Category: Duchesne

Odds and Ends, 10/13/20

In der news.

And it’s another great moment in Counter-Currents history!  Nature finds a way!

Laugh at this.

This is why I argue that ethnonationalism is the best system for handling the politics of identity. Ethnonationalism upholds the right of all peoples to sovereign homelands if they feel their identities are threatened in multicultural, multiracial societies.

Does that apply to Hungary as well?  Out, Morgan, out!  In my opinion, the Hungarian people should eject the invaders in their midst by any means necessary.

White Nationalists are fond of the phrase “Our race is our nation.” But this is not literally true. The white race is not a people, because peoplehood is more than just kinship, which brings us to the second pillar of white identity politics: culture.

As if there is no underlying common culture, known as Western civilization. Keep on selling books on, or by, Yockey, you hypocrite.

I’m no fan of Liddell, but, still.

Something else we learn from this – genetically speaking, Corsica should be part of Italy.  Hello, Napoleon!

Hunter Wallace 

OCTOBER 10, 2020 AT 9:16 PM

LMAO.

Donald Trump literally had four years to do something about Antifa. FOUR YEARS. He didn’t do a damn thing about the problem except blame it on “Joe Biden’s America.” He is the president and evidently he is helpless.

Further, all of Trump’s recent activity (obviously politically motivated and election-induced; typical Trumpian selfishness) against “diversity training” has come four years too late.

Gee, if Johnson agrees with Zman that boomer-bashing is stupid, then he should talk to Borat Jeelvy (No Bueno!) about that. I didn’t listen to the whole Johnson-Zman livestream– once Zman started talking (with Johnson’s prompting) about his coffee and tea drinking habits, that was enough. What navel-gazing, self-indulgent buffoons these morons are. So, at the risk of being called a “low information moralizer” (since I do not know what was discussed after the great caffeine revelations), I have to say that what a major topic of discussion and debate should have been was Johnson’s and Zman’s drastically different “takes” on covid-19.  Even if there was some discussion on that after I tuned out (or before I tuned in), that would still be clearly insufficient – covid-19 should have been the top priority topic. But given how fundamentally dishonest Johnson is, it is no surprise that we didn’t get a full-throated debate on this issue. They could also have debated the extent to which the “Jewish Question” is relevant.

Johnson is also hypocritical talking about “bitter” people whose sense of “not getting justice” makes then behave badly (Sallis?).  Very well. Three names to throw out here with respect to Johnson’s bitterness – Spencer, Friberg, Forney.  What about that?

By the way, if a buffoon like Zman is really a STEM worker, that’s frightening.  The rot in STEM has obviously affected the Right as well as the Left.

See this.  The Sardinian-Sicilian hope for the Italian Right.

Counter-Currents quality!

Much of my life has centered around fantasy books, role-playing video games, and heavy metal music…Perhaps the biggest influence of my life has been heavy metal music…we enjoyed complimentary drinks from the bar while listening to classic heavy metal songs all night.

WN 2.0!

Can we doubt that Whites are a grossly inferior race?  Hypothesis: the Herrenvolk will be over-represented among the “Black owned movement.”  Just the folks you’d want dominating (no pun intended) the leadership positions of the “movement.” Question: is HBD a “Yellow owned movement?”

Yeastbucket news.

The Tropical Alliance continues.  The existential meaning of Asians is hatred of Whites.

Weidman a HBDer?

Hey!  What about those high, high IQ Jews and Orientals?

Der Movement marches on:

polistra says: • Website

October 12, 2020 at 11:21 am GMT • 100 Words   ↑

The plain fact is that Columbus is irrelevant. He didn’t do what either side claims. He didn’t discover anything. He landed on Haiti, not North America, and thought he was in Indonesia. He certainly wasn’t the first European; the Vikings had been here much earlier. He’s not worth fighting over.

Before the 1930s, school history texts didn’t emphasize Columbus. They correctly treated the Vikings as the first discoverers.

Columbus became a big deal in the 1930s because the Italians had the guns. Now the blacks have the guns, so their heroes get the national holidays. Heroes are just an expression of power.

Possibly, once the “movement” peanut gallery digests the latest genetic information about the Vikings, their fetishistic ardor may diminish; on the other hand, Der Movement Inc. has never let facts get in the way of dogma, so who knows?

The bottom line is that European colonization of the New World (and elsewhere, for the most part) only started after Columbus. Whatever occurred before had no geopolitical impact. In this sense, it were the “school history texts” “before the 1930s” that were biased, not the ones who came after.

