Category: Jews are not White

Common Sense Fetishist and Other News

More “movement” stupidity (redundancy).  In all cases, emphasis added.

“Common Sense Counselor” – another deranged fetishist. Good sense from “Cascadia Patriot” answered by the usual fossilized dogma by Der Flabby Irishman:

Cascadia Patriot
Ashkenazi Jews are not a “European tribe”. They are a mixed-Race people with varying degrees of White-European admixture. For a large percentage, and for many, the admixture is likely to be mostly from the last 300 to 400 years or so. Prior to that they were a much more insulated and separated community throughout Europe (minor exceptions are usually the case though). They still have varying degrees of descent from ancient Near Eastern and Middle Eastern peoples who came into Europe over the last 2000 years or so.
Common Sense Counselor
I do not want to quibble, but can the same be said for Italians and Slavs?

No, you stupid bastard.  And Slavs, for christssakes?  That’s what you get when an ex-libertarian flabby retard imbibes “movement” dogma.

See this, ignorant moron. The Ashkenazim are a mix of Middle Eastern, Southern European (mostly Italian), and Eastern European (Slavic).  So, if “Italians and Slavs” are mixed race mongrels according to your Irish racial purity (so admired by Der Movement, no doubt, Anglocentric American racialism historically being known for being pro-Irish), then I suppose that makes the Ashkenazim doubly-mixed mongrels, eh?

The fetishist is answered by the original poster:

Cascadia Patriot

@Common Sense Counselor No. Neither have widespread and significant admixture from the Near East and Middle East. Both are indigenous to Europe, unlike the origins of Ashkenazi Jews, and have a very similar 7,000 to 10,000 year history in their genetics, again, which the Ashkenazi only have due to relatively recent admixture (last 400 years or so) from Europeans. It’s been shown in studies that a fairly low percentage have a fairly low amount of admixture from non-European non-Whites (some Italians and some Slavs). Also, if you look up 3 dimensional PCA diagrams on Racial genetics they all cluster close in the White-European family.  

Southern and Eastern Europeans are on the peripheries so obviously there will be more outliers and ancient “frontier” and borderline mixtures. But the same can be said for others and all of this is the argument the anti-Whites use to say that the White-European sub-Race doesn’t exist. Which is nonsense and we just have to do our best to maintain what we’ve had for many thousands of years now.

See this.

The only thing that is permanent is the mark that one makes on the world with one’s deeds. Everyone wants to live well, of course, but it is better to live effectively: to live so that one is remembered for what one has accomplished.

And to put a little finer edge on the concept, it is not just fame in itself which is important. What counts also is the type of fame, the type of renown. The goal was to be remembered not just for being able to throw a spear farther than others or to swing a battle-ax harder or to use a sword more skillfully; it was to be remembered for having lived a meaningful life, a significant life. For some that meant a life of accomplishment, of changing the world; for others it meant a life lived as closely as possible in accord with the ideals of personal honor and of service to one’s people, so that one’s life could be held up as a model and remembered as such.

Superiority is not a birthright; superiority must be earned.

Burger King is an international terrorist organization.  That is not sarcasm. It is a logical extrapolation of their call to use their products for political violence. Why doesn’t anyone on the British Right sue them for godssakes?

Close down Burger King. Arrest their CEO and Board of Directors for promoting international terrorism.

Advertisements

A Purebred Son of Europe

As much an Aryan as the good and great Professor Hart, no doubt.

So, here we see a Jew named Letzter complaining about ancestry testing variability, even though, as we shall see, he is benefiting from parental privilege.

The thing I find interesting is the 23andMe results – he tests as 100% Ashkenazi Jewish, which the company labels as “100% European.”  A purebred son of Europe!  More of a purebred than Spencer and Johnson, eh?

Now, the alert reader is probably wondering – if the Ashkenazi genepool is ~ 50% (modern) Middle Eastern, how can someone who is 100% Ashkenazi be 100% European?

Well, let’s trace the “logic” of 23andMe here, and the “logic” of those that take such test results seriously while onanistically and breathlessly discussing the data on Amren comments threads.

First, we have a specific narrow ethnic group being well represented among the parental (or reference) samples used to determine genetic affiliation.

