Category: history

It’s the Tropical Alliance

The reality of racial alliances – Asians with other Colored against Whites…since 1905. In all cases, emphasis added.

Remember this?

In contrast, Sallis has talked about a “Tropical Alliance” or a “South-South Alliance” or a “pan-Colored Alliance.”

So, read this.

Appreciation of the Russo-Japanese War’s racial significance was not limited to the actual combatants. Lothrop Stoddard writes that the war inspired “an understanding between Asiatic and African races and creeds . . . a ‘Pan-Colored’ alliance against white domination.” He wrote that Japan’s victory “produced intensely exciting effects all over the Dark Continent [and] sent a feverish tremor throughout Islam.”

Chinese statesman Sun Yat-sen was sailing through the Suez Canal in 1905 when the news of Japan’s victory broke. The locals, mistaking him for a Japanese, enthusiastically congratulated him on his people’s great victory, calling it a triumph for all colored people. Muslim leaders called for political alliances and commercial relations with the Japanese — even for the reorganization of Oriental armies under Japanese direction. A few dreamed of converting them to Islam.

At the same time, as Stoddard noted, white solidarity seemed to be eroding; the Asiatic cause was finding “zealous white sponsors and abettors.” Among the most dangerous symptoms was an expansion of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1905, in the immediate aftermath of Japan’s victory.

Anglo-Japanese.  Of course. Proto-Derbyshires, perhaps? Hey, if the “wogs begin at Calais,” then what does White solidarity matter?  Ethnonationalism!

Laurence Whelksays:
January 16, 2020 at 7:29 am
“Above all, however, there is no comparison with spending time researching the lives of one’s own co-ethnic heroes and one’s own culture. As Europeans, we are so spoiled for choice we needn’t waste time with the rejected, outcast, and badly damaged members of other groups.“
This pretty much sums up my stance on regaling vs. reviling Mishima. There are plenty of our own people to study and hold up as exemplars – no need to go fishing for mentally ill, sexually deviant outsiders to worship.
There seems to be a misplaced expectation among racially aware right whites of a potential kinship with East Asians because they are – like us – one of the smart races. It’s the smart races we should be most wary of…

Indeed.  But in some cases the “misplaced expectation” is intentional – Yellow Supremacists and other HBDers, the Silk Roaders and their masochistic sexual fantasies about black-booted Chinese girls with guns, Derbyshire and his self-admitted “measured groveling” to his Chinese wife and the interests he has in normalizing his mixed-race family.  There’s an agenda there.

Listen to this.  You have a duty to fight HBD, the Arctic Alliance, and Der Movement.  Note the part about getting involved in politics.  Sound familiar?

Sallis: Always,always right.

An effeminate SJW soyboy talks sports.

Andrew Joyce:

Andrew Joycesays:
January 16, 2020 at 12:09 pm
Greg Johnson declares a piece with 50 references (covering biographies, psycholical papers, sociological studies, mental health research etc) unscholarly, while promoting pro-Mishima pieces on his website with barely a reference and packed with vague and sweeping claims. Just one of the reasons I’ve long regarded Johnson as an intellectual fraud who should stick to film reviews, some of which are actually enjoyable to read, if a little on the sissy side for my taste. He’s now written about 1000 words in comments, rather than provide, or point to, a single piece of worthwhile (and for us, necessary) piece of political literature. Instead, Johnson has obfuscated matters, mischaracterised the essay, avoided its core argument, denied being influenced by his own homosexuality, and otherwise simply thrown a hissy fit. All in sharp contrast to the majority of readers at both this site and Unz. It would be laughable but for the desperation and strange sincerity of his effort.

Note the reference to Unz.  I have a difficult time taking Joyce seriously – particularly with respect to his views on Jews – if he’s in support of having his work on Unz.

In his latest podcast, with some incoherent, mumbling “racial traditionalist” Millennial, Johnson specifically promotes Taylor, Brimelow,and MacDonald (by name) – supporting my contention of the ethnonationalist-HBD-Nordicist alliance.  Of course, that’ll be labelled as “the paranoid style”- after all, noticing things is “paranoid.” and “crazy and bitter” too, lest we forget.

Odds and Ends, Liddell

Liddell, etc.

“I think gays can be particularly useful to the alt-right,” Alternative Right editor Colin Liddell told me. “Our movement is a revolutionary and taboo-busting movement, and gays have the right ‘psychological equipment’ for that. And, because of their lack of immediate family, gays often have a stronger feeling for their ‘wider family.’ The left has successfully displaced this sentiment to the fake ‘gay community’ or to leftist causes in general, but the true wider family for gays is their particular tribal or ethnic group.”

Of course, Liddell was writing for Counter-Currents in 2016-2017.  Later, in 2019, with that podcast with Forney and Friberg, the “Grand Alt Right Feud” was underway.  Like Spencer, Liddell’s attitude toward homosexualism changed based on “movement” feuding. In contrast, the attitude of EGI Notes has been consistent.  On the one hand, I believe that a homosexual can be a useful activist as long as they don’t promote a homosexual agenda within racial activism. On the other hand, I agree with “Common Sense Counselor” that homosexuals shouldn’t be leaders – but otherwise, as long as no agenda is being pushed, being activists is fine.  Unfortunately, those I am aware of do in fact push an agenda.

In response to this retarded Liddell essay (not surprisingly at the Jew HBD Unz site) we read this (apparently from the same Zman I otherwise critique):

Z-man says:

January 25, 2019 at 6:40 am GMT • 300 Words

Blaa, blaa, blaa, a lot of typical, rehashed critique of the Italian war effort.