Or, please tell us how the initial Viking exploration led to large scale European colonization.

Idiots.

Proximate White Racial Interests?

It’s wrong to emphasize the proximate.

Let’s consider this again.  I object to basing pro-White arguments solely on proximate issues of Whites being better with respect to some traits.  See my arguments here (at TOO of all places!):

…that what’s it is all about is race and genetic interests, not about legality, IQ, economics, the environment, or what have you.  It’s about White vs. non-White demographics in America, and all the rest is a smokescreen obfuscating this key point…Summary: It is about Race, or the Race-Culture; it is about genetic interests, and these are things that can be, in the long run, defended only by Explicit Whiteness. If we can’t talk about racial interests as Whites, we can’t win. All these other arguments are ultimately meaningless if they don’t serve ultimate interests.

It is inherently dangerous to center the debate about White interests on proximate issues. After all, one can always make arguments that other groups manifest the positive traits in question and in some cases may manifest these proximate positive characteristics better than do Whites.  To put it crudely, only Whites can be Whites, but Asians can be “high-IQ and law-abiding.”  Which then is the more stable and directly definitive argument in favor of White interests: White uniqueness as a people in the sense of a distinctive extended kinship family or arguments that Whites are better than other groups in certain ranked traits?

By the way, remember Senator Vaile’s defense of the Reed-Johnson Act:

Let me emphasize here that the restrictionists of Congress do not claim that the “Nordic” race, or even the Anglo-Saxon race, is the best race in the world. Let us concede, in all fairness that the Czech is a more sturdy laborer … that the Jew is the best businessman in the world, and that the Italian has … a spiritual exaltation and an artistic creative sense which the Nordic rarely attains. Nordics need not be vain about their own qualifications. It well behooves them to be humble.What we do claim is that the northern European and particularly Anglo-Saxons made this country. Oh, yes; the others helped. But … [t]hey came to this country because it was already made as an Anglo-Saxon commonwealth. They added to it, they often enriched it, but they did not make it, and they have not yet greatly changed it.We are determined that they shall not … It is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves.”-Cong. Rec., April 8, 1924, 5922

Thus, kinship-based arguments independent of claims of superiority, have already been successful in American history for appealing to the high trust northern hunter gatherers.  Why then use HBD proximate arguments that can be hijacked to promote the interests of Jews and Asians?  Unless of course that is the real intention.

This reminds me of Ian Jobling, whose “activism” on behalf of Whites was motivated by his belief that Whites were the only group capable of prompting the liberal democratic universalist values – including Rawlsian ethics of all things! – that he espoused; essentially he thought Whites embodied the leftist egalitarian creeds hastening our destruction.
A problem with basing pro-White activism on proximate values is that it legitimately smacks of the very sort of “White supremacy” that kinship-based White nationalists are unfairly accused of.  Indeed, if you are going to argue that Whites are important to you precisely because they are better at X,Y,Z than are other groups – and in some cases claiming that Whites are unique in being the ONLY group capable of manifesting these positive traits and creating the desirable societies resulting from such traits – then how else will that be construed other than overt White supremacy?  Such an approach will likely repel Herrenvolk Whites even more than a simple kinship-based “we are all one big extended family” approach to the problem.

But, hey, maybe I’m wrong.  This can only be determined empirically.  If the MacDonald-Duchesne school of thought is correct, then they should achieve success in using their strategy to push Whites toward the “ethnicized individualism” they envision.  Does anyone truly believe they will achieve such success?  Hasn’t all of these proximate arguments already been made – and failed spectacularly?

Now, those are comments about the prescriptive components of the MacDonald thesis.  I’ve already commented and critiqued the descriptive.  I’ll say only one thing.  How about trying to demonstrate the validity of genetic-based ethnic behavior by examining whether these behaviors are stable in novel environments – like the USA?  Can differences be observed between, say, Anglo-Americans and Swedish-Americans on the one hand, and Italian-Americans and Russian-Americans on the other?  Here I talk about people of unmixed ethnic ancestry, whose families have been in America for 100+ years.  If the traits are inherited, it should be stable in the New World.  If the argument is that the differences are an emergent trait of having communities of these peoples, instead of isolated families, then I suppose you can compare Swedish-Americans in Minnesota to Italian-Americans in New Jersey.  Of course, the same approach applies to non-European peoples as well.

Laugh at this.   MacDonald doesn’t seem to comprehend that by his own theories (!), the Herrenvolk ancestry of those two is precisely the reason why they support the Left, and will continue to do so.

