Category: Japan

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.

Mishima, Joyce, and Johnson

And another tidbit.

First, the other tidbit:

Comment:

abprosper
White does not Equal Posterity. The Irish and the Italians and the countless others of European extraction inflicted their own ruin on our posterity and founding state.

Quite right. Imagine if we didn’t have micks and wops like John Lindsay and Hubert Humphrey mucking things up, what a more racially healthy nation America could have been.

Now, to the main course.

Reproduced below, at the end of this post, is more of the animus-driven back-and-forth between Joyce and Johnson on the Mishima issue from TOO. I’d at this point just like to summarize my views on this in outline form:

1. I agree more with Joyce than Johnson on Mishima, not because I wholly agree with Joyce nor because of my personal distaste for Johnson, but simply because I view Mishima as a greatly over-rated figure on the Far Right, and Joyce’s piece is a long overdue and necessary corrective.  Mishima can be viewed as an “intersectional” figure who has recently enjoyed an “uptick” in interest from the Far Right (back in the WN 1.0 days, I can assure you that none of we Nutzis cared a fig about this Oriental) since he appeals to a number of “movement” factions – Traditionalists, the Gay Cabal, the HBDers and Silkers who grovel before The Altar of Asia, as well as Millennials who want to be both “based” but have a cover for their “racism” (but, but, but…I like this Japanese guy too…).  

2. Having said that, I’ll agree that Joyce’s piece can be viewed, objectively speaking, as a bit too harsh and one-sided. But that’s fine. I consider Joyce’s essay to be akin to Yockey’s Imperium in the sense that it is supposed to be a polemic and not a work of purely objective scholarship – so Johnson’s whining about Joyce’s alleged failings in that regard are, for me, irrelevant. Joyce is essentially making a political argument – that White Far Rightists should stop wasting their time with this bizarre, homosexual, inauthentic, organically unsound, over-rated, Japanese writer, and look to their own people for their heroes and role models. If that is its purpose, and I believe it is, then Joyce’s essay is effective.

3. Joyce can have focused more on the idea that Far Rightists admire Mishima not necessarily because of the objective things the man did, but because they view him as a symbol of rightist defiance against globalism, universalism, liberalism, democracy, consumerism, etc.  So, in that sense, one can argue that the points brought up by Joyce about Mishima the man are irrelevant with respect to that motivation for Mishima worship. The problem though with this interpretation is that there are White historical figures who could serve the same role as inspiring symbols – and in those cases the historical figures are not only more racially relevant, but more authentic and have the advantage of actually having achieved things of value to the White race. This goes back to point one – why Mishma himself specifically has been chosen as this symbol rather than others who are more deserving (Codreanu for one).

4. Joyce’s “gay-baiting” accusations against Johnson are probably unfair as well.  Although, as stated above, Mishima’s homosexuality likely plays at least a partial role in his appeal to some on the Far Right, I believe that Johnson’s interest in Mishima is more likely centered on Johnson’s interest in “traditionalism” and the idea that this “traditionalism” is embodied by the life, work, and symbolism of Mishima. If Joyce had critiqued Savitri Devi, Johnson may well have responded in like manner. All of this does not excuse Johnson’s snide (and as stated above ultimately irrelevant) remarks about Joyce’s commitment (or lack thereof) to quality scholarship.

5. Dr. Joyce – what the hell is your essay doing on the Unz site?  Say it ain’t so!   Are you an Unzian?  If not, tell them to take your essay off that damn site.  If so, why the hell why?

