Category: books

Movement Moneyball

Food for thought.

I have a good opinion of Robert Griffin, and not only because he interviewed me for his book.

Putting aside the debates about baseball strategy (who really cares?), the main points are these:

We believe what makes us feel good about ourselves.  Moneyball is a self-confirming experience for its audience.  We get to feel in the know and on the side of the angels and linked up with a cool guy like Brad Pitt, and all we had to do to achieve that status was spring for a movie ticket or a DVD or streaming rental.  And we are safe; nothing goes on that challenges or threatens us.  We are nestled comfortably among the wise and righteous and don’t have to think about anything or do a damn thing.

That’s what Der Movement and HBD does.  It makes a certain subsection of Whites “feel good about themselves” (typically by throwing other Whites “under the bus” so to speak) so as to make the poison easier to swallow.  “A spoonful of sugar makes the cyanide go down” is one way of putting it.

We are basically lazy.  If you are halfway slick you can tell people just about anything that is simple to understand and has a surface level of plausibility (as long as it doesn’t make them feel bad about themselves—these all go together) and be rest assured that they aren’t going to put effort into thinking about it or checking into its veracity or coming up with alternatives to it.

Most “movement activists” are indeed lazy.”  They “drink the movement Kool-Aid” without a moment’s  hesitation.  Thinking for themselves is too difficult.

So what can we do?

We can take seriously my mother’s advice to me when I was a kid: “Robert, you are a nice boy, but you believe everything anybody tells you.  Quit doing that.”

We can differentiate mediated from direct experience.

We can distinguish abstractions—images, words, concepts, assertions — from the concrete realities they supposedly represent.

The Lenny Bruce joke: we can trust our eyes more, our senses, our experience of things.

We can look directly at the people pushing something and ask: Who are these people?  What’s their agenda?  What’s in it for them and theirs if we buy what they are selling?

We can think for ourselves and not let other people do the thinking for us.

We can become mediators of reality ourselves.

Isn’t that what EGI Notes has been telling you all to do regarding the “movement” for years now?

Is anyone listening?

Doubtful, but I’ll still try.  If even one person is converted to reality, it’ll be worth it.


Der News, News, News, 3/5/18

It’s Der Movement!

First: an unannounced odyssey.  Every couple of months I search Amazon to see if Bolton’s Yockey book had been published (as well as checking Far-Right sites for an announcement).

Lo and behold!

I’ll read that Kindle when I finish the sets of books I’m tackling now (Late Western Roman Empire, and also a new Hitler biography is gathering dust here and I need to get to that at some point). But for now I ask: why hasn’t this book publication been announced and promoted at various Far-Right sites?  This is an important development and we have to search it out as if it was being hidden.

Sometimes Der Movement baffles me, it really does.

So let EGI Notes make the announcement:


Nicholas Farrell, who is not an ethnic Italian but lives in Italy, sighs loudly once again about those stupid and unruly Afrowops:

The Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, comparing himself to Michelangelo and Italians to marble—the raw material the Renaissance genius used to fashion his sculptures—once complained to German journalist Emil Ludwig: “It’s the raw material that I lack. Governing the Italians is not impossible. It is useless.”
Since the fall of Il Duce in 1945, Italy has had 65 governments, and today the Italians return to the polls to choose the 66th. Incredibly, for non-Italians at least…

Yeah Farrell, it’s all like real terrible and all.  How about leaving Italy then?

A new “movement” disease called the Farrell-Munro-Deasy Syndrome: live in, or at least visit, someone else’s nation (as an ethnic alien), complain about and insult the natives, with marrying a native woman optional (while mocking the men…an omnidominant ploy? Perhaps those “farther from human origins” are more “omnidominant?”).

So far I have no reason to include that Leonard ( fellow in this syndrome; while he lives In Italy he so far has not attacked the natives.

Read this.

