Category: John Morgan

Behold the Cancer, Behold the Female, Behold Der Movement

In all cases, emphasis added.

Before we get to the women, something to consider:

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data, available through 2015, were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data, available through 2016, were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, 1,762,450 new cancer cases and 606,880 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Over the past decade of data, the cancer incidence rate (2006-2015) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% per year in men, whereas the cancer death rate (2007-2016) declined annually by 1.4% and 1.8%, respectively. The overall cancer death rate dropped continuously from 1991 to 2016 by a total of 27%, translating into approximately 2,629,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the racial gap in cancer mortality is slowly narrowing, socioeconomic inequalities are widening, with the most notable gaps for the most preventable cancers. For example, compared with the most affluent counties, mortality rates in the poorest counties were 2-fold higher for cervical cancer and 40% higher for male lung and liver cancers during 2012-2016. Some states are home to both the wealthiest and the poorest counties, suggesting the opportunity for more equitable dissemination of effective cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment strategies. A broader application of existing cancer control knowledge with an emphasis on disadvantaged groups would undoubtedly accelerate progress against cancer.

Note how health indicators mirror the sociopolitical-ethnoracial realities of America.  Given that America worships People of Color, and gives them every advantage over despairing, subaltern, low-caste Whites, it is not surprising that the “racial gap in cancer mortality” is decreasing, and that is occurring despite the poor lifestyle choices of Coloreds, including the observable fact that the typical Black female has a Googolplex BMI. On the other hand, “socioeconomic inequalities [in cancer] are widening.”  So, if socioeconomic inequalities are widening at the same time racial gaps are narrowing, this suggests the cancer burden is increasingly on middle-class, lower-middle class, and poorer Whites, likely from red states, and from the “poorest counties” in such states. This is all consistent with the Global Elite-Colored Alliance against Whites, manifested in cancer rates – the wealthy and the Coloreds doing better, and Whitey – squeezed between “socioeconomic inequalities” and Colored empowerment – doing worse. They are literally killing our race.

The only surprising thing from the social standpoint is the greater improvement in the situation for men compared to women – most likely explained by the inability of the System’s anti-male regime to compensate for the rampant obesity, promiscuity, etc. of women.  Note obesity is linked to many cancers, and some cancers are caused by sexually transmitted viruses.  Also, we need to have a racial breakdown of these sex differences. It may be that White women – despite all their faults – are doing better, but this is compensated by higher cancer rates and mortality among female Coloreds, for reasons stemming from lifestyle choices and genetic differences.

A Roissy commentator:

And the silly, age-old (lol) question that older women always ask me: “How can you be interested in young(er) women? What do you have in common?” I have to imagine that they are not totally clueless that men want younger women for their better/fresher looks, tighter skin/firmer bodies, more energy, generally better personalities, and (most important) their fertility.

As I have said here a few times, men should not, if possible, marry women their own age. That is what supports the boner-medicine industry. Most men can get erections, it is just that they cannot get them for their old wives or gfs, but aren’t black pilled enough (or feel to guilty) to recognize/acknowledge that truth. Older women simply have very little, to no, sexual capital. It has all been spent (in many cases, wasted away). Give these older men a younger woman and….BOINNNNNNG! Feminist society and the pharmaceutical industry instead want to blame the man for his failure to get/maintain an erection, instead of focusing on the object of his attempts. It’s bullshit. Men in their 20’s and thirties should date women 5-10 years younger than them. Men in their 40’s and above should date women at least 10 years younger than them. If marriage is in the forecast, the age difference should be 10 years. You’ll thank me for this advice, if you take it, when you are 40+, when your younger wife still gets you hard.

Finally, I have seen many older women who are beautiful, in their own way, when they have class and a sense of noble pride, but that should not be confused with sexual attraction to them.

One can speculate about female bitterness about “hitting the wall” explaining some of the crazed “extreme cat lady” SJW nuttiness of many older women (Warren being a perfect example).  We all have to suffer because they are being ignored by men?

This brings up another issue: Advice to younger White male readers here about marriage.  I am of two minds here.  On a collectivist level – what is good for the race – then family formation and reproduction is important, and, yes, get married.  From an individualist level – personal happiness and actualization – getting married (and all that comes after) will be by far the biggest life mistake you will ever make.  So, you need to make a choice: Race or Self.  If you value the former higher, then “take one for the team” and become another miserable man with a ring through his nose; if you value the latter, avoid marriage like the plague. For the latter men, if you are younger and can’t do without female companionship, then I suppose you can become a jackass gamester, a nihilistic sexual hedonist.  If you are made of sterner stuff – MGTOW – avoid the yeastbuckets completely.  Know thyself – and then make the correct life decision.  MGTOW – combined with men’s rights activism – is preferable to being a gamester jackass.

Compared to the rest of most of the Far Right, at least I’m being honest with you on this issue.  They’ll just tell you – “get married and have White children.”  You DO need to know the costs involved.  Balance benefits (of course the largest personal benefit is the massive fitness boost in your individual genetic continuity) and the costs.

