Category: Andrew Joyce

Fisking the Duped

Clueless quota queen.

The MSM has been in SHOCK! HORROR! mode over the news that one Patrik Hermansson, purporting to be graduate student Erik Hellberg (as if anyone could tell the difference!)…

The “movement” obviously could not.

…infiltrated and—arguably illegally and unethically—surreptitiously recorded a number of right wing organizations (he fashionably says “Alt Right” although they mostly predate the term) in Europe and the U.S. e.g. Undercover With the Alt-Right, by Jesse Singal, New York Times, September 19, 2017.

Counter-Currents‘ Editor-in-Chief Greg Johnson, a victim, has a characteristically sensible discussion here.

If by “characteristically sensible” you mean minimizing the outrageous incompetence of “leaders” letting an infiltrator joyride through the “movement” for a year, sitting with “leaders” to “vet” genuine activists, and giving “keynote addresses” about “anti-fascist infiltrators” (I still can’t get over that one), and then hysterically “banning” people who call for accountability, yes indeed, very sensible.

The bottom line: Hermansson/ Hellberg’s “revelations,” although written up in hyperventilating British tabloid style on Hope Not Hate, the Cultural Marxist Enforcer website that sponsored him, contain no evidence or even allegations of any illegal behavior, let alone any conspiracy to commit violence.

That’s not the point is it, you mendacious handout artist?  The point is that a nobody, an infiltrator with a flimsy cover story, was able to worm his way into the highest levels of “movement” discourse and decision making, simply because (1) he’s a Swedish Nord, and (2) he’s an effeminate homosexual. What happens in the future, when an infiltrator is sitting at the highest “movement” councils in a time of crisis?  Or this: how do we know that there  isn’t another infiltrator like Hermansson already there?

All Hermansson/ Hellberg seems to have, at most,  is Politically Incorrect talk—from people already associated with Politically Incorrect websites!

No, all he has is exposing a bunch of clowns with their red rubber noses and makeup on.

He claims “sometimes being a mole in the far right was dangerous….” But he (and his rewrite man, who tried very hard) provide absolutely no support for this.

Big deal. The Hope Not Hate donors, who reportedly supported him for a year, must be very disappointed.

No, they are getting a big laugh over it all, I’m sure.  But in the last analysis, they could have done us all a big favor by exposing the affirmative action racket in the “movement” for what it is.  I say “could have” because I know the mental weaklings among the “movement “rank-and-file don’t have it in them to abandon failed “leadership.”

VDARE.com and I make a number of minor appearances on Hope Not Hate (here and here), but it’s just Search Engine Smear stuff.

Which is mildly interesting, because Hermansson/ Hellberg did contact me and Lydia and I met with him for coffee in Cipriani Dolci above New York’s Grand Central Station. 

And the other shoe drops.  Quota queen Brimelow fell for the same scam as his affirmative action colleagues.

(Note to Hope Not Hate bookkeeper: I paid!)

In other words: VDARE donors likely ultimately paid for it.

I guess I agree with Greg Johnson’s summary: “A bit socially awkward, a bit inarticulate, a bit effeminate, but not so outside the norm for academic types that I felt suspicious.” (Hope Not Hate says proudly that Hermansson/ Hellberg is a “gay, anti-racist activist”).

Two important points. First, the more I hear about Hermansson’s “effeminacy,” the more I think that Andrew Joyce is correct in his criticisms of gays in the “movement.”  If the Far Right was less tolerant of homosexuals, then Hermansson’s behavior would have been a more obvious red flag (alternatively, Hope Not Hate would just have had to dig up an attractive young blonde women to do the job, recording conversations while fending off groping and dodging marriage proposals).  Second, if Hermansson was so awkward and inarticulate, how did he end up being invited by Johnson to address a private Counter-Currents meeting?  How did he end up with the London Forum “leaders,” helping with meeting vetting?  Don’t these guys understand that the more they mock Hermansson as part of their “spin,” the worse they make themselves look for trusting Hermansson and elevating him?  Are these guys really that clueless?  So lacking in self-awareness?  Apparently so.

But I must also say that Hermansson/ Hellberg never said he was anything other than a graduate student, frankly asked if he could record me (Lydia got bored and left)…

That’s surprising. I would have expected she would have a high threshold for boredom.

