Category: Derbyshire

Dark Tweets

When given lemons, make lemonade.

Those on the (Far) Right complain, with justification, about the hypocrisy of being deplatformed from Twitter and other social media platforms, while those on the (Far) Left are kept on, despite outrageously radical, racially inflammatory, and cheerleading-about-leftist-violence tweets and posts.

Has it occurred to anyone on the Right to create “sock puppet” accounts on these platforms, pretending to be anti-White Colored racists, Antifa supporters, foaming-at-the-mouth SJWs, laughably ignorant race-deniers, etc.?  Push the envelope of leftist insanity (as long as you do not promote violence or any other type of illegality, of course, which goes against the stern pacifism of EGI Notes), have fun, create chaos and balkanization, sow discord and confusion, provoke leftist feuds on the basis of race-ethnicity-sex-sexual preferences- ideology-tactics, etc. Perhaps at some point, the Left will start to become paranoid, accusing each other of being sock puppet trolls. Outrage the Mainstream Right. Stimulate White race consciousness. See how far you can go without getting banned; I’m sure you can go quite far indeed, as authentic leftists prove every day.

The possibilities are virtually unlimited.  This is a form of metapolitical ju-jitsu, turning the hypocrisy of the System against itself. The only question is whether rightist sock puppets can mimic genuine leftist insanity; likely at the beginning, attempts by rightist sock puppets to be intentionally inflammatory will fall short of what actual leftists are posting on a daily basis.  But, practice makes perfect, after all.

 

Maybe someone Der Movement heroes are already doing this; if so, very good – do more, and better.  If not, then this displays, once again, the total lack of imagination of the Far Right.

Other items:

There are some who may question why I am always so harsh to Derbyshire, more so than to other ideological opponents. The answer is that his outrageous hypocrisy grates on me. He has the tiresome shtick of being a “humble working class English lad who longs for the days when England was England,” yet he is proudly married to a Chinese woman, has mixed-race children, and defends miscegenation. He brings his Chinese wife to America, a country in which he was an illegal alien, and then he writes for an American-based immigration restriction website (itself founded by an immigrant, but insofar as I know a legal one).  He calls Amren attendees “latrine flies” and heaps scorn on their beliefs, but then eagerly latches on to Amren and speaks at Amren conferences after he’s kicked out from National Review.  We are supposed to feel bad for Derbyshire over his defenestration from National Review, but he had no problem causing trouble for MacDonald at CSULB with his scurrilous The Marx of the Anti-Semites hit piece on MacDonald (that I vigorously criticized at that time). He always pushes his family in the faces of his readers while calling “race purists” “nuts” – and then when he gets the inevitable email response from outraged readers he threatens them to come to his home so he can greet them “in the proper manner.” I suppose we should give the old boy credit; he has balls the size of Jupiter and Saturn and more chutzpah than all the Jews in Israel combined. However, I still find him annoying.

He’s monitoring the situation!

As regards Spencer on CNN, I have no strong objection in this instance, although generally I am opposed to talking to the press.  It was no great victory either, more or less a “wash.” Interesting that they chose Spencer instead of Taylor, though.  The Far Right needs its own media. Oh, that’s right – “there’s no money.” After all, Derb and Pete have priority, do they not?

It’s laughable when the fetishists undermine their own arguments.   The last WASP on the Supreme Court!  Followed by about how much of a “turncoat” he was.  Bring back Earl Warren!  Actually, Warren was of Scandinavian stock – even better for Der Movement!  Of course, Warren’s name is synonymous with anti-White betrayal – are we surprised?

I don’t know.  If we are going to have a civil war in America over race, another one that is, and it is becoming increasingly likely that in some point in the future we will, then maybe we need to get as many Whites on our side as possible?  In that case, pan-Europeanism is a good idea, and the Nordicist-Fetishist types like Ash Donaldson should be eschewed.  We also need educated Whites on our side; perhaps Der Movement can tone down the anti-scientific “traditionalism,” get out of their “snug hobbit holes,” and put together a mature, future-oriented ideology?

