Category: anti-racism

Racism is Not Mental Illness

A brief argument.

See this.  That Counter-Currents essay is fine as far as it goes (*), but I would like to make two brief further arguments against the latest politicized fad (**) of attempting to equate “racism” with “mental illness.” I make the arguments of (1) adaptive fitness and (2) universalism.

1. Adaptive fitness. The essence of what is traditionally considered “racism” – preference for one’s racial ingroup and hostility to racial outgroups when those outgroups are in competition with the ingroup – is quite obviously adaptive behavior, given the greater genetic similarity of ingroup vs. outgroup (***). Further, “racism” can produce mutually beneficial networks of “ethnic nepotism” among ingroup members, as well as the production and maintenance of a culture congenial to the ingroup, both of which boosts the biological fitness of the ingroup compared to outgroups.  

To label adaptive behavior “pathological” is objectively an oxymoron. Indeed, labeling a group’s adaptive behavior as “pathological” is an act of aggression against that group – serving someone else’s adaptive interests – and, ironically, can itself be considered “racism” against the group so targeted.

See this for more about the genetic interests involved. “Racism” can prevent ingroup genocide, it can prevent the dispossession and displacement of one’s people, and benefit each member of the group whose individual interests are protected by the “racism” that benefits the whole.

2. Universalism. The same standards of mental health vs. mental illness should apply to all peoples, especially if we are to accept the “non-racist” universalism of the System/Left. Then how to explain that the same behaviors that are labeled “pathological racism” in Whites are labeled as “healthy expressions of identity,” “enlightened self-interest,” and/or “justifiable group defense” when applied to non-Whites? How and why is “mental illness” contingent upon the racial identity of those diagnosed?

No doubt the System/Left will trot out their typical sophistry attempting to explain why only Whites can be racist, but this simply exposes their particularism and rejection of Universalist truths – in fact, a rejection of the “anti-racism” they wish to impose specifically and only on White behavior.

When any behavior – much less adaptive behavior! – is labeled as mental illness in one group but labeled as healthy expression in another group, alarm bells should go off. And when that behavior is indeed adaptive, the uneven labeling reflects nothing more or less than a thinly disguised attack on the group whose adaptive behavior is hypocritically pathologized and unfairly stigmatized.

If the System/Left wants to be exercise particularism, rather than universalism, on this subject, in opposition to their oft-stated alleged fundamental Universalist beliefs, then they expose both their hypocrisy and their anti-White animus. If Whites are “special” in the negative sense in that only their “racism” is a symptom of “mental illness,” then why shouldn’t pro-Whites adopt a positive particularism in defense of their race?  

Particularism is inexorably linked to “racism” – thus, if the System/Left supports particularism, then this gives moral legitimacy to “racism,” and if they fall back on universalism, then their attacks against a specifically White form of “racism” is hypocritical and illegitimate.  

Note that my arguments can also be turned around to support the idea (asserted in the Counter-Currents article) that xenophilia is true mental illness, as xenophilia  works against adaptive fitness; further, the (Universalist) human norm is to be ethnocentric, which, to the System/Left, is acceptable and healthy for all groups except Whites.

Notes:

*However, given that Greg Johnson is in the habit of ascribing “insanity” to his critics, that essay is hypocritical.

**That homosexuality was first a mental illness and then not, purely on the basis of sociopolitical trends, indicates the biases involved, which the Counter-Currents essay rightfully mentions.

***When individuals use the “relative finder” function of whatever personal genetic ancestry test that they have taken – a reasonably objective feature of such tests as it compares genetic kinship (similarity) between different customers – what do they find?  Almost always they find matches to people from the same race as them, many deriving from the same or similar ethnic ancestry.  And why not?  Race and ethnicity are akin to large scale extended families, and ethnic nepotism is just a broader and more diluted version of familial nepotism – with the adaptive value of the broadness (the numbers involved) more than compensating (by several orders of magnitude) the dilution of the relatedness.

Apostate Woes

And other news.  Some notes on scifi.

Read this utter nonsense.  That represents the archetype of the stereotypical silly, superficial, moronic, and childish apostate from Far Right politics.

