A Brief Ethnographic Comment

Thoughts.

Contra MacDonald’s wrong-headed claim that I am some sort of spokesman in favor of (Southern) Italians, long-time readers of this blog know that I am in fact highly critical of Italians (of all types, North and South). However, my criticism is based on reality, not crazed fantasy, and I am equally critical of other groups. In contrast to Der Movement, I do not say that Italians are bad and Germans are good; instead, I say that both groups are bad (and of course each has some good as well). Indeed, all groups can be justly criticized, including each and every European ethny.

I see Italians as undisciplined lazy hedonists who act the buffoon and whose pathological individualism makes then comically inept with respect to collective action, and who therefore are the subject of well-deserved contempt.

I see Germans – and here I also include Austrians – as humorless comically self-unaware fanatics who lurch from one extreme to another and who are oblivious to the damage that their crazed behavior does to themselves and others. 

If Italians are a comedy, then Germans are a horror movie.

The ultimate indictment of wops – the common fate of Rienzi and Mussolini.

The ultimate indictment of krauts – the mirror-image extremism of Hitler and Merkel.

No one else should smugly laugh at that; I can criticize your ethny with equal accuracy and effectiveness.

Rational vs. Irrational Fascism

Another look at fascist ideology.

Previously, I objected to Quigley’s description of fascism as “irrational" - 

[Side note – I do not like Quigley’s correlating fascist states and movements to irrationality in the sense he does – while such movements were opposed to hyper-rationalism of modernity, they were not irrational in the sense of what was best for the nation and ethny and the organization of society had many positive rational aspects. I would argue that modern liberal democracy is truly irrational].

There are two basic issues here.  First, the definition of irrational.  Second, what do we mean by fascism?

Let’s consider this definition of irrationality:

Irrationality is cognition, thinking, talking, or acting without inclusion of rationality. It is more specifically described as an action or opinion given through inadequate use of reason, or through emotional distress or cognitive deficiency. The term is used, usually pejoratively, to describe thinking and actions that are, or appear to be, less useful, or more illogical than other more rational alternatives.

Irrational behaviors of individuals include taking offense or becoming angry about a situation that has not yet occurred, expressing emotions exaggeratedly (such as crying hysterically), maintaining unrealistic expectations, engaging in irresponsible conduct such as problem intoxication, disorganization, and falling victim to confidence tricks. People with a mental illness like schizophrenia may exhibit irrational paranoia.

These more contemporary normative conceptions of what constitutes a manifestation of irrationality are difficult to demonstrate empirically because it is not clear by whose standards we are to judge the behavior rational or irrational.

The last part is in my opinion crucial to this discussion – it is difficult to definitively define political behavior as irrational given the problem of “whose standards” and the intense nature of political identification. Hence, it is just very easy to simply label your opposition as “irrational” as contrasted to your own “rationality.”

What about:

Irrationality is cognition, thinking, talking, or acting without inclusion of rationality.

What’s “rationality?”  Thus, we see controversy and subjectivity there as well, so defining “irrationality” as the absence of “rationality” is not helpful if we are unable to clearly define “rationality.”

One (somewhat vague) definition of “rationality” that conforms to the manner most people use the term is beliefs and/or behavior (e.g., a decision-making process) based (predominantly or completely) on the use of (verifiable) facts, logic, and consideration of consequences in pursuit of some objective(s) that is (theoretically) achievable and that would enhance the status and/or well-being of some (verifiably) real entity or entities (or useful mental constructs of such). “Irrationality” would therefore be beliefs and/or behavior that does not conform to that described above.

This then comes back to the issue of subjective standards, since I am sure most fascists would consider their beliefs and behavior as conforming to ethnic, racial, social, political, and historical realities and that the objectives pursued would enhance the status and well-being of the group or groups involved. Anti-fascists would disagree, and then one would have to do a “deep dive” into fascist ideology and its consequences, and each step of that analysis would, no doubt, be steeped in controversy. I suppose that the “irrationality” of fascism would be ascribed to, e.g., the emotionality inherent in many of its manifestations, including a “mystical” (sic) tie to blood and soil, as well as the alleged “irrationality” of certain palingenetic objectives, which would not always correlate to the types of issues (e.g., economic growth, peace, human rights) of interest to classical liberalism.  One could also ascribe “irrationality” to certain fascist critiques of modernism, materialism, and, not surprisingly, to a purely rational approach to life, even though there may well be – from the fascist perspective – rational reasons for such beliefs.

From a pro-fascist standpoint, given ethnic genetic interests, one could aver that fascism is more adaptive than are Universalist ideologies, although Salter did criticize fascism for an ultimately self-defeating over-investment in ethny (perhaps an example of “irrational” behavior).  Thus, the hyper-nationalism of fascism led to expansionist militarism, destructive warfare, and the mobilization of other states to crush fascism, leaving the fascist states arguably worse off than before. But does the fact that this over-investment took place stand as evidence of fascist irrationality? Note that it is unlikely that Mussolini would have conducted aggression within Europe in the absence of Hitler’s influence; further, the other fascist movements in Europe did not have expansionist militarism has part of their ideology.  Indeed, “fascist militarism” essentially was a Nazi legacy, and had as much, or more, to do with Hitler’s fixations, and to historical German militarism, than to any inherent characteristic (“irrational” or otherwise) of fundamental fascism.

Perhaps it would help to look at definitions of fascism itself. Griffin’s description of fascism as palingenetic ultra-nationalism is a good starting point.  We can then tackle some of the ideas of Maurice Bardeche on this topic.

See this.

The characteristics of fascism, we have seen, are disputable, and only a small number of those we have examined have been retained in a logical definition of fascism. The single party, police methods, propaganda, Caesarism, the very presence of a Führer are not necessarily attributes of fascism; still less an alliance with reactionary politics, the refusal of control and open membership to the masses, the inevitability of prestige operations and military raids.

A firm and stable direction of the nation, the primacy of the national interest over private interests, the necessity of a discipline loyally accepted by the country, are the true political foundations of fascism, those that emerge from its very definition. 

That seems reasonably rational to me, from the standpoint of the well-being of nation-state and ethny.

Power may be exercised in a fascist state by a central committee, a council, or a junta as well as by a designated leader; such rule need not be brutal and abusive. It can also be tolerant and supple. The essential political instrument of fascism is the role that it grants to a minority of disinterested and committed militants capable of leading by the example of their own lives and to bear the message of a just, loyal, and honesty polity. The famous fascist methods are thus constantly and ceaselessly reevaluated. What is more important than mechanisms is the idea that fascism has of man and freedom.

So far, that all can be consistent with rationality.

See this.

Democracy puts no limits on freedom beyond prohibiting harm to others. Democrats are quick to discover that one might harm the government without harming others, and their codes are filled with political offenses. But they have never admitted that without harming others individually, one can still harm the nation as a whole through the abuse of freedom.

Such harm from democracy would be irrational, no?

Fascism opposes this anarchic concept of freedom with a social conception of freedom. It does not permit that which harms the nation. It permits everything else. It is wrong to believe that it is in the spirit of fascism to limit individual freedom or freedom of thought. Nothing has changes in the everyday life of a country when it becomes fascist: contrary to the famous saying, when someone rings the doorbell at seven o’clock, it must be the milkman…

…Fascism recognizes this irreplaceable mystique of achievement. It is a sign of degeneration when the worship of a man is substituted for the task to be accomplished and when the nation nourished with nothing more than words, authority without a program, portraits disguised as principles: it is nothing more than a donkey with a policeman trailing behind him.

Thus, fascism leads to a different social morality than democracy, and it seeks to develop a human type that the democracies ignore or combat. Just because fascism nurtures different values than does liberal democracy does not mean that the former is “irrational” (an idea that assumes liberal democracy is “rational”).