…and never evinced anything other than academic interest in the movement.

Maybe that’s why his rewrite man couldn’t figure out how to smear us.

No need.  You smear yourselves, first by incompetence, and then by your pathetic “spin” to try and cover up the incompetence.

So why did Hermansson/ Hellberg (and/or his rewrite man) not realize they were undercutting the Left/ MSM Narrative? Because these Leftists are idiots. 

If they are idiots, then what about the Rightists so easily fooled for a year?

They live in an intellectual bubble and they believe their own propaganda.

Is Brimelow talking about “movement” activists here?  Or just deluded VDARE donors?

At least, the Hope Not Hate rewrite man does. But after we met, Hermansson/ Hellberg (email him) replied to my polite note:

Thank you yourself! It was really great talking to you.

Since I left I’ve actually looked into applying for universities in the US so I’m right now looking at Georgetown in DC and possibly NY as well. It’s my supervisor who pushed me to look into a phd or a research position.

Hey, Pete: did you – or any of the “characteristically sensible” members of the “good old boys network” – ever bother to check “Hellberg’s” academic bonafides?  Maybe contact his “supervisor” directly to say what a fine job he’s been doing (by supervisor I mean the alleged academic supervisor, not Hope Not Hope staff). You know, as part of the “extreme vetting” and all.  The Alt Right could have done that after drinking mead, reciting poems in Old Norse, and blowing on a Viking horn (and on anything else for that matter).

My intuition: Hermansson/ Hellberg actually is a graduate student. He really does hope to study in the U.S. (Note to VDARE.com readers: watch out!).

My intuition: Brimelow/Mophead actually is a panhandling, empty suit, quota queen.  He really does hope to continue to exploit readers to contribute to keep Happy Penguins LLC’s coffers full, so he can continue living that fine blue state lifestyle.

He’s just ripping off Hope Not Hate as well as the AltRight.

Are we talking about Hermansson here, or the editor of an “immigration restrictionist” website?

All joking inside, this is a serious matter.  What we likely have is a coordinated effort by an Alt Right-Alt Wrong alliance of affirmative action hacks to minimize the travesty that took place, distract their supporters from utter incompetence, and to get back to “business as usual” as quickly as possible, ensuring a steady stream of donation money.

Frankly, it’s more disgusting than comical.  And our EGI goes down the toilet due to failed leadership.  So much for adaptive fitness.

Advertisements

The Alt Fail

Navel-gazing ideological contortions.

One wonders how Andrew Joyce squares his recent series on homosexuality (*) with this expression of tolerance.

It would seem that AltRight.com’s current crusade against homosexuality is to a large extent informed by their feud with Counter-Currents.  But let’s give the other side equal attention.  Greg Johnson’s crusade for ethnonationalism, and crusade against pan-Europeanism, which came as an unpleasant surprise to me (who considered him to have been a pan-Europeanist), mysteriously coincided with the deterioration in his relations with Richard Spencer.  Memes in the service of personal animus, it seems.

Feuds between “movement” leaders is a “grand tradition” – one can remember Pierce-Carto and Pierce-Covington, but in those cases, the disagreements were personal/tactical.  The situation in which “movement leaders” actually take ideological stands on important issues merely to spite each other is totally unprecedented.  Yes, it seems that “youth culture” is indeed a key component of the Alt Right scene: narcissistic, feckless, and juvenile.

On a related note (emphasis added):

However, more important is understanding how a far-right movement operates, organizes and functions. This is invaluable for finding the most effective strategies for opposing and undermining them. I spent hundreds of hours with these people and came away with a real understanding of what drives their activism, the tactics they seek to use, and what they were planning to do. This allows Hope Not Hate to always be one step ahead, and to plan responses and opposition earlier than anyone else.

But don’t forget…the problem is not with the outrageously irresponsible, feckless, imprudent, failed leadership that allowed an effeminate homosexual anti-racist infiltrator to joyride through the “movement” for a year with a tragicomically flimsy cover story while legitimate activists were frozen out of meetings because of “extreme vetting.”  No, the problem is with anyone who states that there should be some accountability for this pathetic failure of common sense and good judgment – or so say our “betters” among “movement leadership.”  I guess when faced with the possibility of the panhandling donations running dry, hysteria ensues.  Too bad they weren’t more hysterical with basic operational security.