In support of this, see some of the AOC quotes here.  Speaking of “the wall” as it pertains to females (is that what Trump has really been talking about all this time?), AOC has hit the wall (and hard) at age 29.  That may explain much as well.  The obvious connection to White interests and EGI requires us all to speak out on this issue.

In a normal society, aging women can distract themselves from their zeroing-out SMV by focusing on their grandchildren.  Note to older females – your unmarried daughter’s cats are not your grandchildren.

The yeastbuckets are well on their way to destroying the field of economics.  And I won’t even get into the whole hysterical co-ed vs. Trevor Bauer Twitter feud, except to state:

1. White and Jewish athletes were tweeting each other.

2. A young White female stuck her nose (or another body part) into the conversation, insulting the White athlete (of course).

3. The White athlete counter-attacked.

4. White female then publicly claims “harassment,” says her “last three days have been ruined,” gives newspaper interviews, and contacted his team in order to get him into trouble.

Lots of “agency” there, right Greg?  A new Joan of Arc, ready to lead the White race into battle? By the way, these white-knighting news stories always tend to omit that not only did she attack him first, but ALSO stated that he was like a “16 year old girl on her period” (projecting much?).  

Once again, John Morgan emerges as the voice of reason in the pathetic dumpster fire that Counter-Currents has become.  Where is Johnson digging up this new crop of writers?  Are they scraped off the side of a toilet bowel in a men’s room in Grand Central Station?  I won’t even mention Chad Crowley’s latest “effort.” My prediction that Counter-Currents will become the new Majority Rights is coming to pass.  

Hey, Roissy, dishonesty by omission is still dishonesty:

Hey, Jeff, you little pissant wall-eyed value-eating slave labor-loving wage-gutting nation-wrecking globohomo nerdo, was the tranny blowjob worth it? Asking for a friend named Donald Trump.

HAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

***

Some thoughts on the Bezos Bimbo.

News is out (thanks to Trump’s friends at the National Enquirer) that Bezos cheated on his wife of two decades and had an affair with a 49-year-old woman sporting staypuft lip injections. That’s her above, Lauren “dirty” Sanchez. She is the wife of a friend of the Bezos’. The timeline is murky, but the latest reporting suggests Bezos was slamming Slamchez while both were still married, but you know how these satanic cult elite marriages are arranged to allow for “managed indiscretions”.

There were questions if the Bezos marriage blew up because Jeffy or his wife stepped out, but now we know — the rich husband cashed in his inflating SMV. The cosmic order remains in balance, and we may enjoy the spectacle of TDS sufferer Bezos getting his name dragged through the mud.

Bezos has been looking jacked since Trump became President. It’s known that lifting will raise testosterone levels, and higher T will increase the risk of infidelity (jacked up muscles => jacked up libido). I wouldn’t be surprised if Bezos has more than one mistress in his closet that he acquired after he started throwing the iron.

It was Roissy (if I remember correctly, channeling the MPF crowd_ who publicly stated that Bezos will do a “hard right turn politically” now that he was “jacked.”  How’s that production turning out?  About as well as the lifelong liberal Democrat Jack Nicholson as a prospective political “alpha shitlord?”

Wrong, wrong, they’re always wrong.

Advertisements

Support Glen Allen and Other Issues

In der news.

MacDonald and I are in perfect accord here.

Let’s see.  You can donate to support Allen’s suit, a fight against pure evil:

Beirich, Potok, et al. don’t even pretend to engage in honest debate and the free flow of ideas. Atty. Allen quotes Potok: “We see this [as a] political struggle, right? … I mean, we’re not trying to change anybody’s mind. We’re trying to wreck the groups, and we are very clear in our head, … we are trying to destroy them.” And in this case, the attempt to destroy Allen goes far beyond ethical and legal norms — not surprising given the SPLC’s sordid history of using smear tactics and hypocrisy (Section 31) as well as their dedication to fund-raising far beyond what they actually use to further their causes (Section 27).

Or you can support this.

Your choice.

The current crop of Counter-Currents writers are so bad, so superficial, so mediocre, that they make John Morgan sound like the voice of reason and maturity in comparison. 

Note also how the site is converging onto an Amren-VDARE HBD conservatism position.  Derb snug in his hobbit hole – with Madame “Rosie” throwing him some crumbs if he behaves.  “White advocates” and their “sweet business deals.”  The Brimelows and their tin cup poster children. What a shame.

More on this.

KMacD admits the Trump cheerleading – but where is the accountability?  Spencer is correct that the Republican Party is the major enemy and must be destroyed in order to break the logjam of cul-de-sac stagnation politics.  He is dishonest, or ignorant, when he says we were ALL on the Trump bandwagon, as readers of this blog know full well.  But, his overall instinct here is better than GOP-lover Quinn (see above) at the HBD-Conservative mainstreaming Counter-Currents site. The Sallis Strategy – destroy the cuckservative GOP. I laugh at the delusion of these Alt Righters that they are somehow responsible for Trump’s victory.  It’s exactly the opposite – the Trump campaign energized the idiotic Pepe-Kek brigade.

