Odds and Ends, 1/29/20

More than one "moral cretin" in the "movement," I would say.

The moral cretin.  Emphasis added:

Ever notice how it is only the scoffers like Derbyshire who use terms like “a secretive cabal of elites”? I call this the “Joo mind control rayz lulz” technique; in academic circles, it’s known as a straw man argument – an argument your opponent creates out of whole cloth and attributes to you as if you made it, but chosen for its stupidity because your opponent is better at refuting the arguments he invents for you than the arguments you actually make. It’s a tell-tale sign of weakness.

But that’s not what I really find salient in John’s piece. What I find remarkable is that John thinks little old ladies taken in by confidence men deserve bankruptcy. His response to the plight of victims of fraud goes beyond the decadence and cowardice of indifference, to the open malice of schadenfreude. There’s really no way to make that kind of statement, and object to the crime of fraud, and remain morally consistent.

“I do feel some mild regret on behalf of my kids, who I suppose will spend some of their adult years in a continent-sized version of 1970s Lebanon or 1990s Yugoslavia or 1960s/70s/80s/90s/00s Congo/Sudan/Somalia/Ethiopia/Zimbabwe, but at least I’ve taught the little Derbs (him and her) how to use firearms.”

If John’s kids were full bearers of his ancestral legacy (instead of only half-bearers), he’d feel twice as much regret on their behalf. So that’s one up side to miscegenation – half the regret contemplating your children’s doom. Miscegenation and national ruin sound like the best match since “hey, you got your peanut butter in my chocolate!”

But John’s already signed off on fraud. Fraud victims deserve their fate. Is this sort of thinking indicative of the logic they teach in British public schools?

If you think I’m being too hard on the old lemon-stuffer, consider his articles on Kevin MacDonald’s work. This “fraud victims deserve it” line isn’t a new one for the Derb. It’s a consistent one.

Watch this.  So, fat people are both “jolly” and “extraverted” but also nasty with low impulse control.  Got it.  HBD!

By the way, how do these theories apply on a trans-racial basis?  After all, “well be-titted” East Asian females or thin “African-American” females are as rare as honest HBDers.  So, how do these ideas apply to races in which certain phenotypes are extremely rare?  Aren’t there plenty of fat neurotic Jews as well? How does that fit in?  Do we really believe that the association between ectomorphy and neuroticism (if it actually exists and is not a HBD fantasy) is because "neurotic people are nervous and don't eat so much?"  I thought being an ectomorph was essentially an innate somatotype and not merely due to "not eating so much." How can anyone take any of this drivel seriously?

This misses the point.  Even if Mishima was a paragon of Japanese traditionalist virtue, a neo-samurai hero, he’s still from a culture, a High Culture, a civilization, alien to the West. Even if you value “traditionalism” – and I do not – you can find representatives of that  paradigm authentic to your own European background.  Mishima – even with all of his (many) faults - is an interesting historical figure from a White rightist perspective, but that’s it. He’s an interesting figure and should be nothing more – to us. To Japanese rightists, he may be of existential importance, but that’s their business. This obsessive fetishizaiton of Mishima among the White Right is, frankly, bizarre and disconcerting.

Sigh…read this.  Obviously, I side with Taylor in this debate, but it would help to have actual science backing up the "race is real” argument, rather than HBD flim-flam about “Blacks having higher testosterone levels.”  What’s next?  Penis size?  French army surgeon!  

Part of a Counter-Currents comment that passed through moderation:

I would like to say that I find locker room bigotry against gays to be stupid and disgusting. I know that the founder of this site is a homosexual. This does not belittle his achievements and his intellectual standing. His sexual identity is not the issue. We all have our troughs to wallow in. But when one begins to rationalize personal moral and mental aberrations as being equal with healthy behavior that’s when such an individual needs to be called out.