Category: genocidal filth

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.

Strom Contra Derbyshire

The superiority of WN 1.0 is shown once again.

Read this, emphasis added:

It means that the majority of racial mixing involves the destruction of the White race – Whites mating with Asians, Whites mating with Blacks, Whites mating with Arabs or Jews, Whites mating with mestizos, Whites mating with the racially unclassifiable. You have seen it in your shopping centers. You have seen it in the street. You are a witness to genocide. You are seeing it before your very eyes every day. What are you doing about it? If you do not at least speak out against it, you are allowing yourself to be complicit in this horrible crime.

The crime is racemixing. It is a worse crime than murder – far worse.

For when you commit murder you kill one man, you end one life, you tragically injure one family and circle of friends. When you commit murder, if your victim has had no children you do cut off the potential existence of one small branch of the race’s future.

But when you commit the crime of racial mixing you are participating in genocide. The probable effect and possible motive for your act is to bring into the world hybrid young, who will not be clearly of one race or the other and which will, by their very existence, increase the probability of future racial mixing and dilute both the gene pool and the sense of identity of the next generation of White children.

Derbyshire is even worse than what Strom describes here, since he not only has race-mixed, but has written for VDARE defending race-mixing and asserting that “racial purists” are mentally unstable (“slightly nuts”).

When will people like Strom denounce Derbyshire as this blog does? After all, Kevin, aren’t you being complicit to White genocide by not openly denouncing the fact that Derbyshire is being given a forum to disseminate his views on forums of the Far Right?

On another, perhaps not completely unrelated note:

This finding has been observed most strongly in Der Movement, I suppose.

The Other Shoe Has Dropped

Trump unmasked as The Genocide Emperor.

Watch this, focusing on the comments about Trump.

And now, read this, emphasis added:

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump says he’s now in favor of more legal immigration because of economic gains on his watch.

Trump raised eyebrows in his State of the Union speech Tuesday when he said he wanted people “to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come in legally.” His policy positions to date do not reflect that wish. Asked Wednesday during a meeting with regional reporters whether the line represented a change in policy, Trump said it did.

“Largest numbers ever”…Since most – virtually all – of these newcomers will be non-European, this is race replacement, this is genocide, and this is biological, cultural, social, economic, and political dispossession.  Keep in mind that Whites have an increasing death rate, dying from despair, with the dispossession championed by Trump being a key part of that.

Thus: Trump the avatar of White genocide.  Trump the advocate of mass non-White immigration.  Trump the promoter of White Death.  Trump the genocidal lunatic, seething with animus toward European-derived peoples.  Trump the architect of the Great Replacement.

Now, I am sorry, but I need to bring up the past.  Let us make some useful comparisons.

The “movement” about Trump since 2015: The God Emperor, In Trump We Trust, an American Caesar who will stabilize White demographics, the movement won the election, we memed Trump into office – wild, fervent, almost onanistically homoerotic support.

Ted Sallis about Trump since 2015: A fraud, a vulgar ignorant buffoon, a Negrophilic race cuck, Touchback Trump (as a champion of “touchback” immigration – the illegals can come in as long as they go home first and re-apply), Amnesty Don, can’t be trusted, his only objection to illegal immigration is the illegality – he supports legal immigration, etc.  I also noted that the only reason to support Trump is that his persona and bombastic statements, when coupled to America’s culture of anti-White hysteria, “triggers” the Left, causing division and chaos.  I was right about that as well.

Long time readers of this blog will be familiar with all of this.  But now, it is time to speak plainly. Now that the other shoe has dropped, and Trump is revealed for what he truly is (and even if he “walks back” these comments under pressure, “the cat is out of the bag”), it is time to hold the Trump fanboys accountable.

Thus, I openly call them out. They should RESIGN from the “movement” – or at least RESIGN from any position of “leadership.”  They should shut down their websites and blogs, they should stop panhandling, and they should just go away and ponder their perpetual bad judgment, their inability to admit error, their defective character – all of it.  Now, I know they won’t do it.  Instead, they’ll just continue rolling along, making the same horrendous world historical mistakes over and over and over again.  After all, it’s time to put all our effort into supporting “Tulsi” now, right?  The God Empress!  The Semi-Samoan Hindu Princess who will usher in the White Millennium!