Second, a member of that group gets tested, and since he is essentially being compared to himself, he gets a result of 100% membership in that group (*).

Third, 23andMe decides to label that group as “European;” hence, the individual is “100% European”- obviously nonsense from a genetic-historical perspective.

This tells us two things about ancestry testing as offered by the various companies:

1. The results obtained are exquisitely sensitive to, and dependent upon, the available parental populations – the choices of the reference samples used.

2. The superficial interpretation of the results, particularly for normie and Nutzi nitwits, is going to be influenced by the choice of labels that a company decides to use for given ancestral components.

Considering the second point, 23andMe could have just as easily labelled Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry as “Middle Eastern,” or perhaps (and most accurately) given it its own category separate from both European and Middle Eastern.

More importantly, consider the first point.  A thought experiment – what if there were no Jewish parental population samples, and Ashkenazi Jews had to be analyzed using non-Jewish parental populations?  Then, instead of being “100% Ashkenazi Jewish,” such Jews would get results indicating they are a mix of Middle Eastern, Southern European, and Eastern European.

I trust that people with a triple digit IQ see the underlying problem here, and why parental privilege is such a big issue with these tests.  A person’s fundamental results, and the public perception of “purity,” is going to drastically differ dependent upon whether their narrow ethny (or ethnies) is included as a parental population or not. When Ashkenazi Jews are included as parentals, people of such ancestry will get results such as “100% Ashkenazi Jewish” (*) – labeled as “100% European” – but if the Ashkenazim were not included as a parental population, then those same people, with their same genomes, would now be interpreted as mixtures of various other groups.

Thus, the outcome of the measurement is fully dependent upon how the measurement is conducted – Bohr and Heisenberg could have fit in well with 23andMe and the other testing companies.

And idiots who take the companies’ reporting of results at face value, without considering all of these points, are just that – idiots.

*Yes, the first iteration of Letzter’s results had his Ashkenazi percent in the “low 90s.” That is still remarkably good and indicative of someone with parental privilege, a person deriving from a specific ethny well represented in the parental population base. Consider that for the somewhat broader British/Irish category, also well represented as parentals, Derbyshire got only ~ 70%, although the strong representation of other Northwestern European samples covered him very well at the regional level. If 23andMe had a well-represented specific English category, Derbyshire’s main ancestry percentage would have been higher.  

The bottom line is that “low 90s” for a single ethnic group is a great match, and 100% obviously cannot be improved upon.  Derbyshire’s results are not as good from the single group perspective, but from a regional/subracial basis, he’s also a parental privilege beneficiary – his entire ancestry is covered by groups represented as parentals and labeled in the “European” category.  

As an extremely important aside, I would strongly suspect that both Derbyshire as well as Letzter would have a very low “unassigned” percentage at the highest (90%) confidence level of the 23andMe test. Such a low percentage would indicate that there is excellent parental population coverage for the person’s entire ancestry. The difference between, Letzter and Derbyshire is that the good parental population coverage for Letzter is highly specific (Ashkenazi Jewish) while for Derbyshire is its more diffuse with broader groups (British/Irish and other closely related Northern and Western European ethnies). The relatively greater advantage for Letzter is indicative of both the obsession with Jewish genetics (and thus the availability of Ashkenazi parentals) and the high level of distinctiveness of the Ashkenazi genepool.  

Even apart from the issue of how the company decides to label ancestral components, the validity of 23andMe results at the lower confidence levels is, in my opinion and consistent with logic, going to be correlated to the amount of “unassigned”  ancestry at the highest confidence level.  Indeed, for those people with low  “unassigned” at 90% confidence, it is very likely that their 50% and 90% confidence results will be quite similar – an obvious impossibility for those people getting in the range of ~ 30-50% “unassigned”  at the 90% level.

A Message for Eric Kaufmann

A brief message.

Following up on this, we read this:

Eric Kaufmann was born in Hong Kong and raised in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. His ancestry is mixed with a quarter Chinese and a quarter Latino. His father is of Jewish descent…

So, the person advising on how to ease the anxiety of Whites so that they can be more easily (slowly) dispossessed and, eventually, race-replaced by mixed-race individuals, is himself mixed-race and half-Jewish. I’m shocked, shocked, I say.

