suzdal, because it belongs to all of us. We are all brothers (or at least cousins) of the people of Salzburg. That doesn’t mean that the Japanese cannot appreciate Mozart. They can and do. But the act of doing so requires a cultural leap. Mozart’s music would not have appeared autochthonously in Japan in another million years. It is, at root, alien, just as Japanese music is alien to white people.
My question is, What “white culture?” Sure, Frenchmen are more like Slavs than Sri Lankans…but they’re not Slavs. The only way this matters is when a Slav goes to France, to be French, assimilate with the French and not go back to his home country, or vice versa. There is no overarching “white culture” outside of a now dead mall with boarded up Orange Julius from 1982. The climate controlled consumer culture from 1960 is all we had. The walk in closets in random suburb were just never big enough for what we bought. It was always fake.
JR Wirth: Almost no one (with the exception of perhaps Richard Spencer) argues in favor of some “blob of whiteness.” Everyone recognizes the different nationalities and ethnicities and that not all White people are the same. BUT . . . it is White countries . . . and only White countries . . . that are under attack. Whites must stand together as a race with common interests. Not warring against one another for the amusement of our enemies.
That’s not how real communities work. We need to feel that the person being attached IS US. Even with clown ass-es putting up Ukrainian flags consider Ukrainians to be “them…those poor suffering bastards.” That means when tornados strike Oklahoma, as usual, you don’t say, like I do “the hicks got it again.” Or when an earthquake strikes my area you don’t say “Those sodomites over there had overpasses fall on them again.” Why? BECAUSE we’re not one people. Only the cold war and consumer economy patched that all together. It’s over.
Christianity was the glue for Whitey, but the jews infiltrated and perverted it. Our “government” suffered the same fate..
Do our enemies make a distinction between an anglo and a Italian? Would you be upset if your daughter married a Slavic guy (ok, maybe a little). With less than 10% of global population we don’t have the luxury of white ethnicity. White is white if he is willing to fight with me and is true.
So, English is not your native language, then.
For all the kvetching about the “blank slate” view of human nature in the DR, we need to come to terms with the fact that it is true, at least to an extent.
There are limits to what the “environment” can do, but it is nowhere near powerless.
The “New Right” reminds me of the “New and Improved Tide” or the New and improved or other new formulation of product designed to lure in new unsuspecting customers, just a new label on the same old shitty product.
A “New Right” can only ever be the old right in a new skin suit promoting the same old crap if it is ever to be an approved “New Right.” They just want to slap a new label on the same old crap.
i think left/right metaphor is played out. need something more direct, but still pithy. what is needed, is a political theory grounded in human nature. anything else is going to have fatal contradictions built in.
to me the biggest hurdle in any system is dealing with the overwhelming attraction of fantasy vs reality, for so many individuals. restricting the franchise helps in this regard, but does not solve the problem. just look at the behavior of the few maniacs who actually run the world right now…
No intelligent person denies nature/nurture is a combination. The issue is proportion. As observation reveals, nature seems to have the lion’s share. There will always be outliers, but you do not design policies to cater to the outliers, unless it is for positive outliers (e.g., scholarships for the most gifted).
Have babies, raise them Christian, preferably Catholic. As this autocracy loses legitimacy and the economic realities begin to hit hard the various factions will continue to battle it out for spoils but the future belongs to those who reproduced.
The left by definition is suicidal and those dazzled by fake wealth and trinkets are also less likely to have babies. Time is on the side of those who replicated their DNA in stable, functioning, competent family systems.
The problem with that is the Catholic Church is completely converged and run by atheists who aim to destroy Catholicism. It has “educated” the last 3 generations of Catholic priests and loaded the church up with homosexuals and child molesters and other people with the aim of the destruction of the Church and of Western Civilization.
If the Church can even be saved, it will probably take many decades, if not centuries to undo all the damage of the last 60-100 years.
The Catholic Church is one of the institutions involved with the invasion of the West. The Catholic Church not only supports all the open borders stuff, but they make a ton of money with foreign adoption. Putting these evil people in charge would only hasten the decline.
I say all of this as a Catholic.
the entirety of the church hierarchy is homosexual, now. until this changes, the church is in no position to help.
That is a column. At least 10% are not gay.
Calumny. Fcking autocorrect!!!
I am a recent convert. Even with all the crap the Church has in the hierarchy, it still remains the Church of Christ.
Some small good news – many of the younger priests that I have met are explicitly traditional – one of our priests was ordained in a Latin Mass.
Catholic Charities is a major facilitator of the invasion of the USA from the 3rd world. Tithe to that institution (the Catholic Church) and you paying for the destruction of the USA.
The good news is the “woke” will [probably] end up destroying even their own institutions. The bad news is most of those used to be “our” (or “other’s”) institutions. The logical endpoint is everything brought to ruin. 🙁
I tell every young white couple I meet and am friends with to make babies. I never tell them what I actually mean but always give positive words of encouragement to “go forth and multiply.”
Can’t really advocate for the Catholic stuff tho, the church is corrupt as hell and like the other commenter said full of homos and child molesters. To be avoided unless a catholic school is the only private school in your area. Finding an old school conservative church like a smaller Missouri Synod Lutheran church is the best route.
I have no idea where I heard this joke probably 15 years ago, but it still applies and cracks me up. A comedian is talking about there childhood, etc. “When people find out that I went to Catholic school, they always ask, ‘Are you Catholic?’ And I answer, ‘No.’ They always ask, ‘Why?’ And I say, ‘Because I went to Catholic school.'”
Find a Catholic Church and school which celebrate the Tridentine mass (non-Vatican II) and offers communion on the tongue (ick, but you’ll get used to it and render yourself impervious to the Wuhan Flu). If you do that, you will find:
1. A church which is full;
2. Of white people;
3. With laughably huge families.
My faith is mediocre, at best, but man has to believe in something.
The homo problem in the Church is real, albeit getting somewhat better, but the “pedo priest” thing is vastly overblown by the media. Bill Donahue wrote a pretty comphrensive book on this subject last year. One could always accuse him of carrying water for the bishops, but he does a good job making his case. Things like the PA Grand Jury report treat “Father O’Callaghan molested me in 1956, he died in 1964, and I first reported the assault in 1987” as “credible accusations”. The lib media could easily turn this playbook against any of the more conservative protestant churches once they move on from the biggest target, the Catholics.