Italy wasn’t ancient Rome in 1939. Germany, Britain and France had surpassed ‘The Boot’ in technology since the industrial revolution. Mussolini’s own economics minister told him that Italy would not be ready for a modern war until 1942. They aided the Germans in the Battle of Britain with Fiat bi-planes going against sleek Spitfires and didn’t have any large numbers of modern fighters until, yep you guessed it, 1942. Their Navy lacked radar but their submarines and commando divers still did a lot of damage to British shipping and the Royal Navy. The Army had lighter tanks compared to the heavier more modern British ones.

True the Italian people weren’t convinced of fighting against the British or French or even the Russians but that is a testament to their intelligence and realistic attitudes not apathy. They eventually did fight anyway. In Africa they met with defeat at the hands of better armed British forces but poor Italian leadership and tactics also were to blame as they spread their forces thin along the coast. But they did regroup before the Germans came to help. When Rommel came in with his Afrika Korps most of the troops under his command were still Italian. In fact the first defeat of the US Army were at the hands of mostly Italian units in the Kasserine pass in Tunisia. As for Russia the German positions were almost hopeless on all fronts including the flank defended by the Italians. The carnage there was immense. Once the Allies invaded Sicily yes the Italians gave up too quickly but the writing was on the wall. Still ten thousand allied troops died in Sicily, many at the hands of discouraged Italian troops. If Hitler had been assassinated in ’44 the Germans would have probably surrendered at that point, a year earlier, to the Allies also.

The case of Adam Gemeli, the UK sprinter that Lemaitre narrowly beat for the 200m, seems to indicate this. As an athlete of Persian and Moroccan descent, Gemeli is “near-White” and physically could pass as a Southern European.

This is the obviously non-White Gemeli, who no sane person would confuse with a Southern European.

Liddell is crazed.  Note that Liddell wrote that at Counter-Currents, where Johnson shills for homosexuality on the pretext that opposing homosexuality is like Nordic vs. Mediterranean divisive conflict.

It’s Der Alt Right.

I agree that Joyeux Noel is a good movie, about a brief incident of pan-European amity amidst an ethnonationalist bloodbath.  Thanks ethnonationalism – you’ve done so much for us!  There are still ethnonationalist filth today who openly promote self-described petty nationalism.  Enemies all.

By the way, one unfortunate part of that movie was that the “German” officer was portrayed as Jewish, despite looking Germanic and displaying typically Germanic behavior.  A very incongruent note among an otherwise excellent film.

The Big Lie

First, meet Terentius Neo.  Then we’ll get to the other lies.

The usual suspects in Der Movement (e.g., Kemp) have used the portrait of Terentius Neo to pontificate about non-European admixture in Roman Italy from “slaves and immigrants.” The usual paradigm is that Neo’s appearance reflects alien ancestry while his (assumed) wife reflects “native Roman-Italian ancestry.”  Evidence of such ancestries?  It is just that the fetishists “eyeball” the fresco and make a judgment based on their personal opinion?

Let’s consider what we know about this Neo family.  Emphasis added:

The fresco depicts a pair of middle-class Pompeians believed to be man and wife. Terentius Neo was a baker as the house had been modified to include a bakery, and the portrait shows the couple as equal members of a confident and fashionable mercantile class. The man wears a toga, the mark of a Roman citizen, and holds a rotulus, suggesting he is also involved in local public and/or cultural events. The woman is in the foreground and holds a stylus and wax tablet, emphasising that she is of equal status, educated and literate.

Neo was a Roman citizen during a time when the citizenship was not universal (the destruction of Pompeii was almost 150 years before the Edict of Caracalla).  Could he have been the son of a freedman?  Possibly, but what possible reason to assume so except that the Kempians don’t like his physical appearance? He was not only a citizen, and a professional for that era, but also someone likely “involved in local public and/or cultural events.” That does not prove anything, but it certainly is not inconsistent with being of native stock.  Or is the “Neo” that makes one assume a freedman assumed a Roman name?

See this.  Someone on the Internet vacillates between asserting a Samnite origin (native Italic stock) and about Neo being a freedman – a freedman in the first century AD who is not only a Roman citizen but is also likely involved in “local public and/or cultural events.” The Samnite hypothesis – itself speculation – seems more plausible. Indeed, it seems like the main rationale for speculating about an exotic origin here, besides the speculation about the name, is the idea that “gee, Terentius Neo doesn’t look like all those Anglo-Saxon actors playing Ancient Romans in the movies and on TV.” 

Bottom line – we don’t know the origins of the man (or his supposed wife, for that matter – maybe he’s the native and she’s the alien?  He could be a freedman, but it seems unlikely that a freedman would be a publicly active Roman citizen in the first century AD.  Was he the son of a freedman?  Anything is possible, but if the only criterion is – “he doesn’t look like Charlton Heston playing Marc Antony,” then that’s not good enough.  For all we know, he was a native Italic.

Putting aside the ethnoracial provenance of Terentius Neo, there’s a more fundamental issue here.

The typical “movement” paradigm has been that the original peoples of Italy, including (and especially) the Romans, were fairer and “more northern” (Nordic) compared to modern Italians, thought to be darker and “more Mediterranean” due to “admixture with Afro-Asiatic “slaves and immigrants.”  

However, what if the opposite is true?  What if modern Italians, particularly North and Central (where the Germanic influx from late Antiquity through the Middle Ages was greatest), are actually fairer and “more northern” than the ancients? Even in the South, to a lesser extent, this may be true as well, given Norman inputs.

The Normans expanded from northern France to a number of regions, including Sicily and the southern portion of the Italian Peninsula (and even sacked the city of Rome in 1084), where they established the Kingdom of Sicily (3, 36).