First, we note that this individual’s involvement in Far Right politics was motivated by personal issues, not by ideology nor by any sort of deep ideological commitment and intellectual thought process. These types are always motivated by personal problems, a need to “belong,” a need to “rebel” against family and society, a childish need to “shock “and draw attention to themselves in a narcissistic, infantile manner. Thus, if they no longer have their personal issues, or if they discover that their Far Right comrades are more interested in actualizing political and metapolitical goals rather than being a social worker for defective losers, or if these types satisfy their person needs and mask their inadequacies through other activities, then they no longer require, or depend upon, their masquerade as a “Far Right activist.”  As there was never any authentic ideological motivation or commitment, the loss of their personal need for self-validation through rightist politics results in repudiation of their insincere belief system.  Indeed, they lash out at authentic Far Right activists who they see as “failing them,” rather than understanding that the reverse is true.  Truly pathetic.

Second, such specimens exhibit a truly childish worldview in which the objective Threat of Color must mean that every single Colored on the face of the Earth is a hostile, White-hating, criminal monster. Thus, finding some Colored individuals, even just one, who do not behave as depraved monsters is sufficient for these faux-activists to decide that the entire Colored Threat is false. This is reflective of their navel-gazing, highly personal view of rightist politics.  It’s not that masses of Coloreds, on a global level, are a threat to White racial interests; oh no, their focus is on how individual Coloreds interact with them personally.  Meet a single friendly Negro who doesn’t bash your head in and steal your wallet and your entire racial worldview immediately evaporates.  All of the objective facts that ostensibly motivated your political activism evaporate if some non-White nods hello to you on the street.  It sounds ludicrous, but this is actually the “epiphany” that many of these airheaded nitwits actually have.


Ultimately, the objection of these apostates is that have been personally disappointed by the “movement.”  It didn’t satisfy their personal and private needs and wants. Of course,the same can be said, to a lesser degree, of non-apostates who simply, quietly drop out of the “movement” “scene” without making a fuss about it.  I remember being quite stunned by one drop-out of WN 1.0 analog activism who explained himself to me thus  -“they (note: his “movement” colleagues) only pretended to like me because of the work I was doing for the group, they didn’t like me for who I am; they didn’t care about me as a person.”  Not wanting to be rude, and not wanting to add to his “emotional trauma,” I hid how shocked I was by that comment, but I remember thinking – of course that is true, how could you ever been so naive to believe otherwise?  


Why do people working together on a project, for a cause, have to like each other, and be genuine, caring friends?  That seems to me to be a quite feminine attitude – we all must hold hands, tiptoe through the tulips, and agonize about our “feelings.” No. Employees at a company do not have to like each other, players on a sports team do not have to like each other, faculty in an academic department do not have to like each other, students in the same class do not have to like each other, and people collaborating in a “movement” do not have to like each other either. Any friendships and/or relationships that develop are a byproduct, a side-effect, of the official interaction; it is not required or in any way necessary. Likewise, a “movement” does not have to satisfy the personal needs and desires of an activist. If it does so, that’s great, but it is no necessary (granted, the “movement” must not repulse its activists, but the lack of a negative is not the same as the presence of a positive).  


Anyone who leaves a “movement” because of personal disappointment in how it affected them in the sense of not fixing their deep-seated issues is not the sort of person who should have been involved in that “movement” to begin with. The problem is not Normal Lowell. The problem is the idiot who wrote that article.

This is one reason I vehemently oppose the “big tent” strategy supported by poor judgment, failed Quota Queen “leaders.” Yes, we should have outreach.  Yes, we need to recruit.  Yes, we need to reach out to the White masses.  Yes, eventually, we want a mass movement. But, the leadership cadre, the activist core, the human material that makes up your movement – assuming it is a real movement and not a fraud – need to be high quality, genuine, authentic, ideologically committed and serious people. The typical Der Movement approach of accepting any and all Whites who can fog a mirror held up to their nose and who can mumble memorized gibbering of fossilized “movement” dogma is a recipe for failure. Particularly, accepting any and all “youth,” including and especially troubled teenagers and young adults, people who are so pathetically eager for acceptance and belonging, people whose ONLY positive characteristic is being White and ostensibly on board “the movement train,” without any other positives to contribute, this is an error.  There needs to be a long apprenticeship, a seasoning, a series of trials and tests, before a person is fully accepted.

