Does Anyone Really Believe the Dogma?

Consider.

Did you ever notice that people in Der Movement never actually follow through the logical consequences of their beliefs and/or that they always make unprincipled exceptions?

For example, there are Nutzis who believe two things:

1. Ancestry testing is absolutely accurate and precise and should be interpreted literally

2. The “one-drop” rule

If they really believe both items, then they’d have to conclude that both Richard Spencer and Greg Johnson are “non-White.”  But no one (insofar as I know) has argued that; therefore (with the exception of the nitwit who harassed Cobb), no one really believes those two things, at least not in combination.

There are people who suggest, or imply, that Spencer’s (soon-to-be-ex) wife, as a Russian-Georgian*, is “non-White.”  If they really believe that, then they must believe that Spencer was involved in an inter-racial marriage and has mixed-race children, no different from Derbyshire.  But, I have not read anyone – at least any serious commentator that I remember – who argued that.  Therefore, they cannot really believe that a Russian-Georgian should be considered “non-White.”  I could also mention those "activists" who have the cognitive dissonance of thinking that Julius Evola is, at the same time, both a great White Traditionalist thinker and a non-White; that is the same principle of confusion.

Speaking of Derbyshire, we have people who declare themselves opposed to racial inter-marriage but are great pals with “the Derb.”

Digging deeper in that direction, there are folks in Der Movement who believe that anyone who has ever even just dated a non-White is a “race traitor” who deserves “The Day of the Rope," but the fact that you have prominent Alt Right figures with a history of dating East Asians apparently does not bother those folks at all.

Now, with the exception of Derbyshire – who I truly despise – none of the above is meant as a criticism of the people involved, particularly since – with the exception of opposition to racial inter-marriage – I don’t not believe in or promote the other memes in question.  My point is that most in Der Movement must not really believe in those memes either, since they never follow through on those beliefs in any way.  It’s all cant.  People go through the motions to spout official dogma without really believing in it.  And just as that scenario led to the demise of state communism in Eastern Europe, and just as it may eventually eat away at the multicultural premise, the idea of people reciting, like robots, ideas they do not really actually believe in, or at least understand or follow through on, may lead to the demise of Der Movement, Inc. as well

*Someone needs to tell Nina that Georgia is not part of Southern Europe – not historically or geographically and not politically or economically.  The ethnic and cultural composition of Southern Europe has been influenced by bidirectional inputs from the Mediterranean basin as well as from Northern and Central Europe – all inputs essentially lacking in Georgia.

Blackpilled

Enough is enough.

We’ve had the Steve King, James Watson, and Covington school fiascos – all underlining the sad state of Euro-America and the complete lack of any accomplishment of the “movement” since its inception.

Every day brings fresh evidence that Trump is an utter fraud, who hoodwinked a gullible White America and an equally gullible Alt Right.  We have a President who is, essentially, a semi-retarded grifter who tweets like a teenage girl, and who was almost literally worshipped, for years, by the Far Right.  And only Coulter has the integrity to publicly admit being wrong; all the others now shake their heads sadly about Trump, making believe that they never designated him as “the last chance for White America” and an “American Caesar” who was going to “stabilize the System through positive effects on White demographics.”  Down the memory hole with all of that!

Then, the other shoe drops about ancestry testing, after previous revelations about incompetent assays, bizarre and constantly shifting results, and online reports about “cooking the data” to spite “racists” (and the weak denials about that fall flat after what was done to Watson and Cobb)* – we now find out that even identical twins cannot get consistent results, and that 13% worth of ancestry can appear and disappear dependent on what company does the test or the version of test used.

Then we have the continued stupidity of the “movement,” ruminations about resurrecting the Alt Right (for the love of god, why?), outrageous gaslighting narratives about why all the purported promise of 2016 has fallen apart, coupled with utter delusion about “leaders” debating on whether or not we need to wait “another 50 years” for “victory.”

We have “leaders” whose “extreme vetted” meetings were infiltrated by anti-racist activists with transparent covers; in one case, the infiltrator was allowed to address a meeting with a speech about “the dangers of infiltration.”  Apparently, that individual wormed his way in because a UK activist who wears shorts to meetings and has rituals where Viking horns are blown and mead is drunk is racially infatuated with Scandinavians and the infiltrator was a Swede (and, by the way, is a homosexual as well).

Merkel is still in power in Germany, most nations signed off on the genocidal migration accord, and “European populism” – and “Brazilian populism” as well – is not in any real sense more successful or sustainable than the Trump fraud in the USA.

Meanwhile, any sane and honest reading of the news amply demonstrates that the “West” is in terminal decline, full of overweight, simple-minded sheeple, who either worship Negro behemoths running into each other on a football field (the men) or who post hysterical diatribes on social media because someone “fat-shamed” their yeast-infested lardass selves and they now need to vent their fury on the few remaining non-freaks in a irretrievably wrecked society (the women).

The situation is bad and getting worse, there is zero hope on the horizon, and reading about Der Movement is a purgative that rivals syrup of ipecac.

At least for the time being, I’m not going to be posting as much, certainly not every day as I’ve been doing, and I’m going to be - at least for now - reducing or eliminating my regular reading of vomit-inducing “movement” sites.