The democrats believe in the natural goodness of man, in progress as the course of history. They think that all parts of the personality merit equal development. For them, the state does not make men moral, it merely teaches them to read; education is a panacea that can work miracles. Democracy does not intervene to establish its own image of man. Its fine ideal exists nowhere. One cannot even say that the men in charge choose subjects to suit their agenda, like leaders of seminars. Democracy is only concerned with diplomas. Democracy distributes awards for excellence. She places her best pupils in the Pantheon. But in 100 years, she has not produced a single hero.

Fascists do not believe in the natural goodness of man; they do not believe that progress is the irreversible direction of history. They have this ambitious idea that man has the power to create, at least in part, his own destiny.

I suppose that the strict materialists and liberal democrats believe that talk of “destiny” is “irrational” – but it seems to me that creating destiny through an act of will is more rational than a fatalistic attitude of passively accepting whatever comes and/or merely pursuing short-term hedonistic materialism or trusting in “Fate” or “God."

See this.

The purpose of the fascist state is to shape men according to a particular model. Unlike democratic states, fascist states do not hesitate to teach morals. Fascists think that the will and energy available to the nation are its most precious capital. They make it their highest priority to encourage the collective qualities that shape and preserve the national energy. They seek to develop such national qualities as discipline, a taste for order, love of work, the sense of duty and honor. In the practice of everyday tasks, these national moral principles are expressed in a sense of responsibility, a sense of solidarity, awareness of duties of command, the feeling of being at home in an accepted order and in an important task.

That also sounds quite rational.   

Is developing The New Man to build The Moral State rational or irrational?  I would say that regardless of your subjective opinion on that, The New Man and The Moral State can be harnessed to achieve rational objectives; hence, they are ultimately rational with respect to ends (even if not always with respect to means).

It would seem therefore that fascism, in its essence, and apart from the particular manifestation of Nazism, was not especially irrational. Indeed, how is fascism any more irrational than its main competitors?  Liberal democracy disguises the power of an oligarchic plutocracy behind the veneer of popular sovereignty, and is currently undergoing self-immolation due to a tidal wave of demographic and cultural destruction.  Communism resulted in millions of dead, gulag states, economic depression, and pseudoscientific ideas like Lysenkoism.

One wonders if the particular focus on fascism being “irrational” has more to do with its underlying mythos than with its actual real-world manifestation. In contrast, both liberal democracy and communism are perceived as being (ostensibly) based on “rational” materialistic considerations, such as economics, happiness for the greatest numbers, etc. derived from “Enlightenment values,” while fascism with its focus on primal values of “caveman nationalism" (blood and soil) and with non-quantifiable, non-materialistic considerations of palingenesis, national glory, and The New Man, sounds ever-so-irrational  After all, one can have a quantifiable “rational” Five Year Plan for socialist production but not a similarly materialistic Five Year Plan for palingenetic overcoming and national glory. Unlike liberal democracy and communism, fascism is not an ideology for the bean-counters of a managerial elite, hence it is seemingly based upon non-quantifiable “irrational” urges.

But some in the mainstream have defended the irrational as part of existentialist authenticity, a concept that can be extended to the race question.  And can’t irrational urges be harnessed to achieve rational objectives?

See this:

…a call to “preserve our distinctive genetic information” is unlikely to motivate most Western individuals to defend their genetic interests against the titanic forces arrayed against them. It almost certainly will not motivate the masses, who, as Michael O’Meara rightfully points out, are always induced to act by “myths” that encompass a cohesive worldview. Even rational activists can often become more motivated by these “myths” (which may of course constitute objective facts to a considerable degree) than to a pure empiricism. Thus, the “myth” of Yockeyan “High Culture” may be needed to motivate the defense of rational Salterian EGI.

In summary, whether or not a political ideology is rational or irrational is to a large part subjective, and in a day and age in which the word “fascist” is used a pejorative, stripped of most of its informational value, it is difficult to arrive at an objective reckoning of fascist rationality vs. irrationality.

Given the definitions given by me here, fascism is not particularly irrational, and to the extent that is does have irrational aspects, those are not necessarily bad, and, further, can be leveraged in the service of rational goals.

The main threat is if the irrational aspects of fascism inflate to a level akin to Salter’s criticism; thus, controlling fascism’s primal urges and keeping those urges within reasonable limits would be key in avoiding irrationality overload.

EGI and National Socialism, Part III: National Socialist Basics

Fundamental characteristics.

See this.  There, National Socialism is defined as:

A collectivist authoritarian system centered on a race-based palingenetic ultranationalism.

In other words: racial fascism.

A more modern definition: An authoritarian political system that utilizes collectivist organization to promote the ethnic genetic interests of the population, in the context of palingenetic ultranationalism.

Let us consider what I consider the fundamental characteristics, the foundational basics, of National Socialism, independent of the specific Hitlerian aspects of the historical German National Socialist German Worker’s Party (e.g., Germanocentic chauvinism, Nordicism, aggressive military expansionism, certain attachments to traditionalist feudalism, etc.).  In other words, what is the “National Socialist minimum” that would be applicable to, say, a pan-European national socialism?

The “national” part of the philosophy notes that it is a very particularistic ideology, focused on a particular ingroup – nation as a people, not as merely a nation state. National Socialism in its fundamental (as opposed to specifically German) form does not necessarily define what the “people” is, other than it has to be, ultimately, based on some sort of shared ancestry, there has to be a biological basis (see below) for the ingroup. Ingroup-outgroup competition is fundamental to the ideology, and to its particularistic nature; thus, “humanity” as a whole cannot be an ingroup, although a broad racial group (e.g., European-derived peoples) can be, in competition with other racial blocs. Therefore, in the sense of pursuing interests, National Socialism is opposed to humanism and universalism, although Universal Nationalism can be compatible with National Socialism, as other groups are entitled to have their own racial (or ethnic) blocs, although, as previously stated, these will be the subject of competition (although this competition need not threaten the existence of any group).

Being a form of fascism, National Socialism is, naturally, “ultra-nationalist,” the nationalism is of an extreme nature and, also according to its fascist nature, palingenetic in nature.  The nationalism centers on rebirth, a new order, change, and in National Socialism this is focused on, first and foremost, biological race, although cultural and civilizational considerations are also important.  Akin to ethnic genetic interests (EGI), National Socialism considers the biological to be ultimate interests while other considerations, while they may be extremely important, are proximate interests.

The “socialism” is political, not necessarily economic and thus private property and some degree of free market capitalism can be consistent with National Socialism (although economic socialism can be a part of the ideology’s implementation if desired).  Political socialism implies the reality that National Socialism is a collectivist ideology.  Now, Western individualism can of course be part of National Socialism, the ideology does not aim for an Asiatic hive-like mindless conformity; indeed, National Socialism opposes that (and that is one National Socialist critique of Bolshevism/Marxism – that it led to such an Oriental insect hive society).  However, although Western traditions of individual expression, Faustian overcoming, and the development of superior individual are prized, collectivism means that – at least when necessary – individualism and individual interests need to be subordinated to the collective good of the nation/people/race. When there is a conflict, particularly when the conflict becomes existential in the sense of threatening the racial basis of the people, then individual rights are sacrificed to serve collective interests. This also suggests when political socialism requires economic socialism – in the cases where private enterprise conflicts with national interests then private enterprise must be subordinate to state control, leading to at least some degree of economic socialism. Thus, decisions about economics are based on what is perceived as best for the collective; the economy is a mean and not an end.  Unlike Marxism, National Socialism does not derive its fundamental values from economics, but from the natural laws of evolved organisms, the struggle of life itself.

National Socialist collectivism manifests on what can be termed “hierarchical egalitarianism” – which is not an oxymoron.  National Socialism is egalitarian in that it strives to do away with class distinctions and makes all members of the nation – defined as a specific biocultural people – equal members of the “folk community," independent of class, wealth, status, etc.  All have the opportunity for upward mobility, and to prove their worth in the service of their people.