This is a vehemently pacifist blog, advocating complete non-violence in the grand Gandhian tradition, a beacon of human love and compassion, unalterably opposed to the use of any force whatsoever.  Turn the other cheek!  However, on a purely theoretical basis, purely hypothetically, what if, the next time some “extreme right leader” is “violently attacked by protestors” that some identified extreme left activist thug simply disappears?  Vanished, never to be seen again. What happened to them?  A mystery it all is!  Such a course of action is of course despicable and denounced by this blog in the strongest possible terms, it must never happen, we denounce it utterly, but, hypothetically speaking, purely theoretically, it may make the thugs think twice the next time they decide to do their usual ten-on-one “sucker punch” style attacks on rightists.  But self-defense for rightists contravenes the hardcore humanist views of this blog so it must of course never ever occur. Never, never, never!  Rightists must of course be attacked with complete impunity, with the Left fearing no payback whatsoever.

After all, why should a “movement” ostensibly based upon concepts of national greatness, masculinity, virility, force, and Faustian overcoming ever defend itself?  Do nothing, meekly allow yourselves to be assaulted, and then cry for the authorities (who hate you) to step in – that’s the ticket!

By the way, that happened while a “hardcore conservative” is President of Sicily.

Sound familiar? Just like how Trump and Sessions look the other way when Antifa run wild in the streets of America, even though Der Touchback and Der Howdy have the power to declare that group a terrorist organization and fully unleash federal law enforcement on them.

In any case, isn’t it clear that “extreme right” leaders need bodyguards when venturing out in public?  It’s even obvious to an ultra-pacifist and lover of humanity as me that the “extreme right” needs to form paramilitary groups to defend their politicians, speakers, and leaders, within the scope of existing law. 

Read here. That is why we need POPA.

Community Activism Needed

Things to do.

A comment from brings up a subject I’ve been discussing ever since I was interviewed by Robert Griffin for his book – the need for “movement” activists to get involved in the community, help “normal” White folks, and thus build strong fundamental ties to Whites that will prove fruitful in both recruiting and drawing general support from the population when such support will be required.

Golden Dawn, a Greek nationalist movement, does a lot of community outreach for Greek people. The young women and men both see to it that no vulnerable Greek is without assistance. A drive to the doctor for an elderly person, a medicine or eyeglass campaign, a roof repair or a lawn mowed for an elderly man, new mothers assisted, etc. I understand Hezbollah does a similar outreach for their people. Builds love and tribal identity. Enforces bonds among the young and solidifies self-worth.