Then there were the earlier Vandal invasions, and the settlement of Sicily by mainland Italians, including North Italians, as well as other Europeans, after the Muslim population was relocated to the mainland after the Morabit rebellion and its aftermath.  The key point is the possibility that the ancients were actually “darker and more Mediterranean” than the moderns, rather than the reverse. Let’s consider my summary of the functional gene analysis from the Roman genetic paper:

Figure S29 gives functional allele frequency data, which mirrors the general genetic data. For example, throughout most of Roman history, lactase persistence is low, and increases only toward the end periods, starting with Late Antiquity, precisely those periods that have samples exhibiting the most haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe.” Blue eye color was highest in the earliest (Mesolithic) and latest (Late Antiquity and Medieval and Early Modern) Roman periods; Iron Age/Republic and the Imperial periods look similar.  Hair color was not studied.

The three skin pigmentation graphs show varying line curves, but the trend is lighter skin as one progresses through time, rather than the reverse – the fairest seems to be the Late Antiquity/Middle Ages period – there certainly does not seem to be any differences between Iron Age/Republic and Empire, apart from the previously mentioned trend that goes against “movement” dogma.

The functional data, combined with the ancestry data, are compatible with the idea that the ancients were at least as “dark and Mediterranean” as the moderns, if not more so.  There is zero evidence for the reverse – Der Movement’s idea of the ancients being “fairer and more Nordic.”  

These posts about Rome, Napoleon, etc., we have seen here and at Western Destiny recently, although interesting in their own right, are more a means to an end rather than an end in themselves. And that end is the deconstruction of the “movement,” to expose Der Movement, Inc. as intellectually, factually, morally, spiritually bankrupt, as a conglomeration of liars, grifters, sweaty fetishists, and pseudoscientists unable to ever admit being wrong, a stronghold of ineffective incompetents, affirmative action cases who hide their ineptness and intellectual vacuity behind a screen of slogans and fossilized dogma. The “movement” is a pathetic failure, a bunch of frauds and liars, and all of you should eschew it and help build a New Movement.

That’s the end.  All these posts are the means to that end.

Meanwhile, all you Type I Nutzis will continue getting lied to, and you’ll believe it all.

You will be told that Blacks have higher serum testosterone than Whites and other races, even though peer-reviewed scientific studies prove otherwise. You will be told that the Ancient Romans, Greeks, and even Egyptians (!) were Nordic, even though ancient DNA studies continue to disprove those ahistorical inventions. You will be told that Rome collapsed because of “racial degeneration” so that the people “didn’t know how the big stone thingy worked anymore,” while the reality is that as the Western Empire declined and fell the genetics of Rome moved in a more “northern” and “western” direction and that the “big stone thingy” was working fine until the Germans came in, destroyed the Western Empire, and plunged Europe into a centuries-long Dark Ages (and it is only in this post-Roman period, that was German-ruled, that we find a lack of piped water). You’ll be told that the original Romans were individualistic northern hunter-gatherers even though the genetic data suggests a mostly Neolithic farmer ancestry and an overall Mediterranean (mostly West Mediterranean but with some Central and East Mediterranean components) racial provenance.  The fact that the height of power of the Empire was associated with a shift in the genetics of Rome to the “south” and “east” (I’m not saying that this shift was good, it is true that maladaptive population replacement took place within the city of Rome itself and in immediately surrounding areas, but I’m just reporting the historical and genetic facts) is something the “movement” will NOT tell you. They will lie to you about individualism and collectivism in Europe, confuse amoral familism with collectivism, and tell you one minute that Sweden is highly individualistic and in the next minute that it is a collectivist “unimind” with a “shame culture.”  You will be told that Rushton is a truth-telling hero, while his fellow HBDer Dutton (himself a buffoon who calls others neurotic while he behaves like a semi-retarded five year old with attention deficit disorder) admits that Rushton was a fraud and a hypocrite. Lynn will lie to you about IQ with his absurd and unscientific “estimates,” while being out-argued by an African. You will be told that everyone on the Far Right was part of the Alt Right and all blindly supported Trump, even though I was openly attacking the Alt Right and calling Trump a “vulgar ignorant buffoon” and a “Negrophilic race cuck” as far back as 2016. You will see the “movement” agonize over MENA admixture in Southern Europe while either ignoring North Asian/Siberian/East Asian admixture in Northern Europe or labeling the latter as “a great benefit to all humanity.” It is LIE after LIE after LIE, distortion after distortion, endless fraud and grifting – they even have the nerve to lie to you that the only thing the “movement” needs is money, after wasting millions of dollars given to them by suckers like you.


And you’ll only see it exposed here.

Ward-Perkins: The Fall of Rome

Who killed civilization and what happened next?

Quote from Amazon review:

Why did Rome fall?

Vicious barbarian invasions during the fifth century resulted in the cataclysmic end of the world’s most powerful civilization, and a ‘dark age’ for its conquered peoples. Or did it? The dominant view of this period today is that the ‘fall of Rome’ was a largely peaceful transition to Germanic rule, and the start of a positive cultural transformation.

Bryan Ward-Perkins encourages every reader to think again by reclaiming the drama and violence of the last days of the Roman world, and reminding us of the very real horrors of barbarian occupation. Attacking new sources with relish and making use of a range of contemporary archaeological evidence, he looks at both the wider explanations for the disintegration of the Roman world and also the consequences for the lives of everyday Romans, in a world of economic collapse, marauding barbarians, and the rise of a new religious orthodoxy. He also looks at how and why successive generations have understood this period differently, and why the story is still so significant today

That very well summarizes the book; having read it, I strongly recommend it (you should be reading on this subject other than retarded “movement” propaganda), and would like to make some points about it here. The book is broadly divided into three parts. First, a historical overview, with the author’s opinions and interpretations as to what happened and why, and also insights into the cross-assimilation process between the defeated Romans and their new German masters. Second, a detailed analysis of the physical evidence for an actual catastrophic Fall, an end to civilization, and the suffering that spread in its wake. Third, a brief summary, with a final warning that what happened to the Romans in their complacency could happen to “our” current civilization (I put “our” in scare quotes because it has already been subverted by aliens – we are already in the process of a Fall).