I will not be so crude as to openly name those who should – if they any sense of decency whatsoever – resign. No, but let us instead use euphemistic nicknames.  The following is not an exhaustive list, but gives a “flavor of accountability,” to coin a phrase:

Mr. HuWhite, The High Trust Kid, Hobbit Hole, Lady Raine’s Little Weasel, In Mud We Trust, Mophead and Rosie’s Pet, The Drunken Bard of Alexandria, Gamblin’ Man…well, you get the picture.

Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a Racist?

Let us consider this question.

Read this.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (henceforth, AOC) calls the Negrophilic leftist Trump a “racist” and engages in nonsensical justification for her accusation.  But is AOC herself a racist against White people?  And does she have the moral right to criticize Trump on racial issues?   I argue the answers to those questions are Yes and No.

First, AOC promotes a dishonest and anti-White narrative about Unite the Right – that “Neo-Nazis murdered a woman.” The violence at Unite the Right was initiated by leftists, who were there to use thug tactics to break up a legally convened rally.  The death in question was the direct result of one individual – Fields – who had no direct connection to the organizers of the rally, and the death – regardless of the politicized jury verdict – was possibly not in any way premeditated, not “murder,” and may in part been due to the pre-existing health problems of the individual killed. Any “Neo-Nazis” present had no intention or desire for violence, and to argue otherwise is so fundamentally dishonest as to constitute grand-scale gaslighting. It also suggests an animus toward White people and specifically an animus against those Whites who defend their racial interests in the same manner that non-Whites such as AOC do for their own people.

Second, and more importantly, AOC supports policies on race and immigration that – by the definitions of the UN Genocide Convention – promotes White genocide.  If one takes the UN Genocide Convention seriously, and applies its standards fairly to all people, there can be no other conclusion than what I have just stated.  If this is so, then it is reasonable to further conclude that any person who supports genocidal policies holds a racial animus against the targeted population.

So – is AOC an anti-White racist?  The only conclusion based on all of the above is Yes.

Does AOC have the moral right to criticize Trump on race? Hardly, if the designation of AOC being a genocidal racist holds.  And there is another reason the answer to this second question must be No. Consider the following. Trump has a history of catering to Black interests – such as with “criminal justice reform” or a pardon for the violent abuser Jack Johnson – and a history of associating with Black racial leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. So, AOC, when you establish a history of catering to White interests, and when you establish a history of associating with David Duke and Richard Spencer, then get back to us with your opinions about Trump’s alleged “racism.”  Otherwise, you are nothing but a low rent hypocrite.  And an anti-White racist.

An Incredibly Evil Piece of Despicable Filth

The Derb.
See my recent post on Jayman’s pathetic attempt to delegitimize Salter’s work.  The triracial mongrel Jayman is, like Derbyshire, a HBDer, and, thus, is part of the HBD political agenda to enslave Whites to Asians and Jews. “Awkward squad” Derbyshire, whose life revolves his self-admitted “measured groveling”  to an alien Asiatic, of course praises the anti-White, part-Chinese HBD fanatic who espouses the same insane creed as does Derbyshire himself. That Jayman is now going to blog at the site of a wealthy Jews, who is hostile to White nationalism, and who also hosts the likes of Breezy Steve and “actor on the stage of history” Frost, is also no surprise.
By the way, trolling trash who promote “moderation” also support “racialist (sic) conferences” which give a forum to Derbyshire to spew his anti-Salterian, anti-racialist garbage to an audience he previously referred to as “latrine flies.”
The Codreanu quote here  comes to my mind when I consider how a future White ethnostate should treat all of the aforementioned excrement.

Anti-Bias Brainwashing

A psychometric attack against White racial interests.

“Scientists” are perfecting brainwashing techniques to make Whites “lessen bias.”

Abstract: Although people may endorse egalitarianism and tolerance, social biases can remain operative and drive harmful actions in an unconscious manner. Here, we investigated training to reduce implicit racial and gender bias. Forty participants processed counterstereotype information paired with one sound for each type of bias. Biases were reduced immediately after training. During subsequent slow-wave sleep, one sound was unobtrusively presented to each participant, repeatedly, to reactivate one type of training. Corresponding bias reductions were fortified in comparison with the social bias not externally reactivated during sleep. This advantage remained 1 week later, the magnitude of which was associated with time in slow-wave and rapid-eye-movement sleep after training. We conclude that memory reactivation during sleep enhances counterstereotype training and that maintaining a bias reduction is sleep-dependent.