A Positive Critique

Dominique Venner.
This book has already been reviewed at Amren, so instead of just repeating what has already been done, I’d just like to cite a few relevant points from this excellent book (highly recommended) and how these points fit in to some of the opinions promoted here.
Venner begins with outlining “the flaws of the nationalist opposition” (if he did so today, he would be termed “crazy and bitter,” as “punching right” is only allowed for affirmative action panhandlers); these flaws include (today’s equivalents in parentheses): ideological confusion (of course, the entire “movement”), conformism (Der Movement’s fossilized dogma), archaism (Nutzism, Traditionalism), opportunism (all Chiefs, no Indians, and all Chiefs with the tin cup out), mythomania (conspiracy theorists), terrorism (acting out), and anarchism (lulz lulz).
The section on “Revolutionary Theory” is standard fare and all good, and a wakeup call for those who believe that no firm ideological underpinning for activism is necessary.  Basing activism on vague ideas and “acting out” leads to the sort of weak-minded, Type I activists who turn traitor as soon as they meet that “one nice Black person” they heretofore stupidly believed could not exist (when you have a childish view of reality, all people are binned into rigidly Manichean categories of all good vs. all bad).
“Young Europe” – Venner calls for pan-European cooperation, against the division of narrow ethnonationalism. “Unity is indispensable to the future of European Nations.” Indeed, and that’s a key feature of my work over the last 20+ years, as opposed to the ethnonationalists and their publicly proclaimed dystopian vision of European nations ethnically cleansing each other.
The section “For a Man or an Idea” is an attack on what I call the Man on White Horse Syndrome, and is highly relevant in this the Time of Trump.  Venner writes: “Passive herds, expect their miracle men to fix everything. Even the smallest groups have their idols. The inevitable disappearance of the great men leaves the naïve embittered and discouraged.”  Sound familiar?  And then: “The Nationalist does not need followers but militants who are defined by their doctrine, not in their relation to a man.”  Indeed.  Anyone listening?
Venner criticizes the “Theatrical Revolutionaries” who are “enemies of the revolution.”  The part about “costumes” I will address below, but in general, this criticism is relevant to all the Nutzis who ruin us all – Type I dimwits.  Venner talks about “Zero plus Zero” – in other words, grouping zeros together just gives you a bigger zero (the history of Der Movement, Inc.).
With respect to Venner’s criticism of “costumes”-  I both agree and disagree.  It depends upon context and what kind of “costume” one is talking about. Should activists dress up like Nazis?  Strut around with swastika armbands and SS uniforms?  Of course not.  Should they take the Alt Right and Alt Lite course of action, and appear at rallies like refugees from a cosplay convention, aping Captain America and Batman?  Certainly not.  Should they wear uniforms when simply interacting with normal people or going “undercover?”  Of course not.  Compare Joe Tommasi, who stopped dressing up Nazi like he did at first and “went native” as part of his guerilla war program, to the costumed Nutzis who eventually killed him.
Having said all of that, there is nothing wrong with uniforms per se, when attending certain types of meetings, or attending public rallies, or when engaged in more overt action.  There are benefits of wearing uniforms: for esprit de corps, discipline, professionalism, etc., these benefits are well known, which is why they have been used for military and paramilitary groups throughout civilized history. There is a history of uniformed paramilitary political solders in virtually every (ex)-Western nation, including America and the Silver Shirts.  Tasteful, utilitarian, culturally endogenous, and non-nutty uniforms are fine – better than the cosplay crew, better than the Nutzis, etc.
Lastly, Venner talks about “Division of Labor and Centralization” – people should do the tasks to which they are most fit, and propaganda needs to be local if possible: “…the propaganda branch should be able to rapidly supply material adapted to local groups, rather than over-generalized and locally irrelevant material.”  In relation to this, see some of my criticism of the National Alliance here.
Yes, you can have, as Venner suggests, a centralized leadership, but the actual “field work” has to be properly local and decentralized.  When activists need permission from “the National Office” to use the rest room, then nothing gets done.  The unwillingness of Pierce to allow local units to create and distribute their own propaganda specifically suited for local conditions and local current events was a terrible error, as much strategic as tactical.  All sorts of explanations were given (“quality control” and “we want to recruit people who understand the big picture and who are not merely emotionally excited about some local event”), but one suspects it was as much about maintaining tight control and the exercising of power, as well as maximizing National Office income (local units actually had to purchase the propaganda material they were to distribute!) as about anything else.  You know, it would still have been possible for the National Office to (quickly) review and approve (or suggest changes in) locally produced material – so the first objection falls flat.  As far as the second objection goes – there is nothing wrong with leveraging local conditions and current events to bring your group and its ideology to the attention of prospective recruits, one can always cull the herd once people are initially brought in, most likely only the truly dedicated will join an overtly public racialist group anyway, and by focusing on local conditions and events, you let the people in that locale know that you understand them and their problems, and that you are there to help – it’s a two-way street, not merely a bigwig somewhere trying to pad their membership rolls in order to boost monthly dues income.  So, the second objection falls flat as well.  Venner was correct: propaganda should be both general and local; if it is just extremely generalized it becomes stilted and stale, and puts too much of a distance between the prospective activist and the organization.  Idealism is great and should be paramount, but one cannot eat Idealism, and Idealism alone will not protect a community from the Colored hordes and their Levantine masters.  Idealism has to be built upon a foundation of pragmatic activity and real-world concerns.  Once you take care of the latter, then you can indulge the former.
In summary, the problem with important books like this is that they get no serious attention from the “movement.” I’ve seen this again and again.  Yes, sometimes such books are discussed and favorably reviewed.  Some people say, yes, yes, we need to follow this advice, and then with the short attention span of the Type I retards, all is forgotten, and all just falls back to “business as usual” – the default setting of “movement” dysfunction wins again.
Expect more of the same with this book.
Was Venner’s suicide at least in part motivated by a realization of the utter failure of the “movement?”  It was about 50 years from his book to his death – what had been accomplished?  Did anyone listen to what he wrote?  What has happened since his death?  We have now the Alt Right making a mockery of serious nationalism, flouting many of the suggestions Venner made.
Perhaps it is time for a Negative Critique?

Youth is Wasted on the Young

Talking to the wind.