The author is a self-described “Englishman,” and, although “he was born and raised in Rome and spoke Italian from childhood,” he explicitly states in his book that, personally, he dislikes the Ancient Romans. That is an odd thing for a historian to state about a people he is writing about, but, if he is sincere in that statement, and there is no reason to believe otherwise, then that demonstrates that he is not a shabbos nord stepandfetchit pandering to swarthoids. He is merely writing what he believes is the truth, based on his research. 

One negative about the book to get out of the way – the author writes: “There is no reason to believe, as people once did, that ethnic behavior and identity are genetically transmitted, and therefore immutable.” There is actually every reason to believe that, at least in the sense that a significant portion of identity is determined by biological affiliation and that much of behavior is genetically transmitted; where I part with Der Movement (apart from its constantly disproved dogma on such subjects) is with the idea that this is completely deterministic at the level of being 100% genetic. Phenotype is the combination of both genes and the environment; both are important (genes being more so), and the relative contributions of each inform as to whether the phenotype is mutable or immutable.

Another interesting and amusing part of the book is when the author describes how perceptions of the Fall of Rome have been shaped by ethnic and political considerations.  Thus, Italians and other “Latin” peoples tend to view the Fall of the Western Empire as a catastrophe, with savage and ignorant Germanic barbarians toppling civilization and ushering in a Dark Age. On the other hand, Northern Europeans, particularly Germanics, including the Anglosphere, propose the idea of “a largely peaceful transition to Germanic rule, and the start of a positive cultural transformation.”  And when, in the past, Germanics agreed that the Fall was traumatic, they asserted that it was all for the good, with one German philosopher quoted, with all the sweatiness of a typical Type I Nutzi, about how vigorous northerners rejuvenated Italy by toppling the enervated dwarfish Roman stock (one can imagine Humphrey Ireland as a Goth warrior, furiously attempting to stomp two foot tall scurrying Roman swarthoids, or Greg Johnson envisioning manlet Tom Cruise as an enervated Roman dwarf). On the other hand, the Scottish historian William Robertson lamented the destruction of civilization that resulted from the barbarian destruction of the Western Empire, and then there is Gibbon.

Politically, the view of modern Germans informs opinions on this matter; when WWI and WWII was fresh in people’s minds, the idea of rampaging barbarians was at the forefront, but with today’s more peaceful and influential (and cucked) Germany, the “peaceful transition” idea has more adherents. The author quotes harsh evaluations of the Germanic invaders by English and French scholars during the 1930s and in the immediate post-WWII period. 

More interestingly, the author claims that today’s pro-Germanic paradigms about the “peaceful transformation of the Roman world,” with the consequent prioritization of Late Antiquity, is being used by European Union elites to legitimize their German-dominated globalist construct.  Further, the de-emphasis of Greco-Roman culture is part and parcel of modern anti-Western politically correct “scholarship.” This is all consistent with my longstanding thesis that the System leverages Nordicism to prop up the anti-White multicultural system, not only by dividing Whites but, perhaps more importantly, pandering to Northern European sensibilities by making anti-White constructs such as the EU, and the equation (or dominance) of other cultures – including non-White ones – with that of the Classical Civilization (thus undermining the foundations of the West [regardless of Spengler and Yockey]), more palatable. Similarly, I have argued that HBD occasionally panders to Nordicism in order to make palatable memes that have as their objective raising Jews and Asians to dominance over Whites. The HBD-Nordicism (combination of both paradigms) peddled by MacDonald – with its lies about Rome – is part of this (even though that’s not his intention, the outcome is the same).

The authors’ idea is that modeling the EU on the Roman Empire would leave out much of Northern Europe, but a German-dominated Late Antiquity period serves as an effective model for today’s German-dominated EU. Perhaps in a sense the EU elites are correct given Ward-Perkins’ thesis of Late Antiquity being associated with “the end of civilization.” This time it is the Western Civilization that is ending, with the same ethnic drivers of this catastrophe as with the end of the Classical Civilization. The first time as tragedy; the second time as farce.  In any case, the author of this book looks at the evidence and concludes that the catastrophe scenario is more accurate; the “peaceful transition” hypothesis is effectively falsified.

The author claims that the Eastern Empire survived while the West collapsed because of better geographical protections – the thin band of sea separated Europe from Asia, which allowed for the protection of Constantinople and the richer areas of Asia Minor and the Levant.  In any case, as I have written before, if Der Movement wants to blame biology for the Fall, and not other reasons and circumstances, how would they explain the survival of the  more “racially degenerate” (from a European standpoint) East?  If they invoke non-biological considerations, such as that put forth by the author, is it possible that such considerations apply to the West as well?  It is of course theoretically possible that the West collapsed for biological reasons (but remember that genetically the Western Empire was becoming more “northern” and “western” at that time) and the East survived for non-biological reasons, but it is more likely, and less cherry picking of explanations, to consider all of the practical reasons for the Fall without imposing “movement” dogma on it, and a desire to make self-serving racial analogies between then and now.  I also point out that the author is of the school that claims that the Western Empire was not in terminal decline when it fell, and was still powerful, albeit troubled. 

The author makes an interesting conclusion about Roman-German cross-assimilation after the Fall.  Thus, he writes: “…both groups moved ‘upwards’: the Romans into the political identity of their German masters; the Germanic peoples into the more sophisticated cultural framework of their Roman subjects.” Thus, the “Roman” population of various regions eventually (politically, and eventually ethnically, as those boundaries dissipated) identified as “Visigoths” or “Franks” (and in Italy, became “Italian” or identified with more local identities, so that only the inhabitants of Rome itself identified as “Roman”); meanwhile, the Germans attempted to adopt much of the “sophisticated cultural framework” of the civilization that they destroyed. Thus, the Romans politically became German and the Germans culturally tried to become Roman. This of course contrasts with much of “movement” propaganda of culturally pure noble Germanics sweeping aside all traces of degenerate Roman culture and civilization.  