However, National Socialism is hierarchical in two meanings of the word. First, and fundamentally, it recognizes differences between people and ranks people based on inherent worth – that worth not based on class, wealth, status, etc. but instead based on racial values, merit, accomplishment, service, etc. These differences can be those between ingroup and outgroup and they can also be those within a group, such as recognized differences within the ingroup, meaning that while all members of the nation are fundamentally equal parts of the folk community (egalitarianism) so are more valuable specimens than others and are allowed to rise or fall based on their ability (hierarchical).  Second, hierarchy is manifested in the manner in which the nation state is politically organized, with a leadership cadre, and a leader-to-follower stratification of society based on overall worth (that is still egalitarian as members of the folk community have equal access to leadership possibilities independent of class or any other pre-determined societal stratification). This hierarchical political leadership need not lead to some of the “defective political institutions” identified by Salter in his On Genetic Interests analysis of fascist regimes.  Thus, I wrote:

Getting back to national socialist-style fascist regimes, one can ask: can the problem of defective political institutions be solved?  I think yes, if we presume that the “fuhrer principle” is not an essential feature of such regimes.  One could them consider authoritarian/totalitarian political structures that can have checks and balances (e.g. the Soviet regime had power split between Party, KGB, and Army –with Stalin being an aberration) and be responsive to the (properly informed) will of the people.  I have always been intrigued by Fest’s talk of “totalitarian democracy” in his book on Hitler; point is, we can consider “fascism” broadly conceived as a flexible, living ideology and not as a fossilized, history artifact.  In this way, national socialist political structures can be envisioned that can control elite free-riders and constrain ethnic mobilization within reasonable limits. One need not resort to democracy – which has been discredited with the destructive evil of multiculturalism and mass migration – to ensure the stability of any future EGI-based regime.

Again, we need to separate the fundamental basics of National Socialism from its specific implementation by the Hitlerian National Socialists of Germany.

April 20, 2022

It's Saint Adolf's Day!

Happy April 20th.

April 30th will not be celebrated by Der Movement with the same fervor.

Desi Juden

A comparison.

First, Happy Easter.

A paradigm among the Far Right is how South Asians in America are becoming the new Jews – a highly educated, highly paid, fast-talking, ethnocentric professional class that is anti-White and involved in leftist politics with an anti-White slant, including promoting pro-Black and pan-Colored narratives in order to attack White interests (meanwhile secretly despising Blacks as much as they despise Whites).

I have some indirect experience in hearing about how much South Asians in America despise native White Americans. South Asians, used to thinking in terms of caste, see a hierarchy of groups in America, with themselves at the top. Near the top are other Asians as well as the Jews. They consider educated White immigrants – say, Polish MDs or Russian engineers – as superior to native White Americans. Blacks and Hispanics are at the bottom, but they consider native White Americans as hardly better than Blacks or Hispanics  Since they consider White immigrants as better and different from native White Americans, they’ll gossip (*) to the former about the latter – e.g., how native Whites are stupid and lazy, all on drugs, the children having no ambition, doing bad in school, and having sex at a young age, while the superior South Asians are disciplined and hard–working, and leverage their intelligence to become successful. These White immigrants, offended at Desi arrogance, turn around and tell me all of this. My response is that if these South Asians are so superior, why do they need to escape the shithole of India (or wherever in South Asia) and come to the inferior USA, which was created by native White Americans? In any case, the similarity with Jews exists, and is compatible with South Asian agendas to enhance their own power and status in America at the expense of all of those “stupid and lazy” White Americans.

Another manner in which South Asians mirror Jews is that while they are highly ethnocentric against outsiders, they are sometimes prone to turn against each other out of envy. In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote that if the Jews won, they’d turn on themselves and kill themselves off in hate-filled struggle. South Asians are in some ways similar. Some personal anecdotes follow. I once had a prominent STEM Jew gleefully tell me how he gave a bad score to a grant submitted by another Jew, a Nobel Prize winner (who I had once met) – “He’s a Nobel Prize winner and I know I’ll never win one, but I have grants and I made sure he won’t get his own.” The same STEM Jew, while engaged in career-enhancing networking with his Jew buddies, hated his Jew rivals, muttering about one - “I’ll kill him, I’ll kill him.” Similarly, I once had a female (*) South Asian come to talk to me, with a snide malicious tone, about one of her fellow female Desis who was hired at a higher position – “Did you see her CV? Is she qualified? I don’t think so. Her background is really weak.” I just shrugged – I have no interest in getting involved in a brownster cat fight. But one can observe in that incident the similar behavior patterns of South Asians and Jews. Interestingly, a White immigrant told me how they had a similar experience with East Asians, as one female East Asian gossiped about another who had a higher position that the latter achieved her status by "sleeping with the board of directors." There are of course many similarities between East Asians and Jews, with the Chinese being called "the Jews of Asia," but that's a story for another day; here I focus on Brown, not Yellow.

This all leads to an interesting question. At the current time, South Asians and Jews are acting along similar lines to dispossess the common White enemy, including leveraging Black (and other Colored) activism against Whites. But at some point, in the struggle for upward mobility, South Asians and Jews may find themselves in conflict, competing for the same niche space – the established champion (Jews) fending off the up-and-coming contender (South Asians) that has a similar overall societal profile. Jews would seem to have the upper hand now, but the Desis have the advantage of being more obviously non-White, with all that means in a browning America. Or will the Jews try to co-opt South Asians as part of the Jeurasian alliance? This is all another lose-lose situation for Whites, who are shunted aside as aliens pick over the remains of a dead America.

*It is almost always the females who do this; the males are more disciplined in hiding their anti-White animus in person (although online, it seems to be the opposite). Interestingly, it are mostly female South Asians who are the most public anti-White activists in America.

Racial Smugness

Food for thought.

In Baker’s book Race is a comment about how it is often individuals who are not optimally representative of their group who are the ones who most strongly identify with, and defend, that group.

Hitler, an Austrian of South German ancestry and non-Nordic phenotype, is a good example here, as he was fanatically attached to a German identity, was a Nordicist, and was someone very strongly focused on the interests of the German (not Austrian) state. Other Germanocentrics and Nordicists were not good phenotypic representatives of those ethnoracial groups; the Nazi regime was full of such individuals.  In America, White ethnics, who are not of the Anglo-Saxon founding stock, nor of closely related (non-Anglo) Northern European Protestant background, are often “racists” who strongly identify with a White America that they are more peripheral to compared to Anglo-Celto-Germanic White Protestants. One can of course think of many other examples. For instance, non-Whites have similar examples of this phenomenon. Some of the most radical Blacks, some of the people most obsessed with their Blackness, are “African-Americans” who are more “brown” than “black," and who obviously have significant White ancestry.  

Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule. There were fanatical Nazis and Nordicists who were thoroughly Nordic. The “movement” today is full of Nordic Nordicists, and many of the pro-American FOX News/Gab crowd are Northwest European types. Some radical Blacks are dark-skinned and are of mostly, or all, sub-Saharan African ancestry. But in its broad outlines, Baker’s observation has some merit. Granted, part of this merit is because the outliers - the peripheral types that Baker describes - stand out more and are thus better remembered.  But, still, even with all of that, there does seem to be a real over-representation of the more peripheral types among those most strongly committed to the group that they identify with. There is a real phenomenon here.