If one wanted to adopt a top-down approach as part of their overall activist strategy, targeted White elites, particularly wealthy White elites, then the optimal approach would be to target individuals for which there was at least a slight possibility of sincere conversion to the cause. In contrast, Bezos and ex-wife have very clearly demonstrated that they are committed enemies of White interests, with no indication whatsoever of being susceptible to change.  To the extent that their “northern European extraction” is relevant here, then – according to MacDonald’s own theories – that would make them less, not more, likely to accept pro-White arguments and to be converted to promoting White interests.

MacDonald’s tweet merely demonstrates the strong hold Nordicism still holds over Der Movement (Nordicism here defined in its broadest sense, by ancestry, since if we consider phenotype, then Bezos resembles a cross between a Jew and an earthworm).

It is baffling how the author of the Jewish trilogy – an important piece of serious scholarship – can descend so far as to make such childish Type I tweets.

In any case, that tweet is a perfect example of the dogmatic fetishism that has led the “movement” to decades of unremitting failure.  Instead of focusing on the “low hanging fruit” of (allegedly) “modestly collectivist” Southern and Eastern Europeans, your “leaders” fixate on wealthy Herrenvolk who have an objectively documented history of giving hundreds of millions of dollars to fund your racial enemies.  At what point are the rank-and-file going to wake up and realize how they are being so badly misled?

But, hey, Bezos is of great benefit to all humanity and we need more men like him!

Competent wops?

Read this.

You may have never heard of Frank Borzellieri, but from 1993 to 2004, he was the most famous local politician in the country. He first ran at age 30, and was releected three times to the school board in the Bronx, New York. He blasted anti-white bias and the idea, that, in his words, “white Europeans are to blame for all the historical troubles of man.” He caused a huge stink and he got more of the vote every time he ran. He lost reelection only because all the school districts in New York City were rolled up into one giant one. He influenced and inspired countless people. If you are smart and energetic, you can do the same.

And he ended up having his life ruined because of his pro-White activism.  To his credit, Derbyshire did direct attention to Borzellieri’s plight and asked people to help, but in general, Frank was abandoned by Der Movement (do we really need to wonder why?).

And then we have:

…it may be that the most important thing you can do is give money to people and organizations doing work you respect. Every activist organization needs money; without contributors they die.“

D’Nations!”  Maybe Der Movement should first demonstrate concrete positive achievements with the millions of dollars they have already received before they ask for more.

They’re “cute.”  T level = zero.

He’s HuWhite.

Here’s something for Andrew Hamilton to enjoy.  See this as well.  But, hey, keep on whining about the odd Egyptian in Napoleon’s Imperial Guard.

Fisking Duchesne

A necessary task.  Emphasis added.
See this.

We have now reached the last chapter of Kevin MacDonald’s Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. 

Let us be thankful for small mercies.

This indispensable book…

Indispensable for promoting ludicrous HBD-Nordicism.This is not to say that whites have always viewed themselves in the extremely individualistic and anti-nationalistic manner they do today. Some decades ago, Americans were quite comfortable identifying their liberal nation in ethnic “Anglo-Saxon” terms and imposing strict limits on immigration from non-European nations. Well, only “non-European” if you ignore the Reed-Johnson Act. Well, I suppose that does fit with my description of Der Movement’s view of Europe as ending at Vienna to the south and at Berlin to the east

..They did not think that cultural nationalism was inconsistent with liberal principles. It was really after WWII that whites came to the view that liberalism demanded the integration of multiple races within their homelands. Why did they come to this view?

Then how the hell is the worldview “genetic” and “Darwinian?”  Unless you posit a massive genetic change as a result of the war, then it makes no sense that the same people who closed the gates to wops and hunkies now embrace the Third World.  Unless of course Racial Proximity Theory is correct.

This is where the inordinate influence of Jews comes into MacDonald’s historical study. The Jews did not create Western liberalism. But in the United States, the focus of MacDonald’s work, Jews were crucially important in the articulation of the argument that America was meant to be a “polycentric” nation populated by multiple races. They came up with the idea that liberalism was inconsistent with the identification of America as an “Anglo-Saxon nation.” They played the leading intellectual role in formulating the idea that all Western nations were meant to be multicultural and that assimilation to a “dominant culture” was a violation of the “human dignity” of immigrants. They pushed the idea that Western nations were founded on racism, patriarchal domination, exploitation of the Third World, and that the mere existence of Western nations without racial diversity was a form of “white supremacy.”