Advertisements

I’m an Indigenous Swarthoid

A riposte.  Red font emphasis added.

This is what the “movement’s” fetish with “racial purity” has given us.

I warned all of you fetishists:

The concept of (absolute) racial purity was originally a racialist meme, one which had particular relevance in the New World environment of the intermingling of highly distinct racial groups (European, Amerindian, and Negro), Negro slavery, and fears of miscegenation. However, today, in the age of genetics, racial purity has become an “anti-racist” concept, a meme of the anti-White Left, a weapon to be wielded against the concept of racial preservation. The leftist argument goes like this:

Premise 1: The reality of race and the legitimacy of racial preservation depends upon absolute racial purity.

Premise 2: Absolute racial purity does not exist (as scientific studies tell us).

Conclusion: Therefore, there is no such thing as race, and racial preservation is illegitimate and irrelevant.

So, this is a logical argument that comes to a false conclusion because of a faulty premise: Premise 1. Premise 2 is however correct. Genetic studies tell us that groups heretofore thought “pure” are likely the result of ancient mixes of other groups.

But, hey, don’t listen to me. Instead follow the great and good Durocher and Ash Donaldson. Victory awaits!

It is also funny how “there is no such thing as indigenous peoples” applies to Europeans, but not to, say, Amerindians or Australian Aboriginals. Curious, that.

 “There’s no such thing as a Dane or a Swede or a German.” 

Hmmm, how about: “There’s no such thing as a Jew or a Nigerian or a Chinamen.” Mr. Netanyahu, tear down that wall!  Nigeria, hand over your land to Bushmen and Hottentots!  China, hand over your territory to all who wish to invade; after all, your national existence is an illusion!

I have, of course, dealt with the question of “what is indigenous?”  See here.

A simple one sentence definition: A group is indigenous when it is the oldest extant group inhabiting a territory in which the group underwent ethnogenesis.

Of course such groups are not “pure” – why should they be?  And why should fast talking Jews and their Goyishe kop puppet liars stop the analysis at “Africans and Russians?” Why not Homo erectus?  Why not self-replicating RNA molecules floating around in the primordial soup?

And by the way, you stupid bastard, ancient steppe peoples were not genetically equivalent to modern Russians.  They were not “Russian” any more than a Cro-Magnon from Provence was “French.”

In my case, I’m an indigenous swarthoid and damn proud of it!  Skin darker than a Nigerian and nostrils wider than an Angolan!

Derb the racial hypocrite.

Twenty years ago, my mother was bedridden and near death. It was one of the last times I was with her, perhaps the very last time—I’m not sure. She was drifting in and out of awareness, sometimes just saying things out loud—random things, clear and coherent but not connected to each other.

So I was sitting there by the bed and heard her say: “I don’t mind dying. At least I knew England when she was England.”

Yeah, Derb, if your mother was still alive, would she see England in the faces of her grandchildren?

Trump will monitor the situation!

There is no truth to the rumor that Greg Johnson, being taller than Richard Spencer, scorns Spencer as an incompetent manlet.  No truth at all!  But, hey, focusing on a bagel dwarf and “incels” helps distract from things like this.  At this point, I think these guys are just trolling us. They can’t still be serious about racialism, can they? I mean, it’s a joke, right?

Yet, Taylor can’t be there because he’s banned from the EU.  The whole thing is curious.

Race Denial Incoherence

And other news.

Denier:  There is no such thing as race!  It is merely a social construct with no biological basis!

Realist: Then how do you distinguish those nasty privileged White racists from those nice and humble oppressed Blacks, whose lives, as we are told, matter ever so much?

Denier: Look, there are some people who happen to have dark skin and others who happen to have light skin – and that’s the only difference between them – and the former are placed in a “Black” socially constructed group that is victimized, and the former band together as a socially constructed privileged “White” oppressor group.