I’ll need to put more time and effort into IRL activities, while, with respect to activism, trying to see if a scientifically literate Yockeyian Movement can be started to replace the nonsense we have today.

To put it in Alt Right language – I’m completely and utterly Blackpilled.

*I do not believe that either Watson or Craig are 16% or 14% Negro.  If that is so, the “results” were either due to the utter incompetence of the tests used or fabrication of the “data” for political purposes.** Neither possibility builds confidence.  

Meanwhile, we read the following from LivingDNA:

The company is run by David Nicholson and Hannah Morden-Nicholson who saw an opportunity to show humanity that we are all made up of all of us, dissolving the concept of race through Ancestry DNA testing.

“Dissolving the concept of race through Ancestry DNA testing.”  Oh, I’m sure they’ll be real conservative in their admixture estimates, of that let us have no doubt!

The typically mature and thoughtful response of Type I Nutzis to the testing flim-flam can be read here.

**Those results are even more troubling when one considers that both Watson and Cobb derive from ethnies that are well represented in parental population samples. Therefore, if we assume the results are inaccurate, then more “innocent” explanations fall away, and we are left with test incompetence or company mendacity.

I have four sets of questions for ancestry testing companies:

1. Assume that ethnic English are used as the parental population defining “European.”  Individuals from which of the following groups would most likely test as being a very high percentage European – English, Greek or Russian?  What if the parental population for “European” was Greek instead?  What if it was Russian?

2. Assume that the parental population samples defining “English” were derived from 100 ethnic English individuals living in London (if that many still exist).  Who is more likely to test as “100% English” – the same London English used as the parental population, or completely different English individuals living in, say, Liverpool?

3. If customers observe their ancestry percentages fluctuating 10% or 15 % or 20% or more from one test to another, or even from one version of the same test to another, is there any objective basis currently available to us to decide which set of results are more accurate, precise, and definitive?

4. If at the 90% confidence level (that is still less than that typically used in the scientific literature), customers observe as much as, say, 25-50% “unassigned” ancestry (***), can they have any confidence that results at the lower confidence intervals are any more dependable than flipping a coin or rolling dice to choose between the top two or three likely outcomes?  Doesn’t such a high level of “unassigned” ancestry mean that the available parental populations are inadequate to determine for those customers results that have any reasonable statistical rigor whatsoever?

Since we do not expect to get any honest answers – or, likely, any answers at all – to these questions, I will answer them myself:

1. English, Greek, Russian.

2. The group from London.

3. No.

4. No, Yes.

*** I know some people whose “unassigned” ancestry at the 90% confidence level is only 2-3%, and I know other people who are up to 40-50% (!).  Obviously, the data (e.g. the default 50% confidence interval data) for these two sets of people are of completely different nature.  The former are based on a foundation of reasonably solid parental population representation and the latter are floating off in a realm of speculation, uncertainty, and a complete lack of any real accuracy and precision. One could even say it is irresponsible for a company to present data to the second group.  If you don’t have the parental population coverage for all of your customers, then go about obtaining it, rather than defrauding them with inaccurate nonsense.

Keep in mind that according to typical scientific standards, 90% is not really conservative at all, at least 95% is required. One wonders how much “unassigned” some folks will have at 95+% confidence levels?  50%” 60%? More?

Sunday in Der Movement

In der news.

All together now: Cuckadoodledoo!

Didn’t I warn you that this guy is a buffoon and a fraud?

The last chance for White America!  The God Emperor!

Spencer is correct: Trump as any sort of “change agent” is finished.  I could have told you that (and did) three and more years ago, but, hey, better late than never.

Hey, Ann, I could have told you all of that back in 2015.

Once again, Sallis is right.  Mainstreaming always fails because your more centrist position can always be co-opted by the System and/or by other, more moderate, populists.  If you stake out a radical position that truly represents what you are (or should be) about, then one of two things happen – either you distinguish yourself from the opposition and thus stand alone or you force the opposition to shift toward you, moving the so-called “Overton Window” in the proper direction.  As to the cries – “oh, you won’t’ win” – please tell me about the success of President Le Pen.  You should win or lose standing on principle, rather than lose as a compromised fraud.  At the very least, if you stand your ground, you know that any success is authentic and due to shifting people toward you, rather than vice versa.

Note to micks who still identify as “liberal Democrats” and who spite WASPs by identifying as “oppressed Hibernians in solidarity with People of Color.”

Watch this.  Of course, Greg Johnson was telling us it was really a “win” for Trump (and, implicitly, I suppose, for all of us), because those wonderful Republican “didn’t lose as badly as they could have.”

Reality here – not delusional debate about “when we will win our victory.” Things are bad and getting worse.  I assume the mindset of the “optimism crowd” – if we assume that they are sincere and not merely boosting their egos and cash flows – is that despair will lead to inaction and surrender, so we have to give people hope. Unfortunately, constant disappointment, and constantly dashed hopes, leads to disgust, and, yes, despair and inaction; falsely inflated hope that "all will be well” also can lead to inaction as people believe that “it’ll all work out in the end regardless of what I do or don’t do.”  Reality is best.

Kevin, if you are going to talk about gravity, it is churlish not to mention Einstein and General Relativity.

I’m no fan of Einstein or his ethny, but fair is fair.

Big surprise.