Gotta put a plug for Orthodoxy in this thread. I look forward to the day the Papacy finally collapses and all those misguided trads find their way home.
Even according to the Orthodox the Bishop of Rome is the legitimate Western patriarch and the “first among equals”.
He is considered the First Among Equals. Among the Orthodox, the respect for Rome is both that it was the center of the Empire, but more importantly, it was the place where St. Peter & St. Paul were martyred. There is no absolute ruler in Orthodoxy. Yes, Western Patriarch, but cannot override the decisions and authority of the other Patriarchs. There is no equivalent of the Vatican in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Nobody wants to touch the immigration & demographic issues with a 10 foot pole, on the “left” or “right”.
How do we make housing affordable?
Left: Build more subsidized housing! Land transfer tax! High rise condos!
Right: Remove environmental restrictions and build more suburbs!
What happens: some phoney ban on “foreign buyers” gets passed, banning overseas investors from buying properties. (A tiny fraction of property owners and with easy loopholes).
Nobody picks up the $100 bill on the sidewalk, which is quite simple – reduce demand for housing by reducing immigration levels. This is such a simple fix and doesn’t even bring things like race or culture into the discussion. It’s the same story on every single issue. Why are there 5 hour wait times to pass through security at the Toronto airport? Why is crime going up? Why are drivers getting worse? Etc. Etc. Etc. Nobody can even bring themselves to think of the reason, let alone express it.
Until basic, observable facts can be spoken about things will continue to get worse in every direction. The West and in particular the USA is operating based on faulty premises.
The “Right” refuses to see the truth about immigration. The Left sees the truth and loves it.
“reduce demand for housing by reducing immigration levels.”
This, but also, restrict home ownership to people who will live there & work locally. No more plutocrats using real estate as an investment vehicle. No more welfare addicts with housing vouchers. A happy side effect will be ending the Socialist termites who move to Red areas while telecommuting to their Blue jobs.
We can’t find a social ideology that works on a global scale because there ISN’T a social ideology that works on a global scale. Whatever your beliefs are, they won’t be shared by your neighbors from Punjab, Beijing and Caracas.
Mass migration must stop before civilization can move forward.
There are plenty of countries where you can’t own any property or a business if you are not a native.
For some reason it seems off limits to discuss it in the west.
Maybe because it might present a problem for “dual nationality” types.
It would seem that “forsaking all others” should be a reasonable requirement, but not for those feeling themselves entitled to brigandage and/or parasitism.
That’s simple: the people with real power in the US want it. Look at the Officers and Boards of, for example, MSFT/AAPL/DIS/JPM/GS. Look at who their top shareholders are (spoiler alert! It’s Blackrock and Vanguard.) Look at who the Federal Reserve funneled the results of their unprecedented money printing to (spoiler alert! It wasn’t you, you just pay the price in rampant inflation and debt.) None of these companies are run by people who see themselves as having primary loyalty or connection to this country and its people. If they did offshoring would not have happened. Nor would US citizens be forced to train their foreign replacements.
Your last sentence is not only correct, but it should be expanded to most people and groups in most times and places.
A cacophony of words, ideas, presumed persuasion, converts; and then what? We engineer a ground swell of sanity and elect the next messiah to govern us and then all is well? Another Obama, Trump, or TBD? Why not just create an all-encompassing video game and plug everyone into it as in The Matrix? Can you really live a life well lived solely within the mental state? Who’s going to grow the crops and build things?
At some point, we have to become tangible human beings again and place actions before words. Bongino preaches that Rs are bad but Ds are worse, so vote harder because the alternative is worse than either. IOW, pot is less worse than meth, but cold turkey is Armageddon so don’t go there.
And the beat goes on. Yakking, more yakking, new yakking; but no one shall pick up an axe handle. Here’s a new political idea. Make Congress into Fight Club. The legislation can’t get any worse and it will at least keep out the riff-raff and faggy wimps and crazies that always seem to get elected.
I’m all for Fight Club entrance exams into politics. WWF was fake but we knew it was. Pretending any “leader” in government is real is tiresome. Seeing the House floor populated with face-bandaged people would be amazing.
I like the idea but I feel you are thinking too small…
Instead of “Fight Club”… think “Gladiator”.
Congress is already full of gay actors pretending to be warriors when the camera is on.
re: yakking; marine captain told me once “talk in one hand, shit in the other, see which one fills up first”
This is the point in the decline of nations where a patriotic general marches a battalion of marines into Washington, frees the Jan 6 prisoners and replaces them with politicians and FBI executives. Except by strange coincidence, Obama purged all the patriotic generals. Biden continues the purge with Marine Lt. Col. Scheller who remains under confinement awaiting trial for the audacious crime of criticizing the Afghan withdrawal.
Din C. Nuttin: With all due respect to those who served honorably in combat, I am not as enamored as some appear to be by a system founded on the presumed “duty, honor, country” of military service. And particularly today – when regardless of ‘patriot generals’ – the rank and file is increasingly non-White and non-male. The military, like every other institution, is a reflection of the people. Demographics first and always.
Plus the military is part of the core grift of the federal government. The military is there as an excuse to siphon taxes/printed money to arms manufactureres who bribe the politicians to keep declaring new crusades to spread democracy. The generals want endless war, since it keeps their budget nice and fat.
In this regard, Putin says “Отстройте еще лучше.”
An interesting aside here concerning this subject, I saw an informal survey around seven months ago and the subject was which branch of the service is considered the most “patriotic”, “patriotic” in this case meaning; God, Country, loyalty to the Constitution & The Bill of Rights, etc. It turned out that the branch of the service considered the most patriotic based on the above metrics was the Air Force. The reason being…………………………………..demographics. It turns out that the Air Force is the “whitest” of the four services, with the highest concentration of Heritage Americans and The Marine Corps came in dead last with the highest number of diversity recruits.