Realist: So the only difference is the skin color of these groups, a mere superficial element?  No other similarities within and differences between the groups?

Denier: That’s right.

Realist:  But there are people from, say, South Asia, who have skin as dark or darker than many Black Americans, and there are some people from, say, Northeast Asia, who have skin as light or lighter than many White Americans. So are Koreans and Japanese privileged Whites who are oppressing Black Indians and Bangladeshis?

Denier: No!  When I talk about “Whites” I mean, you know, Whites, and “Blacks” mean Blacks.  You know what I mean.

Realist: No, I don’t know what you mean.  Please explain.

Denier:  I mean that “Whites” are relatively lighter-skinned people of European descent who look like Europeans, while Blacks are relatively darker-skinned people who have African ancestry and look like people from sub-Saharan Africa.

Realist: So these “socially constructed” groups are based on people who look somewhat similar to each other and who derive from particular continents – continental population groups?

Denier: They are ethnicities, not races!

Realist: Putting aside that your “ethnicities” are based on continent of origin and physical appearance that goes beyond mere skin color, I ask – are English, Germans, Italians, Greeks, and Russians all the same ethnic group?

Denier: Whatever. Those are socially constructed groups – part of the “White” social construct.

Realist:  Again – are they all the same ethnic group?

Denier: No.

Realist:  So, we have different ethnic groups that are binned together because they look approximately similar and originate from the same continent.  Population genetics will show similarities at that level as well, in a global context.  Obviously then, this group of “Whites” – which we can call a race – has a biological basis and is not merely some sort of social construct.

Denier:  You’re a racist!  You should get elbowed in the face just like Richard Spencer!

This demonstrates the problem with ancestry testing companies.  Assume European ethny “X” that has some Siberian/East Asian admixture.  A testing company has “X” as one of its parental populations, well represented in their database, and as part of their “European” category.  A person of “X” ancestry – someone who has the same Siberian/East Asian admixture – gets tested, and since they match the “X” parentals, they get a result of “100% X,” which the company interprets as “100% European.” In this manner, the Siberian/East Asian admixture is hidden, because it is part of “X” ancestry and “X” is a “European parental population.” The individual, who may well look like they should be eating with chopsticks, goes on Amren comments threads to pontificate on their “racial purity.”

Now, you may argue that if “X” is an indigenous European ethny, and if the admixture took place long ago as part of the ethnogenesis of “X,” then it is fair to call all “X” ancestry as “European.”  Very well, but then you have to accord the same status to the ethnogenesis of other European ethnies, including the cringing subhumans from the South.

Just in time to fool the rubes in 2020.  The Republican playbook: Campaign Right, Govern Left.

So much winning!  Never fear!  Trump is monitoring the situation, monitoring very closely

It is staggering that all of the heroes of Der Movement (with a few exceptions) did not realize early on that Trump was a fraud and a buffoon.  With respect to being a fraud, we have all of the evidence: His Jewish family connections, his fondness for Negroes, his socially liberal “New York values,” and his past support for leftist Democrats. As for being a buffoon, his debate performances were clear indication of that; for example, his clownish ignorance when asked about America’s nuclear triad strategic deterrent (of which he clearly knew nothing), compared to his great interest in talking about the size of his hands.  Why did anyone take this fat retard seriously?

He won the election because many White Americans were desperately hungry for red meat right-wing populism, and were heartily tired of the GOP Establishment and the non-choice of elections. They took Trumpian rhetoric at face value. I supported his election because it was obvious that Trumpsim was accelerating the breakdown of America and disrupting the multicultural consensus. I also stupidly (or naively) thought that Der Movement would be able to take advantage of Trumpism to further the promotion of explicitly White interests. I should have known better; that foolishness is to my eternal shame.

Just like Derbyshire – someone with a sense of entitlement who believes that their entire social milieu should change to accommodate their (wrong) life choices.