Carefully consider what Duchesne is saying here.  First, MacDonald is correct that Herrenvolk Whites are wonderfully individualistic, honorable, noble, altruistic – and high, high, high trust. Second, these traits are genetic – due to superior WHG and Steppe ancestry. Third, despite that, somehow the Herrenvolk were properly ethnocentric, acting in a collectivist manner to safeguard ethnic interests, until after WWII. Fourth, the change was due to…drum roll please…the Jews. So Herrenvolk minus Jews = Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard; Herrenvolk plus Jews = Mitt Romney and Bill Clinton. Genetic it all is!

But, here’s the thing. Are all Whites equally susceptible to this dastardly Jewish influence?  If yes, then that punches a big hole in the idea of significant intra-European differences in ethnocentrism and affinity to universalist appeals.  If no, then it stands to reason that the more resistant White ethnies are the ones we need at the forefront of the White resistance, not those who are most easily manipulated.  So, which is it?

MacDonald is not of the view that whites are inherently condemned to be swamped by non-whites in lieu of their individualism. As we saw in Part 8 of our extended review, whites are still instinctively ethnocentric even while they express adherence to immigrant multiculturalism. 

Huh?

Furthermore, and this is the focus of chapter 9, MacDonald anticipates that, as “expressions of anti-white hatred” intensify, whites will start to coalesce as a race. But he cautions against a strategy premised on the expectation that whites will suddenly start behaving in the collectivist manner of non-whites. 

So, they will behave collectively, but not in a collectivist manner.  They’re collectivist individualists!  Or individualistic collectivists!  It depends upon whether their high trust WHG genetic program is activated or their heroic Steppe genetic program.  Tightly argued, indeed.

Whites are not inclined to create kinship-based communities. 

National Socialism never happened. 

Therefore, if whites are to join communities that emphasize their racial interests, they need to be rationally persuaded that these race-oriented communities are morally justified. Whites need to be persuaded that their individual self-interests, and their own liberal way of life, are fundamentally threatened by immigrant diversification. As MacDonald writes:Pro-white activists attempting to combat this moral community [of the Left] must be aware of the very powerful tendency among their constituents toward wanting to be part of a moral community. In particular, they must emphasize that whites have interests that are morally legitimate.

They must emphasize that Whites as a collective group have such morally legitimate interests.  Individualism

!It is MacDonald’s view that a Darwinian perspective would be an excellent rationally-based argument to persuade whites about the legitimacy of their ingroup interests. As whites face increasing hostility from non-whites, they need to be persuaded that their communities based on social trust, rule of law, scientific objectivity, and equal rights, will survive only within an ethnicized form of individualism.

“ethnicized form of individualism” – an oxymoron, no?   

They can’t be expected to create “group-oriented intellectual movements based on dogmatic assertions, fealty to group leaders.”

 I don’t know – “dogmatic assertions, fealty to group leaders” sounds a lot like Der Movement.  Any “rock stars” have their dogma implicitly accepted?  I won’t even mention Hitler.

The non-white mind, if I may put it bluntly, can’t fully distinguish the subject and the object, the mind and the body, the context and the thing-in-itself. 

Sounds like Type I activists.

It is MacDonald’s conviction that the key to a successful moral argument is to persuade whites to create moral communities with a proper Darwinian understanding of history and in-group interests. The following are some of the key Darwinian lessons whites must integrate into their moral communities:

That there are genetic differences between peoples, and that despite their individualism and universalism whites have legitimate racial interests like every other race.

Thus, we must consider interests on a collective, racial level.  By the way, this point describes an EGI-based perspective, a worldview based on kinship-racialism, not the proximate HBD-based flim-flam that privileges the interests of Jews and Asians over that of Whites.

That those communities enjoying higher social trust, lawfulness, political participation, functional schools, and ethnic cohesion happen to be heavily populated by whites with minimal diversity.

Much of that can be achieved with “high-IQ Asians,” no?

That the moral communities whites cherish based on democratic politics, rule of law, and meritocracy are deteriorating precisely because these communities are increasingly populated by non-whites and dominated by radical Leftist politics.

“Democratic politics” led to the current situation, and those high-IQ Asian cognitive elitists are very meritocratic, no?

That whites are the least morally depraved race on the planet when it comes to political corruption, inequality of rights, and ethnic despotism.

The Merkels of the world would label that as racism.

That low-IQ immigrants are a drain on society and on the ability of white nations to compete in our highly technical world economy, as well as a major cost to white taxpayers.

IQ!  HBD!  We need more high-IQ skilled Asians!

