Nordicism: The Resistant Cancer

There’s no escape from it.

See this comment.

I cannot be too harsh with this Spaniard. He is at the point where I myself was years ago, when I was routinely writing for “movement” journals, blogs, and websites. However, since this person spends most of his time in a Spanish, rather than American, milieu, it is a question as to when, or even if, he is going to wake up to the truth about the “movement.”

In my case, I had the delusion that negative elements, such as Nordicists, were a minority of leaders and activists, and the vast majority were well-meaning people whose views were at least roughly compatible with my own. I thought that the Nordicists, while a serious scourge, were a dying-out remnant from the past, and that they and their outdated views would be swept away by the tide of pan-Europeanism. How wrong I was.

The reality, at least in the American “movement,” is of a conformist mass of activists, who follow the leading dogma, and who are thoroughly inculcated wit “movement” dogma that I view as destructive. With respect to the more “thinking” leaders and activists, in fact most of them are negative, destructive types, and only a small minority are what I would term positive.

With respect to Nordicism, one can view it as a cancer within the body of pro-White activism. One can treat the cancer and initially eliminate most of the cells, and one can be deluded that the body is firmly on the path to health. But, alas, some cancer cells exhibit mutations that confer resistance to treatment, the cancer grows back, and the relapse – typically accompanied by metastasis of the cancer and impairment of normal bodily functions – eventually kills the patient.

In the case of Nordicism, the mutations include: (a) HBD. Thus the fusion of HBD and Nordicism, spearheaded by Lynn, Hippocrates, etc. and now promoted by The Occidental Observer and other outlets (like the Amren “race realists”) has breathed new life into Nordicist doctrine – and it is also no surprise that non-White HBDers gleefully promote HBD-Nordicism in order to divide Whites. (b) Ethnonationalism. The rebirth of petty nationalism, spearheaded by Counter-Currents, also serves Nordicist objectives to divide Whites. (c) The Alt Right. Nonsense is more easily spread in an atmosphere of juvenile jackassery. (d) Internet culture. When any idiot with a computer and an Internet connection can reach a wide, international audience, the worst memes can be easily spread. (e) Crypto-Nordicism. Just like a cancer can evade a body’s immune system, so do we also have people who are de facto hardcore Nordicists but who deny that they are Nordicists (they “just speak the truth,” don’t you know) and/or pretend not to know what Nordicism is. Thus, to the extent that some of today’s activists think that historical Nordicism is passé, they still accept and promote Nordicist themes disguised as other forms of “movement” discourse. Of course, as such themes become ever more accepted, then being overtly Nordicist will also, in due course, also be more accepted.

I also have to note that the Quota Queens have a strong personal (including financial) interest in keeping Nordicism alive (in spirit if not in name) because Nordicism underpins the ethnic affirmative action program that enables grifters and incompetents to be “leaders” sucking at Der Movement’s engorged D’Nations teat.

Mainstreaming for the Loss

Mainstreaming - the proven recipe for defeat.

Skullface loses…again.

The bottom line - Marine Le Pen has now been elected President of France as many times as her father.  All of that mainstreaming, all of that compromise, all of that throwing her father and his principles under the bus, for absolutely nothing.

We of course observe that the Quota Queens have learned nothing from the continued defeats of mainstreaming.

Remember this?  No surprise about who is always right, eh?

Summary - Orban wins, Le Pen loses. Farstreaming is a proven success, just as mainstreaming is a (repeatedly) proven utter failure.

Note to Der Movement - “coming close” and “almost winning” are irrelevant for a winner-take-all election. Every Le Pen loss, every  electoral cycle defeat, wastes precious time, allowing France’s demographic situation to worsen and thus making any possible future Far Right electoral victory that much more difficult. The electoral window of opportunity is being squandered with the endlessly failed strategy of mainstreaming. The mainstreaming hypothesis is continuously refuted – has the approach ever worked?

I believe that the best chance for the Far Right in France is either an Orban-like situation in which an established center-right figure authentically farstreams to the Far Right as an actual change of heart and not as a mere electoral tactic, and is able to organically expand his (a man, not a woman) base of support, and/or a de novo leader with positive qualities and no significant “baggage,” someone (again, a man) who is of indigenous French descent, and is not a rat-faced North African Jew. Marine the Mainstreamer has wasted enough of the French people’s time with repeated failed electoral attempts.

Whither High Culture?

What direction?

I previously harshly commented on Steuben’s Counter-Currents essay about a “Spenglerian High Culture,” which I considered inferior to my own essay on a Overman High Culture (links to both essays contained in the EGI Notes post link provided). Others have critiqued the Steuben piece; for example, see this.

If you are a planning a book I have another objection which might interest you. It is that Spengler himself is the ultimate Faustian man, and his work is essentially Faustian – Spengler himself stands outside of all history, making repeated pronouncements on how nobody before him had understood history as well as he, for he has to rise above all cultural cycles to be able see their forms. In many ways he is a 20th century Faust. And therefore a new cultural epoch, if it was truly new in the Spenglerian sense, could only look with incredulity and probably contempt at Faustian spirit of The Decline of the West. They would certainly consign such a book to the flames, for any non-Faustian people would find the idea of stepping outside of history incomprehensible, hubristic, and absurd. Whatever their world feeling, it will not permit Spengler’s foray into a space outside of all peoples, all cultures and all of history. To do this is essentially Faustian. Rather, they will be fully rooted within a world view and a world picture, as all peoples and cultures are except one, the Faustian one. Indeed this is also the proof that we ourselves are still Faustian people, for we too could hardly comprehend adopting such a world view, and certainly could never be at home in it. For good or ill we belong to this Faustian world and only a truly Faustian person can take seriously a project like The Decline of the West.