So, here is a brief message for Kaufmann:

Dear Sir,

I do not know your level of sincerity concerning your work on White interests. Regardless, taken to its logical conclusion, and from your own words, the ultimate outcome of Whites following your advice is their slow but inevitable demographic eclipse and their race replacement by a mixed-race population.

I note that your own ancestry is described as “mixed with a quarter Chinese and a quarter Latino. His father is of Jewish descent.”  Even if we were to assume that the “Latino” is Euro-Iberian, then that still leaves 75% of your ancestry of non-European descent. Therefore, by the standards of those who most closely exemplify the pursuit of White interests you pontificate about, you are not “White.”

Very well, you have the right to express your opinion.  So do I.  And my opinion, expressed here, is the same that I have expressed toward other non-Whites attempting to interfere with the expression of White interests by Whites.  

Whites have their own internal debates, their own conflicts (ethnicity, sub-race, religion, etc.), their own consideration of different strategies, and their own concerns. These are OUR affairs, not yours.  These are OUR conflicts, not yours. These are OUR debates, not yours.  And these are OUR interests, not yours.

How Whites relate to each other, how Whites decide to work together (or not), how Whites decide to strategize (or not) in defense of their own interests, that is something for US to do, not you.  Ultimately, WE have to be the arbiters of OUR fate. OURSELVES ALONE.

And, no, we do not need, or want, non-Whites with their every “helpful” advice, telling us that our best option is to slow down our displacement, replacement, and destruction; that we are “dying of Whiteness;” promoting intra-White division; that we need alliances with Asians in which Whites must grovel before their Yellow and Brown masters; that we must have a multiracial “White separatist state;” that we are akin to child molesters and are “latrine flies;” that we must accept the “racial status quo;” that racial preservation for its own sake is “insane;” that we must have a “Red State nation” that accepts “conservative Blacks;” etc. 

Maybe, sir, you can take your advice to Israel, and suggest to the Jews there how they can accommodate their eventual race replacement by Arabs through an increased short-term focus on Jewish interests (hard to say how they can go beyond what they already have), or you can go to China and spread a similar message there – although, contra Frost and the “Arctic Alliance” crowd, the Chinese are hardly in any danger of race replacement.  But, wherever you go and whatever you do, we can do without your proffered chalice, dripping as it is with carefully concealed poison.

Whatever the outcome of the White racial problem, I do not believe the outcome is going to be pleasant for the likes of you. If you are wrong, and Whites quietly go to extinction without any expression of self-interest, then the resulting Colored dystopia will ultimately not be of benefit for the Coloreds themselves.

What if you are correct about the situation? That you are correct that it is untenable to suppress the expression of self-interest by a group whose demographic majority is disappearing? Let’s say I agree with you – even the White omega race may well become ever more demanding of their racial self-interest.  Where I disagree with you is with the idea that this discontent can be effectively managed through a safety valve release of controlled, moderate expression of racial self-interest. 

As Suvorov wrote – revolutions do not occur during the time of greatest repression, but when that repression is suddenly relaxed.  Louis XVI learned that, as did Gorbachev. Once the expression of White racial interests is legitimized, once the pent-up fury of a wronged people begins to be released, how can it be safely controlled? Once the genie is out of the bottle, and the toothpaste is out of the tube, can everything be safely be put away again once things begin to spiral out of control?

The future is chaos. And your stage-managed attempt at orderly White extinction will only add to that chaos. Enjoy.

Best regards,

Ted Sallis

Thursday News

More stupidity.

Not bad, Ann, not bad.  What?  It only took you 3.5 years to realize the same thing I was saying back in mid-2015.  A one, a one, a one-two-three….

23andMe retardation – if Jews are distinct from Europeans, then why does your company list Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry as “European?”  You admit that they’re distinct yet you still place them there.  This is proof positive that (1) labels given by testing companies have no connection to objective reality; and (2) they know that what they are doing is wrong, but they still do it.

At this point, I think the companies should just label ancestral components with neutral labels – e.g., “A,B, C, D, E, etc.” and then we can observe what combination of components are diagnostic of different ethnies.  But, alas, while that would be more objective, it wouldn’t be good for sales now, would it?