*Before someone accuses me of being “queer,” I’ll say I’m in general agreement with Joyce (excepting the Christian apologetics and the idea that Tacitus was a historian in the modern sense, instead of in the ancient sense – a story-telling propagandist), but more nuanced.  However, my view remains that if someone is homosexual but is pro-White, and if they acknowledge that homosexuality is a defect, and if they “stay in the closet,” then tolerance could be given.  In On Genetic Interests, Salter asserts that homosexuals should actually be very pro-extended family and pro-ethny, given they have a greater genetic interest investment in broader circles of relatedness, as most of them do not have children of their own.  If a homosexual actually behaved in that fashion (most do not, including some “anti-natalists” masquerading as WNs), then some degree of societal tolerance could be acceptable.  That doesn’t preclude personal disgust and the acknowledgment that overt homosexuality, celebrated by society, has the pernicious effects described by Joyce.

Punchgate, Spencer, and NECis

Punchgate and related matters.

The System has been crowing about the attack on Spencer, praising the attack, saying it was great, making musical memes about it, and publicly discussing such action as appropriate and “American” (like slavery and segregation, eh?). It has been truly disgusting, but, in the long run, from the balkanization standpoint, the Left’s action may backfire on them.

This essay summarizes the reality of leftists who call us “fascists” but who believe that political violence against their enemies is justified.  But this is nothing new.  Back in the 1930s, there were a number of major street brawls in American cities between the Right (Silver Shirts, Bund) and the Left (Jews, anarchists, communists).  The basic total outcome of those brawls was a victory for the Left (the more things change, the more they stay the same) – there’s a reason why Oliver was talking about 50 years of “movement” failure back in 1969.  Joyce’s essay on “anti-fascism” is mostly true, but it skips over the reality that the Left still rules the streets, as they’ve done in America for nearly a century. And while European nationalist parties may come to power in such circumstance, America for now seems different.  If we cannot break out of the digital sandbox and go analog, it’s not going to work out.  Triumphalist essays about how “anti-fa is dead” while Spencer can’t stand in DC without being punched in the face doesn’t cut it. Sorry.  And even the European nationalists hold meetings, have street demonstrations, etc. – so Joyce’s arguments don’t hold there either. Would the European nationalists have achieved their level of accomplishments (such as they are) if they and their leaders were unable to go out in the street without being punched in the face?  Let’s have triumphalism after real triumphs, not after mocking defeats.

Praise Kek!  Spencer seems to have learned something from Punchgate. First, he admits he is worthy of criticism for his naiveté and lack of preparation and security.  Second, and more importantly, he seems to understand things must be different going forward. WE SIMPLY CANNOT AFFORD MORE INCIDENTS LIKE THIS.  IT MUST STOP.  WE MUST DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND.  That requires proper operational security and planning. Now, if after this, these incidents keep on occurring, that proves all my comments about “quota queens” are correct.

Also, despite my problems with Spencer (*), he is presently the best and most well-known public spokesman for the American Far-Right.  We can’t afford to have him as a subject of physical attack and subsequent Internet mockery.

*Besides the latest incident, there was Hailgate (not so much a big deal in my view), the Hungarian meeting fiasco, and, sadly enough, the serious inherent problems with the AltRight.com project. Shockingly enough, I have to agree with Silver again (yegads – my worldview is crumbling) – I don’t understand why Spencer is associating with a half-Iranian NECist, whose moronic ramblings has brought out other NECists on the comments threads at AltRight, posting Cavalli-Sforza charts from more than 20 years ago as if they were still relevant given the march of population genetics.  NECism keeps on popping up, and misuse of scientific data contributes to this. While I await a global assay of genetic kinship (the only genetic metric that is politically relevant), based on all the data I’ve seen, there’s no doubt that “Persians” will have the greatest kinship with other “Asian Caucasians” and not with Europeans. What outliers “look like” doesn’t matter.  Grasping comments about “artificial boundaries” doesn’t cut it – the European boundary is biologically relevant. Even a no-good low-IQ knuckle-dragging Euro-Swarthoid like myself had “Iceland” as one of my top hits in a company’s kinship measure of raw genetic data.  Would a “Persian” rate the same?  Let’s say I doubt that very much.  Morons talking about “artificial boundaries” don’t get that (1) Identity has culture-historical elements as well as biological, and (2) more relevant to all the racial heavy breathers, race and culture influence each other.  Populations that share foundational cultural/civilizational bases – such as “Western Christendom” – will tend to genetically align over historic time, while others that share “Eastern Islam” will align as well. Populations tend to be genetically similar to geographically close populations, except where there are reasonable boundaries to inhibit gene flow. These boundaries have never been perfect and do not need to have been, as long as gene flow has been repressed over historic time. Mountain ranges, bodies of water, these are geographical boundaries to gene flow – not perfect, but over time, they have serious impacts. Cultural/civilizational boundaries also have very serious impacts on gene flow.  True enough, Persian antipathy to Arabs may have reduced the extent of gene flow there, but the flow was even more markedly reduced between “The West” and “The Rest.” And it is doubtful that Persians were ever genetically similar to modern Europeans.  Prediction: genetic kinship assays will show “Persians” as closer to Iraqis and Afghans than to Europeans.