Read here about some of the current legal troubles of Richard Spencer and the Alt Right.  This blog supports Spencer with respect to this situation and I hope it works out somehow, although I’m not very optimistic.  We’ll see.

One point I’ll make is that these guys had things reversed.  First, you build a presence in the community, you build an infrastructure, you spend the time – years – to build up a network of support (including lawyers) and then – after – you “go public” to the extent of participating in rallies such as Charlottesville – or organizing other public events – that have the potential for trouble and the potential for generating legal liability.

If these younger fellows would ever had asked advice and input from the dreaded over-50 crowd (and, no, Alt Wrong HBDers are not included in the group whose advice should have been solicited from), then perhaps some of these errors would not have been made.  And for those of you who say “oh, that’s 20-20 hindsight” you’re wrong: I’ve been writing about the need for building infrastructure, community, and networks for years, I’ve been preaching prudent planning and contingency preparation; further, more than 15 years ago, when I was interviewed for Griffin’s book, I made the following points (emphasis added):

I think the challenge is to heighten whites’ racial awareness — especially the sane, honest, hardworking, law-abiding whites — and convince them to form voluntary, private organizations in their own communities. These organizations would exist to do practical things. The problem now is you have racialist organizations and they say, “Join up and send us your membership dues,” and you get a little membership card and a newsletter once a month. But the members stay isolated and everything stays divorced from reality. We need racial nationalist organizations that help children with homework, and help old and infirmed people, and that clean up neighborhoods, and where everybody stands together when some outside force tries to push them around. Maybe these organizations could have youth auxiliaries.  

As it is now, we have white people thinking, “What am I going to do? I have got to send my children to the local school and it’s full of minorities and they are going to be taught all sorts of nonsense and they are going to get attacked, and my neighborhood is deteriorating, and my life is going to hell.” An activist comes up to them and says, “Let’s go protest against the United States’ foreign policy in the Middle East.” That’s great, our foreign policy in the Middle East should be protested, but there is still the question of what is going to be done to help the person scratching his head trying to figure out what he is going to do about what is happening in his life. At a very basic level we have to protect ourselves physically.  

The Nation of Islam may be an example of the kind of thing I’m talking about. It was founded in the 1930s, but it wasn’t until the early 1960s that most white Americans ever heard about the Black Muslims. They spent decades building a base of support in the black community by helping black people with whatever they were doing in their community. So when they started becoming vocal and white people in the early 1960s started saying, “Hey, these people are a problem, what are we going to do?” it was already too late. The Black Muslims were already firmly established and had become an integral part of black society. In a similar way, a white nationalist movement has to grow like a plant, with its roots firmly in the soil.

Sound familiar? Sound relevant? Build a base of support in the community.  Do that FIRST.  Have youth auxiliaries (putting Beavis-and-Butthead in their proper place).  Protect activists (and White people generally) physically.  Once you do those things, once you are firmly planted in the soil of the community, then you will have white collar and blue collar members and supporters – including lawyers – ready for when they are needed.  You’ll be grounded, on a firm foundation, you’ll have those deep roots so your trunk and branches won’t get blown away in a storm.  You have all these things and then you go out and do your rallies and protests.  Some would argue that the rallies and protests are needed to gain the supporters in the first place, to which I say that the type of supporters you need first and foremost are the ones gained by community organizing and not from rallies with cosplay actors dressed like Captain America, and also, why is it that low-IQ, low time preference Negroes did things correctly, but the ever-so-superior Whites did not, and cannot, do so?

Whenever these guys begin to realize they should get input from older people who have some useful perspectives, they know how to contact us. But it is a bit late now, these problems should not have went down like this to begin with.  If and when these legal problems are resolved, I’d advise the sort of careful, long-range, and strategic building of community, infrastructure, and networking described above, including a legal team, a security force, folks with business sense, and some older advisers to provide guidance.

Slightly off-topic, but still focused on the Alt Right and their errors and delusions, see this.  That is the most ludicrous stupidity imaginable.

In Der Movement, you don’t dominate anything.  Leadership? Ha!  Respect?  Ha!  (Just look at any comments thread to any post concerning the “Alt-Europeans”).  Interests considered? Double Ha!  Talk about delusional.