That mass immigration brings a downward pressure on the wages of working classes, and that the importation of workers from India and China undermines white high tech workers.

To care specifically about White high tech workers presupposes ethnocentrism.

That immigration and incessant attacks on “white racism” are leading to extreme polarization in politics, civil strife, and eventually civil war across many Western communities, rather than racial harmony and the elimination of human conflict as promised.That diversity comes together with increased anti-white hatred and violence against whites.

All of that can be blamed on “racist haters,” no?

MacDonald’s book thus comes full circle, in a tightly argued manner…

If incoherent HBD-Nordicism, which distorts ancient history and archaeogenetics, and is full of inconsistencies and misinterpretations about ethnic differences in individualism and collectivism, is “tightly argued,” then, well, no argument there!

…from a very original account…

Putting a pseudoscientific veneer on warmed-over Guntherism and Kempism is not particularly original.

… of Western uniqueness based on Darwinian principles to a call for white identity politics based on moral Darwinian arguments that appeal to the individualism and the analytical mind of whites to counter the anti-white “monster” the “Left and its big business allies have created.” 

Putting aside that the above is a borderline run-on sentence, see my comments above about how poorly the alleged individualism and universalism of Whites has been addressed, re: strategy.

Criticisms can undoubtedly be directed against Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition.

Uh, yes.  But as long as the critics can be smeared as “insane” and “indecent” then there’s no need to engage with them.

But having studied this book in a thorough manner, I am convinced that MacDonald’s perspective is far more than one viewpoint among other interesting viewpoints. 

I agree.  It is instead comic relief.

It is an indispensable viewpoint without which white identity politics would lack both a solid scientific foundation and a compelling moral argument that could persuade large numbers of whites about the legitimacy of their ingroup interests.

Nonsense.  The exact opposite in fact.

Now, these are the sort of extraterrestrials Der Movement can believe in!  High trust northern hunter gatherers from outer space!  Conquerors from the Andromeda Steppe!

The Wages of Affirmative Action

In Der Movement.  In all cases, emphasis added.

Read this important essay.

How to finish such a pessimistic essay? It’s true that the information presented here is disturbing, infuriating, confusing, and heartbreaking. Can any practical lessons be derived from it?

One clear pattern observed in this essay is the overwhelming reliance on “think tanks” and similar bureaucratic vehicles for the intrusion of harmful Jewish influence into our “democracy.” Jews, even with their very significant financial power, rely on the magnification of their rhetoric, interests, and grievances through such bodies in order to accomplish their goals. This is where they can and should be challenged. Who is granting access and power to these groups? Can existing legislation be used to prevent the intrusion of these bodies into the democratic process and, if not, can new legislation be proposed to do so? The closest the dissident right ever came to a think tank was the National Policy Institute (NPI), which despite its name, and while fulfilling an important movement function, didn’t really produce any policies. 

Considering who has been running the show there, are you surprised? How much failure and uselessness will you rank-and-file types tolerate before you reject the affirmative action policy?

At the present time, our movement clearly needs talented legal minds

Unfortunately, we have none.  Worse, I see no strategy for acquiring any.  Even worse than that, apart from Joyce and I, there seems to be no one else on the Far Right who believes that this should be a priority.  Building a legal support infrastructure is in fact priority number one – not “metapolitics” or “Kali Yuga” or chugging gallons of milk while screaming “Kek!”

…and institutions…

Ditto.

…to unpack existing legislation, and develop new legislative proposals that, even if not explicitly racial, can seriously hinder the movement of harmful Jewish groups through the political body of the West. There is a serious lack of infrastructure of even the most basic kind, and we simply aren’t going to make any progress until this problem is addressed.

I agree.  Readers of EGI Notes know that I have been harping for years about the need to build infrastructure, and have been advocating an overall strategy in which infrastructure building is one of the three main legs  of the activist tripod  (besides the over-used and over-emphasized “metapolitics” leg and the completely withered electoral politics leg).  Indeed, I’ve stated, ever since November 2016, that the four years of Trump should have been used to quietly build an infrastructure behind the scenes.  But, no.  Instead we got screeching lunatics, Beavis-and-Butthead podcasts, street brawls, Unite the Right, retarded Nutzis chugging gallons of milk as a “racial statement,” Pepe and Kek, nitwits in shorts and their “extreme vetting” of “are you Swedish?,” moronic feuds, homosexual harassment, poor judgment, defeat after defeat after defeat – FOR GODSSAKES WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO HOLD THE QUOTA QUEENS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ENDLESS FAILURE?