If one looks at my criticisms of the Steuben piece, as well as criticism from others, such as that quoted above, it is clear that my own Overman essay suffers from some of the same problems. It is certainly prescriptive, not descriptive. More to the point, it is obviously derived from someone with a Faustian mindset; indeed, one can certainly critique my essay as advocating a “new” High Culture that is nothing more or less than a “super-Faustian” one: Faustianism without limits, without inevitable failure, the road to godhood. What could be more Faustian than that?

That is all true. However, I have two ripostes to that argument.  First, as I have suggested over the years, we should not be so deeply wedded to Spengler’s thesis in its absolute form. Yes, it does have some explanatory power. Yes, in its broad outlines, it may well be true. That doesn’t mean one needs to accept all of it, in every detail, particularly with respect to some of Spengler's more dogmatic assertions and predictions. A dedicated Spenglerian would deny any upward trend in human history; it is merely cyclical, with each High Culture, and component of each High Culture, being (objectively) no better or worse than all of the others. Yockey - certainly a “dedicated Spenglerian” - classified both the Egyptian and Western/Faustian High Cultures as having “mighty technics,” as if there is no real difference between several large pyramids and a modern city with its plethora of towering skyscrapers, or between a chariot and an atom bomb.  At the very least, science and technics, together with the standard of living, has shown an upward trend. Is that subjective from a Faustian perspective? Well, if you say so. However, if you really believe that there have been no objective scientific/technical advances in human history then who is being objective and who is being subjective? The assertion of improvement in things such as ethics is, I will admit, more subjective, but strong arguments can be made here as well that ethical standards, at least among those on the Right, have become more refined, and here among European Man if among no other group.  I would argue that if history is “cyclical” then it is manifested by an upward spiral of cycles, but, perhaps, that it is only true of European Man. Certainly, all of the advancements in the human condition – or nearly “all” of them – both material and otherwise, have sprung from the minds and efforts of only one of the various extant hominid races (or species). That of course means that future advancement would be dependent on the continued existence of that people; and their demise would doom “humanity” (more, properly, hominidity) to a true futile cycle of "high cultures." Here is some objective analysis – if the Earth were threatened by an extinction event, such as an asteroid or comet strike, only one of the Earth’s High Cultures up to this point in time would have the will and the capability to recognize the threat and do something about it, and that is the Western/Faustian High Culture.  None of the others have had the will or the capability, and Steuben’s Bring Out Your Dead hobbit hole “high culture” certainly would not. Isn’t the ability to potentially save humanity, and save the existence of “high culture” itself, at the very least a manifestation of objectively superior science and technics?  And, objectively speaking, the ability to destroy humanity, also characteristic of the same high culture, is a negative objective manifestation of that same innate superior advancement in science and technics.

If Spengler is incorrect in that, then one does not need to consider him and his thesis as infallible. Perhaps other things Spenglerian can also be re-considered. Can a certain High Culture, particularly one defined by constant upward striving and over-coming, experience repeated rebirth rather than permanent death?  Is the act of Spenglerian self-awareness of historical cycles, made possible by a Faustian “standing outside history,” which itself is a manifestation of the Western/Faustian High Culture, the spark that would allow the Western/Faustian High Culture to escape the fate of others?

Second, I have to say (and this may be ascribed to me being embedded in a Faustian mindset), if the death of the Faustian High Culture, and its replacement by something new, means a devolution of the human condition, if it means the triumph of backwardness, ignorance, of Counter-Currents’ dream of cowering Whites hiding from life “snug in their hobbit holes,” then please count me as a Culture Retarder who will fight for the old Faustian High Culture and would reject the new. Or, count me as someone who rejects Spenglerian inevitability, and rejects that the development if a new high culture is a purely undirected organic process, and count me as someone who wants to intentionally guide the development of a new culture (i.e., to the Overman direction). That may be “pseudomorphosis” – but who cares?  The higher development of humanity is more important than Spenglerian dogma.

It is important for people on the Right to move away from blind dogma and simplistic explanations and accept the complexity of reality, of life, and of the human condition in general.  It is better to try and fail than not to try at all.  At least the former approach contains the possibility of victory while the latter dooms you to defeat.  If one is to go on a doomed Faustian quest to influence the future of High Culture, then at least make the attempt to be reaching for something higher, rather than hastening a collapse into a hobbit hole of backwardness and of endless despair for humanity.

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.

Odds and Ends, 4/18/22

In der news.

The hobbit hole crowd would like to ascribe the B-2 comedy (and I suppose the earlier FOGBANK fiasco) to the end of a "Faustian impulse." (note - then why isn't Musk's SpaceX an indication of a surging Faustian impulse)?

The hobbit hole argument is not very persuasive. The time interval between knowledge/no knowledge was very short; true that civilizations can decline very rapidly at the end, but in this case other explanations seem more likely. The amount of effort required to retain the knowledge was minimal, if the will to do so was present. The will to do so had less to do with Faustian drives into the unknown and more do with national security interests and basic technological expertise.

American science and technics, like America itself, is dead because it was MURDERED, not because of a "natural death" from a loss of Faustianism. The Jew-High Truster alliance, together with their colored pets, have made the entirety of the American STEM enterprise, including military/aerospace, into "diversity, equity, and inclusion." The American military, literally, cares several orders of magnitude more about "social justice" than about B-2 bombers. We have a Jew-High Truster hyper-capitalist ethos that only values immediate profits (apart from social justice, I suppose some loss of profits in the same of equity is allowed, but STEM will always be sacrificed for money). We have a darkening and dumbed down population, a pathetic educational system, and a corrupt culture.

You can ascribe all of that to "a loss of Faustianism" if you wish, but I doubt any of it would be a happening in the absence of Jews and the absence of the "Yankee" Puritan tradition of moralistic outrage.