Have fun!  After all, why shouldn’t the Strzok types have access to “hater” DNA?  What could go wrong?

In an email to its users on Sunday, the company’s president, Bennett Greenspan, defended the agreement with the F.B.I. but apologized for not revealing it sooner.

Another thing I’ve noticed is the following.  Say that Population A is one of the categories listed on a company’s ancestral breakdowns.  Population A we know is composed of individual ethnic groups U,V, X, X,Y,Z.  So, A is a regional or sub-racial group.  Then, the company will state that ancestry from Population C is a component of the ancestry of Population A, but then show individuals of A ancestry represented as composites of A and C.

Here we see the problem.  If C is part of the genepool of A, and A is a separate category with its own designation, then how can members of A be A+C if C is already considered part of A?  You can wave hands around and say that some people have more C than is the average of A, but if you follow the logic of the company’s designation that doesn’t seem like the fundamental explanation.  After all, if they say that C is a component of A and is typically seen with A and if A is its own category, then any C that is part of A should simply be part of the identity of A and should not be reported separately.  The C cannot be at the same time part of, and separate from, A.

I believe that the real solution to this problem is that Population A is being identified with a parental population that is mostly composed of U, or maybe U and V, and the other ethnic components of A are ignored as parental populations. If the ancestral origins of X has more C than does the origins of U, and if A is being defined as U, then X is going to equal some portion of U and some portion of C. However, the U is used to define A, so X becomes A+C, even though C is a component of A.

Solutions to this is could be to include all the components of A as parentals for A, or simply rename A as U and stop pretending that it is broader than U, or have X as a separate population label with its own parental population.  But to continue pretending that although A = U it is suitable for the totality of U-Z is inappropriate, and will lead to paradoxical results and interpretations.

My question at this point is whether the companies understand this (if they do not – that is frightening) or whether they simply do not want to confuse customers (and lose potential sales by being upfront about the important nuances of interpretation – which would be contemptible).

But, hey, it’s all good for folks with names like Greenspan, so what’s not to like?

Whither Jewish Genetics

Labels do not represent reality.

Gee…now that Amren has covered this, what about this (emphasis added):

Recent genomic studies that have identified a component of distinctive ancestry for Jewish individuals have largely focused on Ashkenazi Jews sampled in the United States in relation to the broader European-American population [7, 8, 9, 10], finding most recently that individuals with even partial Ashkenazi ancestry can be detected on the basis of principal components analysis [10]. Our study furthers the results of these studies by showing that a distinctive component of genomic ancestry extends to Jewish populations more broadly.

A simple explanation for the clustering of the Jewish populations is that this pattern is the consequence of shared ancestry with an ancestral Middle Eastern group…Bayesian clustering with Structure assigns the Jewish populations and the Palestinians to the same cluster (Figure 2), and by the relatively close placement of the Palestinians and the Jewish populations in MDS plots of individual distances (Figure 5). This genetic similarity, which is supported by several previous studies [12, 65, 66], is compatible with a similar Middle Eastern origin of the Jewish populations and the Palestinians.

I guess not.  More likely is perhaps an analysis of the hora-dancing genes of Romanians.  As I’ve said before, it is the inconsistency I find objectionable. If you want to talk about Iberian ancestry, all well and good, but then you should talk about Jewish ancestry as well.  If you focus on the former while always studiously ignoring the latter then people will justifiably question why.

Also, consider this – some ancestry testing companies, including 23andMe, label Ashkenazi Jewish genetics as “European;” thus, to them, 100% Ashkenazi Jewish = 100% European.  In other words, a Middle Eastern ethnic group that has some European admixture, a group with genetic similarity to Palestinians, is considered “European” (presumably because the most recent historical location of this ethny was scattered among the peoples of Europe, just as are the Roma).

On the other hand, authentic indigenous European ethnies that are not adequately represented by parental population samples are described as a mix of mostly European with some “admixture,” despite the fact that it would make more ethnic-historical sense to label the genepools of those ethnies as “100% European” than it would to label the Palestinian-like Ashkenazi genepool as “100% European.”