Just a little food for thought, one of the guys I work with is a decorated Marine who’s served multiple tours in Iraq. He’s a proud Marine and patriot, until the subject of immigration is brought up. Then he’s nothing but an activist for his tribe. Point this out to him as I have on a few occasions and he gets royally pissed-off, not that I care mind you.
I’m assuming he is an Hispanic jar head. They were tribal to the max when I was in. Still some good guys , especially the Cubans, but the others were always, Mexican/Salvadoran first.
The time to pick the guns was 60 years ago. But Wallace et al cucked and it’s been downhill ever since.
Modern Democrat governors ignore the “law” and do whatever they want. Pot is illegal to posses anywhere in the United States at the federal level. But we have states openly defying the feds on this and other issues like Immigration.
Relying on the citizens to pick up the guns is just plain foolish.
Utah has an “R” governor and they ignore all sorts of laws when it comes to immigration or plural marriage. “D” v. “R” is almost meaningless these days and usually reflects nothing more than the wishes of the party machinery’s biggest donors.
> According to his analysis, any participation in politics ends up supporting the system, so the only way to oppose the system is to drop out entirely
Ernst Junger wrote in “The Forest Passage” how a small group of dissidents is used as a legitimizing force to the regime. The argument was that if 100% of people voted ‘yea’ to the government, it could easily be stated that the numbers are all fake and coercion is involved. If say, 98% give a yea and 2% nay, they can point to the naysayer and say “See? This is a legitimate government, since we allow this dissent.”
The solution isn’t so much to drop out of the political game entirely, but quit playing a patsy to rigged rules that are designed to ensure you lose.
For a long time now I have advocated for local organizing, with some networking between the local groups. The reason is there are a limited number of ways in which a regime changes. One is the regime reforms itself for its own advantage. We see this today with how the regime is changing the rules of society. The other is the regime reforms due to genuine fear of revolt of collapse. In both cases, reform is elite driven.
Civil war is an option, but this two is elite driven. One set of elites decides to impose change on the other elites, enlisting the people in their cause. Revolution is another option, either driven by a new elite rising up outside the old elite or the system collapsing, thus creating a void for a new elite. There can be a lot of overlap here, but all require a crisis of the system itself.
That means your choice is try to persuade elites to act in a way that you think they should, which is always going to be in their interests, or you organize and wait for the system to fall into crisis. You either rally to a new elite in order to fill the void or you are the new elite leading the charge into the void. The prerequisite for this is organization outside and independent of the system.
(1)
I’m pretty sure Yarvin have given more thought to the metaphysical side of these questions than Zman gives him credit for.
(2) One these I don’t see New Right theories taking into account is technology with its path dependence and pandora’s box aspects. It’s nice to say you should drop out of society and not participate in politics, but that gives free reign to the enemy to establish infrastructures that may become more permanent than any specific regime. Similarly, it’s all well to have a medieval Catholic autocracy when the government having a say in your bedroom activities is constrained by the opaqueness of our lives, but not so much when the government really can monitor your bedroom activities.
(2) To borrow C.S. Lewis’ idea of the Tao, we make the path by walking it, we make the Tao by living it. To adopt a “Latin” perspective on democracy literally means giving up on the Anglo-Saxon way of politics. Withdrawing doesn’t create an alternative parallel participatory politics, it kills participatory politics.
“For European nationalists, this brings obvious comparisons to unfortunate incidents.”
Cute turn of phrase. You often twist in the wind shy of frankly saying, “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer.” But in the American context, what does “volk” mean actually mean? Ukes and Ruskies or their American counterparts clawing at each other’s throats? Are Saxons and Pollacks truly blood brothers?
If demographics is destiny as it appears to be, who but today’s English were yesterday’s polydemographicals? Smogasbord America looks to be the future, conservative fussing nothwithstanding.
Rod Dreher proposed the Ben Op as something sensible, forseeing the cultural and economic collapse that’s coming. Then he backed off his assessment, refusing to follow through, maybe in the hope of remaining employed. At least he anticipated the coming of horse and buggy days even if he didn’t stay the course.
“That may be what is preventing a New Right from forming up and taking the place of Buckley-style conservatism on the big stage.”
Oh, there is always a New Right. It is necessary for the successful scam known as dialectic materialism. The problem is not what is preventing a New Right from forming up. The problem is the man behind the curtain who is promoting today’s flavor of New Right. The “man” is TPTB. The fact that you know the names of your examples just means they are already on the payroll. Your statement, “Channeling popular frustration into a sterile alternative is the secret to maintaining order” is accurate, although I would say “a secret” instead of “the secret”.
Meet the New Right, same as the Old Right.
Yarvin and Dreher aren’t the only ones advocating abstention from politics. Before either of them bruited this option, a certain Paul Weyrich was doing the same. He created something of a stir by arguing that so hopelessly thoroughgoing was the Left’s corruption and debasement of politics and culture that the only sensible thing for traditionalists to do was to withdraw in every way possible. In his schema, we would be like the Irish monks who kept the flame of Western civilization alive after the collapse of the Roman Empire. Some centuries later, when times were more propitious, the monks sallied forth like so many Johnny Appleseeds, and sowed civilization again. This would be the job of our descendants, too.
Weyrich made his arguments and limned this analogy in the second half of the 90s. Like David Horowitz, who was banging on about anti-white racism at the same time, Weyrich was a prophet.
In a good reminder of who still, inexplicably has access to power and money on the right, Declan Leary at TAC has a write up of the National Review Institute Conference that must have been paid for by defense contractors. They got Sen. Tom Cotton to speak, where like a mainline pastor telling his congregation why Jesus would totally be on board with CRT, abortion and gay marriage today, he explains that George Washington would throw his warning against foreign entanglements out the window today because of how the world has changed since then. He wants to flat out tell China we will go to war to defend Taiwan.
As Leary closes with, “If the most sincere of all hawks, from Elliott Abrams to Tom Cotton, feel they must ape the rhetoric of realism in order to succeed post-Trump, there can be little question that the old consensus has been all but fully shattered on foreign policy. The only way realists and restrainers could squander the opportunity is to take such people at their word when they suggest they’re changing sides.”