The Betas Karamazov

Psychosexual insights from a Russian classic.

“The Battle of the Sexes” is fundamentally important for racial activism, particularly since we have White Knighting activists who expend their political capital on ditzy female airheads.

Now, before someone accuses me of hypocrisy by using “game” analyses here, let me remind you that I’ve always maintained that, as regards sex, “game” is essentially correct in the descriptive sense.  By opposition to “game” is prescriptive. In other words, I see the gamesters as correct in their description of women and of the sexual marketplace, but I disagree with their prescriptive suggestions on how men should behave based on these realities.

Thus, we can analyze a few characters of The Brothers Karamazov through the lens of sexual realism.

A “game” evaluation of the major female characters has already been done by someone else, and I see this analysis as sound.

The Wikipedia description of those characters are as follows (emphasis added):

Agrafena Alexandrovna Svetlova (a.k.a. Grushenka, Grusha, Grushka), a beautiful 22-year-old, is the local Jezebel and has an uncanny charm for men. In her youth she was jilted by a Polish officer and subsequently came under the protection of a tyrannical miser. The episode leaves Grushenka with an urge for independence and control of her life. Grushenka inspires complete admiration and lust in both Fyodor and Dmitri Karamazov. Their rivalry for her affection is one of the most damaging factors in their relationship. Grushenka seeks to torment and then deride both Dmitri and Fyodor as a wicked amusement, a way to inflict upon others the pain she has felt at the hands of her “former and indisputable one”. However, after she begins a friendship with Alyosha, and as the book progresses, she begins to tread a path of spiritual redemption through which emerges hidden qualities of gentleness and generosity, though her fiery temper and pride are ever present. 

Katerina Ivanovna Verkhovtseva (a.k.a. Katya, Katka, Katenka) is Dmitri’s beautiful fiancée, despite his open forays with Grushenka. Her engagement to Dmitri is chiefly a matter of pride on both their parts, Dmitri having bailed her father out of a debt. Katerina is extremely proud and seeks to act as a noble martyr, suffering as a stark reminder of everyone’s guilt. Because of this, she cannot bring herself to act on her love for Ivan, and constantly creates moral barriers between him and herself. By the end of the novel, she too, begins a real and sincere spiritual redemption, as seen in the epilogue, when she asks Mitya and Grushenka to forgive her.

Thus, typical young women: cruel, capricious unpleasant, arrogant, shit-testing, and we see that  Dostoevsky falters in his story-telling when he has both characters show “redemption” toward the end of the book.  In reality, both would have continued their behavior until their looks failed, at which time they’d find some beta male to parasitize off of (“marriage”) complete with nagging and general nastiness (“married life”).

Let’s now consider the main male characters, along with their Wikipedia descriptions (emphasis added).

Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov is the father, a 55-year-old “sponger” and buffoon who sires three sons during his two marriages. He is rumored to have fathered an illegitimate son, Pavel Fyodorovich Smerdyakov, whom he employs as his servant. Fyodor takes no interest in any of his sons, who are, as a result, raised apart from each other and their father. The relationship between Fyodor and his adult sons drives much of the plot in the novel. 

Dmitri Karamazov

Dmitri Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Mitya, Mitka, Mitenka, Mitri) is Fyodor Karamazov’s eldest son and the only offspring of his first marriage, with Adelaida Ivanovna Miusov. Dmitri is considered to be a sensualist, much like his father, spending large amounts of money on nights filled with champagne, women, and whatever entertainment and stimulation money can buy. Dmitri is brought into contact with his family when he finds himself in need of his inheritance, which he believes is being withheld by his father. He was engaged to be married to Katerina Ivanovna, but breaks that off after falling in love with Grushenka. Dmitri’s relationship with his father is the most volatile of the brothers, escalating to violence as he and his father begin fighting over the same woman, Grushenka. While he maintains a good relationship with Ivan, he is closest to his younger brother Alyosha, referring to him as his “cherub”.