Sallis right again:

“I’m not surprised you’ll get different results from different companies,” Dr. Jennifer Raff, Assistant Professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Kansas told TechCrunch back in September. “They have their own proprietary info based on those samples. If one of them has lots of individuals from a particular region and the other company does not, you’re more likely to show up as having ancestry from that region whereas if the other company doesn’t have that data represented in their database, it’s going to show up as a different population.”

What the parental populations are is going to significantly affect the results.

This reminds me of a personal anecdote. A family I know – normies not Nutzis – asked me to take a look at some confusing ancestry data they got from a company that shall remain nameless.  No problem with paternity – child has 50% chromosome match with father as well as mother, etc.  The ancestry percentages for the child are very crudely plausible based on the parents. So far, fine as well as it goes.  But the chromosomal fragments do not match.  Thus, for example, the child inherits some percentage of ancestry “X” from the mother and not the father (who lacks it, according to the test). But, the mother’s “X” is on, say, chromosomes 3, 5,and 6 (I don’t remember the exact details) and the child’s “X “is on, say, chromosomes 10 and 16. That of course is at the lower confidence levels.  At the highest confidence level, all of those chromosome fragments are “unassigned.”  So, putting aside a historically novel medical finding of mass chromosomal translocations resulting in a normal child (a probability roughly equal to picking one specific atom out of all those in the observable universe), we are left with the reality that the chromosome fragment identifies at the low confidence intervals are being assigned with the precision of a coin flip.  A fragment may be “X” but very likely could be “Y.”  Or maybe the father actually has “X” – and this is where the child is getting it – but the father’s chromosome fragment is instead labeled “Y” at the low confidence interval and “unassigned” at the higher.  Thus, maybe it is really the father who has “X” at the chromosome fragments that would match the child but the test is assigning those fragments to a different ancestry, while perhaps the mother has little or no “X” at all. If you take the low confidence level data at face value, then this all makes no biological sense at all. Recombination normally takes place between homologous chromosomes, not between non-homologous ones.

These companies would be better served to just estimate ancestry from SNP frequency data and/or genome-wide correlations of SNP frequencies (genetic integration) rather than making low probability guestimates of chromosome fragment identity.  However, the latter method is I suppose better for telling crazed cat ladies that they are descended from Pocahontas, so there’s that.

In addition, the companies' "timeline" estimates are ludicrous, and cannot be used to "time" admixture, even if the admixture is real and not artefactual.  Putting aside the question as to whether the chromosome fragments are properly identified to begin with, and whether the boundaries between purported different ancestral fragments are also properly identified, an important point is being missed (many academic population geneticists make the same possibly incorrect assumptions).  In a large panmictic population, certainly over time you'll have sufficient scrambling of ancestries so that in an individuals there will be sufficient possibility for meiotic recombination to mix fragments between homologous chromosomes and this breaks up ancestral blocs over time, allowing for an estimation of the arrival of the intrusive elements. But if a small population was interbreeding in isolated communities, then it is possible to have individuals with very high ancestral proportions of the original intrusive stocks, and given mating over time between such individuals any exchanges of chromosome fragments would likely be between fragments of like ancestry.  So large blocs of a given ancestry can be maintained over time, and only start degrading in size relatively recently, given increased human movement.  But let's not have real life possibilities interfere with the business model.  Send in the shekels!  Pocahontas awaits!

Also see this.

And this.

And this.

How any of this is any better than DNAPrint (was flawed as well) is unclear to me.

Testing Follies 2019

I’ve finally lost all confidence in the commercially available “state of the art.”

A recent article I just discovered.  This is just too much.

Excerpts, emphasis added:

To check out the accuracy of these test kits, Charlsie Agro – who fronts Canadian telly watchdog show Marketplace – and her identical twin sister Carly used them to submit their DNA to five separate consumer-grade genetic-testing outfits, and compared their results.

And their results were surprisingly varied. For one thing, the tests couldn't agree on where exactly their ancestors actually physically came from. Test kit supplier 23andMe reckoned the twins are about 40 per cent Italian, and 25 per cent Eastern European; AncestryDNA said they are about 40 per cent Russia or Eastern European, and 30 per cent Italian; and MyHeritageDNA concluded are about 60 per cent Balkan, and 20 per cent Greek.

As bad as that is, it gets worse.

Two of the tests reported that the twins had no Middle Eastern ancestry, while the three others did, with FamilyTreeDNA saying 13 per cent of their sample matched with the region.

13% vs 0%!  I need to rethink my previous comments in which I stated that anything less than 10% was questionable; now I’ll put that up to, say, 20%. Maybe 25%.  Or maybe anything less than majority ancestry.  Or maybe not even that – in the case described above, the tests could not even agree on what the predominant ethnic ancestry was.  It would seem therefore that the only dependable metric for these tests is what the majority racial-continental ancestry is – and everything after that is a crapshoot (possibly depending on parental populations, see below).  Has anything improved since DNAPrint 15+ years ago?  

On top of this, each test couldn't quite agree on the percentages between the sisters, which is odd because the twins share a single genetic profile.

Identical twins for godssakes!  We are not talking about siblings, who may have inherited different ancestral components from the parents, but identical twins!   A useful control would have been to have the same twin submit the sample twice.  Would the results have been anything consistently close even then?  