It is also amusing to see stereotypes conformed – the huge White whale has a Black “husband.”  White fatties and Negroes – who would have ever guessed?  All that’s missing from this picture is a bucket of fried chicken and Captain Ahab.

The HBD Agenda

John Reed, Fred Derbyshire….it’s all one.

Question: How is Fred Reed any different than Derbyshire?  They are almost EXACTLY the same, defending multiracialism and miscegenation because of their own personal failings in that regard. Further, they are also exactly alike in making Blacks the main race problem – “look here, it’s dem dere Negroes that are no good, but my favorite non-White group is A-OK.” Even more – both praise the phenotypes of the racially mixed people their own families represent, and heap scorn on anyone who thinks otherwise.  The ONLY difference is that Derbyshire worships East Asians while Reed worships mixed-race “Latinos” (there are of course “Latin Americans” who are of European stock – Bolsonaro of Brazil being one example – but Reed is not really talking about them, is he?). 

The fact that Reed critiques Derbyshire only makes all of this more hilarious.  His attacks against Coulter are just icing on the cake, since she’s a known mudshark herself.  

This is the utter and complete disgrace Der Movement falls into when you have an affirmative action policy; after all, Derbyshire, Reed, and Coulter do have something else in common besides a predilection for inter-racial sex (and, possibly, male-level testosterone levels) – and that “something” is not Eyetalian or Romanian ancestry.

And anyone who criticizes Reed for his self-interested defense of multiracialism and miscegenation without also doing the same for Derbyshire is a rank hypocrite.

But there is a deeper issue here.  Note how most of these discussions – even those from the anti-Reed/Derbyshire side – solely focus on proximate issues.  So, the debate is about physical appearance, the perception of “robustness” and “sturdiness,” the problems or lack thereof of biracial children, “social consequences,” personal preferences and marital bliss (or “measured groveling”), criminality, IQ, etc. – but no real discussion of ultimate interests, of Salterian values, of EGI, of racial preservation, of genetic continuity. Thus, the debate is framed wholly within the HBD framework, it is wholly conducted via the values of HBD, and the value of racial preservation for its own sake is ignored.  IQ is considered, while EGI is not.  This demonstrates the power, the total victory, of HBD within Der Movement, Inc.

How was this victory achieved?  Consider the following. Why do you suppose the HBDers focus so much on intra-European differences?  Why does HBD focus so intensely on the alleged deficiencies of Southern and Eastern Europeans, with a particular concentration on Italians, especially Southern Italians? Why is the only exception to that South/East emphasis harsh critiques against the Irish?  Did you ever consider that the Irish and the (Southern) Italians constitute the main part of the “White ethnic” population of the USA (with Eastern Europeans like Poles making up most of the remainder)?  Did you ever consider how all of this is well designed to impede White solidarity in America – a clear HBD objective?

Further, why the constant harping about “Inner Hajnal” vs. “Outer Hajnal” (almost always in reference to Europe – the idea that Jews and Asians are “Outer” rarely if ever comes up), with the constant reminders that the Irish and the Southern Italians (and Eastern Europeans) are “Outer?”  And why the constant sniping against Frank Salter and EGI?

The HBDers want to replace racialism with cognitive elitism on the Far Right.  They hate and fear White solidarity, they hate and fear pan-Europeanism, they hate and fear the organic solidarity of Europe and of the West, and, most of all, they hate and fear anything that threatens the status of “Rosie and the kids,” Professor Hart, “Razib” and “Godless Capitalist,” and all the rest.  At best, they want White nationalism to be replaced by Jew- and Asian-accepting IQ cognitive elitism; at minimum, they want to ruin White nationalism to make America safe for Jews, Asians, race-mixers, and triracial Jamaican bloggers. They want EGI ignored, they want the genetic distance between Europeans and Asians ignored, they want genetic kinship and genetic continuity to be ignored, and they want only proximate metrics of benefit to Jews and Asians to be considered – with the exception that they’ll also promote any proximate metric that turns Europeans against each other.