On the one hand, I agree with some of what Spencer said about optics.  But, on the other hand, his arrogance about his critics is just too much.  Yes, Rich, you are taller and a more successful womanizer than Anglin, better-looking than Weev, and more heroic than Vaughn.  Now, please concentrate on wisdom, maturity, judgment, and persistence, to complete the picture. Also a better understanding of the link between prominence and responsibility/accountability would help as well.

Another thing – according to Greg Johnson, Spencer is a terrible human being, unethical, destructive to the “movement,” etc., and he has no patience for supporters and enablers of Spencer.  So, what does he have to say about Edwards and MacDonald positively engaging Spencer in this podcast?

This is not “Sallis being a troublemaker.”  This is an important question of character and moral ethics.  Consider a group of prominent dissidents.  Person A publicly and repeatedly reviles Person B, attacking B’s morals, character, behavior, and contributions to the cause; Person A also accuses Person B of being involved in personal smears against A.  Thus, A is 100% against B.  Very well.  But then Persons C, D, etc. come in, freely associate with B, give B a platform, and take B seriously as a leader, fully enabling B and what B stands for. Now, what is going to be Person A’s position vis-à-vis Persons C and D, etc.?  Consider further Person A establishing a record of being intolerant of criticism, even from third parties who have no connection whatsoever to Person B.  Is A going to look the other way regarding the B-C-D association?  Is it all “politics” with no ethical considerations involved?  I realize that I may be an overly idealistic, and non-pragmatically apolitical moralpath, but how can anyone take A and his attitude toward B seriously if A ignores all of the above?

I see this as an important issue.  

Sallis right gain: I’ve been saying for years that Trump needs to stop the jackass tweets and do televised addresses.  The good news is that he did it and, surprisingly, didn’t make a total fool of himself.  The bad news is that he, expectedly, did a mediocre job of it.

A very true statement:

China, for example, doesn’t develop weapons; it copies designs stolen from others.

Copy, copy, copy, steal, steal, and steal.  Steal and copy, copy and steal.

But the Chinese can do a lot with that stolen and copied technology, particularly as the West collapses under the weight of “diversity” and moral qualms about using the technology. Further, the West is hobbled by the attitudes of Luddite freaks like Tolkien and all those who fetishize “traditionalism.”

The Zman:

Eric Hoffer made the observation that people involved in causes never reach a point where they say the cause has achieved its goals and therefore can disband and cease its activities. For example, anti-smoking zealots have accomplished all that can be accomplished, yet they persist.

Yes, because as we know, no one smokes any more.  As we know, no one is ever again going to die of smoking-affected disease.  As we know, you can never again have that wonderful experience of walking down the street after someone smoking and be asphyxiated by their noxious fumes.

Saturday Stupidity

In all cases, emphasis added.

Recent technological developments in China have made keen observers marvel at their ingenuity and, also, feel somewhat surprised at their achievements and their plans for the future. In particular, the news that China intended to launch artificial moons to replace expensive and unsustainable street lighting was something that really forced people to take notice. These new moons work simply by reflecting the sun’s light, much like the actual moon does, but in a directed fashion that enables humans to control where and when the light appears. We’re always led to believe that China is the world’s leading culprit when it comes to polluting the atmosphere and contributing to climate change, which they are at present, but with measures such as these, they’re laying the foundations for a more sustainable future. In 30 years’ time, when the West is still bickering within about the Paris Climate Accord, China will have surpassed everybody as the world’s most green nation state. Additionally, China has recently hit the headlines for developing a new sun. Sounds ridiculous? It’s a reality. China has developed a device that can reach temperatures of 100 million degrees Celsius – the actual sun’s core burns at a slightly less impressive 15 million degrees. This project is part of a process undertaken by the Chinese government to better understand nuclear fusion, with a view to using it to replace less sustainable energy sources in the future.

While the Chinese are doing all of that, we’ll be following the advice of Tolkien and Johnson, rejecting technology, and enjoying all the “de facto anarchy in the provinces” while we are “snug in our hobbit hole.”  

Seriously, though, a fundamental plank in the New Movement Platform proposed at Western Destiny is “Futurism, not Traditionalism.”  One reason why the Right always loses is that it is constantly trying to recapture a lost past, rather than trying to conquer the coming future.  

Speaking of the Chinese, we have their vocal pet, man-on-a leash “measured groveling” Derbyshire. He’s an “Anglo-Saxon supremacist” don’t you know.  He could have produced more Anglo-Saxons by choosing a co-ethnic wife, but I suppose the “awkward squad” personality (so designated by his own mother) reduced the choice to “Rosie.”

The document I’m mainly drawing on here was posted at quora.com in August 2018 by Philip Yip, who describes himself as Administrator for the CANZUK Facebook Group. [Why don’t the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK form an Anglosphere union?, Quora.com, August 25, 2018] Yip, I note in passing, is a Cantonese surname, so presumably Philip Yip is of Hong Kong Chinese descent—mildly interesting by itself in this context.

There’s a place for “Rosie” and the kids after all!  That’s what “HBD race realism” is all about, isn’t it?

Does New Zealand, for example, really want an inflow of British Muslim rape gangs or black British drug dealers?

Does America, for example, really want an inflow of British English illegal immigrants and their Chinese wives?