Let's compare the hobbit hole high culture to my vision of the overman high culture, which is summarized thus

No more “proud, tragic” failure in “striving for the unattainable” in the “Faustian” culture – instead the Overman Culture will be characterized by the proud successful attainment of the infinite. That is what a hopeful individual can project as the new High Culture of the West, with links to the Classical and the Faustian, but surpassing both in the aim and objective of the human spirit. That is what Western Destiny can and should be.

Two people get it.  See this.  Also see this.  Steuben's trash post was one of the worst ever at Counter-Currents, and that's saying something, considering how badly the site has degenerated. One MUST understand - Steuben is expressing the underlying worldview of Der Movement's "traditionalism" - they WANT to live in 10th century hobbit holes. Actually, they THINK they want that - if they had to give up all the perks of modern life, they'd collapse into a fetal position and weep softly. Yes, type on your computer and spread nonsense over the global Internet while advocating a return of the Dark Ages 

There are three choices:

The System - to the sewer

Der Movement - to the hobbit hole

Sallis Groupuscule - to the stars

Quo vadis?

See this.  Also see this.  Liddell and Cochran weep.

See this.  Of course men have more "love at first sight." Men care about physical appearance. So, milady, men don't care about your "personality" (sic), your "intelligence" (sic), or your "accomplishments" (sic). The ONLY thing that matters is how you look. So, think about that as you waddle to your fridge to take that pint of ice cream out of the freezer.

Blasphemy of the day: The excesses of German National Socialism ruined fascism, wrecked the West, and put the White race in its current dangerous situation.

Now, there is nothing wrong with the basic principles of national socialism, which I agree with. But combining it with German fanaticism and militarism is what led to all of the problems.

When German fascism should have done was simply expel all of the Jews and other aliens (one way or the other), build up the country internally (which was done in the 1930s), and form alliances with fascist movements in other nations, and of course with Fascist Italy itself. These alliances would be defensive, not for conquest, and to help fascists come to power in other nations of Europe. Merger with Austria was appropriate, as that was popular with ethnic Austrians (ethnically akin to South Germans). As regards German minorities in other nations, they should have been repatriated to Germany, as opposed to seizing the territory in which they lived. The "Polish Corridor" should have been dealt with diplomatically. The alliance of fascists, perhaps in conjunction with Western democracies not threatened by German expansionism, could have put together an anti-communist and anti-Soviet alliance.

Ted Sallis translation services:

White supremacy = Whites defending their legitimate interests, the same as every other group does

Saving White children from White supremacy = brainwashing White children to disregard their own group interests, and sacrifice themselves for others who hate them.

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.

The Coming Bring Out Your Dead High Culture

I am right...again.

I have often mocked Der Movement's irrational, anti-scientific, traditionalist Luddite attitudes as eventually leading to a Bring Out Your Dead ethnostate.

Once again, I have been proven correct, as you can see in this pathetic rip-off of a previous superior analysis.  Look at this crap:

However, it is likely that at least some technologies will be lost or regress in sophistication, as they do not correspond to the Spenglerian world feeling and thus will not be as intuitive to future scientists. Take how the US Air Force today has to reverse engineer some of its B-2 stealth bomber parts. While diversity and dumbing down probably has something to do with it, a subtler reason contributing in the background might be how the desire to propel forward into infinite space has finally burnt out in the modern Western scientist, even among the white and German ones.

After all, things like bombers will be left to Chinamen. Whites can cower in their hobbit holes as their "nations" are nuked by Orientals, and then the rag-clad Whites can crawl out into the radioactive rubble and watch the Yellow Man rocket off into space. But, hey, who cares?  As long as your sacred Savitri Devi texts are still intact, it's all good!

One technology that will probably be lost is that of modern health care. This profane mix of mad science experiments aiming to prolong the body’s existence for as long as possible is inherently Faustian and the antithesis of a Spenglerian sense that all things, even death, have their appointed time and place. 

Just like with the Black Death.  Bring out your dead!

This rejection of modern health care will be even further exacerbated by memories of the transgender industrial complex and COVID hysteria. 

Let's not admit that The Holy Oriental created a pandemic (one of many).  It's just hysteria.  

Future medicine will likely be holistic and focused on a healthy diet and exercise...

Eating twigs and branches and digging your snug hobbit hole.

...with medical procedures reserved for broken bones and the like. Strong taboos will likely arise against progressing further in these matters beyond basic surgery and natural medicines.

Bring out your dead!

The new culture will also have little interest in designing complex legal and political systems, even in its latter stages of development.

After all, Lord of the Rings contains within it the answers to all questions. Leave abstractions to other races.  Just read Tolkien in your hobbit hole and die of a curable disease by age 40.

Guess what, retards?  The Chinese won't buy into your hobbit hole civilization and will become the masters of the Earth...and of space.

Obviously, this Counter-Currents essay is prescriptive, not descriptive (just like mine was essentially prescriptive).  The author is telling you what kind of new High Culture he wants, not one he knows will come into being.  And what he wants is precisely the sort of backward, reactionary, dead-end, traditionalist hell-hole I have longed warned you is the inevitable outcome of a (unlikely) victory by Der Movement.

I oppose this pathetic and disgusting vision of a White "future" - a future that would hand over the keys to the kingdom to the Yellow Man, which is probably intentional in Asian-worshipping WN 3.0. 

Counter-Currents is the deadly enemy of the White race and of a real White future.

Delenda est traditionalism!

Delenda est Counter-Currents!

Delenda est Der Movement!

Odds and Ends, 4/12/22

In der news.

Ted’s First Person Account.  We need more accounts about this from other people. Anyone interested can leave comments at my Gab account.

