Category: dark enlightenment

That Question Again

The age-old obsession with the Jews.
So, at the “dark enlightenment,” we see the peanut gallery once again debating that old and boring question: “are Jews White?” The juvenile mindset that the “movement,” and associated precincts of “race realism,” have on this question is based on the simplistic idea that:
1) If Jews are “White” we must accept them, which we do not want to do.
2) If Jews are not “White” then we can reject them, which we do want to do.
Therefore, the anti-Jew crowd wants to prove the non-Whiteness of Jews, while the philo-Semites wish to prove the opposite.
However, for practical political purposes, this is meaningless. We all can think of many individuals who we will all agree are “White,” persons of impeccable “Aryan” bloodlines, folks of whom ancestry is not in question, and these people we would (I hope) unambiguously reject, since they are despicable traitors to their race and civilization.  Think of many politicians and world leaders, businessmen and other wealthy celebrities – are they part of our ingroup?  Washington DC is full of such types; they can be found in the EU, Hollywood, the US Chamber of Commerce, among our population of “White” billionaires, our financial aristocracy.  We find them among celebrities who proudly race-mix.  We find them among “leaders” who promote Third World immigration and other aspects of White genocide, these are scum who sell out their people for their own selfish interests, or because their minds have been infected with anti-White memes. These are the types that Pierce would have wanted to have executed in his “Day of the Rope.”
Very well.  But if we can identify individuals who are “White” but who we reject, why can’t we do the same about an ethnic group that behaves in the most destructive manner of all?  So, we can all agree that “Jews are White” but at the same time reject them as a “White” ethnic group that has a historical animus towards Europeans, a group that selfishly pursues their own hyper-ethnocentric interests at the expense of the rest of the “White race,” a renegade treasonous “White” ethny that makes common cause with the “rising tide of color” against White and Western interests, a “White” group actively promoting White genocide because they don’t really identify as “White” in the same sense as other “Whites” do, and because they believe that the destruction of the greater White Race ensures their own narrow group survival as an unique population group with its own special history and identity.  We can state that the Jewish “White” group perceives itself as having radically different interests from Gentile “Whites,” so that the two groups are incompatible. We can point out that whenever an attempt is made to include Jews in “White” racial nationalism, they consistently promote destructive memes (e.g., a multiracial “White separatist state,” supporting the “racial status quo,” blaming our problems on “Protestants,” stating that racial preservation for its own sake is “insane,” and of course promoting the anti-White creed of HBD). We can therefore accept Jews as “White.” while at the same time also accepting them as an enemy and rejecting them from inclusion in our ingroup of the White family of peoples. After all, throughout human history, who has been more despised than the traitor? Given their behavior, one could consider that saying that Jews are “White” may actually increase, rather than decrease, the hostility of racially aware Whites toward that group.
Having said all of that, and explaining why the question of “are Jews White?” is practically unimportant to any serious racial nationalism, I’ll switch gears and say that if, for some reason, it was important to more objectively justify exclusion of Jews, then the “movement” could adopt my reasonable definition of “indigenous” and state that we consider as “White” those individuals deriving ancestry from one or more of the indigenous ethnies of Europe.  Thus, Jews are no more “White” than are Roma, despite the fact that some Jews may be genetically or phenotypically close to Europeans.
Even more basic: we can follow Yockey and accept that Identity is holistic, and cannot be strictly reduced to biological reductionism (although the biological is important; it just isn’t everything). Thus, regardless of whether a Jew looks like Dolph Lundgren is immaterial; their overall Identity is non-European and non-Western. When the Jews established a modern homeland, where did they choose?  Palestine, in the Middle East. That choice was not solely or even predominantly motivated by pragmatics – there were other spaces available, spaces that could have avoided the endless conflict with the Arab natives of that region. Palestine was chosen and, more importantly, as Israel holds such a fascination on Jews, because Jews in their total Identity passionately feel a close connection, at minimum historically and culturally, to the ancient Israelites; modern Jews identity with a non-Western, non-European, Middle Eastern “Magian” High Culture.  We see the Jewish settlers of today invoking Biblical scripture as their basis for claiming this land in the Middle East. They view this land as theirs as their birthright as Jews, as part of Jewish history, a history rooted in the historical Middle East, not in Europe.  Thus, Israel is their homeland, not Europe, and it matters not if a given Jew is genetically and/or phenotypically “White” in the European sense. They do not identify as such. They identify as Jewish, a separate and unique group, and there is genetic evidence supporting a biological link to those historical and cultural ties, even though the link has been attenuated through admixture. But again, we need not be reductionist.  Jews are a People, with a strong identity, and that identity is not “White” in the same sense as is the identity of English, Germans, Italians, Czechs, Swedes, Spaniards, or French.
So, Jews may be “White,” but they do not identify as such, when push comes to shove. They may be “White” but they are not indigenous Europeans; there is no historic European nation of “Jewia.” They may be “White” but they do not belong to the High Culture of the West; instead, they identify with the “Magian” High Culture of the Middle and Near East; they may be “White” but their passionate attachment to “blood and soil” is in the Levant, not in Europe.  Whether or not they are “White,” and regardless of how one wants to “crunch” the data on cephalic indices or gene frequencies, Jews are not European Westerners.  They are themselves, with their own interests, which they pursue with great efficacy.  Perhaps if we were equally concerned about our own identity and our own interests, rather than worrying about how to classify Jews, our own situation would be far less dire.