As is this answer to the Type I reply to Spencer:

That isn’t really what’s happening. It’s like an enemy nation producing a new fighter jet that makes ours look stupid and pointless. We stand in awe and recognize we need this in our brand.

Of course, EGI Notes was, as usual, months ahead of the “movement” curve” on this:

…by having clean-cut White men – including young counterparts of Ocasio-Cortez – running for political office on a platform, which while not full-throated White nationalism, is on the borderline of explicitly pro-White and further to the right, and more authentic, than Trump’s phony flim-flam.

We need energetic, charismatic, combative people, of all ages, but particularly the young, to get involved in politics and promote pro-White Far Right populism.  We do NOT need fussy “conservatives,” we do NOT need “HBD race realists,” and we do NOT need pro-Jewish cuckservative Luddite freaks like Tolkien and his hobbit-larping followers – we need “red meat” aggressive Far Right figures getting involved in the rough-and-tumble of politics.  Channeling “Mulatta Milkers” AOC, we can have young White men finding appropriate congressional districts and fighting an insurgent political campaign against dusty decrepit cuckservatives.

An alternate question: Does admitting the pseudoscientific falsehood of HBD endanger the “movement?”  Another question: Or does it just endanger “Rosie” and the GNXPers living in America?

An idiot who makes Evola look like James Watson by comparison.

In one of the footnotes, Schuon defends the phenomenon of black Africans mixing with Mediterranean whites in North Africa…

Why only in North Africa?  How about Southern Europe as well?  Or, by that time, will General Greg Cochran have led the Israeli army to victory there, solving the Swarthoid Problem through Jewish colonization?  Or is Southern Europe already genetically equivalent to Nigeria so that any further Negro influx would be superfluous?  And what if the “white” Berbers of North Africa reject the ever-so-helpful Germanic advice to engage in Negroid miscegenation?  Will they have a choice?  And what is a “Mediterranean white?”  Are there “Subarctic whites” – including both Yukio Mishima and David Bromstad, with the former “looking more white” than the latter?

An essay so bad that I’m even forced to agree with Morgan (in the comments section).

This shows that:

1. Many Europeans know absolute zero about America and Americans

2. Counter-Currents is becoming so putrid that even Morgan looks smart in comparison to the rest of the rotting corpse

3. Europeans who complain about “ignorant know-nothing Yanks” are hypocrites

Greg Johnson has his 2020 Presidential voting plan all set.

Spencer 2020!  A Pepe in every pot!

Delenda Est Traditionalism

Excerpts from a Morganian diatribe.  Emphasis added.

Of the major (and even several of the minor) European languages, the Traditionalist school of philosophy – that articulated by René Guénon and Julius Evola…

One of the most fascinating things about Type I nitwits is the juxtaposition of their fervent man-crush on Evola – which equals if not exceeds that which Roissy has for Trump – and their visceral disdain for Evola’s ethny.  The cognitive dissonance must be extreme.

…and their offshoots – was a latecomer in the Anglophone world. After the better part of a century of near-total obscurity, it was only thanks to the hard work of publishers such as Sophia Perennis, Inner Traditions, and World Wisdom (not to mention Counter-Currents!) that most of the writings of the Traditionalist school finally appeared in English and became known – in certain circles, at least – in recent decades.

To our detriment.

While this has been a major step forward…

Off a cliff.

…there is still a dearth of original, secondary works pertaining to the Traditionalist perspective in English. And most of what has been produced in English has focused exclusively on esotericism (particularly of the Islamic variety). What has been conspicuously absent have been works dealing with history, social issues, and politics from a Traditionalist point of view.

Compared to Rightist works dealing with those issues from a Futurist point of view, the mass of Traditionalist scribblings are akin to the grains of sands on a beach.

It’s not difficult to understand why, however, given that for a long time, Traditionalists have been operating under the guise of being purely concerned with religion and mysticism, remaining silent about the fact that Traditionalism in its complete form is one of the most – if not the most – reactionary current of thought that exists in the postmodern world. 

So, we want to promote and identify with a “reactionary current of thought?’’  You think you are going to inspire revolutionary activism and a reordering of society to your liking based upon backwards-gazing reactionary “traditionalism?”

This is of course a consequence of the fact that most Traditionalist thinkers today have opted for the safety of academic careers (something which Evola noted already in the 1950s and for which he expressed his contempt)…

A contempt not quite as intense as that of Der Movement for Evola’s ancestry.

…and thus want to avoid being called fascists. Their cover has been somewhat blown, however, as a result of Steve Bannon’s claim that Guénon was a crucial influence on him…

The anti-racist, anti-WN, civic nationalist Bannon.

…which has in turn led to some superficial and ill-informed propaganda from journalists using Traditionalism as a branding iron with which to mark both Bannon and Trump (by association) as fascists, by bringing attention to the connection between Evola and Guénon. (And Evola had the audacity to call himself a “superfascist,” so by the logic of the average half-witted journalist of today…

As opposed to the average quarter-witted “movement activist” of today.