Who is able and willing to oppose Greg Johnson's attempt to ludicrously and destructively redefine "White nationalism" to simply mean a bunch of unconnected, atomized European ethnic nationalisms, which makes the entire concept of "White nationalism" essentially meaningless?

Pierce is long dead. Strom has the right idea about racial nationalism, and can match Johnson for brains, but is trapped in the cul-de-sac of the dead National Alliance and the failed Piercian "Leninist" (as Johnson would term it) approach. Plus, Strom appears hesitant to directly critique other "movement" leaders. Spencer has self-destructed, and never had the mental firepower to match Johnson. Taylor and MacDonald have the brains, but they are old, do not want to confront Johnson, and have other agendas (HBD race realism, HBD Nordicism). Duke is old, lacks the will or ability, and is obsessed with Jews.

The Sallis Groupuscule will do its best with respect to this issue, but with me not being a "movement" "leader," of the "wrong" ethnicity, blacklisted and ignored by Der Movement, whatever arguments I make will be read by a tiny number of people and have very little or any effect - most likely.

Affirmative action has consequences. There isn't anyone in Der Movement with the ability, will, and capability to oppose the destruction of White racial nationalism by the Counter-Currents metastasis.

See this.

Greg JohnsonApril 10, 2022 at 2:49 pm

I obviously don’t advocate white states hating and harming one another: nationalism for me but not for thee. I support the good kind of nationalism, which is a universal form of nationalism in which different nations respect the sovereignty of others as they would have others respect them.

What an evil mendacious fuckwad. That's the guy who suggested war and ethnic cleansing could be a way for European states to interact with each other. Yes, and having scum like Morgan living in other people's countries is respecting "sovereignty."

Compare the comment above with what Greg Johnson previously wrote:

But what would happen if a sovereign European state signed a treaty to host a gigantic Chinese military base? Or if it fell into the hands of plutocrats who started importing cheap non-white labor?... Other states would be perfectly justified in declaring war against the rogue state, deposing the offending regime, and ethnically cleansing its territory. 

Again, he promoted the idea of war and ethnic cleansing between Europeans and then has the nerve to write: "I obviously don’t advocate white states hating and harming one another."

Now, compare his statement that European states that start "importing cheap non-white labor" should be subject to war and ethnic cleansing with this:

I make it very clear that the ethnostate should be considered a right, not an obligation.

The Irish people had every reason and right to their own country. If they destroyed their country through opening up to globalization, that’s hardly a lesson against nationalism. But it was, at least, their mistake to make.

But I thought importing aliens is justification for military invasion and ethnic cleansing? We can see why this guy never debates anyone at a level higher than Jones, Gariepy, or Anglin. Anyone with at least a room temperature IQ could just quote his endless inconsistencies and expose him for the superficial self-unaware jackass he is.

I’m Not the One Who Changed

Read carefully.

In contrast to the Quota Queens claiming that I somehow changed, and became “paranoid” and “insane,” the reality is that I’m not the one who changed.  Looking at my work over the last twenty and more years demonstrates that my views have been consistent. My extended hand of friendship has been repeatedly spat upon and slapped away, metaphorically speaking. My realization that things will never change in Der Movement led me to the course of action toward Der Movement that results in the “paranoid” and “insane” ad hominem pathologization.

Thus, my recent post about White Nationalist Fraud. What needs to be understood, and something that took me some time to realize, is that the Quota Queens and their followers actually believe in the more extreme versions of their dogma.

As one very clear example, consider the following remarkable statement (emphasis added) from a post from the execrable site Counter-Currents, a “movement” interpretation of a rather stupid and shallow movie:

Then comes what is to me the most poignant part of this wild, raucous, sad movie. Swiss young people ride up on horses. The man assures Nino that it’s the children of the owner and their friends. Penned up in the hen house, their faces pressed against chicken wire, the workers stare as the Swiss enjoy a beautiful lake. They stroll, kiss, shed their clothes, and swim, contemplating beauty like the Eloi in H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine as we hear a delicate oboe solo, almost like the opening scene of the movie with its quartet and the placid Swiss by a lake. We see blonde hair and firm, naked bodies, tall and poetic on horseback, while the runty Italians stare. The Commedia dell Arte meets Wagner.

Nino, like his fellow workers, are transfixed by the Swiss. It is a defining moment in the film and our age of the relations between north and south. People come to northern Europe to work, compelled by conditions in their homelands, but there is another draw to the north as well: it’s orderly, rational, blonde, quiet, poetic, and beautiful. The southerner can’t resist it; in fact, the world can’t. Despite the south’s inefficiency and resentment against the north and its economic power, the south can’t take its eyes off the Nordic types. They are beautiful and serene.

If the Swiss as like the Eloi in Wells’ The Time Machine, the Italians are the Morlocks, but hardly savage and brutal; they’re rather penned up like chickens who are awed by the swans.

This scene evoked for me how Germany seemed fated to rule during the Second World War. After Hitler’s victories in 1940, most of Europe was ready to accommodate themselves in one way or another to German rule. As one Frenchman said, to his people they were like blonde gods.

So, the realization that I had, and what you must understand, is that the Quota Queens and their peanut gallery followers (those of NW European ancestry) actually do see themselves as “blonde gods,” they are the Herrenvolk Eloi – “orderly, rational, blonde, quiet, poetic, and beautiful”; physically, they are “blonde hair and firm, naked bodies, tall and poetic.”. Non-Nordic Europeans, particularly Southern Europeans, but often Eastern Europeans as well, are Morlocks, “runty,” and are characterized by “inefficiency and resentment” - yet are inevitably drawn to the “beautiful and serene” Nordics. The Nordics are the swans stared at by pitiful inferiors “penned up like chickens who are awed by the swans.”