Thus, a company has adequate Ashkenazi parental population coverage (Jews are always analyzing their own genetics, so there’s plenty of data for Jewish genetic normalization) and decides, arbitrarily, to label this ethny as European, so – presto! – they are “European,” while other populations that are indigenous to Europe, and whose genepools should therefore be described as European, are instead represented as composites of whatever populations that happen to be in the company’s parental sample base.

It is a complete inversion of reality, absolute madness.

On the great Jack Vance – a thousand times better than Tolkien.

The God Emperor is kosher indeed. MIGA – Make Israel Great Again

This will, of course, do nothing but make the HBD Alt Wrong support Trump all the more.

Hey, Strom, do you still think that “Putin is playing a deep game?”

Wrong, wrong, they’re always wrong.

Sallis: Right, right, he’s always right.

But, ah, it really doesn’t matter, does it?

The thing that annoys me about all these fellows is that they can never admit being wrong.  That hints at some flaw of character.  Perhaps they believe that admitting error shows weakness, but I believe the opposite – a refusal to admit obvious error is what demonstrates weakness.

Speaking of the syndrome of grossly mistaken hero worship, here’s cuck nagger Steve King.

And speaking of always being wrong, the “movement” – having learned nothing from Nixon, Reagan, Ron Paul, Putin, and Trump – is now championing Tulsi – The Yeastbucket on Pacific Island Coconut Tree Syndrome.

Der Movement’s affirmative action program is real and it is destructive – thanks a lot readers for enabling it.

Fisking the Epistles

Ripostes to Zman.

I will very briefly comment on the anti-Semitism epistle, before looking at the Alt Right issue in more detail

This is grossly disappointing, but not surprising from these HBD-oriented types.  Most of the arguments are similar to those of Cofnas, and have been, in that context, addressed by others.  Here I concentrate on the ending:

Obviously, my resistance to antisemitism is not based in ignorance of the material or fear of the morality police. The real issue for me is that anti-Semites taste Jews in their sandwich. They are like a man who has only mastered how to use a hammer. He sees every problem as a nail. In the case of anti-Semites, everything is blamed on the Jews to the point of absurdity. It seems to me that in order to be an anti-Semite, one has to commit their life to it, like joining the priesthood or a religious cult. It must define one’s life.

This is not only wrong, but so obviously wrong it is almost ludicrous.  By mainstream standards, an anti-Semite is simply someone reasonably critical of Jews, someone who knows the answer to the Jewish Question, someone who essentially agrees with MacDonald’s position on the Jews.  While it is true that some “anti-Semites taste Jews in their sandwich” and are obsessive in their single-mindedness, that is not a prerequisite to being an “anti-Semite.”  Being “Jew aware” is simply one component of a well-balanced and informed activist life, it need not “define one’s life.”  I may well be labelled an anti-Semite by most (*), but readers of this blog know I take a nuanced and complex view of the race issue, and certain do not blame everything on “the Jews.”  Zman basically is knocking down a strawman here; it is dishonest.  If anti-Semitism is the hammer in the activist toolkit, it is quite possible to also know how to master the use of screwdrivers and wrenches.  This argument by Zman is just plain stupid.

While I bear no ill will to those of you who have become anti-Semites, I just don’t think it is the place for me. My group evolutionary strategy, as it were, is to enjoy the fullness of life, even the parts that are not so good. Obsessing over Jews all the time seems like a waste of time. If there comes a time when I have to obsess over Jews all the time, then I’ll do what I must, but for now, I have lots of other things that interest me. No hard feelings and I wish you luck in your business, as long as it does not interfere with my business.

This is even more stupid.  How does “enjoying the fullness of life” have to do with being aware of, and honest about, the character and influence of the Jewish people, and their effect on White racial interests? He makes it sound like facing facts about Jews is going to spoil his fun, so he would rather be willfully ignorant (contrary to his assertion that ignorance of the material is not part of his attitude) than have a stray dark cloud obscure, even for a moment, the sunny bliss of his life’s enjoyment.  And again, he conflates, in a dishonest fashion, being an “anti-Semite” with “obsessing over Jews all the time.”  What is it about these HBD types that they are so obstinate?

By all accounts, the alt-right is at a crossroads. The movement that started as an internet phenomenon and blossomed into a full-blown political force in the 2016 election….

Full-blown political force?  Nonsense.  Fantasy.