23andMe I’ve completely lost confidence in at this point and the other tests named in this article do not seem to be much better. I may still look into some of these other ones in more detail, to see if more parental populations improve results, but given what’s reported here it doesn’t seem promising.  But we’ll see. It may be a more accurate (but not more precise?) version of nonsense.  Improved nonsense, if you will.

Another basic problem, which I’ve written about before, and that may be contributing to differences between tests, is how different ancestral components are labelled. This may also be the reason why folks online are complaining about how their ancestral percentages change markedly when a test gets “updated.”  What one test, or version of a test, labels as “ancestry X” may be labeled by another test or test version as “ancestry Y” – even though of course the actual gene sequences do not change.  Different nomenclature, different algorithms, different parental populations end up giving inconsistent and sometimes absurd results.  DNAPrint was criticized - with justification – when different versions of the test gave radically different results to the same customers; the same principle applies here.  

I won’t even repeat discussing in detail the retardation of “50% confidence levels.”  That is essentially an educated guess. That’s also related to the parental population problem I think. One test of that hypothesis is whether a person’s percentage of “unknown ancestry” markedly increases as the chosen confidence interval increases.  If so, there is obviously a lack of parental population coverage for that customer, and the company is making, at best, an educated guess as to what certain haplotypes represent, based on whatever parental samples they happen to have in their database, how their algorithm works – and how they decide what to name a particular ancestry based on some criterion or another.

It would follow that those tests that use the greatest number and variety of parental populations would provide the most accurate results (one still wonders about precision). Most people do not understand the importance of parental population choice.  We can take this to an absurd extreme for the purposes of illustration.  Assume Joe Schmoe is used as the parental sample for population X.  If we then take Joe’s DNA and test it against the metrics of X – established with Joe’s own DNA – then in theory Joe will test out as “100% X.”  He’s being compared to himself.  Although given what is described above for the Agro sisters, one wonders if every time Joe is tested his values would markedly fluctuate 10-15 % (or more).  Even with a lack of precision, one would assume accuracy of ancestral determinations would be optimized with an increasing number of parental populations (assuming the samples used are actually indigenous representatives).

Ultimately however, the value of any of these tests is the raw genetic data, which can be plugged into genetic kinship assays, to get a more objective measurement of genetic relatedness and genetic interests.  The rest of this is borderline useless. I note for the record that none of these companies (that I know of) offers genetic kinship analysis as part of their metrics.  A telling omission.  Why not give that data?  As far as biopolitics goes, with respect to EGI, the only metric of importance is genetic kinship.  And again, that can be calculated from raw data, bypassing the nonsense and political biases of companies.

Ancestry got back to us with a long statement that did not address any specific points raised by the Marketplace twins report. "Genomics is advancing rapidly, and as an industry leader Ancestry remains committed to investing in and creating ‘what’s next’," was the most coherent sentence a spokesperson could give us.

“An industry leader” – a left-handed self-compliment.

A spokesperson for 23andMe declined to comment on the record.

Surprise!  Did they say anything off the record?

Friday News

In der news.

Spencer podcast.

I have some comments to make about the discussion at the beginning of the podcast, which was addressing “movement” critics, of which I am one.

Some points made I agree with, particularly concerning the stupidity of people celebrating Spencer’s failures; Spencer is correct in noting that the System doesn’t make distinctions – thus, Spencer’s failures are indeed seen as representative of the totality of White racial activism.  However, Spencer should reflect upon this – one reason why some people are so critical of Spencer, and are annoyed at him for his errors, is because those errors harm us all. Spencer can’t have it both ways – on the one hand saying that the failure of one (himself) affects all, and then, on the other hand, dodging responsibility for harming the “movement,” and instead complaining about his critics.

There are three major disingenuous and/or dishonest points made:

1. The critics are people who “are now blackpilled longer than they were redpilled” – all are recent activists who have become disenchanted.  Well, in my case, I am coming on a quarter-century, 25 years, a full generation, of racial activism. I for one have become completely disgusted with the “movement” from many years of experience – the same mistakes made over and over again, the stupid fossilized dogma, the endless cycle of failure and delusion. Other critics or skeptics of Spencer and/or the Alt Right in general, people like Johnson, Taylor, and Strom are all long-term activists. So, this point is plain wrong.

2. People may have bad motives.  Maybe some, but all of the people named above, whether I agree or disagree with them, are, in my opinion, sincere.  The Pepe-Kek crew should contemplate the possibility that not all – or even most – of their critics are insincere, are acting from bad motives.

3. No one has done better.  That’s true – but that is only relevant to the other affirmative action beneficiaries. Only those people seriously in the running for “movement leadership” – people who fit the “one of the boys” profile of “movement” acceptability – have on themselves the responsibility of proving themselves capable of being leaders. Other people are simply bloggers, commentators, analysts, etc. – in some cases restricted to those roles not by choice – and as such they should be judged by the criterion of leadership.  But I’ll agree – the Quota Queen crew have not taken advantage of Spencer’s absence from the stage to get anything meaningful accomplished. That gets back to point 1 – I have good reasons to be disgusted by Der Movement and its endless failures.

More from the podcast: An Internet Bill of Rights is not enough – we need POPA.

And, yes, we need to stop with the Man on White Horse Syndrome.

Moving on:

See this.