Well, well, well – the Millennial Woes scandal. Sallis right, Johnson wrong. Sallis is Milady-skeptic, Sallis promotes MGTOW, Sallis questions the presence of women in the “movement,” Sallis demands we have standards for leadership instead of affirmative action, Sallis opposes the “big tent approach.”  Johnson takes the opposite view on those issues.


I have to say I know little about this Millennial Woes person.  My understanding is – and if I am wrong I stand corrected and I do apologize – is that he is a cigarette-smoking bisexual Millennial Scottish WN 2.0 Alt Righter who makes videos and speaks at Far Right conferences. He apparently is on good relations with Johnson, and is apparently very well known among WN 2.0 Alt Right circles (which is why I know little about him, given that I am vehemently opposed to WN 2.0 and the Alt Right).

In any case, in summary, this latest “movement” humiliation and Quota Queen dust-up involves the Millennial Woes (who is openly known as Colin Robertson) scandal, which apparently has to do with some yeastbucket complaining about Robertson, re: something sexual, and Collett investigating while Robertson steps away from activism (at least for now). Apparently, Gaslighting Greg Johnson is taking a pro-Woes position while crazed ethnofetishist Colin Liddell is hostile.  Apparently the two Colins have had a falling out.  


Far from it for me to be a “low information moralizer;” so since I know nothing more about this than what is stated above, and since I don’t have a dog in the fight to care enough to learn more, I’ll limit my comments to broad generalities:


1. I could say this is what happens when you let women involved in “movement” “activism.”  But that would be unfair since (a) homosexual sexual harassment occurs in WN 2.0 as revealed by Pilleater, and (b) point 2 below.


2. I remember the WN 1.0 analog meetings we knuckle-dragging Nutzi Neanderthal Boomers and Gen Xers were having back in the 90s. There were women at those meetings.  Somehow, there were never any scandals of either the heterosexual or homosexual nature.  Fancy that.  It’s almost as if – perish the thought! – WN 2.0 is far inferior to WN 1.0 in human material and in the seriousness and judgment of its participants.  It’s almost as if – gasp! – Millennials and other paragons of “youth” act like jackasses.  


3. This is hypocrisy.  See this for what I mean by that.  Simply outrageous, particularly in the context of the previous links. A completely bizarre and cringeworthy tweet. Milady objects. Go to CC meetings at your own risk as well, Pilleater.


4. Once again, Der Movement is humiliated.  And you can’t say you haven’t been warned here at this blog (and at Western Destiny) of what an utter disaster the “movement” was, is, and always will be.  Now, WN 1.0 was indeed an utter failure and a humiliating disaster, but WN 2.0 is infinitely worse, essentially 2.0 repeats the errors of 1.0 and then adds its own layers of tragicomic stupidity. It may very well be true that Millennial Woes did nothing wrong; it may very well be mendacious yeastbucketism. It doesn’t matter. Having these WN 2.0ers publicly humiliate themselves with their drama and scandals and feuds does damage to pro-White activism, regardless of the details underlying it all.


Johnsonian hypocrisy:

Embittered people like Colin Liddell are now functionally indistinguishable from antifa. 

I despise Liddell, but that from Johnson is unfair and hypocritical.  After all, Spencer can say the same about Johnson and his obsessive critiques of Richie Rich.  Why is it that people like Johnson, who promote the idea of “punching right,” have glass jaws when it comes to criticism of themselves and their friends?  Liddell has just as much right (no pun intended) to “punch right” as does Johnson. Third party observers can judge for themselves who they believe is correct or incorrect.