…has stumbled in the past year. Most people peg the start of the trouble at the Charlottesville riots, which were used to paint the alt-right as a bunch of torch wielding Nazis. Others put the blame on the personalities and their endless bickering. Of course, the troubles are exaggerated, but there’s no doubt that the movement is in a difficult patch.

Exaggerated?  Merely a “difficult patch?”  It’s much worse than that.  And deservedly so.  A full-blown collapse is more like it.

In order for the alt-right to get out of the ditch and become an effective political voice, the leaders of the various groups within the alt-right have to stop screwing up. The number of unforced errors over the last year, by big names in the alt-right, leave people with the impression the movement is not serious. 

Err…the reason that people have that “impression” is because it is true.  Come on now. Pepe?  Kek?  People attacking the idea of uniforms and then going to a rally dressed as if it were a cosplay comic convention?  Half-drunk podcasts?  Juvenile sniggering?  Mindless Trump worship?  When was any of that serious?

Leaders need to be something more than gags on-line. They have to be a respectable face to a skeptical public. That means being careful and prudent in their public actions. That’s not what has happened over the last year.

Because we have failed leaders, chosen by their misfit Type I followers according to strict affirmative action rules.  Garbage in, garbage out.

The first thing the alt-right needs to do is figure out how it got tangled up with people who turned out to be unstable or unreliable. 

Your answer. [Since originally writing this essay, the video in question has been deleted by the System.  And that is in essence the point – all the sound and fury of the Alt Right, and we are worse off than we were two years ago]

Starting with Charlottesville, that has been the thread running through all of the stumbles. There’s always a wacko involved. Whether it was a “crying Nazi” at Charlottesville or a tubby cuckold at Michigan, the source of trouble has been people who should never have been given a place at the table. You cannot make up with enthusiasm what you lack in prudence, maturity and intelligence.

“…you lack in prudence, maturity and intelligence.”  That lack is the defining characteristic of “movement” leadership.  Indeed, possessing prudence, maturity and intelligence would be disqualifying, right?

Fringe politics can be a lonely place, so it is tempting to welcome everyone, but this is why the Libertarian Party is full of goofballs. The trick is to avoid the temptation to embrace all comers and be skeptical of converts. 

Some are sincere and full of enthusiasm. These are the foot soldiers that add energy to a movement. Some are attention whores, looking for a cheap stage. Others are unstable loudmouths who like turmoil. A little skepticism about the new converts allows the movement leaders to avoid getting mixed up with nutjobs.

What happens when the “leaders” are nutjobs themselves?  

Another way of not inviting the troubles of others into your movement is to not get too close to the other movements. Quiet alliances can be quietly dissolved when they become inconvenient. The alt-right, which largely appeals to college educated suburban males, had no business locking shields with groups like the Traditional Workers Party at public events. Their thing is not your thing and the best way to avoid conflict is to keep a healthy distance. That way, you don’t pay for their mistakes, as has been the case with the TWP.

No kidding.

That’s the other thing that has to be front and center. The groups that have been operating on the fringe for generations have been on the fringe because they are either doing something wrong or they like the fringe. It’s always wise to be cautious of the older groups trying to hitch their wagon to your star. Charlottesville was not about “uniting the right”. It was crabs in the bucket pulling you back down into the bucket with them. A successful mass movement, in this age, will be one that is free of those of the prior age.

I call “BS” on this.  While I am 100% in support of deconstructing the Old Movement and building a New Movement, the above paragraph implies that the Alt Right itself is something new and fresh, instead of merely the same old crap dressed up with “youth culture” and sprinkled with Bevis-and-Butthead sniggering.  The raises an important point.  Was the relatively greater success of the Alt Right (short-lived as it was) compared to “WN 1.0” due to better ideals and exaction or just finding itself in more propitious times?  More of the latter, I think.  Whites are mewling cowards, but even cowards will begin to fight back when their back is up against the wall and they are left with no other choice.  The rapidly degenerating racial situation is creating opportunities – opportunities for the most part wasted by Alt Right dimwits.  And the rise of Trump helped them – rather than saying the Alt Right helped elect Trump (a fantasy on par with Roissy’s caravans of Amish horse and buggies converging on voting centers), the truth is that Trump boosted the Alt Right.  If Trump hadn’t run, if we had a Jeb-Hillary election, likely no one outside of Der Movement, Antifa, and the “watchdog groups,” would have had the faintest idea of what the Alt Right is.  So stop making it seem like the wonderful Alt Right juggernaut was stopped by inferring “WN 1.0 Boomers.”  The “younger groups” ruined themselves.  And what’s left of the Alt Right today are people like Taylor who calls himself Alt Right even though he was a major “movement” figure when Spencer was still in high school, and groups like Identity Evropa, who have more in common with NA-style groups than with the Pepe/Kek crowd.

