Who are the real bastards (and bitches)?
Over at Counter-Currents, Greg Johnson goes railing against all the “bastards” in the “movement” (including me I suppose); the latest firestorm set off in defense of a pair of ditzy female airheads that any man of sense, any rational and serious activist, wouldn’t spend one nanosecond of their time thinking about (and that goes for all the Type I Nutzis attacking the vagina-holes to begin with) (*).
Putting the XX chromosome flotsam and jetsam (redundancy?) aside, what about Johnson’s main arguments in his tirade? I mean, yes, I agree with the general sentiment. But Counter-Currents is part of the problem, not part of the solution. What with the endless feuding with Richard Spencer, and then the thin-skinned hysterical reaction against your humble blogger here for insisting on “movement” accountability, isn’t it possible that some people view Counter-Currents in the same manner that Counter-Currents views all the other “bastards” out there? Remember the biblical passage about motes and beams, and all that.
I think a lot of these attacks are simply motivated by financial jealousy.
Oh, yes, indeed, I agree: many of the “movement” feuds and infighting are motivated by financial jealousy. I can certainly think of famous “movement” feuds of like character, some fairly recent. But that’s only among the panhandlers, the tin cuppers. Some of us are not asking for any money.
Lauren can spend her earnings on any frilly, silly, frivolous thing she wants. It is a mistake to allow donors to think that they own a piece of you and can attach strings to their gifts. I have fired donors who have tried to do that.
It is hard for me to express my level of utter disgust with this quote. The arrogance is breathtaking. Gimme dat money – but don’t tell me how to spend it! God forbid that donors “attach strings” to their money like, you know, having it spent on activities related to – gasp! – actual racial nationalism. No, damgummint, if Lauren wants to spend donations on “frilly things” (the mind boggles) she has that right! Other folks want to spend donor money on opera tickets or dog food, hey, who are you to say nay to that?
Really, now, this is just too much. “Fired donors?” Some people in the “movement” have balls the size of Jupiter and Saturn, that’s for sure; I haven’t seen such purified chutzpah since the last gelfite fish convention.
And you suckers still give money to these people who are basically metaphorically giving you the middle finger with one hand while they grab your cash with the other. You should only hope you get “donor fired.” Then you can spend your own money on your own (hopefully non-frivolous) things. After all, it’s your money. You earned it. Spend it wisely.
And yet another XX heroine writes:
First of all, it seems really suspicious that the He-Man Woman-haters Club has suddenly come out in full force, often hiding behind fake names and new accounts. These are not people who stick their necks out for our cause. They are spending huge amounts of time online trying to drive women away from our movement. Are these men really nationalists? I don’t think so. Many of them are probably infiltrators.
I hate being vulgar and Alt Right-like, but in this one special case, I’ll make an exception, channel my inner Beavis-and-Butthead, and reply thus: go fuck yourself, you dumb cunt. I’ve been involved in racial nationalism when many of these “ladies of the movement” were infants or toddlers; I was involved in “meatspace” IRL analog activism back when these budding Joan-of-Arcs were wearing diapers, I sacrificed career advancement because of all the time and effort spent in producing “movement” content (including material for Counter-Currents, by the way), I went to meet the Great Sage on the Mountaintop when these female soldiers of glory were sucking their thumbs (back then, only their thumbs) pining away for Santa Claus (and not for their latest Colored boyfriend), but, hey, if I dare criticize any of these sacrosanct ladies then I’m an infiltrator. Well, yes, I know that Counter-Currents has vast experience with infiltrators, but maybe, just maybe, all you heroes are wrong this time?
No, let’s go off “white knighting” for active mudsharks, giggling retards, pontificating “Chinese maidens,” smug “beauties” with a room temperature IQ, and whiners who assert that any criticism is from“infiltrators.”
And for those of you who think my own (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) tirade is “excessive” I’ll simply point out that if Counter-Currents didn’t ban me from commenting, I could have made more mature and restrained ripostes at the actual blog post in question. Being unable to do so, it would seem that the comic tirade here is a good way of attracting attention to my views on the matter. Granted, women can have a place in the “movement.” The types of people Johnson defends we could do without, however. There’s a big difference. And the panhandling arrogance just grates on me.
*Aren’t I wasting time thinking about them? Only to answer Johnson’s post. I hardly know who any of these women are other than perhaps engaging with their content briefly out of curiosity before turning if off after I couldn’t take any more of the superficially silly stupidity.