Category: Hitler

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.


The Scorpion and the Frog

Europeans are the Frog.  Guess who the Scorpion is.

A summary.

A scorpion asks a frog to carry it across a river. The frog hesitates, afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, they would both drown. Considering this, the frog agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When the frog asks the scorpion why, the scorpion replies that it was in its nature to do so.

Read this – Quinn’s finale on the MacDonald-Cofnas dustup.

See this article from 2010, which is relevant to the questions and criticisms of Quinn.

Ultimately, in a sense, Quinn is correct in that whether the Jews are, or are not, acting on behalf of their own evolutionary group interests is irrelevant from the perspective of the victims of Jewish behavior.  Maybe the Jews hate Whites more than they love themselves.  Maybe the Jews are dooming themselves by their embrace of, and promotion of, the poisons they are using to undermine European survival.  It could be irrational; it could just be their nature, as like the Scorpion in stinging the Frog.  In Mein Kampf Hitler asserted that if the Jews succeeded in destroying Aryans, they would turn on each other next, in hate-filled struggle.  Of course, whether or not the Jews will destroy themselves does not obligate Europeans to allow themselves to be destroyed as well.  For the victim of murder, a murder followed by the suicide of the murderer is not more palatable than murder alone.

Perhaps Europeans should worry more about defending themselves against Jewish behavior rather than worrying whether or not that behavior is, or is not, evolutionarily beneficial to Jews.  We need to shift the focus on us rather than on them.

Happy Saint Adolf Day 2018

SLC News.

“World Brotherhood of Europeans” – excluding Afrowops and Romanohorians of course.

Did you ever notice that:

***When Americans fight wars that benefit Jews (e.g., WWII, any of the Middle Eastern wars that benefit Israel), then veterans are good and noble, and popular culture fetishizes veteran worship; however, when Americans fight wars that Jews disapprove of (e.g., Vietnam or even the entire “Cold War” military endeavor), then veterans are despicable “baby killers” to be scorned, while anti-war protesters and draft dodgers are lionized.  Funny, that.  It’s almost as if the entire American culture is modulated to reflect Jewish concerns and Jewish views. 

***In a typical modern American classroom, half the students have attention deficit disorder and the other half have a peanut allergy.  And most are overweight.

More SLC News:

The Alt Right’s “generational warfare” is ludicrous from my perspective for many reasons, foremost among them is that virtually every White Millennial I have known (many in fact) is not only an extreme leftist, but they all are hysterically ultra-SJW extreme leftists, oozing with the most virulent anti-White attitudes imaginable.  Boomers may be cucked cowards, but many (most?) Millennials are open enemies.

Read this.

The roots of what we now call the Alt-Right lay in the Ron Paul movement.

And that is why the Alt Right is doomed to fail.  It was tainted by libertardism from the very beginning.

Read this, emphasis added (from the original book):

….the degree of genetic differentiation among Indian jati groups living side by side in the same village is typically two to three times higher than the genetic differentiation between northern and southern Europeans.

Let’s unpack that for a moment.  Typically, population genetics tells us that the greatest genetic differentiation in Europe is along the north/south axis, being a bit larger than east/west; the first axis in PCA is north/south, the second is east/west.  However, that differentiation, the north/south, in Europe is two to three times smaller than that between Indian brownster “micro-castes” who live “side by side in the same village.”  

Chuck the gamester pussy pedestalizer.

IQ and Leadership

Part of the explanation?

Why “movement” leaders tend to be, in general, incompetent mediocrities leads to a number theories.  There is of course Der Movement’s stringent ethnic affirmative action program. The dominance of Der Movement by Type I activists, who favor their own, for leadership, also is a factor.  Dissident movements tend to draw in marginal personalities, while the elevation of defective freakishness repels the less marginal; the lack of suitable candidates leads to marginal leaders. Leaders are almost always overt and public activists, typically attracting people who have “little to lose” IRL (unless they are trust fund babies or the retired wealthy).

