In Der News, 4/10/21

“Movement” and other news.

Der Movement onanism.  Hubba! Hubba!

It’s all about the “D’Nations,” guys, if you haven’t figured that out already.

Ted Sallis mentioned here.  Contrast Griffin’s willingness to give the ideas here a fair hearing to Johnson’s hysterical attacks directed toward me – “insane” and “paranoid piece of crap.” But, hey, Counter-Currents needs to deflect folks away from Johnson’s chronic bad judgment and instead make them view his critics as “insane” to preserve Johnson’s viability as a “leader” worthy of “D’Nations.” Follow the money, folks. Note that Johnson has been attacking Griffin as well over the years. After all, we can’t have anyone criticizing the dogma now, can we?

I wonder…perhaps the real dividing line in pro-White activism is not that between “WN 1.0” and “WN 2.0” or anything else like that, but that between people like Griffin and myself who recognize that Der Movement is a complete failure and requires a complete deconstruction and reconstruction and the likes of Johnson who represent Der Movement, Inc., and who defend the “movement” status quo, and make money doing so.

In any case, even if I may disagree with Griffin on various things, at least we can agree on the fundamental, core idea that continuing along the current path of Der Movement is an absolute dead end, and we need new directions and new leadership. I would say that we need a completely New Movement.

One more point. There are thoughtful individuals who agree with me about what I wrote about a legal infrastructure, economic activity, and all of my other proposed approaches to a revitalized and reconstructed real movement, but express skepticism about any of it being achieved, and believe that it is wishful thinking. I completely agree with the skepticism and often express that here - I believe that with all of the self-centered Quota Queen grifters as "movement" "leaders," combined with a generally inept and naive (never mind freakish) rank-and-file, I do not hold out my hope for real progress.  However, I still believe that I have an obligation to point out what should be done. 

Is it all just wishful thinking?  In the sense that achieving it is unlikely, then yes, but in the sense of whether it could theoretically be achieved with different leadership, then no. Consider the "Free Expression Foundation" in my blog links. That is a grossly underfunded and understaffed endeavor that could be the nucleus of a legal infrastructure. If the money currently being funneled to VDARE and Counter-Currents instead went to the Free Expression Foundation, then they would likely be able to hire full time legal staff, and that could be the start of something along the lines of what I have in mind. If Regnery (and others on our side with money) would have invested more in things like that, then that would have been another boost to these objectives. Then we have things like the NPI, which could in theory have been the nucleus of a real Far Right think tank. No one forced those guys to make Spencer, with virtually no qualifications other than being a tall preppy WASP, as the head of the NPI. No one forced the Alt Right to do Unite the Right instead of quietly organizing behind the scenes. My point is that money exists and has existed in the "movement," and the nuclei of certain aspects of infrastructure exist and have existed, and all of it has, and continues to be, wasted. It is more of a failure of will, vision, competence, and leadership than any innate impossibility of achievement. In that sense, it is not merely wishful thinking.

Read this. I am a strong proponent of nuclear weapons, including the ICBM leg of the nuclear triad. While Russia and China upgrade their nuclear forces, modernizing them to meet the challenges of this new century, the USA continues to use weapon systems from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s (and let’s not even talk about the B-52, developed in the 1950s).  On a side note, and something I’ve mentioned before – are they really going to continue to use “Ground Based Strategic Deterrent” (GBSD) for the name of this new ICBM? I suppose in Woke America we can’t name missiles after Greco-Roman or Norse gods or their instruments (“Trident”) any more, or name them after conceptual figures from American military history (“Minuteman”), and, on the other hand, the BIPOCs and women would get offended if WMD are named after them. And of course, who on our side would want an ICBM named "Tubman?" So, we’re stuck with GBSD, I suppose.  A small but telling sign of the new bleak America.

I would like to briefly address the concerns of people like Andrew Joyce, re: technology-oriented “ethnofuturism.” I see two major (potentially sane and reasonable) problems with technology – the physical and the spiritual/moral. The physical would include things like practicality, depletion of natural resources, pollution and other forms of environmental degradation, etc. I am optimistic that if Whites can save themselves, can have their own societies, and can focus the fruits of their genius for their own interests, instead of wasting themselves on the “woke” agenda, then I believe that these physical problems can be solved. The spiritual/moral problems involve the sorts of issues brought up by Gene Wolfe in his “tale of the machines” story in The Book of the New Sun, of which I have written about before – humanity giving up its soul, giving up the “irrational” and “human” part of itself, in the quest to master and advance science and technology. These problems revolve around issues of “modernism,” issues of dependence on technology, issues of “transhumanism” and the transformation of our people into something we would not wish. These are important concerns and important issues, but we need to understand that we can have control over this; we need to take responsibility for our interaction with science and technology. We need to understand that science and technics are merely tools, they are means and not ends, they are what we use to achieve our objectives, but they are not the objectives themselves, and they cannot directly determine what those objectives are.  We do not have to sacrifice our souls on the altar of technological progress. We can control our destiny. We are in charge, not the machines.

A comment from a reader of Joyce's post left a comment that included:

A) The authors’ very important and healthy rejection of Dugin and his nefarious “Fourth Political Theory” that promotes a multicultural/multiracial world of mongrels whose only point in common is hatred for what he calls “Americanism” or “the decadent West”. Dugin explicitly denies the existence of a Jewish question (or, even better, a Jewish problem) and, of course, heaps scorn and mud over Adolf Hitler and National Socialism. Deep down Dugin is just a national bolshevik, which means a dangerous, nasty creature who is full of hot air, promoting a ridiculous idea that leads to nowhere. Unfortunately, this cunning bastard has managed to get a considerable number of supporters among what I would describe loosely as “nationalists”. These uneducated fools think that Dugin (like his idol Putin) is “one of us”.

My take is this - I have not yet read the book, so I do not want to be a "low information moralizer" (one of Johnson's attacks against me) concerning what the authors wrote about Russia.  Instead, I'll say that I reject and oppose anti-Russianism and other forms of divisive petty nationalist intra-White infighting. However, I have never (unlike many of the Quota Queens) been a fan of Dugin and his ideas, and have in fact been critical of Duginism.  So, I am, in general, pro-Russia and pro-Russians, but oppose the Duginist agenda.