However, despite the eagerness of some of the Germans – at least the rulers – to co-opt aspects of Roman civilization, they were not did not have the capability to sustain any of it long term, and the physical destruction (material, economy, contacts, the broader aspects of the Roman network) of the Western Empire by the Germans, which the author chronicles in great detail in the second half of the book, meant that no continuance of the Classical Civilization, of Roman culture, was possible.  Indeed, Der Movement likes to tell us that only the people who create a culture and a civilization can maintain it; thus, the descent into the interregnum of the Dark Ages after the German conquest of Rome was inevitable by the Der Movement’s own dogma. Of course, that suggests that, whatever demographic changes took place among the urban masses of the city of Rome itself, the overall Empire, and its leadership, was sufficiently stable, demographically speaking, in a broad sense, to maintain Roman culture until that culture and its civilization was killed, in the West, by the invading Germans. So, while the political assimilation of Romans into the Germanic identity was successful at least in some areas of Western Europe (for as long as those Germanic identities existed in those regions, before becoming superseded by more modern national identities), the cultural assimilation of Germans to Roman culture failed, at least initially. Only after the full cross-assimilation between the two groups (that took many centuries) did a rebirth of civilization become possible.

Indeed, one (most palatable for Der Movement, eh?) of the possible alternative histories broached by the authors, was of a continuance of the Western Roman Empire (in perhaps shrunken form). but under Germanic leadership, rather than of a collapse of that Empire. But that didn’t happen, did it?  The closest thing to a (very brief) revival was the Byzantine (the “degenerate” East) reconquest of Italy during the sixth century Gothic war – and the natives of Italy were so obviously pro-Byzantine that the embittered Goths massacred Italian civilians, including 300 aristocratic Roman children that were held hostage. Goths and Romans as “natural friends,” eh Jordanes?  (Apparently, “movement” lies existed as early as the sixth century AD).

Later of course, the synthesis between the contributions of the North and the South of (Western) Europe led to the creation of the Western Civilization (as Yockey recognized), although of course some in the “movement” believe otherwise.

The author contrasts the paradigm of “Romans politically becoming Germans and the Germans culturally becoming Romans” to that of the Arab conquest of MENA areas, in which the conquered peoples not only adopted the political identity of “Arab” but also adopted the Islamic culture of their conquerors.  The difference, as the author asserts, is that the Arabs conquered in the name of the militant new faith, while the “culturally flexible” Germans came with no cultural agenda; instead, they wanted to partake of the riches of Rome.  The author makes clear that the Germans did not intend to destroy the Empire but to exploit it, but destroy it they did; as the author puts it, they were guilty of manslaughter, not murder (lack of homicidal intention).

The second part of the book is an impressive, albeit somewhat dry (unless you are very interested in potsherds and such things), accounting of the physical evidence of the collapse of civilization, and the resulting drastic drop in living standards consequent to that. The physical structure of the Western Roman Empire was wrecked by the German conquest – and that applies to the entire Empire, even to those areas abandoned before the final Fall, Britain for example.  The author writes: “It may be hard to believe, but post-Roman Britain in fact sank to a level of economic complexity well below that of the pre-Roman Iron Age.” The author states that the (relatively) sophisticated economy of the Roman world destroyed small-scale autarkic local economies, and made everyone dependent on highly specialized interacting large-scale networks, which were very vulnerable to disruption. Hence, we observe the collapse of this highly integrated and specialized economy and the long period (many centuries) of rebuilding required to get back to least partly to what was present before. The author makes the obvious analogies to the highly specialized “Western” economies of today, which are equally vulnerable to disruption.

Of relevance to that, let us remember what the odious scum Zman wrote about Rome, accompanied by my replies:

Zman: …started to think about those people living in the Roman Empire wondering why the water no longer comes from the big stone thingy anymore. 

Sallis: Because invading Germans wrecked them?

Zman: Some may have remembered their ancestors working on them for some reason, but they no longer recall why. 

Sallis: What bullshit.  When the water stopped running, it was because the city was sacked by, and later mismanaged by, the Holy Ones.

Zman: The people who knew how and why those aqueducts worked were long gone. No one was around who could figure out how to make them work again, because they lacked the capacity to do it.

Sallis: Absolute, raging bullshit.  The water stopped flowing after the fall of the empire. Who was running the show then?  Maybe folks who never built aqueducts in the first place. Odoacer: “What’s that big stone thingy?  Can my horse drink out of it?” Hey, Zman, take your Kempian lies back to “Lagos.” By the way, the “Lagos” joke is so stale by now it’s starting to stink like one of Zman’s South Asians.

Of course – surprise! – Sallis is right and Der Movement is wrong.  If one mantra, one paradigm, one meme can summarize Der Movement, Inc. it would be this – wrong, wrong, they’re ALWAYS wrong.

If anyone is to blame for the “big stone thingies” not working any more, it were the Holy Germans. Put that in your pipe and smoke it in “Lagos,” Zman, you insufferable idiot.  Indeed, the author specifically states a lack of evidence that in post-Roman Italy that rural and urban homes lacked the “under-floor heating and piped water” present in Roman times.  Piped water, Zman, which disappeared after your Holy Ones wrecked the Empire.

Whatever the faults of the later Roman Empire – and it had faults aplenty (as did the Roman Republic by the way, as did NS Germany, as did colonial America, as did, or does, every polity in history, albeit in different manners and to different extents – one cannot compare 1950s America to Idi Amin’s Uganda), it still was working, it still had civilization, it was still a working state with a higher standard of living, and technics, than the surrounding peoples. No, Zman, they didn’t forget how those “big stone thingies” worked.  No, the “big stone thingies” didn’t just stop running water.  Yes, it was your Germanic tribal heroes who wrecked everything, as Ward-Perkins – no swarthoid he – has pointed out in exquisite detail.