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/nationally-reviewing-realism/
You have to wonder who is underwriting NRO these days. Their readership is in its 70’s, so it small donor class is also 70-plus. Their last 990 says they raised $6.8 million in 2020. Presumably this is mostly corporate money now. The question is, why would big donors and corporate donors bother? It is not as if conservatives are fronting an underrepresented point of view in politics. NR is mostly about promoting foreign wars and opposing regulation of capital. Those are entrenched ideas in the political class now.
I can see Elliot Abrams showing up as few people are calling asking for his opinion on anything, but what good does it do Tom Cotton to show up there? He can access those donors without National Review’s help. The only explanation I have is that he is a true believer and wants to reward National Review for their loyalty to the invade the world cause.
It’s a quite feminine thing, a support group. NR obviously is grifting but Cotton and Company want assurance everything is fine
plus they have to be (only) preaching to the chorus, now?
Citation factory. “Even the right-wing National Review admits…”
It’s anti-antiwar, defends big tech and finance against non-leftist complaint/regulation, and solidifies elite consensus that the impassible “extreme right” pale is to the left of the average American’s opinion.
Sweet gig.
That’s a good question. Making sure NR stays bought,in case that matters in any way? It also has a very feminine support group vibe, which is odd when the topic is murdering tens of thousands of people.
Well, if one were to think about the “pro-Roe” contingent, a self-professed, very “feminine support group”, you might observe that the murder of thousands is no bar to membership, no?
It’s a 501(c)(3) write-off. They pretend to provide some sort of “educational” “service” and their donors get a deduction. What a grift!
Paul Gottfried (who now runs Chronicles) has accused both NR and TAC of receiving money from left-wing corporations like Google. Its public record that Google has donated to Heritage and other “conservative” think tanks, so I don’t see why magazines would be any different.
We should style ourselves The Third Right.
I myself prefer Keith Woods’ term “Turd Position”
Third Reight
kvhkvhkvhkvh
Felix: Bravo, Sir! I like it.
The only problem with The Third Right is that it will be attacked as “worse than Hitler”, what with the Third Reich association. It will be like Ultra MAGA, or the MAGA King. Of course, it is just a funny play on words to me, but it will be used by the media to demonize the right. Like the current abortion kerfuffle.
Upvote!
‘Cuz Ultra MAGA made me laugh
Lets not be coy. Just own the space.
We should call the movement “Worse than Hitler”
I wonder if the Integrationalists avoid the obvious implications and roots of their proposed solution simply because it’s impossible to bring these matters up and hope to retain the funding for their project.
Like, I want throne and altar, but I can’t say why I really want throne and altar. But if I get throne and altar, the problem solves itself.
It’s better to be ruled by someone born into power than someone hungry for it (especially in a nuclear armed country). Those hungry for power can have it if they take vows of poverty and chastity before administering a civil service.
There you go, the justification for throne and altar. Faith and reason working together.
do you think they privately say why they want throne and altar? because if you do, I think that’s a good start. I know I certainly do think they do.
I suspect that the reason why non of the “New Right” is willing to touch the issue about demographics is because the natural question then becomes, what do we do about it? There are various solutions proposed, everything from multiculturalism to ethnic genocide and everything in between, but no one worthwhile is is willing to offer any solution that will work. Course, you get the occasional wignat who froths at the mouth at the thought of forcing the ethnics out of his neighborhood at gunpoint, but none of them seem to offer a solution that doesn’t involve blowback that could start blood wars for generations.
Nice try. Subtly trying to associate white identity politics with crazy people and massive violence. Your verbal tricks won’t work around here.
As to solutions, there are many, starting with freedom of association. Whites can start acting like every other group, first by identifying as white (or whatever regional or ethnic flavor they choose) and then by organizing politically, culturally and economically as a group.
No wignats. No violence. Just a community where whites can be proud of themselves, their people and their past – and where they have a future.
That is a reasonable goal. The problem is the FBI/CIA/NSA will infiltrate any such community that gains notice, create violent false flags, label it a terrorist movement, and start arresting anyone associated with it. Somewhere in this line of strategy, individual states must push back against the feds, and protect their citizens with opposing force.
It won’t happen. No state government will ever act on behalf of whites qua whites. We must organize and separate, come hell or high water. Paralysis by analysis is not an option.
First off, I am not associating white identity politics with crazy people and massive violence. You already do plenty of that on your own. All I am asking is what is the solution out of this conundrum of demographics that Zman has identitfied? No one seems to have one, which is the problem.
Secondly, what is “white identity”? I know what is English identity, French identity, German identity. I know what ethnos I myself am part of, which is Greek. But I know no ethnos that is “white”. What language does white people speak? What cultural norms and traditions do white people pass down to their future generations? What religion do white people worship? What food do white people make? What is the traditional homeland of the white people? I’d say that the white identity is a made up fantasy, much like the nation of America where it originated from.
Lying and misdirection seems to be your thing. Hasbara isn’t sending their best these days.
First, you absolutely did associate the desire of some whites to live among their own with stupid and violent whites. It’s an old trick – usually used by the most ethnocentric group in the world.
Second, I offered non-violent and reasonable solutions based on freedom of association, solutions that you ignore.
Third, as I noted in my comment (and you completely ignored), “white identity” is really a catch-all phrase meant for any form regional or ethnic whites viewing themselves as a people. It’s why I put it in my comment. So, yes, I don’t think that American whites really see themselves as a group in the same way that ethnic Germans or French do, but Southern whites do, etc.
I’ve offered my solution of various white groups acting like other groups in our society and forming their own communities.
What’s your solution? Should whites just roll over and be persecuted?
Are you alright with ethnic Germans or French or English identifying as a people and pushing back against the lose of their homelands?
Do you believe that any race or ethnicity has the right to identify as a people?
You have refused to answer my question, because you have nothing to say, other than mewling platitudes. It is the reason why you are a failure now, and will continue to be a failure in the future.
That being said, mayhap my question went over your head as it was too sophisticated for you to understand. Let me dumb the question down to where even a monkey can understand. What is the white identity? What does the white identity have that distinguishes it from all the other ethne in the world? Surely even you can answer that, no?
