Taking an Academic Stand

Do not cede intellectualism to the Left.

Contra the reactionary Right, I do not agree that we should abandon academia, I do not agree that we should cede the bastions of current intellectual development and higher education to the Left.  We certainly should not abandon the field of STEM to the Left.  

In fact, the Right have so far ceded academia to the Left; note the political views of American academia.  Note this nonsense, which very neatly summarizes the views of most of not only American, but “Western,” STEM. That piece is full of the most shocking lies about the biological basis of race, clustering of genetics and of phenotypic traits, differences in brain size and intelligence among extant hominid groups, confusion about the meaning of past admixture (not relevant for present and future EGI except that it defines what the present genepool is – but what the present genepool is stands on its own regardless of how it came about), and mendacious implications about human genetic variation (see this for truth).

As STEM become ever more colonized by radical leftists, outright lies, perpetuated by despicable lairs (such as the authors of that The Scientist screed), will become more commonplace, and unchallenged.  Why the “movement” hates and sabotages STEM people who are in the ranks of pro-White activists is yet another profound example of how the anti-scientific mindset of the Right creates its self-destruction.

As I have written multiple times before, the Right has historically been a reactionary anti-scientific irrational bastion of anti-intellectualism.  There are a number of reasons for this; prime among them the association of the Right with “traditionalism,” particularly with religion.  And we know the hostility of traditionalism/religion to science (and the technics derived from science), since science, and anti-intellectualism in general, threatens the traditionalist and religious worldview.

Nietzsche was right (see his The Antichrist for the concept most fully fleshed out in his though) – science caused the "Death of God” – 

What happened? The old God was seized by mortal terror. Man himself had been his greatest blunder; he had created a rival to himself; science makes men godlike—it is all up with priests and gods when man becomes scientific!—Moral: science is the forbidden per se; it alone is forbidden. Science is the first of sins, the germ of all sins, the original sin. This is all there is of morality.—“Thou shall not know”:—the rest follows from that.—God’s mortal terror, however, did not hinder him from being shrewd. How is one to protect one’s self against science? For a long while this was the capital problem. Answer: Out of paradise with man! Happiness, leisure, foster thought—and all thoughts are bad thoughts!—Man must not think.—And so the priest invents distress, death, the mortal dangers of childbirth, all sorts of misery, old age, decrepitude, above all, sickness—nothing but devices for making war on science! The troubles of man don’t allow him to think.... Nevertheless—how terrible!—, the edifice of knowledge begins to tower aloft, invading heaven, shadowing the gods—what is to be done?—The old God invents war; he separates the peoples; he makes men destroy one another (—the priests have always had need of war....). War—among other things, a great disturber of science!—Incredible! Knowledge, deliverance from the priests, prospers in spite of war.—So the old God comes to his final resolution: “Man has become scientific—there is no help for it: he must be drowned!”... The priest knows of only one great danger: that is science—the sound comprehension of cause and effect. But science flourishes, on the whole, only under favourable conditions—a man must have time, he must have an overflowing intellect, in order to “know.”... “Therefore, man must be made unhappy,”—this has been, in all ages, the logic of the priest.—It is easy to see just what, by this logic, was the first thing to come into the world:—“sin.”... The concept of guilt and punishment, the whole “moral order of the world,” was set up against science—against the deliverance of man from priests.

Religion will never forgive science for the Death of God. Hence, the Reactionary Right, fundamentally based on Religion and Tradition, will equally never forgive science. But science need not ask for forgiveness from representatives of a dead past.

For a Revolutionary Right to win, it needs intellectualism, it needs an academic presence, and it needs STEM, it needs science and technics.

We must not cede academia, intellectualism, and STEM to the Left.  That has gone on for far too long. We need to turn our backs on “traditionalism” and on the religious “Jesus is King of Kings” freaks who would bring us back to the Dark Ages.

The world of the mind should be our territory, not the sole possession of the enemy.