More of the cat fight:

Greg Johnsonsays:
January 16, 2020 at 2:06 am
I disagree.
First, there are many things to admire about Mishima as an individual, despite the fact that he was a very weird character: his literary genius, his immense productivity (34 novels, more than 50 plays, countless essays, all before his death at 45), his willingness to spend his prominence in society to buck the liberal democratic trend in favor of the Right, and, yes, his exemplary suicide — because if enough of our people overcame the Christian-bourgeois ethos and were willing to truly prefer death to dishonor, they would make short work of this system.
Second, it is simply wrong to say that Mishima does not offer “arguments.” I suggest you read Andrew Rankin’s Mishima, Aesthetic Terrorist, which is an admirably clear overview of Mishima’s cultural and political worldview. You may disagree with this views, in whole or in part, but it is simply inaccurate to dismiss them as lacking any sort of coherence or argument.
Third, I’ve already pointed out that despite claiming to have spent a year researching this matter, Joyce makes no reference to Rankin or a number of essays at Counter-Currents that actually present a pretty good explanation for why Mishima is a widely read figure in the New Right. I should also mention that there is an entire book on Mishima by the eminent Dominique Venner, Un samouraï d’Occident: Le Bréviaire des insoumis (Paris: Pierre-Guillaume de Roux, 2013) that might have thrown some light on this matter. But, again, there is no sign that Joyce has read it, although it was reviewed at TOO.
I am not going to speculate about Joyce’s motives for such lapses of scholarship.
Fourth, instead of actually reading and citing the relevant sources for understanding Mishima’s status in the New Right, Joyce simply offers what he calls the Mishima Myth. This myth purports to be a summation of New Right discourse on Mishima, but it is nothing of the kind. It is simply an attempt to make this discourse seem maximally vapid, which makes his demolition work much easier. In short, it is what scholars call a “straw man.”
Refuting straw men rather than real arguments is a blot on any scholar’s reputation.
I have read very little of Dr. Joyce’s work, so I don’t know if the lapses of scholarly probity that vitiate this essay are a pattern in his writing. I hope TOO’s and TOQ’s promotion of his work does not turn out to be a bad investment.
Andrew Joyce
Andrew Joycesays:
January 14, 2020 at 11:08 pm
I read Rankin’s book a few weeks ago, and found it lacking. What does emerge in his discussion of Mishima’s politics, such as they can be ascertained, is the same confusion and incoherency indicated by the other scholars named above. Again, I think your opinion is clouded by being a homosexual, and you’ve invested time and effort in promoting an ethnically alien and profoundly unhealthy individual simply because he is a homosexual icon.
Reply
Greg Johnson
Greg Johnsonsays:
January 16, 2020 at 2:29 am
This is a list of artists and intellectuals of the Right whose birthdays Counter-Currents more or less regularly commemorates:
January 3: Pierre Drieu La Rochelle
January 3: J. R. R. Tolkien
January 6: Alan Watts
January 8: Anthony M. Ludovici
January 10: Robinson Jeffers
January 12: Jack London
January 14: Yukio Mishima
February 6: A. R. D. “Rex” Fairburn
March 12: Gabriele d’Annunzio
March 29: Ernst Jünger
March 31: Robert Brasillach
April 12: Jonathan Bowden
April 16: Wilmot Robertson
April 16: Dominique Venner
May 13: Julius Evola
May 22: Richard Wagner
May 27: Louis-Ferdinand Céline
May 29: Oswald Spengler
June 13: William Butler Yeats
June 16: Enoch Powell
June 29: Lothrop Stoddard
July 7: Revilo Oliver
July 11: Carl Schmitt
August 4: Knut Hamsun
August 20: H. P. Lovecraft
August 22: Leni Riefenstahl
September 11: D. H. Lawrence
September 18: Francis Parker Yockey
September 26: T. S. Eliot
September 26: Martin Heidegger
September 30: Savitri Devi
October 1: Maurice Bardèche
October 2: Louis de Bonald
October 2: Roy Campbell
October 12: Aleister Crowley
October 15: Friedrich Nietzsche
October 30: Ezra Pound
October 30: Leo Yankevich
November 7: Guillaume Faye
November 15: René Guénon
November 18: Wyndham Lewis
November 19: Madison Grant
November 20: P. R. Stephensen
December 1: Henry Williamson
December 3: J. Philippe Rushton
December 7: Pentti Linkola
December 22: Filippo Marinetti
December 30: Rudyard Kipling
What all these people have in common is not that they were gay icons but that they were eminent intellectuals or artists who were also Rightists. That alone makes them worth commemorating in a culture dominated by the pretense that the Left is intellectual and the Right is not.
If Andrew Joyce were to publish unscholarly hatchet jobs on any of these figures, I would feel duty bound to defend them. So enough about my motives.
Readers are free to speculate about my motives all they want. But the same is true of Joyce’s motives.