Why is the Right always taken in by this sort of thing?  The whole subjective Nazi-Larping nonsense about “Aryans” or “Indo-Europeans” gives an opening to NECists to get a foot in the door.  [Note: ironically and inconsistently, the “racial purity” Larping crowd overlaps the “big tent” “Aryan” crowd – as if Iranians or Hindu Indians are “more pure” than wops and hunkies!] Even “White” is subjective.  Then there is the cherry-picking of population genetics to favor particular agendas, even to the point of dusting off studies a generation old.  The same flaw that leads to conspiracy theorizing and breathless interest in gnostic traditionalist esotericism also leads to “gosh-isn’t-that-brilliant” acceptance of pseudo-intellectual faux-erudite claptrap of “parapsychology” and so forth that further entraps ECs into the NEC web.  

You know, American WNs look longingly at European nationalists and say “it proves the value of ethnonationalism” – but they ignore the fact that successful European nationalists don’t obsess over “Aryans” or population genetics or cephalic indices or Kali Yuga or Beavis-and-Butthead trolling lulzing. Listen to a Europa Terra Nostra podcast and contrast that to an American podcast or website.

Race in Der News, 1/17/17

The usual stupidities,
Ironically enough, one of the pictures accompanying this article shows invaders easily going under Orban’s pathetic chicken-wire fence.  If we know it’s happening, doesn’t Saint Viktor know?  And, so…?
Yes, and if Harry mates with mongrel Markle, so much for the “Nordic physical type.”  Are English patriots fed up with the “royal family” yet?  Of course, these “royals” already have a quite interesting bloodline. Nevertheless, the vast majority of their ancestry is European, and the vast majority of that is Anglo-Germanic; if they were to continue to intermarry with the native English stock, any Afro-Asiatic traces would be diluted out. Unfortunately, Harry, who seems to have inherited race-mixing proclivities from his mother, is currently intent on reinforcing, rather than diluting, such admixture.
Thus comes the ultimate peril of the China to all nations on earth and especially the White race whom China knows it must defeat and subdue, and if necessary, eliminate to achieve its ambitions, without mentioning the fact that China’s major ally and enabler, the international Jewry also shares this objective.
In a summary, in years China has morphed into a hybrid monster combining the worst and most sinister elements and vices of the traditional and modern China sifted and forged to survive and linger to this day: selfishness, ruthlessness, apathy, cruelty, bully, deceit, egotism, mendacity, jealousy, vindictiveness, amorality, duplicity, abusiveness, aggressiveness, vileness, violence and treachery… It is high time for the White people to wake up and stare at the dire reality of the Chinese question squarely and start thinking about countermeasures as soon as possible.
Jews and China.  Of course, the Silk Roaders claim that anyone – even virulent anti-Semites! – who does not grovel to Asians is either Jewish or is a pro-Jew who “sucks Jewish cock” (exact quote).
AJ: To what extent, if any, do you see yourself as White, or a part of Western culture?
RJ: I do not consider Jews to be white, even Ashkenazis. We have a fundamentally different identity, despite some of us having European blood.

Gefilte Whitefish

In support of Spencer.