The HBDers are not stupid; they have studied Der Movement and they know what buttons to push to further their objectives. They observe the ethnic divides and know how to exacerbate them.  They know how to appeal to Nordicists and other fetishists by bashing those groups the Nordicists despise, and they know how to appeal to the racial vanity of those factions of Der Movement by comparing noble and intelligent “Inner Hajnal” Europeans with the stupid and degenerate despised “Outer Hajnal mongrels.” They’ve been doing this for years, and while these tactics are laughably transparent, they know who and what they’re dealing with, and they know that “movement” reflexes will always win out over rational thought.

Consider “Sallis’ Law.”  How could the HBD strategy be anything other than successful?  So the terms of debate are those of HBD; Yellow Supremacists go from strength to strength while White nationalism goes from weakness to weakness.  And Der Movement’s fetishes, obsessions, and affirmative action program makes all of this possible.

Yes, there are differences and disagreements between European peoples.  But, you know, those are issues for WE to sort out, among ourselves; we should not want or need others, who have malicious intent, to do their concern trolling to set us against each other in bitter squabbles that we cannot win – and that they cannot lose.

Call this “crazy and bitter” and “the paranoid style” all you want, but serious reflection of HBD activity in light of what is written here should illuminate the truth. The bottom line is that HBD is a political movement – politics is activity in relation to power (as Yockey told us) – and the power here is power for Jews, Asians, and White race-mixers.  

Evidence Derbyshire Supports Race-Mixing

Answering lying scum.

A piece of utter filth commenting at Counter-Currents writes:

threestarsPosted May 31, 2019 at 10:43 am | PermalinkYou’re perfectly exemplifying the malaise Quinn is talking about. You’re maliciously strawmening Derbyshire, who NEVER advocated for race mixing with Asians and specifically said so himself on numerous occasions. If we were to shun every member of our movement or ally who was married or had sex with Jewish, Asian, or Indian women we’d be back to the dark days of barely articulate methheads raving about Hitler.

Let’s put aside the interesting statement (perhaps true for the Alt Right) that there would not be many activists left – apart from stupid drug addicts – if we shun race-mixers.  Also, we can put aside the implication that opponents of miscegenation are “barely articulate methheads” (I suppose they are slightly nuts latrine flies as well). Let’s focus on the claim that Derbyshire never advocated for Eurasian mongrelizaiton.

Really?  Derbyshire NEVER advocated for race mixing with Asians?  Of course, there’s different interpretations for “advocated.” Given the sensitivities involved and the gross damage done to racial interests by miscegenation, I consider a defense of, and supportive tolerance of, race mixing, coupled with praising the results of such mixing, to be reasonably equivalent to “advocating” – particularly when the person in question is a race-mixer themselves and represents the miscegenation ideal in the bedroom and the crib.

Let’s consider Derbyshire’s infamous “awkward squad” VDARE post, the one in which he essentially admits that he married a Chinatrix because he is a socially awkward loser with an unpleasant personality.  While it is true that he suggests that mass miscegenation may have “unforeseen consequences” and that opposition to such mass mixing could be legitimate, we note he never defines what level of admixture is too much, and then he proceeds to strongly defend European-Asian admixture, even to the extent of mass admixture that produces an evenly hybridized population. The relevant passages are as follows, emphasis added:

It can, I think, seriously be doubted whether, if there had never been large numbers of blacks in the U.S.A., anti-miscegenation laws would ever have been thought of at all.

As to Jared’s dire warnings about the dangers to mental and physical health faced by the offspring of mixed-race marriages—Pshaw! There are hazards of every kind in human reproduction.

I just last week read in a newspaper article that: “Twin and triplet babies have a five time greater risk of dying within their first year compared to single babies.” We all know that older mothers have higher risk of birth defects. Suicide rates are sensationally higher in some nations than in others, for reasons partly genetic. (The only three nations of Finno-Ugrian linguistic stock are all in the top 20 on that list.)