So, to the Quota Queens and their followers, that description sums up “the relations between north and south” – with “north and south” here specifically referring to Europe and to Western man. If you think that Counter-Currents post is some sort of outlier, cherry picked by me because of my “resentment,” I ask you to consider the totality of Der Movement’s dogma, and ask yourself whether the Counter-Currents statement above is an outlier or a very accurate summary.

Consider that a prominent Nordicist authored a book entitled Destiny of Angels – taking a (real or apocryphal) quote by Pope Gregory to characterize all “Nordish” peoples – a book described thus (emphasis added):

The author insists that Nordics must separate to survive. In this volume he discusses how Nordics differ from others in physical, mental, and spiritual characteristics, and in what they find beautiful. This book is especially good in its discussion of the ways in which Jews and egalitarians take advantage of the Nordic traits of objectivity, generosity, and altruism to persuade them to be mongrelized.

Note: “Nordic traits of objectivity, generosity, and altruism.” Obviously then, non-Nordic Europeans lack those traits.  What can you expect from grunting runty Morlocks, anyway?

You see, these types actually consider themselves and their fellow “Nords” to be angels, swans, or Eloi, while non-Nordic Europeans are, I suppose, devils, penned-up chickens, or Morlocks.

Then we have Humphrey Ireland, who complained about Yockey’s pan-Europeanism, because Yockey had the temerity to consider – as per Sir Humphrey’s phrasing – tall, rational Swedes and five foot tall swarthy superstitious Sicilians as part of the same Western race. We certainly can’t have that!  Eloi and Morlocks are akin to different species, after all. Then there’s more, of course: Spencer’s tirades, Taylor’s resentments against uppity White ethnics (excluding Jews of course), the ethnoimperialists of Counter-Currents and Amren who live in other people’s countries and then write diatribes complaining about the natives, Counter-Currents commentators who smugly write about how “generous” they are in bestowing whiteness on their ethnic inferiors, never mind the entire corpus of “movement” dogma, leading to some of the more hilarious examples of Sallis’ Law.

These people are never going to take non-Nordic Europeans, particularly Southern (most of all) and Eastern Europeans, and their interests, seriously.  No matter what camouflage they throw up, their true feelings on the matter are summarized by that Counter-Currents piece, and the other items mentioned. No attempt at reasoning or logical argument can alter any of those people, since we are dealing with deeply internalized feelings that are a fundamental part of their identity. That is why these types can read a refutation of Kemp and come away asserting “Kemp was right.” They describe their group as having “objectivity, generosity, and altruism” but they themselves display extreme subjectivity, narrow exclusiveness, and ethnocentrism.  

But, fine, that’s their right, I would not want to try and convince them otherwise even if it was possible to do so (it is not). But this post, and all of my work, is not targeted to those people.  It is instead targeted to people whose views can be changed, people who may have been hoodwinked by White nationalist fraud. It is targeted to all who hold to the true pan-European ideal, whether these be NW Europeans who reject the mindset described above (*), as well as to Southern and Eastern Europeans who are full equals in the pan-European enterprise – not two foot tall runty superstitious chickens staring in awe at their beautiful, swan-like superiors.

A careful re-read of that Counter-Currents piece makes clear why a New Movement is required and why my critiques of Der Movement are justified and are not a manifestation of “insane paranoia.”

*Preservationism, including narrower subracial and ethnic preservation, as well as broader racial preservation, does not require irrational hyper-self-absorption, hysterical supremacism, and/or contemptuous attitudes toward different types of Europeans.  For example, On Genetic Interests points the way to a rational, kinship-based, objective evaluation of group interests, and reasonable approaches to achieving preservationist objectives. Yockey’s work points to the proper attitude of a pan-European ideal (especially so if we include Eastern Europeans to join the North-South European Western synthesis).

On Democracy

Three thoughts.

1. Fascism is more honest than liberal democracy – fascism doesn’t hide who the true leaders of the nation are. Fascism also doesn’t fool the masses in thinking that they, instead of a powerful elite, run the nation.

2. Democracy is such a wonderful approach for running human groupings that it is not used in the military, not used in business, not used in academia, and not even used in professional sports. In any human endeavor where winning is essential, hierarchy is observed and democracy does not meaningfully exist. Indeed, as point one suggests, liberal democracies don’t actually practice real democracy either.

3. Looking at the historical cases that came the closest to true democracy, like ancient Athens, political participation was limited to the most capable and responsible element of the population.  When considering republican forms of government that utilized true democracy as much is realistic in such a system, like the early American republic, political participation was likewise limited. Indeed, limiting political participation is likely the only way that any system even somewhat approaching true democracy could ever be viable.

Odds and Ends, 4/8/22

In der news.

First Sallis Groupuscule blog post.

The real purpose of good fiction – ranging from an epic novel (or movie) down to a short story or even a high quality comic book – is to induce reflection on the nature of realty and on the human condition, and to ponder how that affects one’s view of past, present, and/or future. Certainly it can be, and indeed should be, entertaining, but if fiction is merely entertaining than it is no better than a sitcom.

Ted Sallis translation services:

Man cave = place of refuge from nagging harridan

Wife = nagging harridan

Biological clock ticking = woman wants man as a sperm donor and as a beta male provider

Defending your woman’s honor = let’s you and him fight

Female hypergamy = alpha fux

Marriage = beta bux

Happy marriage = fiction

So, CNN has no problem talking about an "authoritarian" leader being re-elected. That's likely a more honest election than what we have here in the USA, and reflects the will of the Hungarian people, but Orban is "authoritarian." What do we call Western European nations that ban free speech, ban political parties, and throw people in jail for tweets? Is that "liberal democracy?"

A rare useful Amren article.  Cue the retards in the comments telling us that conspiracies are real. Napalm and mustard gas!