…that makes Bannon and Trump really fascist!) It remains to be seen what the long-term consequences of this will be in terms of Traditionalism’s reception in the mainstream, although I’ve noticed that it’s become harder to find Evola and Guénon’s books on bookstore shelves these days. It may have the beneficial effect of forcing Traditionalists out of the realm of pure scholasticism and into putting their beliefs into practice, if academia ultimately becomes a hostile environment for them – which it inevitably will, if present trends continue. Time will tell.

Put your beliefs into practice!  Snug in your hobbit hole!

Dr. Wolfheze is not content to merely sit on the sidelines while his civilization is destroyed, justifying it by whining about “muh Kali Yuga.” 

Like Greg Johnson?

The book’s Preface is titled “Childhood’s End,” and in it Dr. Wolfheze briefly discusses the Arthur C. Clarke science fiction novel of the same name as being symptomatic of the post-war (in this case meaning the Second World War) mentality: namely, that the rapid and dramatic progression of science and technology are leading us towards an apocalypse that we cannot yet identify, but which still fills us with a sense of dread. 

Science and technology – BAD, BAD, BAD!  Being snug in your hobbit hole – with de facto anarchy in the provinces of course – GOOD, GOOD, GOOD!  Let’s leave dat dere scientific mumbo jumbo to the Chinese, we’ll get out in dem dere woods and munch on some twigs and branches. That’ll work out well – about as well as Evola “pondering his fate” during a Soviet artillery barrage and ending up in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.  Traditionalism!

Spoilers ahead; if you haven’t yet read the book but think that you might, skip to the next paragraph.) In that book, a near-future humanity is visited by an extraterrestrial civilization which helps to solve all of humanity’s problems, bringing about Utopia. The problem, as humanity soon learns, is that it turns out that it was the struggle to deal with those problems that gave their lives meaning, and having everything handed to them eventually leads to stagnation. It turns out that all of human history was merely a process leading us towards humanity’s real end, for which the aliens have come to act as midwives: evolving into a species of plain, anonymous children, all identical and part of a collective with no more distinguishing features than ants, but endowed with what we would consider to be superpowers. Ultimately, these children combine their forces and transform themselves into a non-corporeal being, destroying the Earth in the process and incidentally all of those unevolved humans such as ourselves – those who haven’t already committed suicide, that is.

This is a science fiction book – and one that promotes race-mixing by the way – not a reflection of reality.  But I suppose that to those who believe that The Lord of the Rings constitutes a viable blueprint for a future society, the membrane separating fact from fiction is thin indeed.

As an allegory of the modern world, the parallels to the Right-wing and Traditionalist view of the modern world is clear, even if Traditionalists would deny that “progress” is leading us towards anything higher, collectively or otherwise. 

OK – you’ll have your hobbit hole and the Chinese will have their nuclear-tipped ICBMs and we’ll see which vision is triumphant.

We, too, are fighting against the transformation of the world into a giant supermarket, where everyone is identical and meaning is to be found solely through the acquisition of material possessions.

Lack of self-awareness alert: How about raging against a “movement” in which everyone is ideologically “identical” and “meaning” is found solely through the mindless chanting of retarded dogma?

In the second decade of the 21st Century it is clear, even to the most simple-minded…

Thus, even to Type I “activists.”

But one thing about this new audience is certain: it will not include the old audience. The old audience will cling to its complementary comforts of infotainment consumption and academic snobbery…

Counter-Currents complaining about “academic snobbery?”  The pot calling the kettle black, indeed.

For Dr. Wolfheze, the end of the Traditional world should not be seen as a cause for mourning, but rather the mark of a need for a new maturity, a desire to be a “man among the ruins,” to use Evola’s phrase…

Or, to be, like Evola himself, a swarthoid subhuman among the supermen?

And indeed, this book, while extremely interesting, is certainly not for everyone – but then Traditionalism has always been an elitist doctrine. 

No “academic snobbery” there!

Engagement with history has always been a weak point in Traditionalism; the Traditionalist authors will make occasional reference to certain historical events as being indicative of the metaphysical trends they see at work in the world, but to my knowledge there has never before been a sustained analysis of modern history from a sacred, Traditional perspective, which has always seemed to me to be a major flaw in their work since it neglects to show how the forces which have produced the modern world have been at work in material and tangible ways. 

Congratulations to Morgan for writing a champion run-on sentence.

I intend to write a more in-depth review of The Sunset of Tradition at a later time – my primary purpose in writing this brief announcement…

More than 2000 words is a “brief announcement.”  More run-on sentences to come, have no fear!

Speaking of “traditionalism,” we see Der Movement is obsessed with The Lord of the Rings once again. Someone needs do an ethnological study of that work’s relationship to Der Movement.  Is the obsessive appeal biological – to Celto-Germanic NW European-derived people – or more ideological – to Type I traditionalists independent of ethnic origin?  That would be a productive analysis to better understand the traditionalist memetic virus infecting the “movement” – to better understand it and how to combat it.

Delenda Est Traditionalism!

Sunday Movement Follies

It’s a pathetic joke.

Get this give-and-take:

Hunter Wallace
Posted November 16, 2018 at 7:56 pm | Permalink
To be fair, WN 1.0’ers largely thought Unite the Right was a bad idea. I spent about a month arguing with Billy Roper about it. Roper was right.
Reply
Greg Johnson
Posted November 17, 2018 at 2:56 am | Permalink
As is clear above the return of 1.0 was less a matter of people than attitudes.
What were Roper’s objections? That UTR was not self-marginalizing and NS purist enough for his tastes?