Fyodor the father and Dmitri the eldest son, the rivals for the “affections” (sic) of Grushenka, are both complicated characters.  Although they both – particularly the father – have some of the “dark triad” traits so believed by the gamesters, ultimately both  men are hardcore Betas – pussy pedestalizing obsessives, with infinite fucks given (IFG) – contrary to the assumed zero fucks given (ZFG) attitude of the Alpha – with a case (particularly for Dmitri) of “oneitis.”  Thus, both men are easy prey for the malevolent Grushenka, playing with them in the same manner that a spiteful (female) cat would torment a mouse.  Thus: Fyodor and Dmitri: Beta Males.   They are both classic Roissyite Gamesters as well: IFG pussy pedestalizers, making their entire lives revolving around women.

Ivan Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Vanya, Vanka, Vanechka) is the 24-year-old middle son and first from Fyodor’s second marriage to Sofia Ivanovna. He is disturbed especially by the apparently senseless suffering in the world. He says to Alyosha in the chapter “Rebellion” (Bk. 5, Ch. 4), “It’s not God that I don’t accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return him the ticket.” From an early age, Ivan is sullen and isolated. His father tells Alyosha that he fears Ivan more than Dmitri. Some of the most memorable and acclaimed passages of the novel involve Ivan, including the chapter “Rebellion”, his “poem” “The Grand Inquisitor” immediately following, and his nightmare of the devil (Bk. 11, Ch. 9). Ivan’s relationship with his father and brothers are rather superficial in the beginning. He is almost repulsed by his father, and had no positive affection towards Dmitri. While he doesn’t dislike Alexei, he didn’t have any deep affection for him either. But towards the end of the novel, his relationship with his siblings gets more complicated. Ivan falls in love with Katerina Ivanovna, who was Dmitri’s betrothed. But she doesn’t start to return his feelings until the end.

Ivan – rebellious, intellectually dissident, cold – is closest to being an alpha in the book, but his “oneitis” for Katerina Ivanovna and his “brain fever” – a sign of weakness – classify him as a Beta, a high Beta, but a Beta nevertheless.

Alexei Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Alyosha, Alyoshka, Alyoshenka, Alyoshechka, Alexeichik, Lyosha, Lyoshenka) at age 20 is the youngest of the Karamazov brothers, the youngest child by Karamazov’s second wife and thus Ivan’s full brother. The narrator identifies him as the hero of the novel in the opening chapter, as does the author in the preface. He is described as immensely likable. At the outset of the events, Alyosha is a novice in the local Russian Orthodox monastery. His faith is in contrast to his brother Ivan’s atheism. His Elder, Father Zosima, sends him into the world, where he becomes involved in the sordid details of his family. In a secondary plotline, Alyosha befriends a group of school boys, whose fate adds a hopeful message to the conclusion of the novel.

With respect to being an Orthodox novice, and his spending more time with young boys (maybe he should have become a Roman Catholic priest?) than young women, Alexei is MGTOW.  However, when he does interact with women, he typically does so in a bashful, clumsy, hand-twisting manner.  Hence, Alyosha = Beta.

Pavel Fyodorovich Smerdyakov, widely rumored to be the illegitimate son of Fyodor Karamazov, is the son of “Reeking Lizaveta”, a mute woman of the street who died in childbirth. His name, Smerdyakov, means “son of the ‘reeking one'”. He was brought up by Fyodor Karamazov’s trusted servant Grigory Vasilievich Kutuzov and his wife Marfa. Smerdyakov grows up in the Karamazov house as a servant, working as Fyodor’s lackey and cook. He is morose and sullen, and, like Dostoyevsky, suffers from epilepsy. The narrator notes that as a child, Smerdyakov collected stray cats to hang and bury them. Generally aloof, Smerdyakov admires Ivan and shares his atheism.

Pavel is a MGTOW Omega male.  At his best, he’s a low Beta.

Father Zosima, the Elder Father Zosima is an Elder and spiritual advisor (starets) in the town monastery and Alyosha’s teacher. He is something of a celebrity among the townspeople for his reputed prophetic and healing abilities. His popularity inspires both admiration and jealousy amidst his fellow monks. Zosima provides a refutation to Ivan’s atheistic arguments and helps to explain Alyosha’s character. Zosima’s teachings shape the way Alyosha deals with the young boys he meets in the Ilyusha storyline.

The character of Father Zosima was to some extent inspired by that of Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk.