Joyce vs. Johnson, 1/15/20

More news.


Joyce:

Andrew Joycesays:
January 14, 2020 at 2:13 am
Queer coping is when a known homosexual gets triggered when a homosexual idol is systematically critiqued and, unable to moderate the emotional response, but also unable to write a full length rebuttal, resorts to long-winded by ultimately meaningless comments designed to claim intellectual victory (and psychological relief) where none exists. When it comes to queers, they’re a lot like wasps or hornets. Just rattle the nest and watch them come out. They can’t help themselves.

I was warned about the cabal in the early 2000s.


Johnson:

Greg Johnsonsays:
January 14, 2020 at 5:40 am
Ryuji Tsukazaki’s remarks are devastating because Joyce’s essay leans so heavily on arguing that “Mishima was a profoundly unhealthy and inorganic individual,” and Tsukazaki argues that such remarks are rather beside the point, because such people are often quite insightful and can make true statements. Joyce admits that his argument is ad hominem. But the argumentum ad hominem is one of the informal logical fallacies.

Yes, argumentum ad hominemjust like calling Sallis “crazy and bitter” instead of responding to the comments left on your blog, never mind “banning” people who critique your ideas and your behavior.

Tsukazaki also points out that, contra Joyce, Mishima wrote plenty about politics. Indeed, about one-fourth of Mishima’s 43-volume collected works consists of non-fiction, including political statements, and even his writings on literature, art, and culture have political import. 

That doesn’t invalidate Joyce’s thesis.

Andrew Rankin’s recent book Mishima, Aesthetic Terrorist, is the first book in English to discuss much of this material with an eye to its political and philosophical content. No genuinely scholarly discussion of Mishima’s political import should omit mention of it. Rankin’s book was published in 2018, so Joyce had no excuse not to cover it.

True, Joyce’s essay could have been more complete.  He should write a follow-up, with a focus on answering Johnson.

This essay rather blots Joyce’s reputation as a scholar.

No, it doesn’t.


Zman commentator:

Epaminondas
None of this will prevent a future, more determined version of Trump to turn over the political table. He walks among us now. In fact, the new, more fanatic morality will make Trump 2.0 stand out even more sharply from the rest. If you think you’re seeing the elites panic now, just wait.

Sounds familiar.


Consider this Mexican-looking greasy Afrowop.  Just like Der Movement is full of insincere grifters, so is the gaggle of “anti-racists.”

Anti-Mishima

Joyce essay.

Given my own take on the Yukio Mishima fetishism on the Far Right, I was intrigued to read Andrew Joyce’s own excellent “take down” of the Mishima myth.

I very strongly urge you to read the whole thing.  A few excerpts (emphasis added) and my own comments to these:

According to Henry Scott Stokes, in my opinion Mishima’s best biographer as well as being the only Westerner invited to his funeral, almost as soon as Mishima was born his grandmother (Natsuko) “resolved to take personal responsibility for his upbringing and virtually kidnapped the little boy from his mother,” raising the child almost entirely in her sickroom. Natsuko brought up Mishima “as a little girl, not as a boy,” and he was forced to stay inside, was prohibited with playing with most of his environment, and was told to be almost completely silent due to his grandmother’s complaints of constant head pain. After some years, his mother was permitted to take him outside, but only when there was no wind.There is some suggestion that he was beaten, or otherwise severely psychologically abused, with the result that he suffered a sequence of psychosomatic illnesses involving the retention of urine. There is also some suggestion of sexual abuse or “obscene” treatment at the hands of his grandmother’s nurse. Quasi-incestuous closeness in indicated by his later description of his grandmother as a “true-love sweetheart”, and on his death his mother described him as her “lover.” Mishima was generally regarded by those around him as “an unusually delicate child.”

