Category: genocide

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.

Advertisements

Do Not Legitimize or Normalize Genocide

Promoting White genocide in the unlikeliest of places – or is it really unlikely?

Considering Strom’s piece about race-mixing, an important point is that each case of race-mixing, by its very existence and acceptance, is a form of legitimization and normalization of the practice, which Strom rightfully equates with the promotion of White genocide.

And acceptance there certainly is – not only by the System, the Society at large, but by important factions of Der Movement itself.  Consider Derbyshire. He is not only an enthusiastic race-mixer, but has written for VDARE defending the practice and attacking its critics in scurrilous terms – you see, according to him, all you “race purists” out there are “slightly nuts.”  Very well.  Is he is shunned by Der Movement?  Hardly!  Instead, he is an honored guest and prime speaker at America’s leading racialist “White advocacy” conference – American Renaissance.  So, if you can be a participant in, and defender of, race-mixing involving Whites, and still be one of the leading lights of Alt Right-style racial activism, then what consequences are there for race-mixing in Der Movement?  We also have leading Alt Righters who have dated Asians, with one commentator asserting that such relationships are a “rite of passage” for the Alt Right.

That’s certainly some heavy-duty legitimization and normalization, isn’t it?  But then, if we consider the HBD strain behind all these people, then the whole idea of “White racists being OK with race-mixing” is not so unlikely, not so surprising, after all.  Isn’t Sailer’s Jeurasian mongrel race idea the ultimate endgame for HBD anyway?

Derbyshire embraced; critics of Derbyshire scorned.  White genocide embraced; opponents of White genocide rejected. Jeurasianism embraced; White preservationism ignored.

Meanwhile, in Merry Old England… as TOO would say: Cue the Vikings.  Not so much any more, eh?

Question – if “White advocates” look with dismay at the racial degeneration of the “Royal Family,” why are they accepting of Derbyshire?  What is it?  The unprincipled exception due to personal friendship?  The fact that “the Derb” is “one of the boys” and those ties are stronger than the extinction of Derbyshire’s English lineage?  That the Alt Wrong is so hysterically pro-Asian that they’ll make an exception in that case?  Expediency – the think that Derbyshire’s shallow and boring drivel is somehow “useful” for “the cause” and so they look the other way regarding his personal failings?  Or all of these combined?  Or something else entirely?

According to Taylor, Johnson, and McCulloch we are winning!  So much winning!  I’ve been involved with “this thing of ours” since the mid-90s, and I can tell you that things have never been worse. Any honest person will tell you that the facts-on-the-ground reality is that racialism in America is at an all-time low.  This after all the promise of 2016’s foray into right-wing populism. But, hey, keep on sending in those “D’Nations” so that your fearless leaders can travel internationally (that is, when they aren’t banned from doing so) and go to the movies, while enjoying dat dere Blue State lifestyle. After all, we got to keep them well-stocked in comfy lawn chairs!

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.

Sports Teams Names

Not “racism.”

Question: If names like Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, etc. are a reflection of White racism and meant to mock and ridicule (in this case, Amerindians), then why aren’t there sports teams with names mocking groups also alleged to be victims of White racism?  

Why no Atlanta Coons?  Detroit Dindus?  California Wetbacks?  Seattle Gooks?  New York Sheenies?

Is it possible that the Amerindian names reflect respect for the fighting skills and aggressiveness of Amerindian tribes, qualities that sports teams naturally want to represent?

The fallback view is that while the names are not intentionally racist, they are still unintentionally “insensitive” to the “feelings” of Amerindians, and as such need to be eliminated.  

Well, I don’t know.  We live in a society in which America’s leading newspaper, the New York Times, is an out-and-out hate organization, knowingly hiring a Korean racist with an established intentional pattern of spewing bigotry against White people.  I would think that that intentional racism has priority over the unintentional, no?

As to the argument that anti-White racism is not a problem, or is “impossible to exist,” because “Whites have all the power,” I must say it is mighty strange.  After all, the people who “have all the power” can be insulted, threatened, and humiliated with impunity, and those who are “powerless” are so sacrosanct that any joke (Barr) or even comments meant against bigotry (Papa John’s) causes a White (or even Jewish in the case of Barr) person to get canned.

It’s also strange that a people who have “all the power” are being subjected to state-sponsored genocide, and are discriminated against by law (in addition to by politically correct custom).  It’s strange that James Watson was reduced to selling his Nobel Prize while Al Sharpton is a friend of Presidents, respected political commentator, and speaker at a major political convention.  