Greg Conte Twitter, 1/24/19:

Account suspended

Does Twitter follow Der Movement’s affirmative action policy with respect to who is allowed to have an account?  No wops allowed!  

The “down payment.”

The most self-non-aware tweet in human Twitter history.

Ted Sallis: White Tribal Leader

A racialist shaman.

Based Anglo' Uber

@URefollow

 Gonna start referring to every old white person as "white tribal elders"

Ted Sallis: White tribal elder.  My new byline!  Get used to it!

Read this.

Sarah Beattie, a writer for Saturday Night Life, tweeted, “I will blow whoever manages to punch that maga kid in the face.”

They got a lawyer!  Whitepill, as the Alt Right jackasses would say. Suing is great but not enough. All the folks who are/were calling for these children to be punched – including yeastbucket Sarah Beattie offering a blowjob to anyone who’d punch that boy in the face - they are, it seems to me, all obviously guilty of incitement to violence. They are publicly calling for a teenager to be physically attacked, and in some cases are offering sexual services in exchange. Press charges.  Force the police to make arrests.   And isn’t offering a sex act in exchange for goods or services (in this case, solicitation for assault and battery) prostitution?  Two publicly declared illegal acts in one tweet. Time to send New York’s finest to raid SNL offices. Perpwalk time for Sarah Beattie.  Incitement to violence. Solicitation to prostitution.

Zman:

The great Greg Cochran will often point out that a smart person is someone who says smart things, but more important, they don’t say many dumb things.

By that criterion, Greg Cochran is an idiot.  As is Zman.  If you want any evidence that the universe is a random place, with merciless indifference to what is right and wrong, consider that a good man and real scientist like Harpending is dead, while Cochran is very much still with us.  Yes, I know, Harpending collaborated with Cochran.  No one is perfect; everyone makes errors.  Look at all the “movement” “leaders” I collaborated with in the past and for which I now regret.  All that doesn’t alter the fact that in a just universe, the “today who is alive or dead pattern” would be altered.

Swallow Your Blackpill, 1/23/19

Let’s consider reality.

Watch this.

I haven’t said anything so far about the Covington Catholic School incident, but let me say this. This incident, coming so soon after the James Watson and Steve King fiascos, demonstrate very clearly that Whites are a pathetic, powerless, subaltern caste who are hated and despised by the entire System, and who have defenders, no supporters, no leaders.  Decade after decade the “movement” has preened and pontificated, churned through millions of dollars and through the lives of its supporters, and more recently championed the Presidency of a vulgar fraud (When is that Covington invite to the White House coming Donny?  Will you invite some of your Antifa friends there as well, to punch these innocent children?  Maybe little Jeff would like to do it?). The end result: Whites are more of a disenfranchised, humiliated, oppressed population now than ever before.  And the outrageously incompetent leaders have the nerve – shall we say the chutzpah – to debate among themselves “when our victory will be achieved.”  Are they really that delusional, or are they merely protecting their reputations and their cash flows?

And why don’t the Covington boys get a nice lawyer and sue all those celebrities openly calling for attacks on children, and sue Twitter for allowing it (and for maintaining all those “blue check marks”), while others are deplatformed simply for expressing legitimate political opinions?

Aren’t there any lawyers willing to take the case?  Or is that – the lack thereof - another indication of the “untouchable” status of Whites in American today? 

Hey, Greg, here’s some female "agency” for you.

And some more.

Daniels is the archetypal J Richards poster girl - blonde, man-jawed, big-boned, and floppy-breasted.  And of course, if you disagreed with Richards’ standards of female beauty, then you were “insane.”  That was during the rapid decline phase of Majority Rights, a phase that Counter-Currents is currently enjoying.

In any case, to me, Daniels has all the sex appeal of warmed-over roadkill, but Trump apparently was favorably impressed at one point in time.  There’s no accounting for taste, I suppose.

I was annoyed recently reading about crazed feminists accusing Gene Wolfe (of all people!) of being a “misogynist” who is “insensitive” to yeastbucket feelings because his female characters are “not well formed” and some of his male characters (Severian I suppose) sometimes treat milady with less than beta obsequious behavior.  This is the same Gene Wolfe who was devoted to his wife and who converted to Catholicism – becoming a devout practitioner of that religion – for his wife’s sake.  That’s the same Gene Wolfe whose books are actually full of interesting female characters.  But you can’t please SJW scum.  I also remember some retards accusing Wolfe of “anti-Asian racism” because they stupidly thought that the robot-like “Ascians” were “Asians,” while they clearly are the population of a far-future America. In The Book of the New Sun, the “Xanthic lands” are where Asia is or was – The Commonwealth is in South America; Ascia is in North America.  But I assume the SJWs would find the word “Xanthic” offensive as well.  After all, we can call Europeans “White” but we cannot call East Asians “Yellow.”

Talking about Wolfe always reminds me of my other favorite sci-fi writer, Jack Vance, whose healthy attitudes towards milady were described here, and also described here.

In addition, a young and attractive woman in Cugel’s Saga is described thus:

…gifted with a buxom chest and robust little haunches while still retaining a slender and flexible waist…

Cugel is “worse” than his literary “descendant” Severian in how he treats milady.  Although sometimes Cugel is insulted, tricked, and mistreated by cunning females, he also often gets back at them very well, including incidents of forced sex, which in The Eyes of the Overworld is given the euphemism “couching.”

