Should we be surprised?
VDARE has been recently shilling for Derbyshire’s book Fire From The Sun (about, what else, China). While I have no interest in reading that trash, I was interested in reading the following comment left about it on Amazon, emphasis added:
Top critical review
See the critical review›
One person found this helpful
1.0 out of 5 starsA Good Book Ruined
ByATon June 13, 2014
Mr. Derbyshire started out writing a great book about early Communist China, and then decided to ruin it with pederasty and other perversions. A great disappointment.
I’m not surprised, given Derbyshire’s strong defense of child porn on VDARE.
From Western Destiny.
Hey, let’s not be too harsh on him
! He’s “one of the boys,” after all, and perhaps can one day become a “movement” “leader” or, perhaps, a HBD blogger, complete with Asian wife.
What does it say about Whites that they support Trump more weakly
than they do all the establishment GOP cucks? What does it say about VDARE that they cannot say exactly which
Whites are not supporting Trump?
As before, Trump’s problem is not enraged minorities, but a relative weakness among whites…
Apparently, a book
Derbyfogle would like to give “Rosie.”
Hitler would not tolerate contradiction.
Well, there’s a reason why Saint Adolf is the very archetype of a “movement” “leader.” Contradiction? Discussion? Debate? No, no, a thousand times, no! (Or should we say, Nein!). Only fossilized dogmas allowed, repeated endlessly.
Hitler on the Jews is right about this:
This race simply has a tendency toward ridiculing everything that is beautiful, and it frequently does so by way of masterful satire. But behind that there is more: there is a tendency toward undermining and ridiculing authority.
Racial science was a moderating influence on German chauvinism…
That’s ludicrous on the face of it, and what is called “racial science” here is the most pathetic type of pseudoscience, rivaling the absolute stupidity of HBD.
The “Mr. Hyde” of Der Movement rambles on.
My colleague Andrew Hamilton…
The two worst writers in Counter-Currents history.
But, as I have written elsewhere, many (though certainly not all) of the early racial theorists’ hypotheses have actually been confirmed by later genetic studies.
The anti-Semitic Christian-Socials proposed a vigorous affirmative action program…
Der Movement has a long history of promoting affirmative action, I see.
To be continued . . .
There’s more? Durocher’s review will be longer than the book.
Adolf vs. Steverino: better to pursue the necessary but “impossible” than pursue a more “possible” yet useless or destructive course of action.
Hitler quote (*):
“We must not ask if it is possible to attain this goal, but whether it is necessary. If it is impossible, we will try it anyway and be destroyed. But if it is necessary and true, we must believe that it is possible just the same. And we need this faith. A thousand years look down on us, the future demands sacrifices.”
Note how that differs from the short-sighted idiocy of Steve Sailer, who rejects White nationalism because he assumes its goals are “impossible” to achieve. So instead he promotes “citizenism” that is not only almost as “impossible” as White nationalism but that is worse than useless – indeed actively destructive – even if achievable.
* Quoted in: Stolfi, R. H. S. Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny, Prometheus Books..
Reading O’ Meara’s Introduction to the latest edition of Yockey’s The Proclamation of London, one unfortunately sees the anti-biological race problem rearing its head again. The strawman argument is made that so-called biological racial materialism (the adherents of which – like myself – O’Meara doesn’t want to waste his breath on) is all about looking at humanity from the perspective of superiority/inferiority or of a strict genetic determinism. That is true of Der Movement certainly, and, from a Judeophilic and Asian-worshiping perspective, also true of the HBDers. But it is not true of a kinship-based racialism that takes the reasonable view that it is adaptive to pursue the promotion of interests of those most closely related to you (genetic kinship), modulated by the numbers involved. That is a core component of my ideology – the Salterian EGI component – of which that there can be no compromise. Race exists, it is real, population groups differ, genetic kinship differs, and adaptive behavior is tied into the relative levels of that kinship. Culture is of course extremely important – High Culture/Civilization (using the broad definition, not the strictly Spenglerian distinctions) that includes science/technics – is indeed the most important proximate interest, but genetic kinship is ultimate. I don’t care about, or care for, racial aliens who ape aspects of White Western Culture. I care about racial Europeans. When talking about a Race-Culture both aspects are important, and in the order shown: race, then culture.
O’Meara also makes the bizarre argument that racial classifications are arbitrary because Victorian Englishmen saw themselves as more racially similar to Jews than to the Irish. But here O’Meara is confused, and points the finger of blame in the wrong direction. What biological science actually says is that indeed the English and Irish are more similar, racially, than either are to Jews (or even to many other European – including NW European – groups). This belief of Victorian Englishmen was cultural – more akin to the Yockey/Evola “spiritual race” concept than to anything else. Therefore, O’Meara uses this example of cultural race stupidity to indict biological racial materialism – even though biological racial materialism gives the right answer, and cultural race gives the wrong answer. The example given is actually supportive of the importance of genetic kinship. One can also state that total Identity is composed of both biological and cultural characteristics, and that today any racially aware Englishmen would consider himself more similar to the Irish either biologically or culturally than to Jews.
To be fair, apart from this issue, O’Meara’s Introduction is quite good. This nevertheless is important and the critique, in my opinion, justified.
Scifi making a point.
The science fiction book Voyage of the Space Beagle (four short stories stitched together to make a coherent novel) is an interesting work. This is particularly true since Spenglerian “cyclical history” provides a basic foundation for the underlying sociopolitical paradigms present in the book. Also, with one unfortunate exception, all of the characters seem to be White, for the most part, but not exclusively, (based on surnames) of British Isles stock.
1. The main protagonist, Grosvenor, near the end of the book, disparages the importance of “blood and race” with respect to the workings of history.
2. That character is an obnoxious dickweed: I prefer the main human antagonist, Kent.
3. There is a Japanese character portrayed positively, unusual since these stories were written 1939-1950.
A relevant quote from the book:
It seemed to Grosvenor that he was learning slowly but surely how to influence men. It was not enough to have information and knowledge, not enough to be right. Men had to be persuaded and convinced. Sometimes that might take more time than could safely be spared. Sometimes it couldn’t be done at all. And so civilizations crumbled, battles were lost, and ships destroyed because the man or group with the saving ideas would not go through the long-drawn-out ritual of convincing others.
That is relevant to the “movement” in two ways. First, racial nationalists seem unable or unwilling to do what is necessary to convince Whites of the race problem and possible solutions; hence, our civilization crumbles. Second, within the “movement” itself, the sane faction is unable or unwilling to deal with all the Nutzis, fetishists, trolls, quota queens, and neckbeards in order to get the racial nationalist house in order so as to deal effectively with the first problem – persuading Whites as a race.