The genetics of Rome in the late periods – decline, fall, post-fall – when all those “big stone thingies” stopped working according to Zman, was moving in the “western” and “northern” directions.  Indeed, the settlement of Germans in Italy and the abovementioned assimilation no doubt explains much of these genetic shifts during this period, as well as pre-Fall immigration and political and military participation, and some assimilation even then (The Vandal-Roman hybrid Stilicho as an example).

The last part of the book summarizes the evidence and gives the warning described near the beginning of this essay, with the author saying that we can experience the same collapse in our complacency as the Romans did in theirs.  It’s already happening.

To summarize the main thesis of this book: There was no “gradual evolution” of the Western Roman Empire after the fall. It was crushed, ended, and there was an interregnum of the Dark Ages. You may say, hey, it ended one tired civilization and brought forth a newer, more vibrant Western civilization (Spengler saying that the Classical and the Western are two separate entities – let’s assume that for now, although one can argue both ways). True, but the same outcome could have been achieved, with less horror and without the long interregnum of backwardness, if the “gradual evolution” actually occurred, as I wrote:

Was the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by the Germans good or bad?  If we take the traditional (and “movement”) view that the (later) empire was completely degenerate, then it was undoubtedly good; however, if we take the view, discussed above, that the later Western Empire was actually more morally sound than it ever was, then the question becomes more interesting.

Rather than frame it in the form of “good” vs. “bad” perhaps a counterfactual analysis would be useful.  What if the Roman Empire, the Western Empire, was able to act from a position of strength in the fourth and fifth centuries AD to reform the European situation to one of a power-sharing confederation mode? What if Rome has won the Battle of Adrianople, and had corrected certain deficiencies and regained some degree of vigor.  What if a wise Emperor had realized that maintenance of a far-flung centralized Empire was no longer feasible (note that the division into Western and Eastern halves was the beginning of this realization) and had reformed the Empire into a Confederation of Peoples – Romans, Germans, Gauls – with cooperation, considerable local autonomy and various common objectives (e.g., eastward expansion, defense against the Huns [Chalons as a crude example of what was possible], etc.).  That may have been unworkable given the attitudes of people of that time; on the other hand, the Gauls were Romanized after exhibiting such resistance centuries before; and, and, at this time, the Germans were no longer the same “barbarians” as in the past, some degree of “Romanization” had taken place, at least to an indirect degree. 

Rome could have at some point attempted to cut its losses, preserve itself as an independent “Mediterranean” power, and come to an accommodation with other European peoples.

Would that have hastened the development of the West, bypassing the Dark Ages?  Or would it have inhibited the development of the West by preserving the fossilized remnants of the Classical past its expiration date?  These are all interesting questions, ones that are never asked by a (itself fossilized) “movement” steeped in inflexible dogma.”

And then we have this:

We can consider the 1942 classic The Roman Commonwealth by English historian Ralph Westwood Moore. With respect to the idea that Rome went from a virtuous city-state to a degenerate empire, Moore classified that as a “pious myth” and further stated: “Morality in the large sense was a thing which Rome achieved as she grew, not a Garden of Eden from which her destiny expelled her or a state of innocence from which she fell.”  Blasphemy!  That doesn’t accord with “movement” dogma so it must be wrong, wrong, wrong – or Moore was secretly Moori, a swarthoid with a Medish agenda!

The point of this essay is not to mimic the “movement” (in the opposite direction) and take sides in ancient conflicts. The Goths and other Germans may have wrecked the Classical Civilization but they were instrumental in founding the modern “Faustian” Western High Culture – Western Civilization.  The point of the essay is merely to demonstrate to readers that there is genuine scholarship on these subjects and you do have to depend on the “movement’s” retarded dogma. The “movement’s” cartoonish view of noble godlike Germans and degenerate devilish Romans needs to be eschewed. The lies about the “degeneracy” of the Roman Empire and the changing demographics need to be interpreted in the light of facts, including that the maximal corruption of Late Antiquity and the subsequent Fall of the Western Empire took place at precisely the same time that the genetics of Rome were moving more in the “high trust northern hunter-gatherer” direction. We need to consider serious scholarship.  Shameless liars like Kemp and MacDonald peddle falsehoods about Rome to push their radical Nordicism, but you are not obligated to digest that nonsense as long as real scholarship exists to set the record straight.

Odds and Ends, 12/10/19

Various issues.

UPDATE – the post now credits “Robert Hampton” for the low quality review.

Robert Hampton (not Greg Johnson?) unburdens himself:

Most World War II films like to portray America’s fighting force as an ethnic melting pot. In Midway, nearly all of the characters are Anglos and heartlanders who don’t reminisce about Brooklyn. 

As opposed to reminiscing about Brokeback Mountain.

The one clear exception is Gaido, an Italian from New York. 

That damn wop!

The historic American nation fights for itself.

Like John BasiloneNo, wait….

Basilone – the extended phenotype of guys like Johnson, who clearly exclude “Manila John” from possibly ever being accepted into “the historic American nation.”  No affirmative action for you, paisan.  Gaslighting Greggy and Raunchy Richie want to keep it all for themselves.

Gaido is captured by the Japanese after his plane is shot down. He’s thrown into the sea when he refuses to give the position of the American ships.

Ah…he’s expendable.  Why shouldn’t he sacrifice himself for real White men?

It’s dangerous to show heroic whites defeat evil yellow men.

Derbyshire may get offended.

Question: Do dumb dagoes still send “D’Nations” to Counter-Currents?  After all, Greg needs to fund going to the movies, so it’s all good!  Close to $100,000 for the latest fundraiser – remember, those who give live in the Golden Age today!  Just not in Brooklyn.    