Should we not then have twins? Should we make our women breed early? Should we shun marriage with Finns, Hungarians, and Estonians?

I suppose some people would say so. Most of us, however, have in these matters what investment advisers call “a high appetite for risk,” and take whatever Nature feels like offering us with the partner we have chosen.

In the particular case of European-Asian matches, Jared and I both recently attended a lecture that included a genetic analysis of the Uighurs, a Central Asian people. They are very precisely half European, half Asian.

I have, as it happens, met more than the average number of Uighurs. They seem to me a fine sturdy people not notably lacking in intelligence or afflicted with any very noticeable personality defects. They are certainly robust enough to be giving the Chinese Communists a lot of trouble.

I say again: Pshaw!

So, first, he stupidly equates race mixing with having twins or triplets or mating with “Finns, Hungarians, and Estonians.”  Then – and here is the crucial part – he utterly rejects Taylor’s anti-mixing attitude (Pshaw!), and cites the Uighurs as an example of a wonderfully sturdy and robust product of very nice half-and-half European-Asian mongrelization.

He then even more stupidly defends miscegenation because the Uighurs are “certainly robust enough to be giving the Chinese Communists a lot of trouble.”  Last I looked the Han Chinese were in absolute zero significant danger from any Uighurs, who they are repressing quite nicely, and any non-significant danger from Uighurs likely has more to do with their religion than with their racial makeup.  And even if Uighurs were real troublemakers – what? – is that a defense of race-mixing?  Gee, racially mixed Blacks and Hispanics in America are causing White Americans all sorts of trouble, so let’s support European-Sub-Saharan African- Amerindian admixture.  I mean, they are all real sturdy and robust, so what’s the problem?

Take home message: Derbyshire is a supporter and a de facto advocator for European-Asian miscegenation, and filthy scum who claim otherwise are LYING to you.

I say again: Pshaw!

Against the Derbyshire Apologists

The defenders of evil are themselves evil.  And “paranoid style” is just mendacious and dishonorable Frankfurt School-style pathologization of people defending White interests against Yellow Supremacism.

Look at this absolute trash – apologia for White-hating Yellow Supremacism, with both the author and one commentator defending the traitor Derbyshire.

Let me state the EGI Notes view: Derbyshire is a bitter enemy of the White race.  The ultimate outcome of his agenda, whatever his motivations, is the subjugation and humiliation of Whites to Asians (whether this reflects his personal life I do not know, but never forget his self-admitted “measured groveling”), with miscegenating Jeurasian mongrelization in play.  From the perspective of this blog and from the viewpoint just stated, supporters of Derbyshire are, de facto if not by motivation,  radical White-hating genocidal lunatics.  Derbyshire’s own personal genetic interests are intertwined with that of East Asia, and that is well known to everyone dealing with this topic, including the author of the Counter-Currents piece discussed here. Anyone who supports and enables Derbyshire is an enemy of the White race and is considered such by this blog.  For godssakes, the man OPENLY agreed with the characterization of Amren attendees (who are by and large more moderate than most WNs) as “latrine flies,” the man OPENLY defended miscegenation, the man OPENLY called “race purists” “slightly nuts.” That was all in writing at VDARE. I don’t know – maybe with the new Counter-Currents-Amren-VDAREUnz Review Jeurasian alliance it is true that the ideological difference between Derbyshire and Counter-Currents is “negligible.” Johnson can answer to that. I do know that the ideological difference between Derbyshire and EGI Notes is a chasm that can never be bridged; I have more respect for an out-and-out Black nationalist than I do for race traitors like Derbyshire.