Armchair psychiatrists will aver that such individuals overcompensate because they feel insecure in their identity, and so try to out-do those who they perceive as more optimally representing their group.  A more charitable explanation is that such people, coming as they do from the periphery of the group, are more aware of, and sensitive to, potential threats to that group, as opposed to more central group members who may be more isolated from those dangers. Thus, for example, given that ethnic Germans were a minority within the Austro-Hungarian Empire, struggling against powerful Hungarians and increasingly aggressive Slavs, an Austro-German like Hitler, born and raised in that environment, would be more likely to strongly identify with his endangered Germanic identity as opposed to some North German in Hamburg enjoying the security and power of the pre-WWI German Reich. Likewise, a person not phenotypically the archetype of their group has their own physical appearance as a daily reminder of how fragile maintenance of optimal group characteristics are. They themselves represent the “downfall” of their group archetype; Nordicists who have less-than-Nordic or less-than-Nordish phenotypes no doubt fit into this category. It is possible that both explanations – overcompensation and increased sensitivity to threats – are at work here.

What no one really delves into is the opposite situation.  Why do more central individuals, who are more representative of the group archetype, typically identify with the group less strongly, and are often less aggressive in group defense?  Let us consider Nordic Europeans - and by “Nordic” here I mean the broad range of “Nordish” peoples, not just those who are technically “pure Nordics” according to traditional physical anthropology; here, we can consider “Nordic” to be shorthand for people who are generally Northern European, Northwest European, and/or Northcentral European. The “movement” considers Nordics – particularly those who are more phenotypically Nordic/Nordish - to be the most central and archetypically representative members of the White race. 

The HBD Nordicists would ascribe the less ethnocentric behavior of this group to them being more individualistic, being just “too good” for their own good, too noble, too trusting, too altruistic, etc. A less charitable explanation, flipping the script given for the peripheral people Baker described, is that the more representative and central individuals are too comfortable and too self-satisfied in their identities – a sense of “racial smugness” may be in play here. Thus, these people feel overly secure in their ancestry and phenotype, they therefore do not feel threatened by the lesser types who they view with condescending attitudes and/or pity; indeed, they may feel a sense of noblesse oblige toward non-Whites (while they despise non-Nordic Whites who they see as competitors – not quite their equal but not deserving of the kindness bestowed upon Coloreds). This is a form of “The White Man’s Burden” that the High Trusters have, which is derived from “racial smugness.” 

For example, consider White Nordic females who smile benignly at the ranting of some fat, ugly Negress (or, more succinctly – some Negress).  The underlying attitude of these Nordic females toward the Negress may be something like this – “I’m so glad I’m me and not her, I’m so self-satisfied that I am what I am and I am not a Black woman and I look like myself and not like her. Of course she’s so angry and is full of resentment and unjustified self-esteem. Imagine how horrible it must be to look in the mirror every day and see Koko the gorilla staring back at you. I need to be kind and understanding to her and her people, given my advantages. I can afford to be generous; I have an obligation to those less fortunate. It’s not her fault she looks like Mighty Joe Young’s kid sister.” 

Now, as explained below, I am not saying that these Nordic females actually consciously think any of this.  They would no doubt be horrified and deeply offended if anyone (like me) claimed that their real attitude was what is described above. What I am saying is that their more unconscious, or subconscious, underlying, attitude is essentially what I have described, it is lurking just beneath the surface of their conscious thoughts. Indeed, to the extent that this attitude starts leaking into their conscious thoughts it would make them feel extremely guilty and spur them into even more of a noblesse oblige toward non-Whites.  So, again, don’t view this as me saying that every time a White Nordic meets a Black they explicitly think “for the grace of God goes I; how fortunate I am that I’m me and not this disgusting half-ape – I pity them and must help them.”  No, but they behave as if they do think that, and the reason is that they are ‘thinking” that just beneath the surface of their conscious thoughts.  This is how racial smugness manifests itself.  Of course, there are always outliers, so it may be possible that in some minority of cases, these thoughts are actually conscious and explicit, but no doubt not as harsh as my description (I doubt a SJW would term a Negro as a “half-ape” – although they may pity them for their race and phenotype). Male Nordics would of course have similar underlying attitudes leading them to have racially smug attitudes manifesting in an attitude of noblesse oblige toward non-Whites.  Non-Nordic Whites, on the other hand, are more likely to have underlying attitudes that manifest in viewing Coloreds as more of a threat; these people would lack the arrogant sense of self-satisfied complacency and would also lack any sense of noblesse oblige toward Coloreds. Some of these differences are also discussed in light of my other theory of intra-White behavioral differences – Racial Proximity Theory. But, again, in most cases, the attitudes described are likely to be beneath the surface of thought rather than something open and explicit.

So, to summarize, just as with the opposite group Baker described (the “peripherals”), there is no need to assume that the “central” smug group always, or often, has an explicit and conscious attitude leading to their behavior.  Now, don’t get me wrong, sometimes it indeed is explicit and conscious, but often it likely is operating more as an underlying attitude that is not openly and explicitly recognized as such.  A person does not have to be constantly thinking about how they identify with their group and why; instead, there are a number of behaviors that emerge from a person’s total sense of themselves and from their internal self-conception, as well as from their life experiences. 

In describing the behavior, we should not worry so much about how much of it is explicit and how much is implicit. However, if one wanted prescriptively to try and get the smug to realize how self-destructive their behavior is and that they should change, then issues of how cognizant they are of the behavior becomes more important. Perhaps pointing out the behavior to them will make them realize the extent to which it is true.  On the other hand, I think the people Baker described - the peripheral types - would not be much affected by having their behavior pointed out. That is because, regardless of how aware they are about the underlying reasons for their behavior, they are so much more explicit about it, relatively speaking, than are the SJW types. Thus, even if some of the underlying motivations of the peripheral, ethnocentric types are unconscious, they are still very close to the surface. The "membrane" separating underlying attitudes and conscious thought is much thinner in the ethnocentric peripheral types than it is in the central SJW types, for whom realization of their underlying attitudes would be painful.

After all, here I am, as a White ethnic racist, openly writing about it. in summary, I believe that the peripheral people Baker described are much closer to self-awareness than are smug SJWs. So, the peripheral group would not be negatively affected by having their peripheral nature pointed out; they are aware of this at least at some level.  Making it all explicit would lead them to just be more open about how their experiences made them aware of their group identity and dangers to that group. The SJWs, on the other hand, would likely get seriously deflated if they realized how much of their racial liberalism derives from a deep sense of self-satisfaction over their racial ancestry and phenotype.  In other words, the peripheral people would maintain, and possibly even increase, their ethnocentrism if their behavior was openly analyzed, while the SJWs may have a crisis of conscience (or maybe not, but I see it as more likely).

Therefore, in summary, in addition to Racial Proximity Theory, here I propose “racial smugness" – a self-satisfied arrogant racial complacency – to explain Nordic attitudes toward Coloreds. This hypothesis can be further analyzed, dissected, critiqued, proofed, and extended.

Odds and Ends, 6/2/21

In der news.

As I have a small bit of IRL free time the past few days, another post is now presented, to take advantage of this window of opportunity.

Happy belated post-communist Children’s Day.

Homosexual past?  Pink swastika indeed! The quality of the presentation is horrible. “1924 putsch?”  Off by a year.  “1932 election of Hitler?” Huh?  What alternative timeline was that?  Hitler came to power in 1933 and was appointed by Hindenburg. “Gutternsipe?” Pure propaganda.

Solid evidence that Hitler had a homosexual past = zero.

Solid evidence that the Nazis started the Reichstag fire = zero.

I'm no Hitler fanboy, but that video was pitiful.

Self-indulgent nonsense.

The grift continues?

Just the facts.  HBDers weep. Pangolins?  I thought it was “an American bioweapon.”  Now, it’s back to being zoonotic?  Should HBDers be indicted for treason?  Convicted?  Executed?

This analysis is surprisingly reasonable. The single most important point in that essay:

When viewed as a system, what appears to be coordination and sentience in liberal democracy is actually emergent behavior.