Dissident politics, like revolutionary politics, depends upon reliable communication and operational security. 

Operational security: “Are you Swedish?”  

In all ages, especially this age, these can come into conflict. Making yourself available to speak to the people, make you vulnerable, and not just physically vulnerable. It makes your message vulnerable to corruption by others beyond your control. Effective communications means controlling the message, which is why the people in charge invest so heavily in monopolizing the media platforms.

And as with all monopolies, the “customers” suffer.

Building your own media and supporting the media that supports you is the key. Here is a lesson that can be learned from the New Left. They avoided the mainstream press and instead relied on independent media. They would charge reporters for access to their events. In our age, it means never going on mainstream shows unless they are live, and never agreeing to print interviews. It also means not getting into fights with people on social media. You are the message. Your movement will judged by how you are judged.

Judged as failures.

This has the added benefit of not inviting attacks from the Left. The last year, from the perspective of an outsider, has looked like the alt-right picking a fight with the people in charge, only to be squashed like a bug. That’s bad optics. When you can’t even hold a luncheon for your people, without being harassed by the Left, it’s time to accept reality and become less public. The alt-right needs to be like an iceberg with a small public face above the water line and large rank and file underneath the water line.

Reality and Der Movement is like oil and water.  What else to expect from people who take seriously ramblings about “the Pyramids of Atlantis were built by psychokinesis.” 

Another thing the alt-right needs to understand is this is not 1920’s Germany or 1960’s America. The people in charge are not weak like the Weimar Republic and they are not complacent like the post-war American ruling class. The Nazis filled the vacuum left from the collapse of German ruling class after the war. The New Left was able to roll to victory because the people in charge at the time, were largely sympathetic and even a bit envious. Today, the people in charge are not weak and they are not sympathetic. 

Those movements are not good models for today’s fight. Brawling with state sponsored goons like Antifa is a fool’s errand. Antifa has the backing of the Left and all the money from the billionaires they need. Similarly, demanding to go on campus, on free speech grounds, hoping to shame the Left with their hypocrisy, does nothing but display a fundamental misunderstanding of the opponent. The people running the college campus know that game backward and forward. There’s no beating them at a game they designed.

Agreed.

A better model is something like Irish nationalism. Ultimately, they were effective when they combined a guerrilla movement that operated in the shadows and a political movement that kept its distance from the fighters. We’re not in a world of car bombings and targeted assassinations, but we are in an age when an energetic social media troll can wreak havoc on the prevailing narrative. A guy putting up “It’s OK To Be White” signs around a Progressive hive is the modern version of the car bomb. It does real damage.

Agreed.

That gets to the heart of why the alt-right has stumbled of late. The alt-right had momentum when one wing stuck to making sensible arguments about the demographic reality of our age and what it means for the future. Meanwhile, the other wing took these ideas and used them in the meme war and comment sections of web sites. The reason the people in charge are dumping comment sections and purging social media of anyone with a whiff of heresy is they fear this more than anything. The alt-right needs to get back to what works.

Problem: Did it ever really “work?”

This is a big subject that requires a lot more debate, but effective activism focuses on the effective, not on helping e-celebs get mentioned by Lefty. For dissidents, effective activism makes the strong side look weak and makes the dissidents look smart. If the organizers at Charlottesville had stopped at the Friday night event, and backed out of the rally on Saturday citing safety concerns, the ensuing riot would have been blamed on the other side. You would have effectively used their size against them by being clever.

You cannot expect half-drunk dimwits to be clever.