I am unalterably opposed to ANY scenario – a nightmare scenario – in which Asians live in a White polity: That is anathema.  Any real WN would absolutely refuse such a disaster, they would oppose that horror with every fiber of their being, and they would reject such an unacceptable and atrocious outcome.  Indeed, it would be better to deal with a Farrakhan than a “Rosie,” but, truth be told, it is far better to deal with a “Rosie” than with a Derbyshire.  Better to deal with an honest enemy than with a treasonous one, better a foe who is an easily identifiable racial alien than someone who can slip easily in among the “latrine flies” of a (ostensibly) White racialist conference.  And we must reject the idea that we have anything in common with Asian-loving Judeophilic “cognitive elitists,” “HBD race realists,” and “IQ fetishists.”  We should be looking to Yockey with a Salterian foundation, not looking to Derbyshire with a Lynnian foundation.  Our goal should be an Imperium, not “let’s try something marginally better than the racial status quo.”

This blog has been too mild, too soft, too tolerant, and too accommodating to the likes of Derbyshire and the whole Yellow Supremacist crowd. Traitors who sell out to Asian Supremacism can talk all they want about “paranoid styles” and other shaming memes, but those of us who value White over Yellow will be even more firm and unyielding in out fervent opposition to Derbyshirianism.

Thankfully, I am not alone in this.  I just found a positively sublime contribution from a more sane Counter-Currents commentator, posted after I had written all of the above.  I actually cannot do “emphasis added” for the following, because the entire comment is absolutely on-target, I would have to emphasize the entire thing – it’s one of the best blog comments I have ever read:

LQ Jones

Posted May 30, 2019 at 8:11 am 

More excuses for race-mixer John Derbyshire. A negro married to another negro who otherwise supported our WN objectives would be more palatable and honest than making justifications for Derbyshire, a white man who willfully destroyed his genetic heritage and then has the gall to come to a WN event and promote his “Arctic Alliance” – in the hope that he could convince racially-conscious whites to say, “Hey, right on Derbyshire! Let’s unite mass populations of whites and Asiatics (like you did in your marriage) until they too interbreed (like you also did) and then we’ll all be one big, happy, mixed-race family!” How sickening.

The reality is this: John Derbyshire is far worse than any same-race black couple who supports our movement. For one thing, he has race-mixed and yet he’s met with warm and welcoming arms by the likes of Jared Taylor and others, clearly telegraphing the message at AR conferences that even if you race-mix (at least with Asians) you can still be embraced by the advocates of a white ethnostate – even rise above the average white at such gatherings as you’re showered with effusive praise by WN leaders like Taylor and others for being such “a really great guy!” What disheartening insanity.

In a world of justice, John Derbyshire should not enjoy white nationalist camaraderie. No, Virginia, he should not. Instead, he should be shunned and condemned for his racial betrayal. That those at AR conferences are not doing so only serves to expose just how deep the rot actually is….

Yes, sir.  The rot is indeed deep.  Any sane and reasonable “White advocate” should shun the likes of Derbyshire.  But the rot actually goes deeper than what even this commentator says.  Not only is race-mixer and miscegenation-promoter Derbyshire celebrated and given a forum, but he’s placed above activists of Southern and Eastern European descent.  In other words, a race-mixing Englishman who is on record openly insulting attendees of the conference he himself now attends (because National Review shunned him in a manner that WNs refuse to do) is placed at a higher level than, say, those horribly admixed low-IQ Eyetalians and those horrifically non-Western hora-dancing Romanians.  The pecking order is well established.  Derbyshire above Codreanu!  And as regards Traditionalist Hero Julius Evola?  Come on!  Don’t you know his ancestry?  He couldn’t hold Derbyshire’s chopsticks!

