Odds and Ends, 5/10/22

In der news.

The Nordicism of Counter-Currents commentators is such that the stridently anti-Italian passages in The Dispossessed Majority is not enough for them - they have to invent passages that aren't in that book.

While I did not find any reference to "Sicilians are Black" in The Dispossessed Majority, that trope is found in movies made by individuals of full or part Italian descent, such as David Chase and Quentin Tarantino. And of course, comments such as "Africa begins at Rome (or Naples)" are made by Northern Italians for the amusement of Northern Europeans. This defect in the Italian character, this need to curry favor with northerners by denigrating other Italians, must be faced and cannot be responsibly evaded. And it doesn't work. Mussolini still gets called a "Negroid asshole" by Germans and Italy from Rome southwards is still "Africa" regardless of how mainland Southern Italians point the finger at Sicilians (and who do the Sicilians attack - Sardinians?). Other ethnies may have their internal squabbles, but they do not air them to outsiders like retarded buffoons

White ethnics in Der Movement should be aware that racial attacks against them by their "comrades" can occur at any time, in many cases completely unexpected, like a bolt out of the blue. One minute all is well, the next, your "whiteness" is questioned, your ethny defamed and mocked, bizarre racial "histories" invented, and quotes fabricated. Further, seemingly "benign" "leaders" will suddenly vent their ethnic resentments about those "foreigners" who don't belong in "my country" (talking about White ethnics, not Jews or Coloreds). 

Zoltan is a Hungarian name, so it’s unlikely his ancestors came over on the Mayflower…This is the perfect symbol for our degenerate times. Foreigners tell the American founding stock how benighted and deserving of oblivion we are…

There are leftist Whites of many ethnicities, what is the relevance of one of them being of Hungarian ancestry? And anti-White politics affect all Whites, not just founding stock.

White ethnics: Don't say you haven't been warned.

A friend of this blog on Gab alerts me to the these search results. The obsession with Sicilians by the Instauration crew was an early-day example of ethnic fetishism.

Why do corporations take the chance of "go woke, go broke?" First, some of the corporate leaders are ideologues who put politics ahead of profits. Second, and more importantly, they (for the most part accurately) calculate that the Right is inept at organizing boycotts and publicizing a cause, particularly when the media help to suppress (or mock) it. Third, they correctly calculate that Whites are lazy and indifferent, re: their own interests, and won't sacrifice convenience for a cause. On the other hand, the Left and the Coloreds are motivated enough to organize to affect corporate profits. Fourth, if most or all companies go woke, consumers will have little choice but to patronize one of them - solidarity in wokeness. Go woke, go broke doesn't actually happen that often, or often enough to dissuade them.

In the 1970s, Der Movement had two viable paths - the Tommasi path of violent action (much more viable at that time than later) or the Sallis path of slow and steady infiltration of the System. Instead, it did neither, and just engaged in Hitler fetishism, Nordicism, Turner Diaries fantasizing, and saying that long term action is useless because "the collapse is five years away." When The Order decided to do Tommasi-like action nearly a decade after his death, the window of opportunity for that sort of thing had passed. The USA was in the era of Reaganite stability and optimism, the chaos of the 60s and 70s was replaced by Ronnie Raygun and "fight the commies." And so decades were wasted.

In the comments here, we find this hilarious exchange:

danMay 9, 2022 at 10:29 pm

Taking issue with gays = closeted homosexual

Where have I heard that before…

Reply

Greg JohnsonMay 10, 2022 at 12:32 am

You hear it all the time because it is distressingly true. “Taking issue” = rhetorical minimalization strategy. After all, doesn’t everybody have “issues” with gays?"

So, if you don't want lisping homosexuals as "leaders" of your "movement" then you yourself are of course homosexual. Got a problem with someone trying to get fellated by a dachshund? Then you're having a torrid sexual affair with the family cat. QED.

Thus, every time a Counter-Currents commentator is observed "taking issue" with miscegenation that is a "rhetorical minimalization strategy" to hide their own race-mixing desires. How about this instead - normal people are repulsed by both homosexuality and miscegenation and want neither in a so-called "movement" promoting White interests? See this. Relevant excerpt:

In his essays on homosexuality, Andrew Joyce effectively debunked the tired trope that asserts that someone who criticizes a behavior (such as homosexuality) “secretly wants to do it themselves.” Joyce is of course correct. Imagine applying that silly idea to other behaviors. If you critique someone having a Chinese wife and mixed-race children, that means you secretly want to marry and reproduce with (and engage in “measured groveling” to) Ms. Wei Fuk Yu. If you cite someone’s stated desire to get a blowjob from a dachshund that means you have amorous intentions toward Fido. I suppose you can’t condemn pedophilia or mass murder either, because, well, you know. The concept is stupid and childish and it is not surprising that those involved in a stupid and childish “movement” perpetuate that meme.