I am of course not in any way condoning or supporting the behavior so depicted – of course the attitude of men toward women must be that of beta orbiter groveling, lickspittle admiration, and the idea that every slutty landwhale reeking of festering yeast is a potential Joan of Arc leading us to deliverance.  But, still, Vance is amusing, no?

And in contrast to “The Ring” and other Tolkien crap, Vance presents to us the “Pectoral Sky-break Spatterlight” that I definitely greatly prefer.  The former is a Type I literary artifact; the latter, Type II.

One less for Derbyshire.

Biden and Der Stupidity

Mocking ridicule is always good for deconstruction.

First – hey, dumb mick-limey-frog Joe Biden, go fuck yourself.

This guy appears at something hosted by Al “Freddy Market Massacre Tawana Brawley Greek Homos” Sharpton, a paragon of justice, and he has the nerve to lecture Whites about their racism?

Maybe Joe, well known for being a buffoon rivaling Trump, can explain something to us. On the one hand, Whites are racists, tormenting the poor Negro. Yet, on the other hand, Negroes clamor to immigrate to majority White nations including the USA, Negroes clamor to move into White neighborhoods, use White institutions, the entire “holiday” you were groveling about was essentially focused on “integrating” Negroes and Whites together.  Does any of this make sense to you?  You must believe that Whites are not racists, Negroes are deranged masochists, and/or Negroes are so utterly incompetent at running their own affairs that they are willing to subject themselves to “White racism” in order to enjoy the fruits of societies that Whites have built – societies that the Negro can only destroy.

We await your response Joe – whenever you are done groping girls.

Second, we have the retarded wopess Milano, queen of plastic surgery, whose career peaked with “Commando” and has been downhill ever since.

Destiny of Angels.  I remember reading someone long ago – it might have been Strom – cautioning against an unrealistic too-positive view of modern Whites, with a cross-section of Walmart customers being a more representative sample of current Whites.

Behold: Cuckadoodledoo!

Roissy:

If so, the left wing fad for a meat-free, grain-heavy diet to “save the earth” might wind up making all of us unhealthier, suffering bleeding gums and seizing hearts.

Rewritten:

If so, the gamester wing fad for a grain-free, meat-heavy diet to “be a jackass" might wind up making all of us unhealthier, suffering cancer and seizing bowels.

Seriously though, the Romans ate a carb-heavy diet of grains, fruits, and vegetables, yet had good teeth, because their diet was low in extra sugar (and high in fiber).

Roissy commentator:

Some have suggested fiber is actually bad for you. If you are going to eat plants eat fruit, fruit wants to be eaten, all other plants are poison.

Dat Right!  Dat Dere Broccoli, it be poison!  But that apple, he be begging – “eat me.”

Another idiot listed “olive oil” as a source of fiber.  How about a beefsteak as well?  Candy corn and Mountain Dew will make you real regular!

Then:

Ive gotten two back to back colds since going off low carb diet in over the holidays. Went several years with neither carbs nor colds

Yes sir!  That’s hardcore epidemiology right there!

And then:

I’m fair skinned, cutting grains upped my resistance to sunburns many times over.

Keep it up.  Soon, you’ll be able to walk along the surface of the sun, wearing a tank top and shorts. An experience rich in Vitamin D!

Also:

Jay in DC

As a half wop it greatly pains me that the once bad ass Bobby DeNiro turned out to be a moonbat lefty race cuck faggot. I’m sure his ancestors are rolling in their collective grave.

Well, “Bobby DeNiro” is only a quarter wop, so maybe his racial and social views can be laid on someone else’s doorstep?

Francis Parker Yockey would have been disgusted by Counter-Currents’ shilling for ethnonationalism.

That sound you hear is the HBDers' weeping.

Executive summary: Der Movement is a pathetic joke, full of freaks, misfits, and morons, and the salvation of the White race will be possible only after Der Movement is completely deconstructed and dismantled, and replaced by a New Movement of rationality, sanity, and vision.  

Delenda est Der Movement.

Soak the Rich?

In a word, yes.

There’s some difference of opinion about economic issues in Der Movement, between what I would call the populist wing and the laissez-faire wing.  The former group would in general support, at minimum, a mixed-economy, or in more extreme cases, a corporatist or national socialist economic regime. These right-wing populists tend to support such economic strategies such as social credit, citizen’s dividend, guaranteed minimum income, a cap on salaries, a sharply progressive income tax, single-payer healthcare, and a racial interests-first modulation of the economy.  The more extreme members of this group would like to confiscate the wealth of aracial and anti-White wealthy Whites (never mind non-Whites) and send the ex-wealthy race traitors to work camps.

The latter group are more consistent with the typical hyper-capitalist amen corner of global capital represented by the Chamber of Commerce puppets of the GOP.  This wing preaches unrestricted free market policies, predatory capitalism, “sweet business deals,” and rail against social welfare protections even for their own race by using the pejorative label “socialism” (that is supposed to scare us away from any policies that benefit the mass of our people as opposed to the wealthy few).This latter wing tell us that attacks on the wealthy are based on “envy.”

I identify with the former group.  I have discussed economics in previous posts, but here I will focus on responding to three arguments that the laissez-faire stepandfetchits make in defense of the fatcats feeding like maggots on the corpse of America.