Attitudes?  Really?  This is getting into the realm of Frankfurt School-level pathologizing.  What attitudes?  Pepe?  Kek?  Idiots marching around dressed like Batman and Captain America?  What?  The only “attitudes” on display were Millennial immaturity, Alt Lite cosplay Stickmanism, and Beavis-and-Butthead juvenile jackassery. The KKK and Nutzis in attendance were hanger-ons who jumped on the Alt Right bandwagon the same as did Johnson, Taylor, and MacDonald.  The whole scenario: pure WN 2.0.  People or attitudes, the failures of 2.0 were due to 2.0.  Now, I know the quota queens, marinated as they are in an aura of being catered to via the affirmative action program, are allergic to any sense of responsibility or accountability whatsoever, but, sorry, folks, we’re not buying this gaslighting narrative.  2.0 can take responsibility for their own failures rather than blaming others or blaming nebulous “attitudes” (note how convenient it is to blame “attitudes” – we don’t want to hold Kessler or the any other Beavis or Butthead accountable personally now, do we?  All except Richard Spencer – it was all his fault, right?).

You really cannot separate people and attitudes.  After all, if Unite the Right was imbued with WN 1.0 attitudes, and if the Alt Right at that time was “infected” with “self-marginalizing” WN 1.0ism, then why did folks like Roper and Strom eschew the rally?  Why was Strom skeptical of the Alt Right during this period?  My “take” on this period is that many 1.0 folks looked upon the Alt Right with ill-disguised disdain, and didn’t believe that the Alt Right reflected their views in any way – strange if WN 1.0 had memetically conquered WN 2.0 at this point.  Why were the cheerleaders of the Alt Right people like Johnson himself?  Why were “boomer” “White advocates” jumping on the Alt Right bandwagon?  Who memetically infected who?  What was going on there?

And as far as this arrogant snark –

That UTR was not self-marginalizing and NS purist enough for his tastes?

– goes, I can’t speak for Roper, but I think the WN 1.0 attitude was, in general, that the whole Unite the Right was poorly planned, with no clear strategic objective, no understanding of the dangers and how to deal with it, too broadly based, no true vetting of participants (vetting not a strong point of 2.0 or its apologists, eh?), and the dislike of 1.0 folks for the entire Alt Right: the Alt Right being a bunch of pretentious, immature assholes who justified their asinine behavior with “muh youth culture” (by the way, my use of “muh” mocking that same “youth culture” if the sarcasm is not immediately apparent to the literal-minded).

Now, here is a question for Johnson.  Why didn’t YOU attend Unite the Right?  If memory serves, you didn’t think it was a good idea either.  You have criticized it since then.  So why can’t we assume that maybe, just maybe, WN 1.0 folks disapproved of it for the same reasons as you?  Maybe they can turn the snark around.  Let’s do it:

Commentator:
To be fair, WN 2.0 Traditionalists largely thought Unite the Right was a bad idea. I spent about a month arguing with Greg Johnson about it. Johnson was right.
Reply
WN 1.0er
What were Johnson’s objections? That UTR was not smugly intellectual and traditionalist purist enough for his tastes?

It’s all about responsibility and accountability.  Who knows?  Maybe the lack of those traits among “movement leaders” is a sign of “Kali Yuga” and “The Age of Iron.”  Or maybe it’s a sign of “Yogi Bear” and “The Age of Tungsten.”  You decide.

By the way, Johnson criticizes others for promoting self-marginalizing behavior, but he responds to comments like this by stating:

Greg Johnson
Posted November 17, 2018 at 10:03 am | Permalink
He is our James Joyce, our Captain Beefheart. He’s an artist.

It’s all a joke. A pathetic joke. How can any sane person take Der Movement seriously?  That is why it is met with mocking ridicule here at EGI Notes: it deserves it.

This is useful as it outlines an example of the close relationship between Diaspora Jewry and Israel; in this case, between the ADL and Israeli intelligence services.  This underscores how fundamentally dishonest Lawrence Auster was, with his tiresome shtick of asserting no connection between, say, American Jews and Israel – suggesting that people angry at the behavior of American Jews had no right to “punish Israel” because there was no connection between the two. 

Retard Roissy cherrypicks studies and channels Sailer (eating dat dere Cheerios) to promote a Manganite dietary lifestyle, ignoring contrary studies.

Now, it is true: sugar is worse than fat, excess simple carbs (with a high glycemic index) is not good, and that for some people, particularly your typical American lardass butterball, fasting is helpful.  But a high fat diet has its own risks, is likely not maintainable for a lifetime, is unnecessary, and I personally wouldn’t recommend intermittent fasting to, say, underweight ectomorphs needing to gain muscle mass. And I think the major benefits of fasting can be recapitulated by having ~ 12 hours every day between dinner and the next day’s breakfast, eating normal portion sizes, and not eating between meal snacks.  For most normal people, that is sufficient.