Another mechanism is that even when other variables are controlled for, the perception (perception, NOT reality) of who is an effective leader is related to the leader’s IQ, but in a curvilinear and not linear fashion.  Thus, assuming an average IQ of 100, the peak for optimal perceived leadership is an IQ of 120 – not only are dumber people perceived as less effective, but smarter ones as well. One can theorize mechanisms for this phenomenon, but it is what it is.  Emphasis added:

Although researchers predominately test for linear relationships between variables, at times there may be theoretical and even empirical reasons for expecting nonlinear functions. We examined if the relation between intelligence (IQ) and perceived leadership might be more accurately described by a curvilinear single-peaked function. Following Simonton’s (1985) theory, we tested a specific model, indicating that the optimal IQ for perceived leadership will appear at about 1.2 standard deviations above the mean IQ of the group membership. The sample consisted of midlevel leaders from multinational private-sector companies. We used the leaders’ scores on the Wonderlic Personnel Test (WPT)-a measure of IQ-to predict how they would be perceived on prototypically effective leadership (i.e., transformational and instrumental leadership). Accounting for the effects of leader personality, gender, age, as well as company, country, and time fixed effects, analyses indicated that perceptions of leadership followed a curvilinear inverted-U function of intelligence. The peak of this function was at an IQ score of about 120, which did not depart significantly from the value predicted by the theory. As the first direct empirical test of a precise curvilinear model of the intelligence-leadership relation, the results have important implications for future research on how leaders are perceived in the workplace.

This may be another explanation for “movement” failure.  120 IQ people are intelligent no doubt, but have limitations.  Most prominent “movement” leaders would tend to be in this range (Hello Alt Right!  Hello Alt Wrong!) and more intelligent and capable people are weeded out (and for other reasons such as those discussed above).

But, but, but…”what about William Pierce?” Der Movement mutters.  There are those other variables to consider: “leader personality, gender, age, as well as company, country, and time fixed effects.”  Pierce benefited from ethnic affirmative action, although not particularly charismatic he had certain alpha male personality traits, he was tall and physically imposing, people respected him for giving up his academic career to associate with Rockwell, and there was a time/era effect – he came to prominence in an America more appreciative of the science/technical men; today’s Beavis-and-Butthead “movement” is unlikely to value an “egghead” physicist.

And consider Strom, likely equally intelligent, but never considered as leadership material even before his legal troubles.  Although ethnically acceptable, Strom’s personality and other traits could not compensate for a high-IQ (and likely contributed to a more negative view).  Gliebe was much more acceptable to the rank-and-file: how did that turn out?

Historically: Hitler was likely less intelligent than Goebbels, Mussolini less intelligent than Gentile or Evola, Codreanu less intelligent than Cuza, etc.  Francis Parker Yockey failed as a practical leader, and a careful reading of Coogan’s book suggests reasons why, some of which relate to Yockey’s own personality quirks and personal failings, but also because of jealousy over his obvious genius as well as the inability for him to effectively explain his concepts to the Type I riff-raff.

Getting around this problem would entail the high-IQ leader compensating like Pierce if possible, or surrounding himself with high-IQ advisers and listening to them, or a fundamental change in the “movement” that would allow it to overcome the societal prejudice against the higher-IQ.

The Alt Yellow

Exposing the racial sexual fetishism underlying “movement” and HBD politics.

Sallis right again…and, no, I don’t get tired of writing that.

Readers of this blog are aware that I have been very critical of the pro-Asian precincts of the “movement.”

Thus I have continuously asserted:

1. Certain precincts of Der Movement – including but not limited to Alt Wrong HBD/race realists, certain Alt Righters, Type I activists, some Nutzis, and the Silk Roaders – are pro-Asian (mostly East Asian), are obsessed with Asians (particularly Asian females), and value Asians over either all Whites or over some subset of Whites (White ethnics).  Some actually call themselves “yellow supremacists.”

2. Pro-Asian “White racial activists” tend to be derived from ethnic groups associated with “high trust hunter gatherer” ancestry.

3. As suggested above, these tend to be people who are Type I activists ideologically, Type I activists as regards character (the Beavis-and-Butthead brigade) or the most pure Type I activist that combines both ideological and character components.  In fact, I would like to make an important modification of my typology scheme here.  Only people who are Type II in both ideology and character should be classified as Type II activists.  Everyone else are Type I.  Even though I believe ideology trumps character, the “taint” of Type I character is so strong that an activist with a Type II ideology and a Type I character is effectively, functionally, Type I.  

4. As suggested above, there is an underlying Yellow Fever sexual fetishism here; the pro-Asian attitudes are tied to a history of sexual interest in East Asian females.

5. Indeed, many of these types have a documented history of dating and/or marrying East Asian females.

How do the facts square with Sallistrian assertion?

Read this.  Emphasis added:

The white supremacists on the far right have “yellow fever” — an Asian woman fetish. It’s a confusing mix.