All mighty strange, indeed.

The Ascent of Saint Adolf

Brief book review. 

Reading this relatively new Hitler book, which concentrates on the first 50 years of Hitler’s life (1889-1939) I note that it contains the usual snide, conformist, and biased anti-Hitler and anti-NS comments one comes to expect from politicized hacks. The anti-Hitler and anti-NS comments come fast and furious; after all, Mr. Ullrich, the author, has to maintain his status in polite society as a good-white cuck (and also does not want to suffer the same fate as David Irving, eh?).

One example of Ullrich’s gratuitous anti-Hitlerism is his smug labelling of the grand architectural plans of Hitler and Speer as “sheer insanity” and “megalomania.”  In contrast, I view those plans as inspiring, and as a reasonable model of what a European Imperium should build – nay, even greater than Hitler and Speer had planned!  

Hitler and Speer planned for the ages, planned for eternity, planned for what they hoped would be a German Empire.  What would the likes of Ullrich wish to see instead, I wonder?  A “Germany” full of mosques, perhaps, with NECs running wild in the streets and African Negroes swinging from the trees?  If that’s what they wish, they are, thanks to Mama Merkel, well along in those developments. “Germany” as a subaltern cuck nation colonized by the Third World: that sounds like a textbook definition of “sheer insanity” to me.

Particularly amusing is the author’s description of the Nuremberg race laws as an example of “grotesque senselessness” because of some sort of alleged inability of the Nazis to define Jewish ancestry (which, for some mysterious reason, the Jews themselves were perfectly capable of doing).  Modern genetics confirms the validity of the Nuremberg concept, as even quarter-Jews can be genetically distinguished from gentile Europeans.  The bulk of what we know as Jews constitute a reasonably defined ethnic group, and certainly, within that larger grouping, the Ashkenazim, consisting of the vast bulk of those Jews that the Nuremberg laws dealt with, constitute a particularly well defined ethny.  Given the strong correspondence between Jewish identity and Jewish genetics, the Nazi identification of, say, a half-Jew, as someone with two grandparents belonging to the “Jewish religious community,” is actually biologically sound, and far from the “grotesque senselessness” that the scientifically illiterate Ullrich pretends it is.

There are some even more obvious factual errors in the book as well; for example, what to make of September 27, 1939 being described as “several weeks before the beginning of the Second World War” (emphasis added)?

An annoying part of the book is all the sob stories about the “persecution” of the Jews during this pre-WWII period of the Nazi regime. We have the gnashing of the teeth about Kristallnacht, as well as the alleged horrors Jews suffered in Vienna after the Anschluss – university professors made to scrub the streets with their bare hands, or “pious” old Jews made to do “leg squats” in temples while yelling “Heil Hitler!”  But didn’t others have things worse, including ethnies that were the victims of Jewish communist-led genocide?  How many Slavs were slaughtered by the Jews in the Soviet Union?  Was scrubbing the streets or doing deep knee bends worse than millions of Ukrainians being deliberately starved to death in the Holodomor, while grinning Levantines carted off the foodstuffs?   Ullrich doesn’t have the common decency to acknowledge that Nazi “persecution” of Jews was at least in part motivated by the knowledge of what Jewish communists did to Europeans in the USSR, and the fear that they would have done the same in Germany if they had the opportunity. Yes, indeed, I would assume that Ukrainians watching their children die from starvation would have wished they could have got off easy by scrubbing streets and squatting up and down a few times.  But, hey, they were only Slav gentiles, so who cares about them, right?  

Ignoring all of these glaring flaws, the book is fairly well-written and the objective facts buried under the subjective hysteria do shed some light on the Hitler phenomenon, but I came away from this book with a profound disrespect for Ullrich and his “character.”

And Hitler himself?  Saint Adolf was like an individual given a choice of what to do with his money: either put it into prudent, long-term investments; or got to a casino and engage in the most risky forms of high-stakes gambling – and chooses the latter, losing everything.  The money in this case represents the long-term EGI of the German people and of Europeans as a whole, and, also, the money represents the legitimacy of “Far Right” nationalism, particularly fascist thought, and especially the tenets of National Socialism.  Hitler, being the archetype of the Type I “movement” Nutzi and ethnic fetishist, of course took the gambling route, losing all and ruining all; indeed, it is no wonder Saint Adolf is a grand hero and role model for Der Movement, Inc., since the behavioral patterns of he and they are exactly the same.  In summary: Hitler was an idiot.