Here’s a “popular” explanation of this despicably evil Pavlovian, Huxleyian, and Orwellian research.
Emphasis added:
In a computerized program, faces were paired with words that ran contrary to negative stereotypes. For instance, female faces appeared with words associated with math or science, and black faces appeared with words considered pleasant. Paller said two distinctive sounds were played during the training, one associated with the women and science pairs and the other with the black and “pleasant” pairs.
After the training, participants went to sleep. Then, without the participants’ knowledge, scientists repeatedly played one of the sounds with the volume low enough to avoid waking sleeping participants up. 
Paller said the sleep training produced results. He said bias reduction was stronger for the sleep-training group and that the changes were identified as having continued a week later. 
 Emphasis added:
In a commentary, Gordon Feld and Jan Born from the University of Tubingen praised the study saying: “This is the first to demonstrate that this method can be used to break long-lived, highly pervasive response habits deeply rooted in memory.”

But they cautioned that sleep was a vulnerable state in which people did not have “wilful consciousness”.

They added: “However, Aldous Huxley’s description of a dystopian ‘brave new world’ where young children are conditioned to certain values during sleep reminds us that this research also needs to be guided by ethical considerations.” 

Prof Paller said there were similarities to subliminal advertising and that there was an ethical discussion to be had.  

However, he continued: “More importantly, perhaps, is the question of whether people in positions of authority in society, such as judges and police officers, and perhaps people who make hiring decisions, should have their unconscious bias evaluated and perhaps trained to some standard.”

Then we have this excellent critique:

So every subject was white? How could they legitimately test the efficacy of cross-cultural bias abatement using only one cohort? That’s actually quite simple. The experiment isn’t at all about reducing a natural and beneficial concept called bias; it’s about reducing whites. Were it otherwise I quite think all of the clucking about diversity that emanates from the academy would seep into their studies. Practically every Western university has jettisoned principles of merit to accommodate a campus potpourri–and suddenly not a single student of color could be located to participate in critical bias reduction experiments?

This blogger asserts that Paller’s ancestry is reflected here.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it is true, but I will withhold further comment on that until more information is available. I note that the first author has a Chinese surname. No experiments were done to see if this technique would lessen anti-White attitidues among Chinese. Fancy that!
From a proximate interests standpoint, maybe people would – on their own, without brainwashing – associate Blacks with “pleasantness” if that racial group was in fact pleasant, intelligent, disciplined, creative, productive, and law-abiding, instead of being unintelligent, violent, unproductive and generally useless, making the streets of America run red with their criminal proclivities.  Likewise, people may associate women with STEM achievements if in fact that was warranted, but the realty is, men are in general better in those fields. The idea – the lie – promoted by the evil genocidal filth behind this study is that their techniques allow people to “unlearn” the biases they have accumulated from (negative) influences in their lives.  Really?  The truth: the hyper-PC anti-White System (the same folks who fund this research) have been subjecting society to decades of anti-White and anti-male propaganda. In the mass media, Blacks are discriminated-against geniuses, and women are portrayed as far superior to men both intellectually and physically. What “biases” against minorities and women are being “learned” in this manner? If people have “biases” that go in the opposite direction of Paller’s sociopolitical agenda, it is because they have experienced reality, and reality is a harsh mistress indeed. What Hu and Paller want is to brainwash Whites to reject reality in favor of socially engineered fantasy.

And from the ultimate interests standpoint, this is all about disarming Whites in their competition with other groups, to make Whites unconcerned with their genetic and cultural dispossession and race replacement, while also masculinizing women and promoting non-fertile lifestyles for White females. This is, from a racial preservationist standpoint, in its ultimate outcome, the promotion of genocide.

Update: See this.

We are also experimenting with a crowdfunding project on implanting false memories during sleep…


This fellow is more dangerous than a million feral Negroes. More evidence that the ancestry mentioned above is correct.  Heritable ethnic evil…what else could it be?