For everyone, go below and check out my breakdown of this guy’s tactics. He’s working from a playbook. This tactic #2, Muddy the Waters.
But he’s also refusing to talk about other groups, which is tactic #4.
As to what is white identity, as I mentioned again and again, whites are varied people. If you’d like to learn about Southern whites, I’d suggest reading Faulkner or Twain. If you’d like to learn about about Midwestern whites, you might read Hemingway or Fitzgerald.
I could go on, but what’s the point.
Once again, I’ll ask: What racial or ethnic groups would you allow to identity and organize as a people?
You could say every one of those things about “black” culture- which also originated in America. Do all blacks speak Swahili?
You could say those things about black culture, because black culture is like white culture, a made up fantasy by mongrels who don’t know where they came from.
Oh please. This “what is white” crap is a straw man. There is obviously a white race subdivided into nationalities. Greeks and Swedes are different, but still have far more in common than Greeks and Mongolians. I strongly suspect this “there is no white people” nonsense is just a ploy to embargo whites working together. I know for a fact that this is a Leftist tactic, but when putatively non-Leftists push the same nonsense, there’s a problem. In fact, it’s entirely possible such people are nothing more than crypto-Leftists.
Again, I don’t have a problem identifying a “White” people as opposed to say Negroid and Asiatic. I’m perfectly comfortable in my (white) skin and have no problem—but also no need—in dwelling upon my particular Northern European ethnic background for further identity elaboration/expansion.
Seems like someone is trying to prevent White unity in presenting an argument that there can be no such thing as a White identity except in the negative sense. Which is an interesting concept, that I, myself, have never experienced.
Greece, the cradle of modern democracy and higher learning, a leader in topics such as mathematics and philosophy. Now it’s the a hole of Europe, it’s major export is olive oil and the country’s name is synonymous with anal sex. It’s a cautionary tale of the decline in civilizations
Do you assume American whites are all gun-toting rednecks just looking to hang a non-white from the nearest tree at the slightest pretext?
May I submit the possibility that to a large extent, this is a fiction ginned up by the extremely biased media, both domestic and international? Even a brief survey of statistics and other argument will show that the Homicidal White Supremacist is much more myth than reality.
Please don’t be so quick to demonize Whites as crazy killers. Yes, we’ve had our share of mass (usually) shooters such as the lunatic in Buffalo this past weekend. If media reports are accurate, yes here is a crazed white supremacist, etc. The liberal media has a field day with such a killer. Politicians get lots of material out of such tragedies.
But I challenge you to ask yourself — honestly — how representative is a troubled 18-year-old white boy mass killer? Look up the homicide statistics about the USA. They aren’t too hard to find. [Hint: google “FBI uniform crime”]
You may have to do some calculations, but you will find that Blacks commit (about) 57% of all killings Roughly 30% are unsolved. Using reasonable assumptions, however, you will quickly conclude that about 75% of all murders are committed by Blacks, the vast majority (>85%) being other Blacks. This is quite an accomplishment for a demographic that is only about 13% of our population. That suggests that Blacks are about 6 times as violent as non-Blacks. When compared against whites alone, it’s probably closer to 10x.
If you can find (or compute) a White only homicide rate, I suspect you will get figures much closer what more peaceful nations, most of Europe with large White populations, will have.
Yes, we are gun users here in the USA. It’s the most common means of homicide. Roughly 60% of all gun deaths are suicides. Of the remainder, roughly 80% of them are young black and brown men shooting each other.
You are probably quite an intelligent person, a critical thinker, if you are reading here (or else a paid agent?). If so, then you should not fall for the obvious bullshit that the media serves daily.
A little bit of fact-checking will often prove what a distorted view of reality they present the gullible.
Our esteemed rulers would never allow that. Not only that, there is no unity among whites. The boomers “don’t see color” and the youth view whites as the root of all evil because they’ve been brainwashed since birth. Try belonging to a white community and being able to keep your job. To be white is to commit the world’s most awful sin.
I’d argue that whiteness is a negative identity just like blackness is. It is entirely defined who is against the identity, rather than what makes whiteness an ethnicity. I know that if someone snapped their fingers, and removed all but the Greeks from the face of the Earth, we Greeks would still be Greeks. We would still have our Hellenic world. But if there were none but whites on the face of the Earth, what would be left to perpetuate the identity?
Man, you love the verbal tricks. Now whites have a negative identity. You do realize that pretty much everyone on this board would love nothing more than for whites to be left alone.
We just want to be with our people. That’s about the most positive identity you can have.
The fact that you don’t seem to like Missouri much isn’t our fault. At least you have a homeland to go back to. We don’t.
Stephanos Xytegenios: You’re Greek? No way – I never ever would have guessed!!! It must be that courteous respect for other people’s histories and identities that had me confused.
I am in my 50’s. Up through 1990’s White people in this country were Americans. Whether traveling in Colorado, Louisiana., or Vermont, I enjoyed the regional differences but always felt at ” home”. While not as long long lived as the Greeks, I will argue that, for a couple of centuries. Americans were a legitimate ethnic group. Sadly, that nation is dead and never coming back.
Sorry Step, but where have you been? There is no longer any remnant of a Hellenic world. It was white Europeans who carried forward the Hellenic traditions to establish the once great Western Civilization, until it’s demise early in the 21st century.
Looking like a positive root for white identity? Try this on for size, Skeezix–Western civilization.
“… we Greeks would still be Greeks. We would still have our Hellenic world.”
Don’t let your “Greek” name fool you. Genetically, I’m betting, you have little relationship to the people of that Hellenic world you tout. Such is the history of people and their movements around the world.
Michael Woodley presented a genetic analysis a while back in which he analyzed genomes from Ancient Greece, Classical Greece, and Modern Greece. Sampling is small, but suggestive that those people are not the same—especially the modern Greeks.
the problem will solve itself, shortly. mud people can only survive in AINO because fedgov forces whites to subsidize them. once they are forced to fend for themselves in open competition, they will perish like a flea without a dog. or go back to mudsylvania…
That’s why I’m convinced that they don’t want to eliminate us entirely. They simply want to control white normies enough that they will continue watching the NFL and grilling but be controlled enough to be “tax cattle”. They still need the revenue.