A rare useful Amren comment:

Someguy

Oliver, I am not trying to claim anyone is on par or better than anyone else. I'm really highlighting the under-performing nature of East Asia. I'm pretty sure the Islamic golden age has more mathematicians than China ever had. The point is that an overfeminine race that thinks extremely holistically and is ultra conformist is ultimately entirely useless in adding to any sort of technological progress at a macro scale. I was shocked that Daxing airport was designed by an Iraqi woman. It shows that in all of China there is not one person creative enough to design such a thing.

HBDers weep bitter tears.

What Der Movement fails to realize about milady Marine is that winning by itself (assuming she does win) does nothing to validate the mainstreaming approach. It is only winning combined with useful action while in office that would constitute some validation. Now, if a hardcore explicit racial nationalist was elected, I would say that the victory itself would be of disruptive value, but Skullface Marine is hardly a Nutzi, is she? And, by the way, even if mainstreaming was ever validated (at least once), that does nothing to disprove that farstreaming is a superior approach, with more proven success.

My attitude toward Der Movement is akin to what Nixon's is here, re: the press.

Farstreaming vs. Mainstreaming

Vik wins again.

See this.  More farstreaming success. Mainstreaming is a proven failure; farstreaming is a proven success. Der Movement promotes mainstreaming. The Sallis Groupuscule promotes farstreaming. Is anyone surprised about who is consistently right and who is consistently wrong? 

Let us define these terms.

Mainstreaming is when a more extreme political figure attempts to broaden their base of support by moving toward the political center, moderating their positions, compromising their principles, diluting their ideology, so as to attract what they believe to be a winning coalition of moderate voters who would be repelled by “extremism.”

Farstreamng – a term that I invented - is when a political figure moves toward more extreme political positions, away from the center, embracing a more radical ideology with uncompromising principles. In the context of right-wing politics, it means someone on the center-right moving in the direction of, at the very least, hard right populism, if not the Far Right itself (that would be optimal and a more extreme example of farstreaming). It could also mean someone who is already far on the right moving either farther to the right – e.g., right-wing populists, including civic nationalists, moving to the Far Right and becoming overt racial nationalists..

Mainstreaming would seem to make sense on a superficial level, but the weaknesses of this approach are obvious upon reflection. A mainstreamer alienates their friends and dispirits their base, while never winning over their enemies, who will never trust the mainstreamer, and will have only contempt for this pandering to the center. The mainstreamer can become outflanked by a centrist modifying some positions for the sake of an election. Why should the average voter support a mainstreaming ex-“extremist” when they can vote for a “safer,” more established centrist candidate who now has approximately the same political positions as the mainstreamer?  Thus, by mainstreaming, a politician eliminates the only reasons for favoring them over the centrists, while the centrist still enjoy the advantages of being “more electable,” lacking the “baggage” of an “extremist” past.  If you are going to have the “baggage,” you may as well accompany that with actual policy positions that clearly distinguish you from your centrist opponents. Mainstreaming politicians also have credibility and character perception issues – can they be trusted if they so cavalierly change their most fundamental political positions?  At least a farstreaming politician can more realistically claim that they have “seen the light” and are embracing more “extreme” positions, moving away from the centrist mass,  because that is the right thing to do, but someone moving toward the bland center, moving toward the mass of the voters, has around them the stink of unprincipled political expediency. And even if a mainstreaming politician wins, they have achieved victory in such a manner that they have likely compromised their ability to effectively leverage that victory for doing any sustained good. 

Let’s consider some real-life examples.

I used to mock Orban as “Chicken Wire Vik” – a center-right politician posturing at immigration enforcement (with a flimsy chicken wire border fence) to win votes away from the Hungarian hard right. But over time Orban realized that the further he moved to the right, the more popular he became. He farstreamed so far to the right that he outflanked the mainstreaming “Far Right” Jobbik party, and afterwards Orban has gone from success to success, while Jobbik’s mainstreaming has been a dismal failure. The prime example of failed mainstreaming is Marine Le Pen, who as drifted so far to the center that in many ways her positions are indistinguishable from that of Macron, and she has been outflanked on her right by a North African Jew. I note that the "breakthrough personality" mentioned here is Zemmour and not LePen. It is astonishing that Le Pen has mainstreamed herself right out of the conversation about immigration and French demographics. Thus, even if – IF! – she ever wins an election, she’s compromised her positions so much that such a victory would mean little for the French Right and the long term prospects of French survival.

Donald Trump, in the past widely seen as a socially liberal New Yorker (“New York values”), at most center-right in his overall politics, farstreamed to the right in 2015-2016, running as a right-wing populist, and outflanking the rest of the GOP field on the right, particularly with respect to immigration. This not only led to an unexpected victory to the GOP nomination over more established political figures, but led to a shocking and unexpected victory in the 2016 Presidential election. Trump then spent the next four years betraying his base and governing center-right, and mainstreamed during the 2020 Presidential race, losing (whining about “electoral fraud” aside) to the widely unpopular, dementia-ridden walking cadaver Joe Biden. Food for thought, eh?

Of course, I am talking about general trends here. Mainstreaming may occasionally garner electoral success. Farstreaming may sometimes fail.  Laws of politics are not as stringent as, say, the laws of physics.  Nevertheless, the broad trends, the empirical real world evidence, strongly suggest that, in general, mainstreaming is a losing proposition, and farstreaming is a more likely road to success.