Andrew Anglin, the founder of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, once posted a video of himself with a Filipina he called “my jailbait girlfriend,” the young couple flirting as they sauntered through a megamall in the Philippines. Richard Spencer, a white nationalist, has dated a series of Asian-American women, according to one of his ex-girlfriends. (Mr. Spencer insists that it was before he embraced white nationalism.)

The right-wing agitator Mike Cernovich, the writer John Derbyshire and an alt-right figure named Kyle Chapman (so notorious for swinging a lead-filled stick at Trump opponents at a protest in Berkeley, Calif., that he is now a meme) are all married to women of Asian descent. As a commenter wrote on an alt-right forum, “exclusively” dating Asian women is practically a “white-nationalist rite of passage.”

Saint Adolf:

“I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves,” Adolf Hitler said in 1945. “They belong to ancient civilizations, and I admit freely that their past history is superior to our own.”

Of course, Slavs are “subhuman” but Chinese and Japanese are ever-so-superior.  Hitler: Type I Nutzi.

Then we have that “high trust hunter gatherer” Charles Murray (emphasis added):

Murray left for the Peace Corps in Thailand in 1965, staying abroad for a formative six years.] At the beginning of this period, the young Murray kindled a romance with his Thai Buddhist language instructor (in Hawaii), Suchart Dej-Udom, the daughter of a wealthy Thai businessman, who was “born with one hand and a mind sharp enough to outscore the rest of the country on the college entrance exam.” Murray subsequently proposed by mail from Thailand, and their marriage began the following year, a move that Murray now considers youthful rebellion. “I’m getting married to a one-handed Thai Buddhist,” he said. “This was not the daughter-in-law that would have normally presented itself to an Iowa couple.”
Murray credits his time in the Peace Corps in Thailand with his lifelong interest in Asia. “There are aspects of Asian culture as it is lived that I still prefer to Western culture, 30 years after I last lived in Thailand,” says Murray. “Two of my children are half-Asian. Apart from those personal aspects, I have always thought that the Chinese and Japanese civilizations had elements that represented the apex of human accomplishment in certain domains.

Of course, Murray’s own book on “human accomplishment” – despite his attempt to “cook the books” – tells a different story, does it not?  The apex of human accomplishment in almost all domains is a bit further west than China and Japan, no?

And…”youthful rebellion?”  Yeah, it produced two mixed-race children and a pro-Asian attitude “30 years after.” Murray: the Type I political scientist.  “Youthful rebellion”  – with consequences that last a lifetime.  How about some responsibility and accountability, Chuck? What a turd.

And will you all deny that HBD is a pro-Asian (and pro-Jewish) political movement in large part fueled by Yellow Fever enthusiasts (Murray, Derbyshire, Brand) and their associates (Sailer – who once claimed to be part-Jewish, the penis sized-obsessed Rushton, and pseudoscientist joke Lynn, never mind the “I come from an inbred group” HBD Chick and the triracial and part-Asian mongrel Jayman).

By the way, I’ve personally known quite a few White males (not men), all in STEM, married to Orientals.  Not a single one is “normal;” they are all – ALL – what Derbyshire self-labels as “awkward squad.”  All of them are socially awkward weaklings whose wives “wear the pants” in the family.  Yes, yes, I know: anecdotal evidence.  But how much do you want to bet that a quantitative psychometric study will demonstrate clear personality differences between Yellow Fever race-mixers and the rest of us?

Also read this, emphasis added:

But Spencer’s evolution into a hardcore ethno-nationalist was perhaps not as seamless as he makes it seem. In late 2007, he dated a woman who is Asian American. The two met when she was working for Ron Paul’s presidential campaign.

“I am not the only Asian girl he has dated,” says Spencer’s ex, who spoke to me on the condition that her name not be disclosed. She said she’d initially been turned off by his talk of race-based behavioral differences, but she eventually softened to the idea. They dated for four months, including a trip she took with him to Texas to attend his high school reunion. She says she eventually broke up with him, but not because he was too politically radical. “We all have inconsistencies,” she said. “Especially with love. How can you control your heart?”

I asked Spencer about his Asian ex as he was digging into a bowl of Thai noodles at an eclectic restaurant in the quaint downtown of Whitefish. He seemed shocked that I’d brought it up, and peppered me with questions about how I’d found out. “I would rather you didn’t write about that,” he said, adding later: “You are probably going to nail me with this…I think some people in the movement would probably find that terrible.” He confirmed that she was not the only Asian woman he’d been with, but he said the relationships predated his evolution into a white nationalist.