I grew up on the fringe of a large urban city in the Midwest a long time ago at a time when there were many ethnic groups living in various enclaves. Each maintained its unique cultural aspects and heritage, and the separation was informal and voluntary. Most had annual cultural events centered on a holiday (think St. Patrick’s Day) that were attended and celebrated by all, and peaceful coexistence was the norm. Eventually intermarriage bridged these divides and the suburbs became melting pots. The decline of the USA began in the 70s with enforced desegregation and has continued unabated this then.
So how do we restore peaceful and voluntary segregation in a time when the Federal Government will not allow this under penalty of incarceration? Have I not defined the core problem? Is the solution not obvious?
Better violence against the invaders now–if necessary–than watching Western civilization perish in a muddy deluge.
On the integralism side, the face of that wing is a Harvard academic named Cornelius Adrian Comstock Vermeule.
This piece, like many others, is similar to an article in a magazine that could be called “Lepidoptery Today” that examines the biology and differences of various species of butterflies and moths. It might be very interesting to a butterfly collector but relatively unimportant and meaningless to anyone else.
As long as white Americans can sell their homes and move away from feral negroes and as long as the nice Hispanic guy trims the trees and cuts the grass with a smile nothing will change. I don’t see whites , except for us dissidents, seeing through the fog into the future.
But we gotta keep up the hope that it changes, it will change but perhaps not in some of our lifetimes.
The problem is that there is a large number of feral white Americans as well, if you have never been to the poorer areas of, say, Missouri for example.
Bull. White crime rates are extremely low. The poorest white neighborhoods are safer than the richest black neighborhoods.
Your attempts to muddy the waters won’t work around here. Try Breitbart.
Down vote me all you want, but I lived in Missouri. The ferality of the whites here would make the worse negro look like a church boy. Barbarianism know no color or creed. Only the wignat and the fanatic refuse to see it as such.
I have lived in MO all my life, and I have no idea what you’re talking about. St. Louis and KC have very liberal media, so please provide some examples or move on.
Before I left Springfield, MO. An argument happened behind my apartment on Cherry St. The argument involved several white people. Said argument was settled when the young man went into his apartment, got a gun, and went back out and shot at the car as it was leaving the driveway, killing a pregnant woman in the process.
My mother lived in the neighborhood north of Springfield, near the Habitat for Humanity housing, that experienced several murders every summer. including the famous Dee Dee Blanchard murder. Drug addicts and meth heads are plenty in the Queen City of the Ozarks, and all of them in my examples were white.
Stephanos Xytegenios: So you point to two random killings and some heavy drug use areas as, “The ferality of the whites here would make the worse negro look like a church boy.” Meanwhile in the real world, Missouri typically leads the country in black-on-black homicides, at rates exponentially higher than whites:
https://vpc.org/press/missouri-ranked-1-for-black-homicide-victimization/
Classic misdirection. You guys need some new material.
Yes, by all means, whites should allow themselves to lose their homelands, be demonized and discriminated against, to have their neighborhoods destroyed, to have their children taught they and their ancestors are evil, to be erased from the earth . . . all because there are a few dirt bag whites.
You’re a joke. What’s next, “We’re all God’s children” or “There’s just one race, the human race.”
You remind me of Black Lives Matter and their insistence that black do nothing wrong, it is all the white people. They are wrong with their argument just as you and yours are wrong with yours.
This guy is such a classic plant. Notice his tactics.
1. Associate any form white identity with hillbilly whites. This is their favorite trick. “You don’t want to be one of those losers, do you?”
2. Muddy the waters. “What does it even mean to be white?” Change the subject and suck you down a rabbit hole.
3. Use specific examples of bad whites or good non-whites to make you ignore larger patterns.
4. Ignore any mention of non-whites identifying as a group. These guys never answer you when you bring up Israel or Japan or ethnic organizations in the US. They always keep the focus on whites and whites only.
I could go on, but you get the point. This guys is working from an old playbook. He’s like a salesman using a script.
It’s kind of fun to watch once you recognize who they are. It’s a bit like watching a con man when you know it’s con.
Whenever I am beset by a Hive Mind lecturing about how the White Man is to blame for all that is wrong with non-whites, I say something like: “Since Whites are creating so many problems for them, wouldn’t the best solution be to keep Whites as separated from the non-Whites as possible?” Usually they figure out what I’m proposing and shut up quickly. 😀
All one has to do is look at our major cities and the cesspools they’ve become. Will “colonization” be the excuse for them too? Baltimore is an unbelievable shit hole, yet it is controlled entirely by blacks. Same with Detroit and now NY City. What about Oakland and LA? The reality of race does not need scientific studies and empirical data to be apparent (although plenty of that exists). One can simply go to any urban area and see what blacks do to those areas and compare those same cities to when they were 90+% white.
dude, the crime rates by race are well known. take nigs out if aino and you have eu levels of crime. well, might have to take mexican crime out too, to get all the way to eu levels. but nigs get you most of the way there.
Stephanos Xytegenios: Oh how true. Feral Whites – after all, honor killings of wives and daughters never, ever happen in modern Greece. Nor murder nor robbery nor bureaucratic cheating. Must be nice to be part of ancient Athens reborn, that innate genetic superiority and all.
We Greeks were building cities of marble while your ancestors were living in mud huts, fling dung at each other. It was only after your ancestors copied us could achieve a modicum of civilization that we created.
And yet we Romans conquered you and took your women.
Romans were Greeks.
Liar. The closest you’ve ever been to Missouri is Crete.
Those whites aren’t dancing on cars after they steal the catalytic converter, and looting for tennis shoes.
And they are our people.
Get lost.
poor white would behave better if there weren’t so many nigs setting a bad example for them.
Re the “You remind me of Black Lives Matter and their insistence that black do nothing wrong” comment-
If whites were to take the attitude of blacks, lefties, muslims, or jews, that “no matter what a scumbag he is, he’s one of ours and we’ll defend him”-
Well then, if whites were to do that, the troublemakers better watch right the f*k out!