I can anticipate one objection. If farstreaming is best, then why don’t more extreme political parties routinely win elections?  One must be careful to understand the argument being made in this post. Mainstreaming vs. farstreaming focuses on the direction of political change – should a “dissident” politician move more toward the center or should they move to (or at least maintain their position in) the more extreme end (right or left, depending on what type of “dissident” politics we are evaluating) of the political spectrum. In most majority White countries, it is true that more moderate parties dominate. But this is not stable over time, since the definition of “moderate” changes, countries differ, and situations change.  America has drifted so far left since WWII that Eisenhower’s immigration policies would now be “Far Right Nazi” and today’s mainstream social policies would have shocked libertine Hollywood communists of the 1950s.  The centrist racial attitudes even as late as the 1980s and 1990s would be considered “hard right” today.  So the Far Left of the past has become “moderate” and “centrist” today. In contrast, Hungary has shifted to the right, so Orban’s right-wing populism is now mainstream. Even in today’s leftist America, the White population retains sufficient rightist sentiment as to allow for Trump’s initial success; therefore, there can be internal divisions within a country as to what "centrist" really means. The fact of national political change over time means that even if an “extremist” party has no chance of victory today, they may exhibit success in the future, if they stay the course and stay true to their principles, and if a changing political climate moves the central mass of voters in their direction. Finally, real leadership consists of leading, not following; the principled politician stakes out authentic positions, based on a sound ideology and certain uncompromising principles, and then attempts to convince the electorate to come in that direction. The effective leader leads the populace in the right direction and builds upon a solid base of supporters, they do not abandon that base in a vain attempt to follow the populace to the center (a “center” that is in any case constantly shifting).  So, yes, today, “moderate” has more success than “extreme” – but farstreaming is still the best long-term strategy. You should stake out an attractive position away from the milksop middle and entice the electorate to follow you to the “extremist” “promised land.”

White Nationalist Fraud?

Are real agendas being camouflaged?

See this Western Destiny post.  In this EGI Notes post, I would like to focus on:

Is it possible that the “movement” learned from the Nazis too well? Just as the German Nationalists used transnational fascism as a camouflage to mask their narrow national imperialist agenda, and thus hoodwinked foreign fascists into accepting Germanocentric agendas under the guise of “unity,” so do modern White nationalists who are really Nordicists hoodwink Southern and Eastern Europeans to follow an agenda that exclusively serves Northwest European interests, with those narrow interests camouflaged behind a mask of “White unity.” Thus, exposing the Nazi scam may assist in exposing the modern one, and pointing sincere pan-Europeanists away from the modern scam and toward an authentically pan-European movement.

In this sense, at least with respect to White ethnics, White nationalism as it is specifically practiced by Der Movement is a fraud. But it another way, Der Movement fails as an effective vehicle for genuine pan-racial White nationalism. I have often made the analogy with conservatism and the Republican Party. The latter is merely (the current) vehicle for the former, an organized political entity serving, in theory, to promote a sociopolitical ideology. Similarly, White nationalism as practiced by Der Movement – essentially, Der Movement itself – is merely a vehicle for promoting the ideology of what White nationalism is supposed to be. And just like authentic conservatives should hold the Republican party to account if that party fails to serve as an effective vehicle for conservatism, so should authentic White nationalists hold Der Movement to account if it fails to serve as an effective vehicle for real White nationalism.

What is real White nationalism?  It is Race as Nation – Our Race Is Our Nation – and everything that flows as a consequence of that, with it being for ALL Whites.  And if you want to go down the “who is White” rabbit hole, then that is precisely what this post is about – my oft-cited assertion that the “movement” needs to be clear and consistent as to what its “White” ingroup is, and stop hoodwinking people, and/or being coy, on that subject. If you don’t consider “X” to be your ingroup, then drop the mask, take off the camouflage, and stop tricking “X” in thinking they are in your ingroup and thus should support what they mistakenly believe are shared objectives to serve shared interests. On the other hand, if “X” is in your ingroup, then act like it, fully and at all times, without equivocation and without constantly leaving a gray area of “maybe, maybe not” and/or “well revisit the question later.”  No, that’s more dishonest camouflage – you visit the question NOW, determine an answer, stick with it, with no “revisiting” and retroactive redefinitions in the future. The fact that this even needs to be mentioned, the fact that it is a real issue, is proof positive that White nationalism as practiced by Der Movement is a fraud with respect to the White ethnics who always find themselves on shaky ground.

Indeed, see:

NikandrosNovember 26, 2021 at 8:33 am White nationalists are now more welcoming of Asians, Jews, Jamaicans, and mutts into the movement than they are of Southern and Eastern Europeans. Where did it all go so wrong?

We need a New Movement, for ALL persons of European descent worldwide.  That is what the Sallis Groupuscule is about.

On the Jews

Thoughts.

A Gab correspondent who is as friend of this blog led me to this interesting article. I note it comes from the despicable rag Instauration, but sometimes one can find a gold nugget in a flood of sewage, so one can examine the following on its own merits. Some excerpts and my comments.

The questions in this case concern the Jew, and are basically esthetic and instinctive, as, indeed, all racial questions are.

Not surprising coming from Instauration, but I see that as incomplete. Yes, “esthetic and instinctive” questions are important, but so are those that are genetic/biological as well as cultural/historical. 

It is a truism that the Jew has puzzled the non-Jew since the beginning of time, and continues to do so. The non-Jew has always known that there is something different about the Jew, but has never been able to agree on what that something is. 

Very true and I have written on this as well (see below).

This difference is not the same as the differences between non-Jews. A European in Asia or Africa or the Americas, whether among sophisticated Chinese…

Sigh.  Again, not surprising about Instauration. Nordicists always have a strong tropism for Orientals.

No non-Jewish race, culture or individual has ever been able to find a common human bond with the Jew. 

Attention Jared Taylor!  Actually, this entire essay is a critique of the slavishly pro-Jewish attitude of the “movement’s” HBD “race realists.” If Jews are really such alien non-human entities, and if such a reality is something that is, or should be, instinctively recognized by mentally healthy and honest Gentles, then what does it say about “racially aware” “activists” who willingly – and in some cases enthusiastically - associate with and promote Jews and who strongly defend that behavior from critics?