1. The wealthy earn their money.  To some extent yes, and to that extent of course productive people should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of their labor.  But the problem is that in a free market economy, earnings are based on what the market will bear, on the basis of pure supply and demand.  So, if there is a demand for athletic entertainment and if the supply of highly-skilled athletes is low, then we observe the spectacle of baseball players earning $30 million per year, all for hitting a little white ball with a wooden stick. Is that earning a salary through productivity that boosts societal good?  Is the market always right?  Can there not be inefficiencies in the market?  Even pro-capitalist economists admit that possibility.

Did the Sackler family earn their wealth in a manner we would approve of?  No doubt there were many “sweet business deals” that eventually led to the degeneration of White America via opioids – is that merely fair free market economics?  Is it a fair earning for an actor to get millions of dollars for a movie or for some episodes of a TV series?  We have businessmen who loot the economy, CEOs who profit while jobs are outsourced and their company goes bankrupt, lawyers who twist and distort the legal system in ways the founders never intended…all “earning their money?”  Are they “investing in the economy” or merely investing in themselves?  If their consumerism “boosts GDP” who benefits?  The wealthy and the Chinese who sell us all the junk the wealthy (and we) consume?  Is a growing GDP the measure of a healthy society?

2. People need to be incentivized to be productive, so they must be allowed to have theoretically unlimited earnings; we cannot impose values on people as to what their desire (read: greed) for money should be in order to do “X, Y, Z” that is beneficial for society, or at least the economy.  We are told that the wealthy would not have become wealthy to begin with if they weren’t selfish and greedy. Perhaps, but an intelligent and disciplined person should have limits.  We’ll be told that we cannot measure another person’s greed, and that we cannot know what level of compensation would be required to incentivize another person to strive in ways that enhance the public good. Well, let’s try anyway.  Let’s consider marginal utility.  How much do you need?  Greg Johnson once proposed a one million dollar per year salary cap (adjust for inflation), and I think that is reasonable.  Is more really necessary?  At what point is a $30 million salary necessary?  How much more enjoyment will they get from that thirtieth million, compared to the societal good that can be accrued if the excess money is utilized in ways that benefit race, people, and nation?  If a person needs an ever-expanding salary to do their job well and be satisfied, then there is something wrong with their character, and with the character of the broader society in which they live and work.  At what point does a minute gain in satisfaction – in many cases nothing more than an ego-boost – justify the concentration of fiscal resources in the hands of a few, a few who cannot possibly utilize that money in a manner that is reasonably necessary for judicious and balanced life satisfaction?

And there is the old, crude yet true, statement: Don’t shit where you eat.  At some point, the shenanigans of the selfish wealthy destabilize society to an extent that it puts the long term well-being of the wealthy themselves into question.   Again - marginal utility. And here we get into negative marginal utility.  If you can have a one billion net worth and enjoy it in a stable society or wreck that society in pursuit of ten billion, is it worth it to choose the latter?  We go back to the excuses made above – “if they weren’t greedy they wouldn’t have made one billion to begin with” and “who are you to say where a person’s economic striving should end?”  I respond that if a person can make one billion by being a selfish destroyer then something is wrong with the economy and that the striving should end at the point where the organic solidarity of the society is wrecked, to the detriment of most, if not all.

3. The wealthy can do what they want with their money and/or they do societal good with it.  Is unbridled hedonism and conspicuous consumption a societal good? How about rent-seeking behavior to influence the political process so that billionaires can make some more billions off the backs of the dispossessed American worker? What about rent-seeking support for cheap labor, both insourced via mass migration or outsourced via globalist economics?  What about open support for anti-White causes – something many, many wealthy Whites do?  How many wealthy Whites do we know who support pro-White causes?  Other than Regnery, I can’t think of a single one.  They can do what they want with their money?  No, not when “doing what they want” is socially and racially destructive.  Or illegal or immoral. Would we say it is OK for the wealthy to, say, buy child sex slaves?  Obviously not.  There are limits to “doing what you want.” 

Obviously, I have no problem with Whites who accumulate wealth through hard work, disciplined saving, and prudent investing – the White upper middle class. I have no problem with Whites who are very wealthy through talent, productivity, and inventiveness. Of course, in both cases, the “no problem” depends upon that those in question were not indulging in aracial hedonism, greedy rent-seeking, or, worse, explicit support for anti-White causes - there I would indeed have a problem.  But otherwise, and even more so, if the well-off Whites were pro-White to some degree or another, they deserve their wealth, we should celebrate their success, and they should enjoy that success and keep their earnings.

But as regards the rest – the hedonists, the greedy, the rent-seekers, the anti-Whites – after “the revolution” they should be dragged out of their mansions, their wealth and assets confiscated, and if they are lucky, they will be allowed to live and make use of themselves doing forced hard labor in work camps.  Balancing the books, and all that.

Sunday Movement Roundup

Race and Der Movement.

“Based” Poland!  Visegrad! Ethnonationalism!

Wrong, wrong, they’re always wrong.