Which means they’d respect and adore us: it’s a sh*t test. If you stand up to them, they respect you.
Are you a jew?
Your comment is smarmily subversive and meant to cloud and derail the issue.
Democracy is a totalizing civic religion. So Yarvin is ultimately correct. The only way forward, for now, is “dropping out”. Which does not mean moving to a rural area and living off the grid.
It means embracing a “Latino” mindset.
A key element of American culture (and western culture less so) is the conception of government as endogenous to the the people and society. It (government) is us, in every sense. Totalizing democracy requires that mental paradigm.
Latin cultures (and frankly most throughout history) view government as an exogenous force that is oppressing “the people” to a greater or lesser degree. Which leads to opposing and subverting it as the moral choice.
That works out in practice as ignoring the government and it’s edicts as much as possible. Bend to their overt force as required but curse them as soon as they’re out of your face. Take what you can from them with no compunction to follow their edicts or do their bidding etc. Totalizing democracy requires the explicit consent and cooperation of the culture to function. Deny it that at every opportunity.
That all a very blackmail for Americans to swallow. It’s basically an embrace of a foreign cultural paradigm. And yet, every dissident intuitively knows that our government is a diabolical exogenous entity using force to twist our culture.
There is much truth in your comment. While it indeed initially will seem alien, taking what you can, giving as little as possible, and following Havel’s “live as if you are free” model are the keys to survival (if the fools don’t get us all nuked). I had not thought of it in the Latin context but that’s a very sharp take. Also, it does seem that refusing to be swallowed whole and totally immersed have become more accepted as responses.
It isn’t an entirely foreign concept. From 1862-1876, various parts of the Confederacy lived under military occupation and “Reconstruction” and did exactly that, denying that Yankee imposed government imposed at bayonet point as having any legitimacy.
This ‘take’ on interaction with oppressive governments is indeed common throughout history; it is has given rise to parallel ‘black-market’ governments to protect citizens from their ‘official’ governments as well: e.g. La Cosa Nostra, and others. We best be getting our own “white hand” fellowship going.
The White Hand!
Zman’s examination of political basis has led to a very practical result indeed- thank you coyote and Dino.
I agree with Yarvin about political engagement. I’m glad that we’re finally getting people with a following, and financing, who are seriously critiquing conservatism and the GAE. I had hoped that a practical ideological energy would grow up behind the Trump wave, and it seems to be happening.
And by practical I mean a well-financed, well-connected cadre of people who question orthodoxy. Everyone loves a black joke, but if you want real change, you’re going to need more than just goofballs. And you may even need people whom you don’t agree with 15% of the time. If you believe Charles C. Johnson, who claims to be connected to powerful players in the new right, people are noticing the shit-show and are trying to remedy it. I wish the figure heads had a few more goyim, but maybe that’s to come.
Marko – Yarvin et al may be critiquing traditional conservative orthodoxy, but neither he nor anyone else is publicly questioning the foundational questions. As Zman notes, one can critique democracy and governmental arrangements all one wants, but if that third rail of equality and demographics remains untouched, it’s all a lot (a whole, whole, whole lot) of words.
Find me the putative thinker/commentator/talker/politician who unapologetically declares “All people are not and never will be equal” and then we can talk.
“Take what you can from them with no compunction to follow their edicts or do their bidding etc.”
I will give you an example. After being good little taxpaying civnats all our lives, my wife and I realized a few years ago that our leaders were replacing us, and we were paying for the process. This was right as our kids were reaching college age, and we were being denied all types of student aid due to my income level. So we legally divorced. Pell grants now cover 50% of our tuition bills, my wife and kids get almost free healthcare, and my wife gets a $6K larger standard deduction as head of household. I calculated that this filing of a piece of paper at the county courthouse will save us over $100K. When it no longer benefits us, we can remarry. This would have been unthinkable to us former patriots 10 years ago.
DLS: Initially that sounds a bit drastic, but upon further thinking it makes perfect sense – after all, what gives one’s marriage legitimacy in one’s eyes – the imprimatur of government or God? Since it is the government only in regards to financial and legal arrangements (not in any way the moral sphere), why not?
Obviously this wouldn’t be for everyone, and you have to be careful and trust each other. But the kids were old enough that custody was not an issue. It also helps that we are Catholic (the church does not recognize civil divorce). It also took several thousand dollars in legal bills to set it up. But we did this 3 years ago, told no one in the family, and nothing has changed other than some high-fiving every time we save money. I just went back and updated our calculations, and we are on pace to save $180K over the 7 years we will have kids in college, in the form of Pell grants, health insurance, tax deductions and stimulus funds we otherwise would not have qualified for.
Good job.
Are you able to live together?
Thanks, Felix. Yes no change to anything except filing two tax returns. No one even knows we did it.
The first Third Right populist in Denmark was Mogens Glistrup, a lawyer who specialized in making your taxes go away (and didn’t pay any tax himself) argued that paying taxes was an act of treason and that tax cheats “were like the resistance fighters in WWII: doing a dangerous but patriotic job”.
Bleeding the beast is just next level.
Way to game the system. “Chingón” as they would say in Mexico. I’ve heard of sham marriage but never sham divorce 🙂
Imagine a small town with signs saying “no niggers allowed” on the highway into town. The established powers swoop in to remove the signs and scold everybody they can find about it. They leave, but most of the niggers now have enough sense to not move there (from the huge publicity of the government response) and the one or two exceptions are either shunned out of the place or get tired of bricks coming through the window. Nobody in town cares what the law says about all of it, nor do they mind what the Ministry of Propaganda thinks of them. But the end result is that the racial purity of the town is preserved.
I am arguing for Separation (consisting of some combination of secession, panarchy, nullification, subsidiarity, vigilance committees, and other such examples of noncooperation.
Dino: I wouldn’t label what you’re describing as Latin, so much as it is the reality of living under an occupied and hostile force. As you note, pay lip service when absolutely necessary, pay sufficient taxes to keep the authorities off your neck, but subvert whatever you can, take whatever payback you can get, cheat whenever possible, and always remember your people come first. And living in a rural area – on or off grid – is always an excellent idea. Further away from the government’s large power centers and its diverse circuses.