Advertisements

In the News, 2/28/15

Two Items.
Two for one: showing the uselessness of the “manosphere” and also showing the anti-White hostility of NECs.
William Johnson of the American Freedom Party defines his American ingroup specifically in Northern European racial terms (note to Sunic: stay in Europe).  Johnson is of course perfectly entitled to do so.  Equally, pro-White European-Americans of Southern and Eastern European descent are equally perfectly entitled to eschew the American Freedom Party and take their business elsewhere.

A Telling Admission

A small ray of disinfecting light.
Here we see Silver stating his disagreement with Greg Johnson’s “overarching worldview.”  Johnson’s overarching ideology/viewpoint is that of a White racial nationalist, so opposing that worldview is disagreement with the fundamental tenets of WN.
What’s particularly eyebrow-raising about the comment is that Johnson is a particularly moderate WN, far less extreme than, say, William Pierce (or myself for that matter).  In the past, Silver would frequently harshly critique the more extreme elements of WN, but Greg Johnson’s ethnonationalist-oriented, non-genocidal, New Right, anti-“Vantard” form of “Left Coast Nationalism” is far from extreme.
So, here we have someone who opposes even a moderate and intellectual form of racial nationalism, and is a shill for predatory capitalism.  What’s the battle cry then?  Jeb Bush in 2016!

Greg Johnson vs. the Manosphere

I agree.

I’m glad to see Greg Johnson has taken on the PUA “manosphere” “dark enlightenment” crowd, with this fine essay.  I’ve been waiting for someone in the “movement” to join in with my months-long criticism of this sex-obsessed corner of the HBD jungle.
Johnson:

A healthy, well-ordered society punishes jerks and cads. Ideally, it should simply weed out people with severe personality disorders by preventing them from reproducing.

I understand the motivation and am in general agreement with such eugenic breeding.  But, one must be careful.  There may be a fine line between “severe personality disorders” as exhibited by “jerkboys” and the sort of ruthless leadership personalities necessary for any quality, high-achieving society.  I recall an episode of the original Star Trek, in which a “transporter” malfunction separated Kirk into “good” and “evil” halves. The problem was that the “good” half was unable to make decisions and to lead; absent the “evil” part of his personality, Kirk became an indecisive beta/omega milksop.
So, yes, we need to alter the dynamics so that the “jerkboys” do not dominate the sexual market, because a society of too many “alpha jerks” will be unstable.  However, I would not eliminate “evil” or “jerkiness” or “dark triad” traits completely – we may end up with a population of mild-mannered Last Men.  I always remember Nietzsche saying that you must have some chaos within yourself if you want to be a “dancing star.”
Johnson: 

In sum, my concern is that the manosphere teaches young men to emulate anti-social and pathological traits. Women then reinforce these traits with one of the most powerful inducements of all: sex. And, over time, otherwise good men become the kind of men they would never allow around their own sisters and daughters. This is moral corruption. Namely, moral corruption by teaching men to conform to emancipated female desire rather than to correct it.