And, hey, I thought that Poles are “ethnocentric ‘Outer Hajnal’ Eastern Europeans.”  What happened? Maybe, just maybe (consider it) all of this “Hajnal line” nonsense is just more HBD flim-flam designed to divide Europeans against each other.  Yes, there are biocultural-behavioral differences among Europeans, but these are gradients, not sharp distinctions.  Poles may be a bit more on the ethnocentric spectrum than, say, Swedes (which is not saying much), but it obviously doesn’t protect them from the blowback from multiracial globalism.  All of this HBD nonsense would never have gone anywhere among racial activists if it wasn’t for the fossilized dogma and ethnic fetishism of the Type I retards of Der Movement. They have a lot to answer for.

One theme here recently is how HBDers try to appeal to Type I ethnic fetishists in order to derail White nationalism.  The emphasis on “David Reich’s data say Aryans invaded India” is one such example – because the word “Aryan” means different things to different people. To legitimate scholars, essentially, the ANI component in modern Indians is from Central Asian steppe people who were most likely more akin to modern Iranians than to anything else.  To Der Movement, it all means “blonde Nordics built the Taj Mahal.”  The HBDers are aware of, and exploit, these differences in perception.  

See this.

Spencer criticizes Puritans (who he calls “the worst people of the White race” – “horrible people”) - criticizing a major segment of America’s New England founders.  What’s interesting is that someone like myself who has never made any comments like that was wrongly accused of “bashing the founders” – while I don’t recall anyone criticizing Spencer for actually – and vehemently – doing such bashing.  Those affirmative action protections for “movement leaders” are really airtight, huh?

I agree with Spencer about pessimism being more realistic than airhead optimism. Is the King of Hobbits and the King of Racial Phenotype listening?

Is Spencer’s personal problems making him more Russia-skeptical?

Let’s not stereotype Italians, Richie, it’s not all olive oil.  The relevance of comparing the economies of Russia and Italy is that Russia is much larger than Italy in land mass and population, Russia is resource-rich while Italy is resource-poor, and Russia is a major military power while Italy obviously is not.

I agree with the fellow (Jason I believe his name is) who said non-White anti-White racism is based on envy, and I have written on this before.  And I agree on the description of anti-White Whites as well – intra-racial envy.

It’s all about punishment and revenge.  And the comparison between numbers is true with respect to racial accomplishment.  Compare, for example, some of the swarthoid regions of Europe with China – the former having accomplished more for human progress than the latter despite the latter having 1-2 (or more) orders of magnitude more people.  We can productively enrage the HBDers with this.  I can think of one small area that between the world wars presented to us Evola, Gentile, Majorana, and Pirandello (Cannizzaro died in 1910) – and then we have China, with a population a couple of hundred times larger, which at that time produced who?  Mao?  

I’ll say that overall that was a good podcast and I note that Spencer is behaving somewhat more mature with these people compared to the Alexandria VA-Brewery Boys crowd – until near the end, when he started behaving like a Beavis-and-Butthead Alt Right jackass again.  He almost made it…too bad he couldn’t go the distance. Maybe next time.

The voice of WN 3.0, right Greg? How can we trust Johnson’s judgment?  About the “voices of WN 3.0” or about anything else, including Trump?  At least now Spencer is turning against Trump, while Counter-Currents regaled us about how the mid-term elections were really a win for their tin god, and scolded any of us who thought otherwise.

WWI causes:

Nationalism

Allied to this growing militarism was an intense nationalism in most of the Great powers. Weltpolitik or the desire for world power status was very popular in Germany. The French desire for revenge over Alsace and Lorraine was very strong. In Britain Imperialism and support for the Empire was very evident. This nationalism meant that there was little resistance to war in these countries. Many welcomed what they thought would be a short, victorious war. For example the outbreak of war was greeted by cheering crowds in Berlin, Vienna and Paris. As A P J Taylor wrote “the people of Europe leapt willingly into war.”

Durocher:

More importantly, the EU was not in fact the source of Britain’s demographic problems. True, the indigenous English and Celts of Britain are being replaced by virtue of the EU’s free movement of people, but mostly by European migrants. For the most part, these are quite assimilable and hard-working, and represent relative demographic gain…British patriots need to keep their eye on the ball: national sovereignty, good relations with their fellow Europeans, and, above all, keeping Britain British!

So – we will keep “Britain British” by replacing native Britons with Poles and Romanians?

Behold the pathetic loser.  Exchange real-time amnesty for invasive scum in exchange for a “wall” that likely won’t be built or that will be only modestly useful if actually built.  The Quota Kings have more testosterone than does The God Emperor.

We need today what Oliver described as The National Youth Alliance 50 years ago.

While I despise Welton, the following should make all of the “but, but, but…Joan of Arc” white knighters weep:

Males must not be ashamed of being males. The downside of being male is inseparable from the upside: the fact that it is men who have been responsible for pretty much anything of consequence ever accomplished by human race.

A picture for the ethnic fetishists.  All are prime candidates to be let into an “extreme vetted” “movement” meeting.  Especially the one third from left.  He’s from southern Sweden. The far south. Or maybe he's just a S. Italian immigrant?

Some possible Presidential/Vice-Presidential ticket combinations – all in jest of course:

Spencer/Conte

Spencer/Jorjani

Spencer/Johnson

Johnson/Parrott

Parrott/Heimbach

Duke/Hart

Taylor/Linder

Daniel S/Captain Chaos

McCulloch/Sallis….or…Sallis/McCulloch?

Unfortunately, the Williams/Covington ticket has been derailed by Covington’s death.