This is an error the Far Right makes as often, or more so, than the Right in general. Everything to them is a well-coordinated conspiracy, orchestrated by “the Jews” or “the globalists” (who of course overlap to a considerable degree). In actuality, much of the behavior in question is emergent from the properties of the System, which is, of course, created and maintained, also to a considerable degree, by those selfsame Jews/globalists.  So, in many cases, it is indirect, rather than direct, control.  True enough, the endpoint is the same, but to correctly diagnose the problem, and to avoid sounding like lunatics to “normies,” indirect vs. direct is an important distinction. It is a distinction with a difference, at least with respect to political optics and eventual victory.

One wonders if the same applies to Der Movement.  Perhaps some of that which I ascribe to a coordinated HBD-Nordicist-ethnonationalist alliance is, at least in part, simply due to emergent behavior of a racialist system created by, and for, Nordicists and related types of ethnic fetishists.

Still, though, the coordination among elements in Der Movement at times seems more coordinated than what is observed in the System. Is the "movement" behavior really coordinated? Reality or illusion?  Hard to say.  The recent emergence of Lipton Matthews among a variety of Quota Queen outlets, virtually simultaneously, is an example of either fairly tight coordination or an emergent strain of groupthink that is quite remarkable in its own right. Can it be possible that “movement” dogma and rent-seeking self-interest is so pronounced that the Quota Queens move in the same direction independently and without overt directing coordination?

Getting back to the Zman article, and looking at society as a whole, a fundamental problem is that human types that exhibit “dark triad” psychopathic traits tend to rise to positions of authority (we’ll pass in silence over the relevance of that to Der Movement), and such elites structure society to serve their own selfish interests. On a group level, ethnocentric and collectivist psychopaths (Jews) structure society to benefit their own group, and they leverage more individualistic psychopaths (High Trusters) so as to get the latter to work against their own racial interests (that they care nothing for) and instead support the racial interests of the former group.  Hence, we observe as a result a “right-wing” leadership that acts against White interests not much different, in the end, than do leftists.  The entire System is built to serve the interests of psychopaths, and among these, the group interests of the more collectivist are favored. The emergent properties of such a System become rapidly evident to careful observers.

Well, yes.  Re: Jews and others who support Jewish interests:

They’ll be writing and publishing anti-Black materials themselves, in an effort to capture that particular market and control it.

Yes, it’s called HBD.

And the Jews will figure that if they can keep the reaction under control for twenty years or so, for a generation, it will lose its vitality and die out. And then there’ll be nothing left to threaten them, nothing left to thwart their plan for a Mulatto future.

Der Movement is, perhaps unknowingly, part of that controlling delaying action. The words quoted were from Pierce, thirty seven years ago. Thirty seven years! And what has been accomplished in all of that time? Nothing.

Speaking of which, you can only laugh at this gibbering stupidity. Gee, well, if we can’t tell that folks are Jews due to their skin tones and hair textures, and if Jews can pass as “Nordish,” we’ll just have to parse their behavior. I mean, that’s all objective and scientific, right?  Break out the behavioral calipers, so to speak.

Are those thirty seven years of utter failure becoming more understandable?

Odds and Ends, 5/6/21

In der news. In all cases, emphasis added.

Maybe it’s not a good idea to associate with Negroids?  Di…di…diverseteee….

Against HBD lies.

Thanks, flubros.

Covid realities.

The high prevalence of diabetes in India is contributing to the crisis.  That prevalence is in part genetically determined.

India is facing an epidemic of type 2 diabetes, with high prevalence in urban areas. Urbanisation and associated life style changes adversely affect the risk factors for diabetes unmasking the high genetic tendency existing in the population. Various epidemiological studies in Indians have shown that the increasing prevalence of diabetes could be attributed to a high genetic risk and lower risk thresholds for acquired risk factors such as age, obesity, abdominal adiposity and a high percentage of body fat. Diabetes occurs at a younger age in Indians compared to Whites. The risk of diabetes increases with a body mass index (BMI) of >23 kg/m(2) and waist circumference of 85 cm for men and 80 cm for women in Asian Indians. For a given BMI, Asian Indians have higher central adiposity. There is also evidence of higher insulin resistance amongst Indians, and this is partly explained by higher body fat percentage. A large proportion of urban adults has the metabolic syndrome also which predisposes them to both diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Recognition of these conditions and institution of early preventive measures are urgently needed.

Napoleon miniseries. Typically, movies based on history use actors and actresses that are more phenotypically gracile than the real historical figure, but in this miniseries, the opposite holds – the real Napoleon was more gracile than the actor playing him in this miniseries. Perhaps they wanted to stress the Corsican distinctiveness of Napoleon vs. the ethnic French (even though the actor is French). In any case, it’s better than Der Movement casting Dolph Lundgren as Napoleon.

Umberto Bossi, if you recall, is/was the Kempian Italo-Super-hero of the North, standing firm against “the threat of the South.” Yes, the hero:

In 1998, Bossi received a one-year suspended prison sentence for incitement of violence after he uttered the following sentence at a Lega Nord meeting: "We must hunt down these rascals [neo-fascists], and if they take votes from us, then let's comb the area house by house, because we kicked the fascists out of here once before after the war."

Kick out the fascists!  Umberto Antifa!  

Sleeping with the enemy:

He is married to the Sicilian Manuela Marrone and has four sons (of whom one was from his first wife).

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement plays the fool. 

See this.  It seems like dem dere Lega Nord leaders liked dem dere Southern women.

Correct:

CTON 

Here we are 20 years later, nothing has change--in fact, things are worse, and so many of our own people have either become more self-hating and just buckled down harder with their liberalism and self hatred. White Americans and Western Europeans and the UK have become desensitized to our genocide.

Very cognitive, very elite.

See this. I agree with most of it, but I believe Liddell goes too far, likely due to his rampant Anglocentrism. Multiple attempts by Hitler in the 1930s to achieve an understanding with the UK were repeatedly rebuffed, and I note that the British (and French) declaration of war against Germany for invading Poland neglected to include the Soviet Union, which ended up attacking Poland as well.

So, yes, Hitler was an imperialistic Germanocentric jackass who should have stopped after the Munich agreement, but the “Western allies” had an attitude toward Stalin the same as that of HBDers toward Asiatrics – drop pants, bend over. Both sides are to blame, not just one.

The best way to restrain Hitler would have been to join him in to a pan-Western alliance against the USSR, with the absolute demand, backed up by British and French military might, that the alliance is NOT meant to dispossess the Slavs and resettle Russia and the Ukraine with German colonists, but to defend against Soviet expansionism (and, better still, crush the Soviet Union, destroy Bolshevism, and re-establish normal independent national states in the former USSR).

The problem is not that the UK was anti-Hitler, it was that they were also pro-Stalin. They made a choice – the wrong choice. If they had to choose an ally, they should have chosen Hitler.

For Jim Goad.

Thanks, ethnonationalism.

See this. I wish someone would be investigating the HBDers in this regard.

Happy Saint Adolf’s Day, April 20, 2021

And other news. In all cases, emphasis added.

Happy Saint Adolf’s Day, April 20, 2021.

This is American Renaissance:

John Smith  

Anybody who isn't an Anglo-Saxon of Northern European descent with light skin is a person of color.

George Clooney is fully Northern European but he sure as hell isn't very "White"? Is he? I've seen Sicillians and Jews who are whiter then Clooney.

The French and other Southern European nations were all ruled by the Roman Empire which was mixed race. Including big parts of Southern Germany.

White people are Norweigans, Danes, Swedes, Dutch, Northern Germans, English, Irish and Scottish who have LIGHT skin. Anybody not listed is "a person of color". Even those Eastern Europeans who have a lot of Central Asian admixture.

Not only are Southern and Eastern Europeans all non-White admixed cringing mongrels, but even darker Northern Europeans like George Clooney are non-White as well. Dat Right!