If you want lifestyle advice from this blog I would say to eat a balanced diet, avoid added sugar (including fruit juice) for the most part, avoid “white” carbs and instead eat whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, avoid red and processed meat, get animal protein from fish, poultry, some eggs and egg whites, and some dairy – but if you are male not more than two servings of dairy a day because of the prostate cancer risk.  Make sure you have adequate fiber, so you don’t get apoplexy  during a bowel movement.  Mangan himself is an idiot and I’ve documented his ethnoracial stupidities in the past, and his “muscleman” physique is not evidence that his lifestyle recommendations are right (or wrong).  Fact is, just like there is a bell curve for intelligence and other mental and behavioral traits, there is a similar differential propensity for muscular hypertrophy.  There are people who can do everything wrong and look like Sandow; others can do everything right and look like a noodle-armed Antifa.

And one of Roissy’s commentators linked to this article, which I found AFTER I wrote my recommendations above.  Emphasis added:

Analysis of the mid-Victorian period in the U.K. reveals that life expectancy at age 5 was as good or better than exists today, and the incidence of degenerative disease was 10% of ours. Their levels of physical activity and hence calorific intakes were approximately twice ours. They had relatively little access to alcohol and tobacco; and due to their correspondingly high intake of fruits, whole grains, oily fish and vegetables, they consumed levels of micro- and phytonutrients at approximately ten times the levels considered normal today. This paper relates the nutritional status of the mid-Victorians to their freedom from degenerative disease; and extrapolates recommendations for the cost-effective improvement of public health today.

So: they had a higher caloric intake – no fasting – but balanced that with increased activity.  They ate: “high intake of fruits, whole grains, oily fish and vegetables” – how about that?   Not Der Mangan diet, eh?  And where is the chugging of gallons of milk?  The Victorians were not Alt Right.

Sallis right.  Roissy wrong.  How could we have ever guessed?

The Victorians did eat red meat and eggs, but the red meat was mostly offal; the details are below, emphasis added:

Mid-Victorian working class men and women consumed between 50% and 100% more calories than we do, but because they were so much more physically active than we are today, overweight and obesity hardly existed at the working class level. The working class diet was rich in seasonal vegetables and fruits; with consumption of fruits and vegetables amounting to eight to 10 portions per day. This far exceeds the current national average of around three portions, and the government-recommended five-a-day. The mid-Victorian diet also contained significantly more nuts, legumes, whole grains and omega three fatty acids than the modern diet. Much meat consumed was offal, which has a higher micronutrient density than the skeletal muscle we largely eat today [59]. Prior to the introduction of margarine in the late Victorian period, dietary intakes of trans fats were very low. There were very few processed foods and therefore little hidden salt, other than in bread (Recipes suggest that significantly less salt was then added to meals. At table, salt was not usually sprinkled on a serving but piled at the side of the plate, allowing consumers to regulate consumption in a more controlled way.). The mid-Victorian diet had a lower calorific density and a higher nutrient density than ours. It had a higher content of fibre (including fermentable fibre), and a lower sodium/potassium ratio. In short, the mid-Victorians ate a diet that was not only considerably better than our own, but also far in advance of current government recommendations. It more closely resembles the Mediterranean diet, proven in many studies to promote health and longevity; or even the ‘Paleolithic diet’ recommended by some nutritionists [60].

So, while there are some differences between that and the Sallis diet, it is much closer to Sallis than to Roissy/Mangan.

I suppose it is convenient for Roissy to talk about diets so as to deflect from the utter collapse of his God Emperor, and Roissy’s gross error in judgment (what else to expect from a quota queen?) for his slavish, lickspittle adoration of the effeminate lump of lard Trump.  Let’s quote Hood’s analysis of the Trump fraud, emphasis added:

In the face of opposition, a real political leader must not only deliver on policy but think of ways to strengthen his supporters and weaken his opponents. President Trump has done neither. Instead, the Justice Department is selectively prosecuting his supporters and using reports from his antifa opponents as evidence. Antifa are now raiding the home of one of President Trump’s most prominent supporters, Tucker Carlson.

More broadly, Donald Trump’s seizure of state power has been a catastrophe for his close friends and allies. Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, and other aides have had their lives ruined by the Robert Mueller investigation for crimes that would have been completely ignored had Donald Trump not won the election. By contrast, despite all the chants of “lock her up,” Hillary Clinton will never be prosecuted, nor will she ever pay any legal price for her actions. Somehow, the president of the United States seems to be fighting the government he ostensibly controls, as everyone from leading officials to petty bureaucrats resists his policy initiatives. One even bragged about it in the New York Times in the notorious anonymous Op-Ed, and there was less media interest in demasking him than there is when someone puts up an Identity Evropa sticker.

The Trump Administration is the worst of both worlds in that it creates the illusion of a vigorous, nationalist government—that accomplishes nothing.

Far from “being tired of winning,” we have won nothing since President Trump took office. Illegals are not being deported, anchor babies continue to get US passports, mass immigration continues, and anti-white discrimination law still stands. Though President Trump is routinely accused of having “emboldened” white advocates, it is hateful anti-white speech by journalists and others that has been emboldened. President Trump is an energetic campaigner, but he is weak and indecisive in power.