In any case, no matter how suppressed and buried the instinct is today, every non-Jew still feels the lack of a common bond with the Jew.

Again – what does that say about the HBD race realists?

It is only in modern times that the Jew has been accepted as wholly human, no different from non-Jews in any particular. But as noted, this is a comment on modern times, not on the non-humanness of the Jew.

It is also a comment on the HBDers.

My own awareness of the depths of the difference came during and after an endless flight from Russia back to the United States on an official plane with a Jew as my only traveling companion. (From boyhood I had observed Jews in every sort of setting — scholastic, social, business and governmental — and naturally realized they were different, but not just how profound that difference was.) There were engine repairs and other delays on the flight, and we ended up spending four days in each other’s unrelieved company. For the first couple of days he was simply another Jew, under his Harvard-Wall Street-Georgetown veneer, but on the third day he went a step further. His artificial vitality had drained off and he had withdrawn — into his own world, I presumed. I was just as happy to be rid of his chatter, and thought no more about it. We were on the ground at a base in Spain, but still on the plane because takeoff was supposed to be imminent. I was reading and he was staring off into space, and it suddenly came to me that I was alone. Not in the sense of being with someone who had retreated into his own world and was not talking — for such a person is still there, and I would have been conscious of another human being occupying the rather cavernous interior of the plane but totally alone, in the purest sense of the word.

I still have the notebook in which I noted my thoughts at the time, as they came in a rush. [you can read the entirety of these comments in the original essay – I’ll just note the following]:

…one Jewish great-grandparent doesn’t result in acting one-eighth Jewish all the time, but entirely Jewish one-eighth of the time, or something like that. 

That’s stupid and asinine. Heritable traits do not function in that manner.

Usually in emergencies. As when alone. Dogma: No Jew can exist alone, so they must always attach, like barnacles. But how can this be? How can there be human form, however unattractive, without a human contained therein? They are husks, but how did it happen? Sun-struck, wandering in the desert, some gene wiped out, and the lack transmitted. Or missing from the beginning. Or an evolutionary dead end…

That should be detectable from genetic analyses? It would be interesting to determine the suite of cognitive and behavioral traits that lead to the emergent Jewish behavior that is characterized as "non-human." Further, these traits could be linked to particular gene sequences. Can we identify the biological essence of "Jewishness?"

Back to the main essay:

And yet…somewhere in each non-Jew faced with a Jew there is still a faint — exceedingly faint — twitch of instinct telling him that he is dealing with a creature who is not like him. 

That is the core message of the entire essay.  It is remarkably similar to something that I (independently) wrote:

One thing that has always struck me about Jews I have interacted with is that there is always a sense of their distinctiveness, their differences, their somewhat alien nature. Whether or not a given Jew considers themselves "White" or not (and sometimes transitions back and forth on that subject based on context), they are seemingly always cognizant of their ethnoracial, cultural, and historical differences to White Gentiles. Sometimes it is explicit; they admit they are a different ethnic group, a different people, a group with a very distinct identity; sometimes, it is implicit, but even when one hears Jews mendaciously state "it's only a religion" (which I do not believe that they believe), the sense of difference is still there. And, no, I do not believe that this is a figment of my "anti-Semitic" imagination, but rather is a real phenomenon, recognized by Jew and Gentile alike (and remember that I stated that sometimes it is explicit, being openly acknowledged). Both sides of the equation sense the barrier, the distance, that exists between Jew and Gentile, and it is an underlying feature of almost every interaction.

Interesting that the writer of the Instauration article and myself, separated by decades of time and no doubt by ethnicity and ideology, have come to the same conclusions about Jews and Jewish-Gentile relations.  In the case of my post, I concentrate a bit more on how the Jews view the differences while the Instauration writer looks more from the Gentile perspective. Two sides of the same coin. Back to the essay:

He stifles it immediately, of course, but it is there. And can come out in very odd ways. Especially in marriages between Jews and non-Jews, where the non-Jews spend so much time alone with Jews that they (the non-Jews) can hardly avoid tumbling to the non-humanness of their mates. They have to redouble their efforts to deny it, but the knowledge is inevitably there.

This writer asserts that non-Whites other than Jews are human, and capable for forming bonds with Whites, but I wonder.  In that part about inter-marriage, what if we replaced Jews with, say, Chinese?

So we parted, and have not seen each other since. Like so many others, she is out there somewhere, slowly unravelling what happened to her, slowly puzzling through the colossal weight and in­solent self-assurance of the swindle. She has been tricked since childhood into going against her instincts; there is a lifetime to be undone. Of course, it is a question whether that is possible.

What about HBDers tricking people about the nature of Jews (and Asians as well)?

An anecdote: A person I knew who had a peripheral association with Der Movement was on a long plane flight sitting next to a Hasidic Jew.  At the beginning of the trip, the Jew asked the fellow - "are you Jewish?''  Getting the answer of "no" the Jew at that point completely ignored the fellow and didn't engage in any talk for the rest of the trip.  This fellow said to me about Jews - "They cannot understand that Whites have interests, even Blacks understand that Whites have legitimate interests (even if they oppose them), but Jews cannot do so." Another anecdote: A Jewess I knew characterized the literary classic Moby Dick as "there was this whale, it was really big, and some guy wanted to kill it." Well, yes, but only a soulless cipher would end the description at that. I have had already discussed a situation I was aware of it in which a Jewess responded to a Gentile stating - in response to whining about "the Holocaust" - "other people suffered too" by asking the Gentile "why do you hate Jews so much?" Nice "people" huh?