I have read about male-to-female transgenders who regretted their choices (in one case leading to reversal of sex-assignment surgery), and a common theme is their childhood feminization by female relatives or female friends of the family. Those people were White; Mishima was Japanese. Thus, the female urge to ruin and destroy masculinity – even at the maladaptive cost of ruining their own male relatives – seems to be a cross-racial characteristic. Hail MGTOW!

By contrast, as a homosexual, Mishima nurtured fantasies of himself as a member of an elitist minority.

We can think of a number of “movement” “leaders” and “activists” for whom that description fits as well.

One could add speculations that Mishima’s military fantasies were an extension of his sexual fixations, including a possible attempt to simply gain power over a large number of athletic young men. But this would be laboring an all-too-obvious point.

The Mannerbund awaits!

Fuse explains that suicide in Japan essentially originates from a servile position within a highly anxious and neurotic society.

After the Schettino incident, HBDers like Brand and Ray pinned the blame on “anxiety” and “neuroticism” among Italians.  Of course, being HBDers (and Brand married to his own “Rosie”), the extreme anxiety and neuroticism among East Asians is ignored.

Durocher comments “You’re either the kind of boy who is challenged, energized, and inspired by this sort of film, or perhaps you’re not a boy,” which I can only regard as laden with irony given that the film’s subject was raised as a girl and once remarked, on being expected to act like a boy: “the reluctant masquerade had begun.”

Durocher attempts to normalize his own Asiaphilic HBD fetishism and pathologize those who refuse to kowtow before the Altar of Asia.

We come back to the central questions of how and why Yukio Mishima should be relevant to us. No answers can be found in the life, politics and actions of a figure not only non-European and profoundly un-fascistic, but who was also strangely un-Japanese. I contend that there is simply nothing genuine to learn from him, and few people who have written in support of Mishima can point to anything tangible beyond the amorphous outlines of the Mishima Myth and a film heavy on style and low on authenticity. There is no single piece of text, no treatise, and no piece of authenticity beyond a final, radically un-European and sadomasochistically-inspired act of self-destruction and death-embracing nihilism. Mishima’s monarchism was servile and parodic, his militarism homoerotic, disingenuous and ludicrous, and his death-as-political-statement was psychosexual and ultimately lacking in logic. Otomo is probably correct in viewing the coup attempt more as a sexually inspired method of “politicising art rather than expressing a belief in ultra-nationalism.”

The question thus arises as to whether associating ourselves with such a figure, surely a clownish homoerotic wignat in today’s vernacular, brings more positives or negatives, both within the Dissident Right and within broader considerations of “optics” or public image. In particular, we should question whether we want to place our politics in a nexus that involves, to borrow the terminology of the Japan scholar Susan Napier, “the interrelationship between homosexuality, politics, and the peculiar form of violence-prone psychosexual nihilism from which Mishima suffered.” I’d argue in the negative.

Very good. 

Two brief criticisms of Joyce’s piece.  First, as these guys always do, Joyce is careful not to offend a “movement” figure that he had no prior “beef” with; thus, he grovels a bit to Durocher:

I rate Durocher’s work very highly…Much as I was intrigued by Durocher’s piece… (which is suitably measured in the assessment of Mishima’s fiction)…In the following essay, I offer not necessarily a rebuttal or rebuke of Durocher…

As my forthcoming essay on Greg Johnson will make clear, “movement” “activists” who have a “standing” or the possibility of a “standing” in Der Movement – that is, people, who, like Joyce, are of “acceptable” Northwest European ancestry – need to be skilled at the political game if they are to advance their interests and maintain their status of “leadership.”  Despite that the HBD-Nordicist Durocher is an incompetent and obsessive hack, a gaslighting liar, and a writer for a Jew site, Joyce states differently.  Of course, Joyce may actually differ from me in his opinion of Durocher (after all, they both have Nordicist tendencies, even if Joyce seems less enthused by Jew-loving and Asian-loving HBD), but, no doubt, Joyce sees no advantage in taking Le Grand Frog to task for his many deficiencies.