I supported Spencer in “Hailgate” (although, as I stated, there was I believe some lack of judgment on his part, just really not that big of a deal), and now I come out strongly in support of Spencer and his mother in their persecution from the Whitefish Bolsheviks.

Several points:

1. The SJW leftists here and elsewhere are not slowed down at all by Der Touchback’s election. No hesitation for them to just continue exactly as they have been before, despite the fact that in a month a new “racist” administration will be in power.  Of course they know, as does anyone not afflicted by Roissy’s homoerotic fixation on Donald Trump, that the vulgar buffoon will throw his supporters under the bus as quickly as he can (Chris and Rudy can explain it all to you, as mainstream examples of this).  No one expects Don and Jeff to overtly support the “far-Right,” but at least can we have the rule of law and an end to political persecution?  We’ll see what happens, but I’m real doubtful.

2. Anyone traveling to Whitefish should give Spencer’s mother some business.

3. While The Daily Stormer is not my cup of tea so to speak, I see nothing at all wrong with what they’ve been doing with this.  Anglin has broken no law that I am aware of, he’s been careful to urge his readers to follow the law, and the Bolsheviks deserve everything that’s coming to them.  How can you persecute the mother of someone you disagree with politically?

4. My understanding of the law (such as it is) tells me that what was done to Spencer’s mother is illegal, and borders on extortion – “sell you property (from which I’ll make a profit) or else I’ll do XYZ to you and ruin your business and your property value” – come on, that’s in writing (!!!) and clear-cut.  If that was done to anyone else, there’s a good chance the individual making those extortive threats would have been arrested.  As it is, there’s a good case for Mom Spencer to file a civil suit against Gersh and associates. I don’t know if Spencer reads this blog, but, hey, Richie, why don’t you contact (if you have not already done so) Kyle Bristow and his group and see at least if you can get some legal advice.  It’s not my place to tell Richard or Kyle what to do here, but it’s a legitimate idea.  Why not take advantage of whatever limited legal resources our side has?  After all, it can’t be that all of Montana’s founding stock population are a bunch of cucks, can it?  Some can be found for a jury who would find in favor of Sherry Spencer against the Levantine aliens, right?

5. For the most part, I endorse Spencer’s activist plans for 2017, as outlined here.

6. Andrew Joyce is an excellent writer, but he needs to explain his promotion of Jack Sen over at TOO.  What will Giacomo Vallone think?

7. After the dust settles, I hope Richard remembers who on the Right supported him during these tumultuous times, and who threw hum under the bus.

Joyce on Sexology, 12/16/15

Some comments and criticisms.


Who is responsible for the outpouring of modern degeneracy?  Do we really need to ask?


Kevin MacDonald has noted that the Frankfurt School categorized healthy Western norms, nationalisms, and close family relationships as an indication of psychiatric disorder. By contrast, in the last few decades of the nineteenth century Jewish intellectuals began championing Western society’s outcasts and non-conformers. Using these outcasts, Jewish intellectuals could fight a proxy war against Western homogeneity, and wage a clandestine campaign for the acceptance of pluralism.

By subtly supporting the position of the socially and sexually deviant, these Jewish figures could gain acceptance or inconspicuousness in the newly atomized society, while simultaneously undermining the very health of the homogenous nation.

Remember that the next time some HBDer starts rhapsodizing over the wonders of Jewish IQ.

An excellent example of this nightmare becoming reality is one of the latest terms concocted within our atomized society:  Otherkin. According to Google, Otherkin are people who identify as partially or entirely non-human. Some say that they are, in spirit if not in body, not human. In any normal, healthy society this nonsense would be regarded as puerile or insane, and it certainly wouldn’t be indulged. But today, in the wake of Frankfurt School victory, the Otherkin community is just one of several growing realms for the bizarre.

Equally, in a society that has succumbed to Frankfurt School ideology one would expect to find that those most markedly different from the normal and healthy would be held up as alleged examples of the best of humanity.

Particularly relevant to our contemporary society, Ellis also astutely pointed out (206) that “there seems to be a certain relationship between the social reaction against homosexuality and against infanticide. Where the one is regarded leniently and favorably, there generally the other is also; where the one is stamped out, the other is usually stamped out.” Ellis’ astute remarks on the context behind the Jewish outlawing of homosexuality, and the use of violence against it by ancient cultures such as the Peruvians, bear further reflection. This is particularly the case given that there is a strain of inverts within our movement who propagandize their cause by weakly arguing that antipathy towards sexual inversion is due to the influence of “Judeo-Christian morals” rather than ethnically universal concerns around demographic health.