Father Zosima as an Elder monk is obviously MGTOW.  Before entering the monastery, as a young man, he was somewhat similar to Ivan Karamazov, a high Beta with some Alpha traits. More importantly, the “all responsible for one another” philosophy of Father Zosima, as well as the outlook of Alyosha (the author-proclaimed “hero” of the novel), is that if Dostoevsky himself.  This is a form of Russian (The Third Rome) messianic Christianity, reflecting the aspects of the Russian soul discussed by Spengler in The Decline of the West.  Thus, Father Zosima asserts a form of collectivist Brotherhood, mutual care and love horizontally across society, in a leveling egalitarian manner, independent of social rank – the expansive horizon, the horizontal plane, as discussed by Spengler. While this is not our Nietzschean “cup of tea” so to speak, it does reflect a type of “will to power” = the idea of the inevitable victory of this worldview, the memetic conquest of humanity (Russian Bolshevism – a secularized version of Father Zosima’s philosophy?).

Ilyusha, Ilyushechka, or simply Ilusha in some translations, is one of the local schoolboys, and the central figure of a crucial subplot in the novel. His father, Captain Snegiryov, is an impoverished officer who is insulted by Dmitri after Fyodor Karamazov hires him to threaten the latter over his debts, and the Snegiryov family is brought to shame as a result. The reader is led to believe that it is partly because of this that Ilyusha falls ill, possibly to illustrate the theme that even minor actions can touch heavily on the lives of others, and that we are “all responsible for one another”.

If this child did not die and became a man, he’d most likely be a Beta or an Omega.

In summary, the Karamazovs were a bunch of Beta males who were manipulated, and ruined, by horrific nasty females. The only Karamazov who ended the story not badly ruined was Alyosha, not coincidentally the MGTOW Karamazov.  There’s a lesson there, I think.

Consider that young men typically have very strong sex drives.  Then further consider that increasing numbers of young heterosexual men are going MGTOW.  How terrible must today’s young women be to trigger such a reaction, to make men go against their most powerful biological drives.  This is something that women would do well to reflect upon.

Men in the “movement” themselves should reflect upon The Nature of Woman, and not waste their time and energy, and expend their political capital, defending what is not worth defending.  Although none of the male characters in The Brothers Karamazov are admirable from my perspective, some are worse than others.  Let’s not have “movement leaders” channeling Fyodor and Dmitri (hopefully, no Pavels are among us), turning themselves inside out for sly, malicious females.

Straight From the Horse’s Mouth

A tacit admission.

Greg Johnson writes the following, emphasis added:

“I am in fact a Hobbit.”—J. R. R. Tolkien 

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien is a favorite author of New Left “hippies” and New Right nationalists, and for pretty much the same reasons. Tolkien deeply distrusted modernization and industrialization, which replace organic reciprocity between man and nature with technological dominion of man over nature, a relationship that deforms and devalues both poles. 

But philosophically and politically, Tolkien was much closer to the New Right than the New Left. Tolkien was a conservative and a race realist. His preferences ran toward non-constitutional monarchy in the capital and de facto anarchy in the provinces, but he recognized that state control can be minimized only in a society with a deep reverence for tradition and a high regard for individual honor and self-restraint. 

Many of Tolkien’s most fervent New Right admirers are neo-pagans...The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, with their many themes from Norse and Celtic mythology, resonate especially with pagans… 

…For those who need no introduction, there is no better commemoration than to spend a winter evening snug in one’s own Hobbit hole reading the works of the man himself (or watching Peter Jackson’s masterly and inspiring movies of The Lord of the Rings).

That is of course the equivalent of Johnson saying: “I am in fact a Type I activist.”  And that’s a designation I already made, did I not?

Certain Alt Right ethnonationalists mimic Hitler to the extent that they are ideologically Type I but have the “bookish” and intellect-oriented Type II character.  

It is clear who I was talking about there.  Ideologically Type I indeed, and ideology trumps “character” every time.  It’s ideology that determines the direction of the “movement.”  Personality and character set a tone, but the actual content, the actual meaning, the actual outcomes – that’s all directly derived from ideology.

Some tell-tale signs to distinguish Type I from Type II fascists:

Serious sci/fi fantasy:

Type I: Lord of the Rings

Type II: Book of the New Sun

They who control Der Movement.