Of course, the alt-right could only have pulled off such a move at Charlottesville if it was better organized. The overall lack of organization is killing the alt-right. There has to be small local groups of people who trust one another and will cooperate with other local groups, as long as leadership trusts them. This is a basic organizing technique. There should be alt-right clubs all over the country. They should be social clubs that focus on the politics of our age. The alt-right leaders need to focus on this rather than making noise. 

Effective organizing means not airing your laundry on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram. One reason competent people are not going to want to help the cause is the ridiculous habit of drama queens from the alt-right making grand announcements on social media. When Evan McLaren wants to move on to other things, he should tender his resignation in private like a man, not post it on Twitter like he is Milo promoting some new media scheme. High quality people do not want any part of this. It has to stop.

Drama queens are derived from quota queens. Want quality leadership?  Put an end to Der Movement’s ethnic affirmative action program.  Anyone who doesn’t address that elephant in the room is being fundamentally dishonest (and will soon find that room full of elephant dung).

Finally, the leaders of the alt-right need to understand that in an information war, the message has to be effective against the target. When Mike Enoch says, “no one has a right to be around white people,” that is highly effective, because it states a simple truth in a way that gets the target audience to think of themselves as white. It speaks to people at a personal level. The whole point of the alt-right, allegedly, is to get white people to think of themselves as white. Anything that distracts from that must be avoided.

If that is the point of the Alt Right, then I’d advise them to behave in a way that also appeals to people over age 30.

Way back in the olden thymes, Buckley Conservatism got going because it spoke to the masses of people revolted by what they saw going on with the Left. Bill Buckley never would have amounted to anything if there was not a willing audience, waiting for someone to provide intellectual leadership. Whatever that brand of conservatism became in the long run, it started as a group of smart guys, who took their task seriously. Most important, they exploited an eager market looking for an alternative to what was emerging on the Left. 

The alt-right is in a very similar position. There are millions of white people looking around at what is happening in America, wondering why they are doing this to us. Fundamentally, and most importantly, the message of the alt-right is sound. It offers whites a reason to fight for their interests and cheer for their team. What must come next is a class of respectable spokesman and leaders who add weight to this message and organize people as a political force. It’s time for the alt-right leaders to take the next step or step aside.

They need to step aside and take their failed Alt Right brand with them.  These “leaders” and their brand were handed a golden opportunity with Trump, Trump’s election, and its aftermath.  They blew it. Big time.  While I realize that affirmative action and accountability are more or less orthogonal to each other, at some point accountability must be forced onto the quota queens.  They cannot be allowed to endlessly fail with impunity for time without end. Enough is enough.  It’s time for a change.

*Of course, according to the Silkers, I am a philosemitic Jew-lover, a tool of the Jews, someone who – in their own exact words – “sucks Jewish cock.”  That is because I reject their (wet) dream of Asians colonizing Whites nations with the borders of the West guarded by black-booted Chinese girls with guns.  Putting aside that Jews favor Asian immigration to the West, and that Israel is building close ties with both China and India, the demented nature of Silker lunacy should be apparent. To their “minds” anyone (White) who doesn’t pitifully grovel to Asians must, by some law of nature known only to them, pitifully grovel to Jews.  That it is possible to not pitifully grovel to anyone is not part of their ideology, it seems.

Silk Road Jews

Asians – including Jews – in the News.

But, she’s…HuWhite.  What’s the problem then?

The pro-Jewish Zman is worried about the likes of Goldberg; interesting that Zman is promoted by the anti-Jewish Johnson on Counter-Currents (*).  

South Asians news one.

South Asian news two.

I do not understand the problem the HBDers have with Chinese birth tourism. Isn’t such tourism simply increasing the proportion of the “American” population that is composed of “high-IQ cognitive elitists?”

If you object to the presence of Coloreds – including Asians – in the UK, then you are a “terrorist.”  By the way, who elected the current government of the UK?  Blame White Britons for that.

*Does anyone know what’s going on starting at 45:25 here?  If I hear the smirking Frenchman’s speech correctly, that’s “GBC?”  I did google it…the whole thing was and is bizarre.  If it is what I think it is, I’ll give credit to Johnson for handling it in the most mature manner possible under the circumstances; the Frenchman on the other hand behaved like a complete jackass.  That’s WN 2.0, I suppose.  Would WN 1.0 behave in such a manner?