All of these individuals – Johnson, Spencer, Colin Robertson, Colin Liddell, Steadman, Parrott and Heimbach, Brimelow and Derbyshire, Forney and Friberg, all of the HBDers and “race realists” (Taylor, KMacD, etc.),  Anglin and Roissy, Duke and Strom, the great man on the mountaintop (*) and his feuding rival Covington, Gliebe and the swastika-soled boots, all of them – should be observed with bemusement, from a distance, from the viewpoint of a third party observer. Taking sides in these feuds and scandals is a useless exercise, because BOTH sides in each case are no damn good. A pox on both their houses. The only reasonable interpretation of this latest nonsense is that it is yet another reason to eschew Der Movement, Inc. and look toward a New Movement.  


Instead of giving those grifters money, donate to Salter instead.  On Genetic Interests alone is more valuable than all the “work” of those aforementioned “activists” put together.  


*I will say this though, for all my criticism of Pierce and his behavior and ideology, it is true that American White nationalism collapsed after his death and never recovered.  And it appears the UK is not any better.  Was the death of Pierce the real end – or at least the beginning of the end – of the WN 1.0 era?  Then there was a brief interregnum, and the rise of Spencer and Johnson (more feuding rivals) marked the rise of WN 2.0.  


Original hypothesis – given the level of neoteny in East Asians, “White male yellow fever” sexual interest in East Asian females is sublimated pedophilia.


New insight – given the relative lack of sexual dimorphism in East Asians, “White male yellow fever” sexual interest in East Asian females is sublimated homosexuality.


New synthesis, updated hypothesis – given the combination of neoteny and relative lack of sexual dimorphism in East Asians, “White male yellow fever” sexual interest in East Asian females is sublimated pederasty. 


Is “yellow fever” masking a desire to have sex with underage boys?  Does this mean that HBD is sublimated pederasty?  Are there psychological and biometric analyses that can be performed to test these hypotheses?


Typical nonsense. The best science fiction writer (by far) is the late Gene Wolfe. Nothing that anyone else has written surpasses The Book of the New Sun. That book series is the scifi/fantasy equivalent of Moby Dick. And in actuality, Bradbury’s best work is a non-scifi novel, Dandelion Wine, about an America long gone. Dune (which I have read, and saw the movie and miniseries), is a very good book, but nothing compared to Wolfe’s best. van Vogt’s Voyage of the Space Beagle is good stuff. For more light-hearted fare, Jack Vance is unsurpassed; beginners should start with his Dying Earth short tales, which have been criticized by feminists as too male-oriented, which should be the best seal of approval there is. Vance’s novels involving Cugel (one of the greatest characters in scifi/fantasy history) are first rate and hilarious, and Planet of Adventure is excellent, as are his Demon Princes stories, particularly the finale, The Book of Dreams. Asimov is over-rated, but his Foundation series is indeed excellent, and thought-provoking from a broad civilizational view. There are many other great scifi books and writers. Conflating the best to Herbert and Bradbury is absurd.

This picture does not inspire confidence in current coronavirus research.

I agree with what Johnson says here.

The American Right has morally and intellectually discredited itself with its reaction to the corona pandemic.

Very true, but as any reader of EGI Notes well knows, you read that here first, many weeks before Johnson’s belated epiphany.  The few times the Quota Queens write or say anything useful, there are far behind the curve of this blog.


And of course, by letting deranged scum like “Stronza” post comments on his moderated blog, Johnson himself must be counted among the rightists who have been so discredited.


It’s just the flu, bro!

The biography of Jack Ma?  ET phone home!

Not good enough, Trump. Please release the data.  I believe it, but how can we all build treason evidence against HBD without the stone cold facts?  Keep in mind that EGI Notes was among the first Far Right blogs promoting the “Chinese lab release” paradigm (while the HBD filth were promoting Chinese government propaganda lies about a fictional “American bioweapon.”


A better title – can you trust Der Movement?

I have a distinct dislike for the journalistic class as a whole. They do not so much report news as collectively make the news, according to a peculiar pack mentality, which combines commonly-agreed designated good guys and bad guys, but also sometimes brutal and erratic shifts collective opinion, not according to the whims of an official chief, but a strange and disturbing hive mind.

A better version:

I have a distinct dislike for Der Movement as a whole. It does not so much report the truth about race as collectively distort the truth, according to a peculiar Nordicist and/or HBD pack mentality, which combines commonly-agreed designated good ethnies and bad ethnies, but also sometimes brutal and erratic shifts collective opinion, not according to the whims of an official chief, but a strange and disturbing hive mind.