Though Spencer now opposes interracial relationships, white nationalists have long looked east for inspiration—Hitler regarded Chinese and Japanese history as “superior to our own.” Jared Taylor and William Johnson, the leader of the white nationalist American Freedom Party, both speak fluent Japanese. “There is something about the Asian girls,” Spencer said. “They are cute. They are smart. They have a kind of thing going on. If I am looking at my own life objectively, it really doesn’t surprise me that much.”

Let me explain the problem, what is “terrible.” The real problem here is not that Spencer dated some Asians before he became a WN.  After all, he dated them, not married them, and he did not procreate with them. OK, fine. But please Richard, be a man, admit your error. You would get more respect from the “movement” if you would just say “look, I was young, I was not a WN, I used poor judgment, and I made some mistakes.  It was wrong, I regret it, and it certainly will never happen again.”  Instead, we get justifications: “There is something about the Asian girls,” Spencer said. “They are cute. They are smart. They have a kind of thing going on. If I am looking at my own life objectively, it really doesn’t surprise me that much.”

So…what?  If some female mudshark makes similar excuses for dating Tyrone Carjacker, should we just blithely accept that as well?  Yes, Negroes are worse than Asians, and, yes, female miscegenation can be considered worse since females are the bottleneck for reproduction.  But, as regards principle, it’s the same thing.  ADMIT YOUR MISTAKE.  DO NOT ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY IT.  Do you guys really need to be told that?

I mean, if Spencer “now opposes interracial relationships,” then obviously he has to consider those past relationships of his a mistake.  Therefore, it’s obvious that one must take responsibility for it.  But, alas, responsibility and accountability is not what the “movement” is about now, is it? And the Asian claims she broke up with him, not the other way around.  Accountability?

These are your “leaders” and heroes, by the way.  Good luck with a “pro-White” “movement” that values Yellow over White, and that consists of activists who think dating Orientals is a “rite of passage.”

Type I activists have dominated American racial nationalism and has led it down into the toilet.  Keep on supporting them though, that’ll do wonders to “advance the cause.”


Fascist Typology

Bardeche’s Type I and Type II

Coogan’s Dreamer of the Day includes a quote from Bardeche’s Suzanne et le Tandis (Suzanne and the Slums), in the chapter: “Le Fascisme International” that seems more complete and accurate (and free from spelling and grammar errors) than the version popping up on the Alt Right.  This quote includes:

I have known, after Clarence, very many “fascists,” for the race is not dead. Some of them had boots, they were familiar with the runes, and they camped out on the night of the solstice in order to sing under the stars the beautiful solemn songs of their ancestors. The others did not have boots, they held up their skinny reformers’ heads severely, they wore glasses, they collected cards, and they made furious speeches. All were poor, they believed, they fought, they detested lying and injustice.

The precise translation is less important than the general point being made; an important distinction between different fascist archetypes, even though it is made in a bemused fashion, in jest, and even though I’m sure Bardeche didn’t mean to focus on that distinction in his  quote.  Nevertheless, regardless of intention and style, there is food for thought here.

Thus, Bardeche correct identifies two archetypes of fascists; thus:

Type I: Some of them had boots, they were familiar with the runes, and they camped out on the night of the solstice in order to sing under the stars the beautiful solemn songs of their ancestors.

Type II: The others did not have boots, they held up their skinny reformers’ heads severely, they wore glasses, they collected cards, and they made furious speeches.

To translate into a context more familiar to the racial nationalist “movement” of today: Type I would be a pure representation of a type that would tend to include: ethnonationalists, Nordicists, Traditionalists, ethnic fetishists, and Hitler worshippers; while Type II would be a pure representation of a type that would tend to include: pan-Europeanists, Futurists, and Imperium-oriented Yockeyites.

Type I, in its purest representation, would tend to be an extroverted, action-oriented mesomorph; Type II would be an introverted, intellect-oriented ectomorph (not sure where endomorphs would fit in, as so many of them tend to be leftists to begin with).

That is not to say that Type I activists are never intellectual, nor that Type II activists are devoid of action, simply that on a spectrum, Type I are relatively action > intellect and Type II are relatively intellect > action.

Bardeche classified both types as: All were poor, they believed, they fought, they detested lying and injustice.  That may be true, although I think the “they detested lying and injustice” part applies mostly to Type II.  It are the Type II activists who would tend to be more of the Moralpath type.  Type I activists would tend to be more pragmatists, being as they are more action-oriented in any case.  While both types include Vangaurdists, Mainstreamers are almost exclusively Type I.  Type II activists, with their severe affect and furious speeches (or, today, blog posts – “crazed and bitter,” eh?), are hardly the Mainstreamer type.