The second lesson from this survey of developments is that social media is likely to become an increasingly compromised and dangerous place for activists. In Europe, new laws are probably a few years away, but the broader plan will almost certainly eventually envelop Canada, Australia, and, despite apparent belief that the Constitution is invulnerable, even the United States. Already American legal scholars have developed arguments for curtailing the First Amendment in the case of “hate speech” (see, e.g., Jeremy Waldron, The Harm in Hate Speech (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012), and it is widely believed that a liberal Supreme Court majority would adopt such reasoning. The clock is probably already ticking on internet anonymity, and the example of Germany indicates that direct police involvement in “speech crime” is on the horizon. 

But one reason this is all happening is the utter uselessness of the Right. They got their “God Emperor” elected, they get millions of dollars in “D’Nations,” they have followers, they have their NPI, they’ve had DECADES of opportunity – with people like me crying in the wilderness for sane activity and infrastructure building – all wasted. All wasted by affirmative action cases and shameless grifters. The situation that exists today didn’t “just happen.”  The Right LET IT HAPPEN.

Off-line activist methodologies should be increasingly explored. 

Another thing I’ve been saying for years.  The Internet, and the over-reliance on digital activism, has been a double-edged sword.  Unfortunately, the WN 2.0 Quota Queens have wrecked every analog IRL activity they’ve touched.  WN 1.0 was much better.  Essentially we need new people involved, with more sense and better judgment.

Failing that, radically alternative modes of using internet networking should be considered. For example, even if someone uses a completely outrageous Twitter handle, complete with comic book avatar, most people still have their entire lives online (job, home town, friends, likes, hobbies, vacations). Don’t forget who ultimately has all of this information, and the organizations that will increasingly be able to access it.

How to do it?

It’s becoming very apparent that social media is itself a form of social control. 

I don’t use Twitter or Facebook.  Notice that?

We now have the ability to identify someone in a crowd simply by cross-referencing a photo of their face with available internet information. In seconds they can be identified, their employer can be contacted, and their loved ones can be harassed. In a strange way, despite the atomized condition of postmodernity, we have social control levels approaching those of the middle ages. We have new forms of social shaming, and new forms of the public pillory. Dissident activists who face overwhelming costs if they are doxxed would be well-advised to reduce their internet presence to the bare minimum, in effect, deliberately fading themselves into obscurity, thus making their life harder for the Zionist-Globalist panopticon to search for and penetrate. Remember who you were before you became an employee number, a Facebook profile, or a Twitter handle, and protect that person like you’d protect your child or other loved ones.

And how?

Andrew Joyce can do us all a service by emphasizing more in the future on practical things activists can do to navigate the situation we find ourselves in. Essays about Jewish power and the dangers we face are, of course, important, but they are also a dime-a-dozen and, in the absence of real actionable approaches, induce despair and inaction, despite whatever brief “inspiring” quotes are added as a coda. We need actionable strategies and we need infrastructure building. Whoever does that will deserve the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year that are currently being flushed down the grifter toilet.

Consider this.
First:

Some in the Dissident Right think the way to overcome these moral communities is to encourage whites to exhibit stronger ethnic identities just like blacks and other minorities. But this message would go against the central thesis of MacDonald’s book, which is that white individualism has a genetic basis.

And then, second:

MacDonald’s answer is that whites do have an implicit inclination to favor their own race, to be ethnocentric…MacDonald anticipates that as whites become aware of their “impending minority status” this will trigger white ethnocentrism.

That’s from the same essay, separated by several paragraphs. Then you wonder why I can’t take any of these guys seriously.
And again, if these HBD-Nordicists really believed their own work, then why don’t they at least support the idea of “modestly collectivist” Southern and Eastern Europeans having some positions of leadership in pro-White activism, instead of the rigidly stringent ethnic affirmative action program for Anglo-Germanics that currently exists?

Virtually all possible answers to that question would not reflect well on Der Movement, would it?

A sincere man of genuine greatness.

More sincerity and more genuine greatness.

Gee – who was it in 2016 who told you that Trump was a fraud and a buffoon?  Think real hard now.

While this is in essence a good idea, how would the “movement” implement it in practice?  Put Patrik Hermansson in charge?

Remember – you reward a sterling record of consistent success by giving yet even more money! “D’NATIONS!”

All of this – everything – in this post demonstrates the wages of affirmative action in Der Movement.

WE ARE NEVER GOING TO MAKE ANY PROGRESS AS LONG AS THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY EXISTS.