Yes, exactly.  The “gamesters” are fine with respect to “description” (about sex; when they get into race, it is merely warmed-over HBD nonsense); the problem is with “prescription.”  I would have no problem if “game” was peddled as a short-term tactic – e.g., “hey guys, here is how you can get laid while at the same time you spend most of your intellectual energy smashing the System.”  However, to these guys, “game” is a strategy, it is a way of life, and it is dedicating oneself to Last Man nihilistic hedonism.  Not only that, it is internally self-contradictory: it is a male-oriented “manosphere” that takes a justifiably dim view of female sexual behavior, and then tells men they have to dedicate their lives to altering their personas so as to appeal to the same “female hamster mental acrobatics” that is leading society to perdition.
The answer these nitwits have to Johnson is the juvenile nonsense about “sitting poolside” – as if the System is going to leave them alone to “sit poolside” when the times comes to hand over the “pool” to a bunch of feral Negroes, who will piss in it and walk off with the hypergamous females. The “game” crowd cannot escape the society they live in; if they want to “get laid” they have to interact with the general hellhole and as they try to “ride the tiger” the tiger will turn around a take a bite out of their ass.
You don’t ride the tiger gentlemen, you KILL IT.
So, we have taken the first step.  Very good.  Next, I hope that some folks (Greg?) in the “movement” will reevaluate the obsession with Judeophilic and Asiaphilic HBD pseudo-science, which makes a mockery of real racial science, historical scholarship, genuine psychometric studies, and population genetics.  When I start seeing some “movement” stalwarts attacking HBD, then maybe there’s some hope for the “movement” after all.

The Beta Race

Some analogies.
I’m not the biggest fan of the whole “dark enlightenment” “game” crowd, but I admit they are correct when it comes to sexual dynamics, female behavior, etc. (my basic problem with them is one of prescription, not description).  Some useful analogies can extend to the race situation.
According to the gamesters, women love alpha males and absolutely despise beta males, for whom they have contempt and who they mercilessly exploit (when they’re not ignoring them). Alpha males are cocky and confident, know what they want and take it, don’t care what others think of them, and have borderline sociopathic traits. Beta males are “try-hard” nice-guys. comfortable providers, the doormats of society.
It is clear that the once-alpha White race is now hardcore beta: weak, wishy-washy, starry-eyed nice guys, doormat supplicants, a subaltern race, groveling toward aggressive coloreds (and the sexual consequences of this are not hard to discern).  Whites are held in contempt by coloreds, who exploit the pitifully beta White race.
Another “game” concept is the “shit test” – obnoxious female behavior aimed at evaluating and probing the relative alpha-beta characteristics of the targeted male.  Woe betide the beta male who fails the test!  Isn’t much world-wide colored behavior a series of massive “shit tests” towards Whites? Illegal immigration? Race-targeted crime? Racial preferences? Double standards? Accusations of “White Privilege” while it is clearly the coloreds who are privileged? What is the upcoming executive amnesty but a large, in-your-face “shit test” aimed at White America, White voters, and the “old White men” of the GOP? And, truth be told, Whites fail these “shit tests” each and every time.
Another analogy is that of schoolyard bullying – where the low character bully targets a victim based on the knowledge that the victim won’t fight back.  The victim runs away (White flight), appeases the bully, allows himself to be beaten and humiliated, etc.  This would end only when the victim stands up to the bully, when the victim defends himself.
The racial analogy is apparent. Whites worldwide have been bullied for decades, Whites absolutely refuse to stand up for themselves, refuse to fight back, and so invite more bullying.
Indeed, the proper image of the White race is that of a cowering beta male, shit-tested and exploited by brassy sluts, and bullied by dull-witted lumbering oafs. 
What advice would you give such a man?
That advice is what the White race as a whole needs to do.