Paul Kersey, Against Hazony, and Other News

Various issues.

Another defeat.

RWW determined Thompson’s identity partly through a forensic voice test on audio recordings and partly through emails and testimony provided by Katie McHugh, a former far-right insider and Breitbart writer.

The series of events seems to be that first that budding Joan of Arc Katie McHugh provided the information leading to the identity of “Kersey” – apparently initially through tweets several months ago – that was then confirmed by the “forensic voice test on audio recordings.”  How else would they know who to compare the “Kersey” recordings to if they first didn’t have the information from McHugh? 


So:


1. It’s not immediately clear what benefits there are in having these very helpful Joan of Arcs involved in White racial activism. The White Knighters (many of whom are homosexual and whose only experience with women consists of competing with them for sexual access to “hot men”) will say that men behave badly, similar to McHugh, as well. Quite right, but in that case there is the compensation that men actually accomplish things – the accounting, the balancing of the books, comes out in their favor.  What women do we balance McHugh with? Some e-thots grifting money online from thirsty beta male Alt Righters?  Who?  What do they accomplish?  Going on “movement” blog threads to whine about “misogyny?” What?


2. For both men and women, the “movement” is too quick to trust people and quickly put folks in positions of authority and inner knowledge (at least if they derive from the north of Vienna and the West of Berlin – even micks are acceptable). There is no reason for an empty vessel like McHugh to ever had been in a position to have any knowledge about the “movement” whatsoever.


3. A pseudonymous activist like “Kersey” should not have been doing podcasts with his real voice; at minimum, some voice-changing software should have been used.  That’s not a 100% guarantee, but it’s better than a 0% guarantee. Once Thompson was identified, matching the voices was simple.

Truly mean.  After all, we all have to get infected so as not to hurt the feelings of diseased Orientals.  


After this insipid review, we see some useful comments.  This person usefully critiques Hazony,and I’ll add some brief fisking of Hazony’s lies:

He is open about rejecting “race-based politics”, and he defines a nation as “…an actual people with a particular cultural inheritance, bound by ties of mutual loyalty”,…

Culture.  That’s very good.  Likely we can find several million Black Africans willing to accept Jewish “culture” as the price for living in Israel, and enjoying Israel’s relatively high standard of living.  No doubt that they will be a fine addition to the Jewish nation and I hope, and expect, that Hazony will be a strong proponent of bringing in, say, ten million Nigerians to live as Jewish Israelis, with, of course, full, unqualified, intermarriage and assimilation.

…adding that it is “a far greater and better thing than the bogus, pseudo-scientific construct that the race nerds hope to replace it with”…

Ad hominem about “race nerds” does not alter the fact that there are clear genetic and phenotypic differences between continental population groups (i.e., races) and that denial of that constitutes actual “pseudoscience.”

… — which is to say, anybody can become part of it by accepting its culture. Since he rejects race, he must also reject ethnicity, logically following, as that stems from race, and if he rejects the idea of a Negro not being able to be (an equal) part of a White nation (as “race-based politics” suggest), then a nation’s “cohesiveness” can’t be ethnic either.

This should apply then to Israel.  See above.

He argues in an article, that this “cohesiveness” is a shared bond, that is, culture, but again, he rejects race (and logically therefore, ethnicity), as part of this equation. He mocks the idea of White Nationalism in petty and disingenuous ways, saying “no ‘white’ nation is found in any history book. 

If “White” is used as a shorthand for “European” than, yes, there are European nations in history books and, indeed, a “European Union” is currently extant.  More to the point, ‘Whites” do not require the permission of Hazony – or any other such Middle Easterner – to identify as they please, including on an “European” (i.e., “White”) basis.  

There is no distinctive ‘white’ language, religion or cultural inheritance. 

European, Western.

The idea that ‘whites’ are a nation is just so much make-believe.”

Excuse me, you Jewish retard, a nationalist can be one who wishes to form a new nation out of a people that currently do not have one based on the specific identity in question.  Or are Basque nationalists a figment of the imagination?