Getting back to Derbyshire…he made his choices in life.  He openly admitted, in writing, to be a socially awkward male – quoting his own mother in that regard (”awkward squad”) – implicitly admitting to the stereotype that it’s the “can’t get a White woman semi-autistic White omega males” who race-mix with Asiatic “females.” So how does that place an obligation on the rest of us to accept “exotics,” to accept “some spice in the stew?”  Why does race-mixing have to be acceptable?  Because Derbyshire is a “really great guy” who invited Taylor to his home to eat food Derbyshire’s Chinese wife made “with her own hands” as Taylor wrote (As opposed to what – with her own feet?  Or that it wasn’t just some cheap Chinese takeout?)?  Why do we have to accept nonsense like “the Arctic Alliance” at an allegedly pro-White conference just because Der Movement’s affirmative action policy is so well established that “one of the boys” is put forth as a “leader” despite committing what Strom rightfully calls genocide?

What a subpar debate about the EU. Spencer’s heart is in the right place (his brain is another matter entirely), while the smirking Frog-Canadian is absolutely stupid and juvenile. And the incoherent woman intermittently intruding like a deranged troll…my god. One would expect better from a podcast put together by middle school students

Look, the question is not if the EU as it currently exists is good. It is obviously not, and I supported Brexit for the same reason I supported Trump – as a protest, as a disruption, as a destabilizing force.  But the idea of a greater European state – one that is run by our side, NOT by Merkel and Macron – is sound (with federalism, as Spencer indicated).

All Spencer had to say – clearly and directly – was that he was NOT talking about an EU and a European army led by the likes of Merkel and Macron, but led by racial nationalists.

The fact that neither of these heroes – experienced podcasters – can just clearly and simply differentiate between the EU as is and a future nationalist European federation is astonishing.  All that blather could have been cleared up by one simple sentence.  Pathetic.

Even More Winning

Endless losing.

The two things I bothered to listen to here was the Anarcho-Tyranny airport incident and about the Derbyshire Yellow Supremacist speech.

The major point not mentioned in regard to Anarcho-Tyranny is that this harassment of people on the Right is taking place under the regime of The God Emperor Trump. Johnson’s “sincere” Trump, the avatar of White demographics, is presiding over a Radical Left Dystopia in which WNs are persecuted by his DOJ, banned from traveling, harassed, deplatforming, physically attacked in the streets, etc. Don’t ever admit that you were wrong, Greg, you wouldn’t want to mar your impressive record of zero self-awareness and zero accountability.

About the “remarkably witty” Derbyshire, at least they have it right that Derbyshire’s talk had “the least amount of substance” and that Derbyshire’s “Arctic Alliance” “sounds like his marriage” and that they are confused about “what is the purpose” of it all.  Johnson is correct that Derbyshire is an “IQ supremacist and cognitive elitist” – and further, that cognitive elitism is extremely dangerous in that high-IQ immigrants are more of a danger for displacing natives and for miscegenation (the HBD plan).

Johnson is wrong that Asian immigration is a “small demographic problem” – China has long been one of the leading sources of legal immigration to the US; Korea provides many invaders as well.

Derbyshire “wasted a slot” – blame Taylor for that.

Morgan’s anti-pan-Europeanism is disgusting and hypocritical. Can you please leave Hungary, since you are not an ethnic Hungarian?  Anglo-Saxons are not quite ethnically and culturally congruent with Hungarians from the ethnonationalist perspective you espouse. Of course, as I’ve talked about in the past, when these guys talk about ethnonationalism they really mean ethnocolonialism. Morgan living in someone else’s nation while pontificating about the virtues of narrow ethnonationalism; Munro living in Romania with sexual access to a Romanian woman (“wife”) while telling us how horrid Romanians are, Farrell living in Italy with sexual access to his Italian “wife” while shaking his head sadly at woppish ineptitude, Deasy visiting Bulgaria and regaling us with the deficiencies of Bulgarians and how their faces “take getting used to.” You see, our betters will live among us like feudal lords, telling us how bad it will be for there to be any political equity and cooperation among our peoples. Sort of like those British who love Brexit but who for some reason move to Spain, southern France, Bulgaria, Italy, Greece, etc. while “Commonwealth” Negroes and Pakis flood into the UK (as long as it is not Poles, A-OK).

So much winning.

A bit of Negritude.

More and more winning.