Unlike Rand, I’m not going to imply Jack Merritt had it coming. His father’s grief must be immense. Yet he is waging an online political battle immediately after his son’s death at the hands of a Muslim.

We’ve seen this before. University of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts disappeared in 2018. After police arrested an illegal immigrant, her father rather bizarrely defended Hispanics. “As far as I’m concerned,” he said, “they’re Iowans with better food.” He also attacked politicians who call for stricter border control, saying Mollie would have called their views “profoundly racist.” Her mother let an illegal immigrant who was related to the alleged killer stay in her home.

Kevin Sutherland was killed, apparently at random, by a black man on the Washington D.C. Metro on Independence Day 2015. He was stabbed repeatedly; no one tried to help.

The late Sutherland worked in liberal politics and had been an intern for Congressman Jim Himes. Sutherland’s Twitter feed was filled with attacks on the Confederate flag, Christianity, and conservatives. Then presidential candidate Chris Christie blamed “liberal policies” for the murder. Congressman Himes condemned him, accusing Governor Christie of “fearmongering and thinly veiled racism.”

In 2015, two black men raped a pregnant woman named Amanda Blackburn and shot her in the back of the head. Her preacher husband Davey Blackburn said he “forgave” the killers and hoped he could “get the opportunity to share the Gospel with these guys.” He also said, “Jesus takes what the world says is a tragedy and makes it beautiful.”

That same year, Islamic militants killed 129 people in Paris. In a video the New York Times called “moving,” the husband of one of the victims said he didn’t hate the killers. “I will not give you the gift of hate,” he said. “Even though it is what you were hoping for, responding to hatred with anger would be to fall to the same ignorance that made you the people you are.”

There’s also Amy Biehl, a young Fulbright scholar who traveled to South Africa to register blacks in the first all-race election in 1994. She was murdered by a black mob, despite her pleas that she was a “comrade.” Her parents showily forgave the killers, who were released without punishment because the Truth and Reconciliation Commission determined the murder was “political.” Indeed, her parents took the opportunity to honor those who “lost their lives in the struggle.” They gave jobs to two of the murderers.

How can we explain this? I believe it’s something beyond pathological altruism.

Yes, it’s those “high trust northern hunter-gatherers” in action. If the “movement” really believes all of that in the genetically deterministic sense (and apparently it does), then everything that Hood wrote is a warning not to put all our eggs in the “high trust” basket. Maybe we should have some input and leadership from some “low trust Neolithic farmers” to balance things out.

If even half our readers sent in ten dollars a month, let alone 10 percent of their income, I have absolute faith we’d triumph — and quickly.

Once again, Hood peddles the outrageous lie that all we need is just more money.  If you give that money to the “movement” as it currently exists, it’ll just waste it, just as it wasted the millions of dollars it already ran through, generating nothing but endless failure.

See this.  It’s already dead.

Richard Lynn, the stalwart defender of the race hypothesis, issues a challenge from on high to find a single instance in which Africans have higher IQs than Europeans and then claims that under such circumstances, “the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified.” Chanda Chisala then says, “Game on!” and manages to find one instance in which a small subset of black children outperform a much larger subset of white children on a series of exams.

Does this mean that Chisala refuted the race hypothesis in IQ? No. It means he refuted an unwise and arrogant statement made by Richard Lynn.

Putting “unwise and arrogant” and “Richard Lynn” in the same sentence seems to me to be a redundancy. 

True enough, finding exceptions does not disprove the clearly observed general trends of racial differences in intelligence. But that is not the point here. HBDer Lynn put forth a falsifiable hypothesis. The hypothesis was falsified. By Lynn’s standards – derived from his moronically unwise and pathetically arrogant statement – the hypothesis is incorrect. In reality, the real hypothesis, that of general trends in intelligence due to racial differences, has not been falsified.  But Lynn’s retarded, completely genetically deterministic, cartoonish views on IQ were falsified.  Yes, it was falsified in a somewhat unconvincing manner, but that is the fault of Lynn for framing the hypothesis the way he did.  I do agree with this:

Does this mean that Chisala refuted the race hypothesis in IQ? No. It means he refuted an unwise and arrogant statement made by Richard Lynn.

But we need to put Lynn ns the same category as Rushton – a fraud and a hypocrite.  It’s not enough to cover up Lynn’s manifest deficiencies by merely saying he was “unwise and arrogant” in one instance. That one instance is a reflection of the hand-waving, pseudoscientific, never admitting to being wrong, nature of HBD. This one instance is a peek at the rotten underbelly of the HBD travesty.

Spencer expresses himself.  And whose fault is that?  The “movement’s” affirmative action “leadership” – of which Spencer is a prominent member.

Counter-Currents comments:

Svea Svensson

Posted December 7, 2019 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

Even if most whites generally prefer a partner of their own race, many of them will choose someone of another race if he or she is younger and more attractive. They trade their whiteness (and sometimes money) for youth and beauty – at least as long as it is socially acceptable.

The most common example of this is probably white men marrying Asian women, which explains why 12% of the white men, but only 10% of the white women, marry outside their race.

This constellation also seems rather normalized among racial nationalists. The American Renaissance Conference even invited one of these men to give a speech on “The Arctic Alliance” earlier this year!

Of course.  The HBDers promote the grand Jeurasian future. Derbyshire, an Englishman married to a Chinatrix with mixed-race children and who is a Judeophile – is the leading proponent of this. So, of course, he’ll be featured prominently at Amren.

Another Ghost

Posted December 7, 2019 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

I agree with you. There was an article I believe on this website that stated white men whom date outside their race often do it out of lack of confidence.

Derb – “awkward squad” – so designated by his own mother.