I recently wrote:

The Alt Right seems to have been enriched with younger Type I ethnic fetishists, people who indeed seem involved in activism to make up for personal deficiencies and who have little else other than their racial identities. Thus, among the majority of these "activists" who are Herrenvolk, there's a tendency toward an exaggerated Nordicism, and a navel-gazing focus on their own ethnicity. We can then understand why hostility toward non-Nordic Europeans, fueled by the narcissism of small differences, is increasing…

That seems to fit “John Smith” very well. One can imagine him as some fellow playing video games in his mother’s basement, looking into a mirror from time to time to admire his light complexion, and obsessing over his Northwest European Celto-Germanic heritage, without which he would have nothing except his video game scores and the semen stains on the front of his sweat pants from jacking off to anime.

Some may say that comments like that of “John Smith” are so extreme and absurd (e.g., George Clooney [and other “Paleo-Atlantid” Northern Europeans] is “non-White”) that they are likely from anti-White, leftist trolls trying to be divisive.  But that’s the point, isn’t it – Nordicism becomes so ridiculous that one cannot with certainty distinguish a genuine Nordicist from leftist trolling. The ends result is the same.

I call Jeelvy a “Turko-Albanian” as a joke – mocking ridicule – to puncture his pretensions, but, alas, to the Herrenvolk, that designation is all too real:

FortunatusApril 19, 2021 at 6:38 am

Being a closed club, is not the same as having a national soul. The mafia is a closed club too. I thought you were talking about a meaningful nationalism based on blood on soil and a national soul and a national culture.

We are here discussing the problems of White people. And from my observation (I am a German living in Germany, which after 1945 was turned by the victors into a dumping ground for the riffraff of the world) the people of the Balkans often are somewhat Mischlinge between Turcs and Europeans proper. The occupation of the region by Turcs for centuries clearly had an influence on the gene pool, and at the end to Antiquity there was a fertility crisis of epic proportion, so I assume some Mischlinge from the East settled in that vacuum. So it would be very wrong to think the ancestors of your people fought in a phalanx with Alexander the Great.

So for me it is an open question what role the people of the Balkans can play in a discussion of a nationalism of White people. I don’t want to be divisive. So perhaps one can avoid this discussion.

But when someone from the Balkans comes along and denies Europeans in a very al fresco discussion of history their national identity (you seem completely ignore the fact that regional identity can coexist with a national identity), this will provoke some reaction from someone who knows a thing or two about your people.

I can understand where Jeelvy’s obnoxious posturing offends people, like this German, but the problem is that other Balkanoids are not responsible for Jeelvy’s stupid antics. Thus, because of his (justified) anger toward Jeelvy, this (alleged, self-described) German reveals his own hidden animus toward Balkan peoples. We see the typical Herrenvolk assumption that everyone else is admixed, but they themselves are pure, an assumption I have repeatedly challenged here.

In any event, we see the typical outcome of when people engage in ethnic gamesmanship – it antagonizes other people, who make their own offensive comments, and we get never-ending cycles of ethnic animus. Jeelvy is a master at starting these cycles of offense. Assuming he’s not doing it intentionally, then the man’s an idiot.

Nick JeelvyApril 19, 2021 at 5:16 am

Bulgaria got its name from the Bulgars and its language from Slavs, but they are the same people more or less who’ve lived there for centuries – i. e. Thracians.

Incorrect.  See this. See this figure. Now, that figure should NOT be taken literally, as it suffers from the same basic problems as supervised admixture analyses, both in the literature and from the testing companies – the choice of parental populations used will determine how the findings are structured. Interpreting the same populations with a different set of reference samples would yield a different set of ancestral components and percentages. That said, the data (such as they are), combined with other studies, and taking into account history, strongly suggest a significant contribution of Slavic ancestry to the Bulgarian genepool. The following seems reasonable:

Early gene flows between southeastern and eastern Europe make it difficult to obtain a correct estimate, although young enough identical by descent segments confirmed such connection and that the East and West Slavs share more identical by descent segments with South Slavs than with Greeks, inter-Slavic populations (a group of Romanians, Gagauz), but less with Balts, while the South Slavs share similar number with East and West Slavs, but fewer with Greeks.

I think most likely that the Bulgarians are mostly mix of indigenous Balkan (Thracian and other groups) and Slavic ancestry, with some fractional ancestry from Bulgars and other groups. But that is only my opinion, my interpretation, and I could be wrong. Unlike Der Retards of Der Movement, I don’t make definitive claims on subjects like this, claiming my opinion is a “fact” that “everyone knows.” I do think though that there is a general consensus among those that study Bulgarian ancestry that there is a Slavic component, but that component is less than what is found in, e.g., Poles.

More on the stupid Jeelvy article:

FortunatusApril 16, 2021 at 4:06 pm

It is never classy to allege that your audience is full of monsters created by propaganda and other evil means after their basic national soul has been destroyed, whereas oneself is the real thing.

I am pretty sure one could say very bad things about modern Macedonians as well. I did a quick picture search and what I saw was not a very pretty sight. If they have preserved their national soul, why do they wear the same garbage clothes like everybody in the West? And I am sure that the Macedonia youth does not sing the song of their ancestors while they annoy as expats others in the West (why did they emigrate, if they have preserved their blood-and-soil-nationalism?).

But I am not here to denigrate you, since I think you are a half decent writer, but this stupid bragging was a bit much.

PhoenixApril 17, 2021 at 3:45 pm

Yea, the Macedonian arrogance thing was laughable.

Also, this guy seems to be unaware that America was a mixture of different European ethnicities at it’s founding.

That last comment is completely consistent with my previous statements about how Europeans know very little about America and American history. Then they complain how the “Yanks” and the “Hamburgers” know nothing about Europe.  Pot, kettle.

On the Jews

Thoughts.

Jews often complain about “resurgent anti-Semitism,” and, indeed, one can find many websites and social media accounts (at least before they are censored) highly critical of the Jews.  Let us consider together.

Most people accepted and have accepted the mainstream Holocaust narrative. Therefore, at the end of WWII, the Jews enjoyed the sympathy and goodwill of most people in the (White) world (as well as the beneficiary of White guilt). So how did we reach the point we are at today, where people meme anti-Semitic cartoons that would make Julius Streicher blush? Some would day that the “sickness” of anti-Semitism is inherent in the evil goyim and this is all independent of Jewish behavior (despite the fact that Jews have been “persecuted” by every nation, other than their own, that they have lived in, since the beginning of their history). A more economical explanation is that anti-Semitism is simply a reaction to Jewish behavior.

If the Jews were simply another ethnic-religious group then they could have fit in with the fabric of America and enjoyed the goodwill of the American people. This did not happen. How did the Jews repay White America for the sacrifice of blood and treasure spent in defeating Hitler? By destroying the traditional White America, through the “civil rights” movement, forced racial integration, the 1960s counter-culture and the anti-war movement, the 1965 immigration act and the consequent mass alien immigration, through the Frankfurt School and the degeneration of American culture, etc. Europe was punished for Nazism, even those nations that fought Hitler, via The Great Replacement.

So is the current zeitgeist of anti-Semitism in any way surprising?

Of relevance.  Solzhenitsyn:

How do we Russians take responsibility for the pogroms, for those merciless peasant arsonists, for the mad revolutionary soldiers and sailor beasts, and the Jews get to spread their hands in blameless innocence over the countless Yiddish names among the commissar-butchers who commanded the whole wretched business?