The second criticism is that Joyce concentrates on Mishima’s homosexual sadomasochism, but ignores themes of heterosexual sadomasochism, such as Kyoko’s House.  As the latter is a key toward understand the White embrace of both HBD and of Silk Road White nationalism, any comprehensive analysis of Mishima’s work must understand it. It also sheds light on Mishima himself, given the details of his childhood as outlined by Joyce.

Gaslighting Greg:

Greg Johnson

Posted January 7, 2020 at 10:12 am | Permalink

I think that if Iran were nuked, Jews would be lynched from the lampposts of New York City. Their power is ocean wide but very shallow. The smart ones know that. But it would not be the first time they overreached. But such a course as you describe would not be a carefully calculated one but a gamble or a blunder.

This is hysterical nonsense.  True, if Iran were “nuked” there would be significant social and political repercussions in America (probably only lasting until the next football game, though), but does any sane person really believe that “Jews would be lynched from the lampposts of New York City.”  Why, oh why, do all you nitwits out there support Johnson?

Greg Johnson

Posted January 7, 2020 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

Groyperism is just the flavor of the month. Fuentes’ MO is to tear down the movement to build his own cult of personality. He can do that for a while, because a huge part of the movement consists of bored online nihilists who want to join the latest sociopath’s cult of personality. But fundamentally selfish people can’t build anything that lasts. It didn’t last for Spencer and it won’t last for Fuentes. After trashing people’s lives like a tornado ripping through a trailer park, Fuentes will crash and burn, and his followers will move on.

Johnson is less a tornado than a chronic disease, like a cancer.  He’s here for the long haul, and Der Movement is being terminally sickened by him.

Yukio Mishima and Der Movement

It’s no surprise.

Is it any surprise that Der Movement is fascinated by Japanese author and right-wing ultranationalist Yukio Mishima?

Mishima has something to offer to many different factions of Der Movement. He was Japanese, so the HBDers love him. The Silkers not only like Mishima because of his racial background, but because Mishima’s work Kyoko’s House reflects the very essence of Silk Road White nationalism:

Schrader also incorporates scenes from Mishima’s book Kyoko’s House into the second chapter, in which the young Osamu (Kenji Sawada) sells his body to the loan shark Kiyomi (Reisen Lee) to save his mother’s restaurant from debt. Osamu becomes Kiyomi’s love slave at first, until their relationship turns into sadomasochism. “Your skin is so beautiful,” she tells Osamu after slicing his flesh, “I just had to cut it.” Their romance becomes one of pain and pleasure, beauty and destruction, a sense of purpose and existence through annihilation, culminating with Kiyomi preparing to bring Osamu to a blissful death.

One can imagine the White omega male Silkers fantasizing that they are a White Osamu and that some black-booted Chinese girl with a gun (a border guard of the West!) plays the role of Kiyomi.  After all, race-tinged sexual masochism is what Silk Road White nationalism is all about.

Speaking of the sexual angle, Mishima was a homosexual (albeit one who had a wife and children while still being more or less openly gay) – note that Mishima’s self-destructive tendencies are consistent with his homosexuality (a la Forney’s analysis of homosexuality) -and as a bodybuilder no doubt titillates the gay faction of the Alt Right.  

Of course, the Traditionalists admire Mishima for his ideology (Mishima being more racially acceptable, no doubt, than Evola), and the ethnoracial fetishists can have some sort of connection to Mishima since he can pass for David Bromstad’s (more White-looking) brother – or perhaps pass as Bjork’s father.

There’s something for everyone!  It’s all good!


Now, Mishima undoubtedly was an interesting person and one can have sympathy for his right-wing views and his Japanese ultra-nationalism,  But, I’m not Japanese, nor East Asian more generally, nor are all those Type I “traditionalists” foaming at the mouth over Mishima and his (over-rated) legacy. I don’t know – maybe if Der Movement concentrated more on Codreanu and less on Mishima, it might learn something.  But, alas, the lure of debasing themselves before the Altar of Asia is too much – the Japanese man must have priority.  I’ll note that it seems like Mishima fetishism in the “movement” rises and falls concomitantly with the interest in HBD; there’s probably a cause-and-effect relationship there.

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

Astonishing.  


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.