One can argue for conserving ideas or conserving people. I think Zman has made this point in several prior essays. This thread goes all the way back to Hegel and Carl Schmitt. There’s no politics without the classic “friend/enemy” distinction.
I would prefer that these “new Right” guys talk about friends/enemies rather than engage in all the intellectual blather about political theory. I like theory as much as the next guy, perhaps even more, but it’s just obvious the US is way past the point of being saved by theory. As Zman wrote so cleverly the other day, Americans are only bound together by a series of economic transactions. Clearly this is not enough to sustain the people.
The practical issues that always get people killed come down to the “friend/enemy” thing. Tough-talking Poles and Ukrainians are possibly going to get us all killed. Since when are these people my friends? Who decided? I’m not interested in befriending unskilled, alien-culture immigrants either. Who decided for me?
Would I prefer a Catholic monarch ruling by divine right? Maybe, but who cares when the barbarians are at the freaking gate and some distant war in Scythia is possibly going to get us killed.
> The practical issues that always get people killed come down to the “friend/enemy” thing
Once people on the right stop caring about norms and abstractions of government and embrace the philosophy of “whatever gets my guy in power”, things will radically shift, and we can hire one of these guys to write the philosophical justification after we win.
Chet: That’s it in a nutshell. All this theorizing comes after we win. And as long as we always keep front and center what we’re fighting for – White people and a White future.
Indeed.
Power first. Rules later.
Its been that way by conquest for the entire human history.
Until people accept that, they are going to suffer the fate of the bison herds getting slaughtered by the new arrivals picking them off from the outside in, until they were none.
“(Yarvin’s) style was something like a stream of consciousness while playing an on-line role playing game. It was elite condescension for those who imagined themselves elite.”
The elite condescension and LARPing are Yarvin signatures. When Tucker Carlson interviewed Yarvin, the main takeaway was an unrealistic view of the empty, pathetic lives people in D.C. lead, which Moldbug apparently thinks are spectacular and the pinnacle of Western existence. Anyone tangentially familiar with that town but not part of it laughed, except for Carlson, who seemed to accept the false premise. Maybe a mainstream interviewer couldn’t reply that D.C. is a shithole populated by parasites and geriatric retards, dunno. Carlson may even agree with Yarvin’s distorted perceptions because he also is a product of that company town.
Your point about the meaningless of any movement that does not directly address The Crisis, demographic replacement, is spot on. I’m not even certain at this point there is a valid Left/Right dichotomy since the overriding issues are the blank slate and demographics in general. Case in point was the 180-page manifesto the New York shooter penned. While the guy seemed to have mental problems, the lucid, well-written tract boils down to a race realist perspective from a leftist viewpoint and notes the inherent problem of the presence of the Tribe and racial minorities in European countries. The propaganda organs are torn about how to package the manifesto as a result. It is well worth a read.
Closing with Yarvin again, he certainly is right that participation in a rigged game is a certain way to lose. Putting aside his delusions and ethnic-based deceptions, that point is spot on. People need to concentrate on what comes next, not which puppet gets his or her turn.
I’m not even certain at this point there is a valid Left/Right dichotomy…
There isn’t.
Todays conservative was yesterdays progressive.
Almost no one is willing to reject the enlightenment premises that liberalism is built upon. (Even I cannot fully do so).
The current political dichotomy is really an insider/outsider one, not a left-right one. It’s hard for people to see that through the strum and drang of daily political fighting and indoctrination.
Agreed. As I wrote in response to you above, while it seems alien as a Heritage American, withdrawal from the system rather than working and seeing things through and from an ideological prism is the proper response and perhaps the only response. Take, give as little as possible, and conduct your life outside the system as much as possible.
I just don’t see how we get past the demographic issue. Western society has been propagandized and polluted for so long now about the goodness of equality, diversity and inclusion that even a forced reset may not be able to wipe that s*** out of the minds of the White race. We’re simply not going to be allowed to go our own way without a hell of a fight, most likely.
uNt-
The visual evidence I witness in my little corner of the world totally agrees with your points.
the reason no one talks about demographics etc is that those topics are central pillars of the current regime’s political ideology. it is not safe to do so. but those pillars are also why the current regime is near collapse, as mud people corrupt and destroy anything they touch. once fedgov finishes dying, people will be free to speak of the obvious truths regarding the previously forbidden subjects.
The regime is a long, long way from dying. POTATUS is shuffling off to Buffalo to cement the Narrative, i.e. If you’re White you’re the enemy of Our Democracy.
Young White males: “When you ain’t got nothing you got nothing to lose.” Just what the Leviathan ordered.
There is little need for a New Right unless it is willing speak to demographics and everything that flows from it.
They aren’t there yet, but I notice that every new iteration of right wing movements seems to creep a little closer to it. Maybe in 20-30 years one will come along that manages to sneak up on it.
Martin Armstrong’s Socrates program forecasts breakup around 2030-2032. Balkanization, sovereign collapse of the USSA.
You probably are right about this timeline. The Fabian socialists took about a century to get us to this point. I anticipate a century of effort to reverse it.
Although, it must be said, sometimes in chemistry can happen really quickly.
Sometimes in chemistry A PHSE CHANGE can happen quickly.
Phase change. Jeez.
Bruno: I regretfully but sincerely doubt there will be sufficient White people (particularly of fertile and/or fighting age) left in 20-30 years. Even if you believe so, work as if the fight is tomorrow regardless of when things actually fall apart. Don’t wait for a political or ideological prophet before trying to detach from and destroy the system while rebuilding in parallel.
White people, when they work in concert, can take on almost comers. Even at great numerical disadvantage. Colonialism and the colonial wars taught us that much. The only real rivals on the field were the Japanese, after they modernized. There are some refinements (Don’t get involved in a land war in Asia, as that places a premium on infantry.) Mostly, European armies cut through their non-white opponents like a hot knife through butter.
So, keep the invasions of the Chinese mainland to a minimum, focus on taking back N America and Europe, and we can make it happen.