Of interest to any Black readers (*) of this site:

In my interview for Griffin's One Sheaf One Vine book, I discussed personal experiences growing up with Jews and Blacks and with almost every racial type possible. One thing I didn't have time to get into there was my observations about Jewish attitudes toward Blacks.  While there is much here to consider, too much to be completely gone into in one paragraph here, a brief summary would be as follows. Please note that here I specifically refer to my own experiences and observations, including things I have personally heard and /or discussed with Jews over the years. While many Jews are willing to use Blacks (and other non-Whites, but especially Blacks) in an instrumental fashion as weapons against White Gentiles, my observations have been that many Jews hate and fear Blacks. This hatred and fear is immediate, primal, and personal - it is based on a fear of Black crime, violence, and rioting; it is a direct personal fear that a given Black or group of Blacks will harm a given Jew or group of Jews. Fear breeds hatred, especially when mixed with contempt; while Jews have contempt for all non-Jews, they particularly have a low opinion of Blacks. Now, Jews hate and fear White Gentiles as well, but this is a different level of fear and hatred. Jews don't fear Whites at the level of the individual violent criminal or at the level of the violent mob as they fear Blacks; instead, Jews fear Whites at the social and political level - that Whites will politically organize a society-wide movement that will be directly or indirectly anti-Semitic. While Jews have contempt for White Gentles as their intellectual inferiors, they do consider Whites to be very much more intelligent and capable than are Blacks. Thus, while Jews complain about Black anti-Semitism and anti-Jewish Black leaders, they do not take that threat seriously other than that it may provoke limited riots or individual crimes of violence. Jews contemptuously dismiss Blacks as too unintelligent and undisciplined (and too easily manipulated) to be a threat at the political level, unlike the threat from Whites. Thus, Whites they consider intelligent and disciplined enough to organize against Jews at the national level; after all, Jews have had bitter experience with this. Again, here I am not here expressing my own opinions, but merely summarizing what I have heard and/or discussed with various Jews over the years about their opinions. I believe that thoughtful Blacks should have an understanding of attitudes toward their race; for many Blacks, what I write here will not come as a surprise.

*And why shouldn't there be such readers? Thoughtful individuals of any race may be interested in bluntly honest talk of issues of relevance to race and society.

Odds and Ends, 12/5/20

In der news.

Since Counter-Currents is part of the HBD-Nordicist-ethnonationalist alliance, what we must accept – indeed, predict with mathematical certainty – is that the site will engage in ever-more-explicit hostility toward Southern and Eastern European White ethnics.

Case in point:

…it’s still arguable whether Italians are white.

And:

Jim Goad

Posted December 3, 2020 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

I think you’re right about this. In the neighborhood where I grew up, you were either Irish or Italian, and it was clear the Italians weren’t white.

We could in theory extend that analysis to other types of people, but, for example, examining the racial worth and "whiteness" of autistic defectives isn't worth the time. And, after all, Goad, who is mysteriously sensitive on this subject, tells us that only "dumb and inarticulate" people use the term "autistic." Very well. So, a question remains: Is being "colorblind" about Blacks consistent with "caring more about facts than social approval?" One would think it the opposite, no?  

More:

Jim Goad

....I resent Italy for sending all its douchebags here, though.

Personally, I resent people - not anyone in particular, of course, just a general statement of principle - who produce mentally defective children who are a burden on society. 

See this.

The economic burden associated with ASD is substantial and can be measured across multiple sectors of our society. Previous analyses that focused on health care underestimated this economic burden, particularly for school systems.

But, wait:

…parents who reported that their child had ASD did not have significantly higher out-of-pocket costs...compared with control parents.

So – an increased economic burden and yet the parents “did not have significantly higher out-of-pocket costs.”  Guess who pays?  

And how much?

ASD is associated with approximately $3.6 million in lifetime social cost.

The lifetime social costs to date are more than $7 trillion, the equivalent of about two years of total federal revenue for the United States.

By 2029, If prevalence remains the same, the cost will grow to $11.5 trillion, and if prevalence continues to increase at the past rate, the cost will grow to nearly $15 trillion.

On Goad (from Wikipedia, emphasis added):

In May 1997, Goad began dating then-stripper Anne "Skye" Ryan about the time that Debbie was diagnosed with the ovarian cancer that later killed her. Goad described Ryan as "Sweet Dracula girl" and as being "...fifteen years younger than me and a thousand times more fucked-up." In November 1997, Debbie was granted a restraining order against Goad, after stating that he had hit, kicked, and spit on her and threatened to kill her. They divorced in December, 1997.

In May 1998, Goad and Ryan had a fight in Goad's car outside of Portland. Goad left Ryan by the side of the road, and fled to Washington state. When police met Ryan in a hospital emergency room, she had a blackened eye that was swollen shut, "bite marks on her hand and she was bleeding in several places. Goad was charged with assault and kidnapping…Goad plead guilty to reduced charges and served 2 1/2 years, split between jail and prison. He was released in the fall of 2000. When asked if he had any remorse or guilt about beating Ryan, Goad said, "Absolutely not. I enjoyed it."

Oh my God, indeed.

I can’t think of another white criminal syndicate in existence that makes a point of being white.

What about Der Movement?  Certainly, the criminally-oriented are well represented in its ranks.

More HBD-Nordicist Counter-Currents comments in response to Goad's "it was clear the Italians weren’t white."

Paul

Posted December 4, 2020 at 7:46 am | Permalink

The scene between Dennis Hopper and Christopher Walken in “True Romance” is instructive in this regard.

Note how Sallis' Law applies well in this case.  Here we have a Goad essay ostensibly about Black criminal gangs and, of course, it devolves into a discussion about the "whiteness" (or lack thereof) of Italians. After all, what "movement" discussion doesn't end up focusing on that topic?  Godwin's Law has nothing on Sallis Law.

The problem with that whole comments thread was that wop who decided to show up and complain. Why bother?  Just acknowledge that Counter-Currents is an anti-White ethnic, pro-HBD, pro-homosexual site dedicated to raising "D'Nations" and dedicated to promoting HBD-Nordicism-ethnonationalism (actually, ethnoimperialism) and move on. Start your own blog, do your own thing, and just scan Counter-Currents to stay up-to-date to what the opposition is doing; if you want to criticize them, do it in your own forum, or in another forum that supports the interests of all Europeans, instead of supporting the interests of "Rosie and the kids."

My paradigm that Counter-Currents is headed in the direction of Majority Rights is supported by things like this. Regardless of what you think about that cartoon, the facts are that, first, Counter-Currents has pretensions of being the "erudite blog for the 120+ IQ crowd," while, at the same time, catering to Goad's Howard Stern-like essays that are accompanied by crudely racist cartoons and, second, this is exactly like "J. Richards" and his moronic posts that were accompanied by crude anti-Jewish cartoons of a quality that would have made Julius Streicher blush. It's the same appeal to Type I crudity in order to boost page views and cater to the newest toy in the writer playpen (in this case, Goad). It would seem likely that one reason Johnson recruited Goad is to boost page views - and, hence, "D'Nations." The seriousness of that blog (such as it is and was) suffers. And as regards the crude images at Richard Lynn's Pseudoscience - that was openly a satiric blog, openly mocking HBD stupidities - unlike Counter-Currents, there was no pretense there of being the "Ivy League" of WN. The same with satiric content at this blog.

Typical Anglo-Nordicist perspective:

There are Hispanics in the Chicago area, but they mostly act, talk, and look like whites that are “ethnic.”

What?  Dominicans, Italians, Puerto Ricans, Poles, Mexicans, Greeks – all the same!  Damn the wogs!

Obama’s mother was a white liberal from the Anglo-Nordic American majority…

Having “white liberal” and “Anglo-Nordic” in the same sentence is superfluous repetition.

I see all of this at Counter-Currents as a very good thing indeed. After all, I could post for years (as I have done) about how Der Movement is hostile to White ethnics, or about Sallis' Law, or about the HBD-Nordicist-ethnonationalist alliance, and the shabbos sud and shabbos ost stepandfetchits would ignore it all and just go along with Johnson's description of me as "insane." Then comes along the latest crop of moronic Counter-Currents writers and commentators who do nothing but prove my points, time and again.  More, please.