 — but of course Whites are not one single “nation”, however, White nations are, by definition, White, and it’s a foundational characteristic. Something he thinks we shouldn’t focus on.

Whites can identity and form nations however they damn please, and they do not require the permission of Levantines.

In his view a race-based nation is just about “the quality of genes” and “skin color”, and reminds us that “race politics brought about the murder of millions in Europe, while in America it produced slavery, civil war and a legacy of domestic unease — and occasional violence”.

And Jewish Marxism resulted  in “the murder of millions in Europe” – maybe we shouldn’t be listening to Jewish ideologues?

So again, I don’t see how his version of nationalism is, down the road, any better than civic nationalism that requires assimilation, acceptance of “a common cultural inheritance, especially a distinctive language and religion”, with “bonds of mutual loyalty”. At the end, this can only result in a multiracial society, like that of the United States, which, I believe, would be ideal for him (for the gentiles): a mono-cultural mixed-race populace waving the same flag.

It is also important that his entire life is focused on Zionism and pursuing Jewish interests, and since he doesn’t care about Whites as such (following his non-racial direction, White nations would cease to exist), I believe he simply wants to make sure the new rise of nationalism (e.g. Trump, migrant crisis in Europe) is a non-racial one that is good for the Jews (think pro-Israel MAGAtardism). After all, he said before that “The nationalist turn in Western politics presents an immense opening for Christian-Jewish partnership in the public sphere”

The same applies to HBD and the HBD takeover of White racial activism.

This is correct.  How does that differ from Jewish HBD I wonder?

So, let’s criticize Napoleon for having some scattered non-European soldiers, but we’ll ignore this,  right?  “Movement” hypocrites.

Come now, what’s good for the Austrian goose should be good for the Corsican gander.

Joyce vs. Johnson, 1/15/20

More news.


Joyce:

Andrew Joycesays:
January 14, 2020 at 2:13 am
Queer coping is when a known homosexual gets triggered when a homosexual idol is systematically critiqued and, unable to moderate the emotional response, but also unable to write a full length rebuttal, resorts to long-winded by ultimately meaningless comments designed to claim intellectual victory (and psychological relief) where none exists. When it comes to queers, they’re a lot like wasps or hornets. Just rattle the nest and watch them come out. They can’t help themselves.

I was warned about the cabal in the early 2000s.


Johnson:

Greg Johnsonsays:
January 14, 2020 at 5:40 am
Ryuji Tsukazaki’s remarks are devastating because Joyce’s essay leans so heavily on arguing that “Mishima was a profoundly unhealthy and inorganic individual,” and Tsukazaki argues that such remarks are rather beside the point, because such people are often quite insightful and can make true statements. Joyce admits that his argument is ad hominem. But the argumentum ad hominem is one of the informal logical fallacies.

Yes, argumentum ad hominemjust like calling Sallis “crazy and bitter” instead of responding to the comments left on your blog, never mind “banning” people who critique your ideas and your behavior.

Tsukazaki also points out that, contra Joyce, Mishima wrote plenty about politics. Indeed, about one-fourth of Mishima’s 43-volume collected works consists of non-fiction, including political statements, and even his writings on literature, art, and culture have political import. 

That doesn’t invalidate Joyce’s thesis.

Andrew Rankin’s recent book Mishima, Aesthetic Terrorist, is the first book in English to discuss much of this material with an eye to its political and philosophical content. No genuinely scholarly discussion of Mishima’s political import should omit mention of it. Rankin’s book was published in 2018, so Joyce had no excuse not to cover it.

True, Joyce’s essay could have been more complete.  He should write a follow-up, with a focus on answering Johnson.

This essay rather blots Joyce’s reputation as a scholar.

No, it doesn’t.


Zman commentator:

Epaminondas
None of this will prevent a future, more determined version of Trump to turn over the political table. He walks among us now. In fact, the new, more fanatic morality will make Trump 2.0 stand out even more sharply from the rest. If you think you’re seeing the elites panic now, just wait.

Sounds familiar.


Consider this Mexican-looking greasy Afrowop.  Just like Der Movement is full of insincere grifters, so is the gaggle of “anti-racists.”