While most activists would tend to have some traits of both types, they would be skewed in one direction or another.  

Some more or less “pure” types exist.  Your host, Ted Sallis, is a more or less a pure Type II. Francis Parker Yockey himself was a Type II.  Most Anglosphere activists in Der Movement are definitely Type I, certainly in the USA. The Alt Right, with all its intellectual pretensions, is actually heavily represented by Type I activists, at least among the rank-and-file.  In general, Type I’s will outnumber Type IIs, the latter being a distinct minority.

Leaders are a mixed bag, and historical fascist leaders have shown mixed characteristics of both types.  Most interesting is when there is a distinct mismatch between ideology and personality; the person has the ideology of one fascist type, but the personality of another.  This is a crucially important point.  While Bardeche’s quote delves mostly into personality, it bleeds into ideology: those boot-wearing activists obsessed with runes, ancestral songs, and the solstice (as well as Viking horns and mead, eh?) would tend to gravitate toward ethnonationalist and/or Nordicist ideologies, and be enamored of “traditionalism,” while those idealists with their skinny severe reformer heads, furious speeches, glasses and other introvert tendencies (card-collecting being a metaphor for introverted intellectualism) would tend to gravitate toward pan-Europeanism, Futurism and other manifestations of avant-garde politics, and visions of Imperium.  

Personality and ideology are often linked, but when the linkage breaks down, all sorts of strange fascistic hybrids are observed.  For example, Hitler politically was Type I, but his personality was more Type II.  Certain Alt Right ethnonationalists mimic Hitler to the extent that they are ideologically Type I but have the “bookish” and Intellect-oriented Type II character.  Conversely, some pan-European Alt Righters are the opposite: politically Type II but with Type I personalities. 

On the other hand, when personality and ideology more or less perfectly coincide, then from that synergy you get the “impossible” extreme Moralpath types – a Ted Sallis or a Francis Parker Yockey.

There is no doubt more to analyze on this topic but this is a useful beginning.

The Moralpath

Introducing a new psychological term.

A stupidity one often sees is labeling Hitler as a “psychopath” (or “sociopath”).  I assume that my critics would use the same terms to describe my own alleged “insanity.”  However, when looking at the actual traits that accompany those aberrations, the descriptions do not really fit.  Hitler, for example, saw himself on a historic and heroic holy mission that involved self-sacrifice – hardly the realm of psychopaths.  Hitler endured a relatively ascetic lifestyle and cared about something greater than himself: the well-being of his people.  Again, not psychopathy.  Hitler was a successful and disciplined political leader, who rose to the heights of world history, hardly some disordered sociopath or selfishly uninhibited psychopath.  Then what was he?

I propose a new term that is the mirror image of the psychopath: the moralpath.

A moralpath is a person whose idealism, sense of justice and righteousness (what the pragmatists would label “self-righteousness”), and inwardly developed moral code is at a level that they would do virtually anything – including war and genocide – to achieve what they perceive as “doing the right thing.”  

This personality type is seen in both the far-Right (almost always among men) and the far-Left (both men and women), among WNs as well as SJWs.  Historically, this is where one places Hitler; in literature, Captain Ahab comes to mind as well as Raskolnikov.  The moralpath is inherently “Faustian” in character and actions. In pop culture, there is Rorschach in The Watchmen, Batman, and even Ledger’s Joker character – whose acts are performed to prove a point about free will and the meaningless of rules – fits here as well. These are not really psychopaths or sociopaths, although there are some traits that overlap, such as antisociality and a lack of remorse.  But the moralpath values truth and self-sacrifice, not a devious cunning to achieve self-interested hedonistic goals (like the “gamesters” who pride themselves on their “dark triad” traits).

Getting back to real life, the description of Francis Parker Yockey’s personality – a “magnificent sickness in which he could only see north and not northeast or northwest” – fits perfectly with the moralpath type. Indeed, Lawrence’s “dreamers of the day”  –

All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible.

– are moralpaths.

Moralpaths (of the Right) are valuable but also dangerous, they are necessary but not sufficient for success.  They are necessary because without them the enterprise collapses into compromised and corrupted mainstreaming, ends and means get confused, and there is no grand vision to pursue.  They are not sufficient, because when unleavened with pragmatism, moralpathy can end in disaster.  There needs to be cooperation between moralpaths and pragmatists to achieve the sociopolitical goals they hold in common.