In theory, one shouldn't interfere with an opponent making a mistake, but Johnson can't help himself, so writing this won't change a thing. That blog will continue making this blog look prescient.

GNXPers weep.

See this.

Beyond that, white men are increasingly embittered. Bitterness is a wild card, because it leads to spite. A spiteful man will even harm his own interests to avenge himself. He can’t be reasoned with, predicted, or controlled. A critical mass of white men like that is going to be a problem for more than just the movie business.

I won’t comment on the irony of Johnson’s comment considering his past attacks on me as “crazy and bitter” and “an embittered former writer” (at Counter-Currents).

Heil Hitler!

Meet Mike Lee:

Jack Ryanod 

This horror - sponsoring our people's replacement by lowest wage Indian Shudra was sponsored by Mike Lee US Senator from Utah - White guy, went to BYU.

Hey!  Lee is a Herrenvolk high-truster, and that’s all that matters!

High Trusters!

Tom Cotton and David Perdue publicly supported it. It’s very odd that Perdue and Kelly Loeffler didn’t oppose it since they are desperately trying to convince Georgia conservatives to vote for them right now.

Very cognitive, very elite.

See this.  Maybe that will turn out to be the case.  It is more likely however that Trump will merely tweet "Fraud! Something must be done!" and go out golfing.  Predicting Trump is like predicting the weather, short term - the persistence theory holds; past history is predictive of future events. In Trump's case, ineptness and inertia.  But, hey, if I'm wrong, great, I'll admit it.

This is absurd.

The movement is far more serious and capable than it was in 2015 when the “Alt Right” was at its peak. 

No, the “movement” is worse than ever, and will continue to get worse with affirmative action losers in charge.

The movement in-fighting will fade, because it is easier to unite in opposition and there will be no more tactical debates about whether to defend Donald Trump.

Ha!  Tell that to the castrato-voiced Quota Queens who soil their trousers (front side) with every latest criticism of Richard Spencer.

Odds and Ends,11/16/20

In der news.

See this.

THE TIME has come to stop focusing on what Trump, Biden, and all the crooked Republicans and crooked Democrats are doing as they try to grab the wheel of the sinking ship in Washington.

Yes, let’s blithely ignore the consequences of increased political persecution of the Far Right and ignore the consequences of further suppression of free expression.

Instead of what they’re doing, let’s talk about what we are trying to do. 

Yes, we’ve been waiting for that for a long time.  I suspect we won’t get any specifics though.

When I say “we,” I mean the men and women of the National Alliance.

Both of them.

If the current leadership of the National Alliance wants to garner support they need to first generate at least some successes that they can point to, with the resources they already have at hand, and they need to describe, at least in general terms, the strategic approaches that they are going to take to achieve their goals.  Merely reading the writings of a man who has been dead for close to twenty years does not suffice. Invoking the names of “The National Alliance” and “William Pierce” are insufficient incentives to attract quality followers, as opposed to all the other activism going on (or pretending to be going on).

FDR’s perfidy and Hitler’s stupidity.

Read this.  “Social science” (sic) marches on.

This article is being retracted at the request of all of the authors. The first author of the paper, Abdiel J. Flores, contacted the journal on his own initiative to inform it that he falsified data in the paper. He altered specific data values in Figures 1 and 2 and associated analyses that resulted in incorrect and misleading results on the effects of SES identity threat on cardiovascular challenge/threat reactivity and on mathematics performance. Because this data manipulation invalidates the findings, the entire article is being retracted. Mr. Flores informed the journal that he takes full responsibility for alteration of data; none of the co-authors participated in or had knowledge of the first author’s actions. Mr. Flores self-reported this matter to his institution, Columbia University, which is handling it in accordance with institutional policy and procedure.

Why hasn’t this bizarrely alien turd been thrown out of his PhD program?

See this. Well, not Counter-Currents or Brimelow/VDARE to start with.  Probably spend some on legal defense, starting independent media – probably a good idea to invest a good chunk of it into dividend funds, and use the proceeds (not the principal) to find full-time REAL activists, not gifters.

Hmm.  Very good.  Now let’s figure out what could be done with the millions of dollars being wasted by the “movement.”  Start here.

The essence of Trump in one tweet. Add another option –

“I’ll get back to you; I’m busy golfing.”

Flubro retardation marches on:

Diversity Heretic says:

For those of us who remember the 1976 swine flu vaccination fiasco…

Which I remember as well, and it was indeed a fiasco.

…the concept of mass inoculations with a minimaly-tested, rushed-to-production vaccine for a highly contagious, but not particularly lethal virus is very disturbing. 

Blame China.

And the fact that it isn’t only a new vaccine, but a new type of vaccine that uses messenger RNA (whatever that is)…

“Whatever that is.” You know, if you are an ignorant moron, and also can’t be bothered to look up terms that you do not know, then probably you shouldn’t be commenting on the subject. Idiot.

…makes me even more uneasy. (I’ve read that it actually makes a person a genetically modified organism, but don’t have the scientific expertise to evaluate such a claim.) 

What an idiot. By golly, imagining getting another organism’s nucleic acids inside your body. Horrors!  Good thing you don’t eat organic material and that your body is completely sterile and contains no microorganisms whatsoever!

The riposte to me on that would be that the mRNA vaccine is of mRNA not typically found in a human body and that it will be translated into protein. So?  The specific viral antigen will be produced, you will have an immunogenic reaction to it, and then the mRNA will eventually be degraded.  

Big deal. No, you are not going to be “genetically modified" in any real sense. No, you are not going to be the first transgenic retard.

There’s a reason that vaccine development often takes a while, such as evaluating the long-term side effects. 

And then the anti-vaxxers still won’t take it.

This vaccination program has all the signs of a major health disaster. 

Letting Chinese live on the same planet as humans has all the signs of a major health disaster.

I’d prefer to take my chances with the virus and I’m in my seventh decade.

Let’s hope you contract it.

Johnson in his latest livestream commented on Donovan critiquing his past association with WNs – "well he was never a WN.” True, but Donovan sure received a lot of (undeserved) positive attention from “White advocates” and other WN-oriented people, didn’t he?

Apart from Donovan’s and Pilleater’s shared, err, “interests,” here is a question – what do Donovan, Pilleater, and Jorjani have in common?

1. They were showered with positive attention by various factions of Der Movement, particularly the Alt Right, and were taken seriously as important figures – Donovan and Jorjani more than Pilleater, but Johnson definitely took Pilleater seriously as well. Indeed, Johnson was associated with all three of them.

2. All three of them were critiqued here at EGI Notes, and I strongly disapproved of the fact that Der Movement took them seriously; my opinion was that the “movement” should not have had anything to do with any of them.

3. In all three cases, things went badly. Donovan denounces his past links with WN, Jorjani did the same, and we know how the Pilleater-Johnson association ended up.

It’s almost as if – gasp! who knows? – Sallis’ judgment about people is better than that of Johnson or that of any of the other affirmative action “leaders” of the “movement.” Paging “Lovecraft’s Cat.”

I make an analogy to running a business. Imagine you are the owner of a small business in a very volatile market with much larger competitors who want to drive you out of business.  On the one hand, you want to grow your business and try to grab a larger market share, but on the other hand you have to be very careful, very prudent; you would need to avoid any serious errors. In this scenario, you have no leeway for large error, as you are on the edge of success vs. failure.  Der Movement is in that position vs. the System/Left.  Every serious error runs the risk of being devastating.

So, Pilleater was an obviously bad investment with no real upside.  Jorjani was a highly risky investment with limited upside - I would never have bothered with him (I don't trust NECs and my scientific background allowed me to recognize Jorjani's silly pseudoscience - "the spectral!").  Donovan may have been a bit less risky, with some more upside, but again, from my perspective, still not worth the risk. If the "movement" wants to take any prudent risks in order to achieve growth, there are better options than those three.