I agree with Joyce’s skepticism toward that “strain” in the “movement.”  It’s not that we are saying “no homosexuals allowed” – it is more of “can you stop talking about it, directly or indirectly, all the time?”  I remember back in the early 2000s when Yahoo groups were starting. I was interested in racial nationalist groups.  In my searches I came across one that asserted that they were “serious gay national socialists.”  A few minutes of analysis of their site confirmed that their “gay national socialism” was all about dressing up in Nazi uniforms and advertising such serious political activism as “U Piss I Drink” (no joke; that was one theme).  It’s one thing for an activist to keep their private life private, in the closest so to speak.  It is another to confuse racial activism with homosexual activism.  If nothing else, a sincere concern for EGI would mitigate against any attack on traditional sexual morality.
But, let us be consistent.  What about other destructive strains?  Should we promote miscegenation, including and especially with those wonderful yellow and brown Asians?  Should we denounce Poles while embracing “Sikh shopkeepers?”  Should we accept mendacious Desis “in our movement” who pose under false ethnic identities and start promoting intra-European feuds? In my opinion, a sincere homosexual of our race is infinitely better than a lying Ganges “family man” trying to turn Whites against one another.

This demographic concern was vital to the interpretations and views of non-Jewish sexologists. Since homosexuality, permitted to spread via fashion, leading to “acquired perversion” in the young, is socially linked to acceptance of abortion and infanticide, it acts to “check the population” and should thus be controlled and quarantined in a state that wishes to improve its demographic health.

The means of quarantine suggested by Ellis were not harsh or unreasonable. Society should refrain (215) from crushing the subject of abnormality with shame but, in an eerie premonition of the “Pride parades,” he argued that society should never allow the invert to “flout his perversion in its face and assume that he is of finer clay than the vulgar herd.” Since the genetic dead-end facing inverts was, in Ellis’ view, penalty enough, society should confine its approach to the sexually abnormal to the “protection of the helpless member of society against the invert.” Essentially, Ellis’ advice was to decriminalize the behavior of inverts and end societal shame surrounding it, but also to prevent inverts from flouting their abnormality, and from having physical, pedagogical or ideological access to children. Such was the approach of a broad swathe of opinion in mainstream (non-Jewish) sexology up to Weimar period. And this is largely the position taken by the Russian state today.

That is essentially a correct stance to take.

For Ellis as an evolutionist, a good indication of the pathology of homosexuality is that it is a reproductive dead end. Homosexuality has always been a puzzle to evolutionary biologists given that same-sex attraction would tend to lower reproductive success. However, since homosexuality has generally been stigmatized in historical societies, men with homosexual tendencies often married and procreated in order to avoid the penalties of being publicly homosexual…

What’s interesting is that many homosexual men have, throughout history, been able to father children.  This means they have been able to be sufficiently physically aroused by a woman to perform.  Should these men be more properly termed bisexual?  Or is homosexuality sufficiently “plastic” than even men who profess no sexual attraction to women are still able to perform with women?  If so, is their homosexuality truly genetic?  One wonders about the reverse?  I would think that – System propaganda about “most people are bisexual” aside – very few heterosexual men would be able to perform homosexual acts if required by social convention.  And yet, the argument by Joyce and other traditionalists is precisely that:  societal acceptance of homosexuality promotes its practice by those who otherwise would not be so inclined (and Ancient Greece is brought up as a possibility).  I actually agree with this latter view, which complicates my analysis.  

One may speculate a combination of genetic and environmental influences, resulting in a spectrum of types. Thus, a majority of today’s population (I say nothing about Ancient Greece) is strongly heterosexual, with no “invert” possibilities. Some fraction of the population however is weakly heterosexual – these are people who would conform to societal expectations of heterosexuality in a traditional society, but who may become homosexual or at least bisexual in a more permissive society. There may be a small fraction, very small, who are strongly homosexual and who would be unable to function with a member of the opposite sex. This is all hypothesis, and needs to be evaluated in an objective manner (unlikely in today’s pro-deviant climate).