“Movement” solipsism on display as follows.  A Counter-Currents commentator links to scientific research – real science, not 23andMe junk – clearly showing extensive New World admixture in the Argentinian population.  The “movement” peanut gallery responds thus:

Phineas Eleazar
Posted December 8, 2019 at 12:52 pm | Permalink
Argentina is the worst Latin American example for you, because its white population is largely descended from recent immigrants from Europe, in about the 1900’s. That is certainly the reason they still have sizeable numbers of nearly pure whites.

Who cares about dat dere science?  Someone writes something on the Internet, so it must be true.  Every thought, every comment, every post from Der Movement instantly creates reality!  The Lathe of Heaven Syndrome.

Laugh at this:

Greg Johnson
Posted December 8, 2019 at 11:21 am | Permalink
You are painting with a very broad brush here. There is an edge of hysteria to this sort of MGTOW apocalypticism. I can’t help thinking that communicating such attitudes, even subliminally, must make a man less attractive to women.

Certainly, Greg is an expert on this matter.

After everything that’s happened, after the complete and humiliating collapse of the Alt Right, we still get this in December 2019.  Remarkable.  And, of course, rattling the tin cup for “D’Nations” – also in the name of the utterly discredited Alt Right:

Gifting TOO—We’re a Central Cog in the Populist, Alt Right Surge


Lee Priest White Power t-shirt.

Predicting eminence.

This investigation examined whether math/scientific and verbal/humanistic ability and preference constellations, developed on intellectually talented 13-year-olds to predict their educational outcomes at age 23, continue to maintain their longitudinal potency by distinguishing distinct forms of eminence 35 years later. Eminent individuals were defined as those who, by age 50, had accomplished something rare: creative and highly impactful careers (e.g., full professors at research-intensive universities, Fortune 500 executives, distinguished judges and lawyers, leaders in biomedicine, award-winning journalists and writers). Study 1 consisted of 677 intellectually precocious youths, assessed at age 13, whose leadership and creative accomplishments were assessed 35 years later. Study 2 constituted a constructive replication-an analysis of 605 top science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) graduate students, assessed on the same predictor constructs early in graduate school and assessed again 25 years later. In both samples, the same ability and preference parameter values, which defined math/scientific versus verbal/humanistic constellations, discriminated participants who ultimately achieved distinct forms of eminence from their peers pursuing other life endeavors.

That’s in Northern Italy and thus an assault against those blonde, blue-eyed, ultra-Aryan, Hallstatt Nordics there – like this fellow – and we can’t have that!

Odds and Ends, 11/19/19

Some odds and some ends.

Counter-Currents reaches another new low in superficial, juvenile scribbling.

The races of mankind – from 1881.

The Gunpowder Plot – Suvorov’s law in action. See: 16:40-17:05.  We need to get to the point that the System is forced to give concessions and raise hopes.

Oh yes, HBDers, let’s use those PISA scores to “estimate” Chinese IQ, shall we?

The results from a global exam that evaluates students’ reading, science and math skills are in and, once again, Chinese students appear to be reigning supreme while American students continued to underperform.
But before you shake your head ruefully and scoff at the decline of Western-style education, take a look at how the data is organized.
The OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) exams are held every three years. Coming first and third respectively in the 2012 exams are the Chinese cities of Shanghai and Hong Kong.
However, China is uniquely not listed as a country in the rankings — unlike the U.S., Russia, Germany, Australia and other nations judged on the basis of their country-wide performances. Instead, China only shares Shanghai’s score with PISA. (Hong Kong, a Special Autonomous Region of China, sends its own data.)
Shanghainese and Hong Kong students are much better educated than those elsewhere in China. Slate quoted the Brookings Institution’s Tom Loveless as saying that  “About 84 percent of Shanghai high school graduates go to college, compared to 24 percent nationally.” In addition, Loveless points out that affluent Shanghainese parents will spend large sums on extra tuition for the children — paying fees that far exceed what an average worker makes in a year.
By not providing full national data, China is in effect cheating.
As Loveless noted earlier this year, Shanghai’s test scores “will be depicted, in much of the public discussion that follows, as the results for China.” He added: “that is wrong.”
All of a sudden, rote-learning doesn’t look like China’s secret weapon.

China’s real secret weapon is the horde of buck-toothed, flat-chested Chinatrics with the secondary sexual characteristics of prepubescent boys, who are used as sexual bait to the cohort of White omega male HBDers, who are so desperate for anything ostensibly female that they’ll conspire against their own race’s interest to grovel to the Altar of Asia as part of the HBD cult. Asian cheating on exams (among other things) is apparently well known to everyone except for the “IQ estimators” of HBD.

All PISA all the time, as the Breezy one always says, eh?

Those “k-selected” Northeast Asians.

Read this, emphasis added:

AR Staff: Welcome back to American Renaissance! We’re glad to have you. Please tell our readers why you left, what you did while you were away, and why you came back?
Chris Roberts: That’s three questions in one.
As to why I left, the short answer would be “depression.” By late 2017, I was overwhelmed with disappointment over a number of things: Donald Trump’s presidency seemed to have become nothing but a string of let-downs and betrayals. 

But, but, but…Greg says that Trump is a sincere – sincere in every way! – man of genuine greatness, and don’t you forget it.

The world of white advocacy was internally fractured and squabbling. The Unite the Right rally at Charlottesville had been an disaster in nearly every way. Two years earlier, the cause of saving our people seemed to be surging into the mainstream. In 2016, there were days when our cause seemed invincible and inevitable. But starting in February of 2017, and culminating that August, the sugar high had faded into a nightmarish hangover. I needed a break.

Those disasters didn’t just happen. They were the fault of incompetent “leadership.”

What did I do while I was away? Many things. I traveled a great deal, both nationally and internationally, taught English abroad for a bit, and worked in real estate here in the US for nearly a year. Probably of most interest to American Renaissance readers was that I lived with the Brimelows…

That’s of great interest no doubt.  Did you correlate their “D’Nations” income to their actual level of accomplishment?  Happy Penguins, indeed.