“Weak and indecisive” – must be all that estrogen generated from his over-abundant adipose tissue.

Interestingly, the only major “movement” figures who were skeptical of Trump from the beginning were the same two who were skeptical of the Alt Right from the beginning: Sallis and Strom.  That’s no coincidence.  The same common sense required to recognize that the “Alt Right brand” was juvenile jackassery with a short shelf life is the same required to recognize, clearly and immediately, that Trump was and is an untrustworthy imbecile and a vulgar, ignorant, buffoon. Everyone else was eager to jump on the Trump and Alt Right bandwagon, even to the extent of engaging in out-of-character undignified behavior.

John Morgan drug user:

Sometimes, some drugs can be used constructively, as I can attest. I don’t use them anymore and haven’t in quite a while, but there was a time in my life when they definitely had a positive impact. Psychedelics, if used properly, do not cut one off from the “true beauty of flourishing life,” they enhance it. Psychedelics helped to turn me from a rather nihilistic materialist into someone who could believe in the value of things such as the chain of our people and the idea that there is something intangible above us to believe in.

SLC News: 1/23/18

Two bits.

Here is one post from BeavisandButthead.com that summarizes The Man on White Horse Syndrome as it is manifested as Trump Fanboyism.

All Trump has to do is release one thirty second video ad against illegal immigration (nothing about legal immigration, mind you), and he is suddenly “officially our guy, he was always our guy.”  Talk about low standards.  How about waiting for Trump to actually do something before sweatily declaring your undying allegiance to the fat-draped obese porn star-screwing with no protection then home to wifey vulgar ignorant buffoon Trump?  Yeah, yeah, MAGA and all that.  

And by the way, why must we exchange DACA amnesty even for an end to chain migration and the other goodies?  How about we both deport the Nightmarers and do all these other Millerite agenda items?  That would be a real MAGA indeed.

Morgan of Counter-Currents, who is insofar as I know still living in Hungary without being ethnically Hungarian writes:

Bucur is right to praise Germany for its willingness to spend billions to bring their kin home, to a safer place. This is the sort of ethnic consciousness that we, as European identitarians, should extend not only to our own ethnic kin but to all those of European descent in this time of crisis. Germany stood up for its own. The failing of the contrasting approach is exemplified by the actions of the Romanian Communists: out of bigotry and the desire for short-term material gains, they were willing to turn their backs on their German countrymen rather than attempt to address their problems…

But, hey, I thought you guys were all ethnonationalists?  Doesn’t that mean Germans live in Germany and Romanians in Romania?  Why should there be Germans in Romania, considered as the Romanians’ “countrymen” unless your “ethnonationalism” really is the ethnoimperialism I suspect it is?  I guess those cringing subhuman hora-dancing Gypsy Romanians should consider themselves lucky to be colonized by Germans, right?

Will the Real John Morgan Please Stand Up?

Inconsistency.

Identitarians recognize that internal squabbles only weaken our civilization and distract us from the real problems at hand. We must develop a wider sense of identity and see ourselves as Europeans as much as we are Poles, Norwegians, or Spaniards. Europe is confronted by competitive and hostile forces on all sides – from the Middle East, from Africa, from Asia – even, it pains me to admit, from the United States, which in spite of its origins rarely has the best interests of Europe at heart. This means recognizing that we actually have much more in common with peoples who may have been historical foes than with those who are trying to subjugate and replace us in our own lands. While I am not going to pretend that there were not genuine problems between European rivals, we simply have to set these old conflicts aside and look at the bigger historical picture. Even the European Union is not a bad idea – what is bad about it is the way in which it has been implemented and the destructive neoliberal values that it upholds, but the general concept is a good one. The world is entering a multipolar phase. The Third World is rising, and is not content to allow itself to become the plaything of Western economic interests. In this new reality, Europeans will only survive if we stand together.

Sounds a lot like Richard Spencer…or Ted Sallis.  Quite different from Morgan’s hyper-ethnonationalist stance a little while back.  I obviously agree with Morgan here now as much as I disagreed with him back then.  Will the real John Morgan please stand up?

Do these guys have any ideological foundation or are they all ideologically incoherent?  Can they be trusted?  What do they stand for?  Is it all about “we’re all like real mad at Richard Spencer right now, so let’s mock pan-Europeanism by pretending pan-Europeanists believe that Russians are Irish are “interchangeable?”  Is this all about personality and personal animus and competition?  Looks like that to me.

But there are also various levels to identity. One’s identity can involve all of local, regional, national (perhaps), ethnic (which can be transnational, as with Hungarians), and civilizational (as in Europe) factors. Ideally, all of these levels work together and complement one another. One can be a Flemish regionalist, Dutch, a Belgian, and a European without any of those elements necessarily contradicting the others.

Well, yes.  Concentric circles of interest, anyone?  Sound familiar?  The idea that one can be both a pan-European racial nationalist and be an ethnic nationalist at the same time – sound familiar?  If Morgan believes this – does he? – then what was all the narrow ethnonationalist sound and fury a while back (that attracted a White-hating “I’m the enemy, silly” Asiatrix like a fly to shit *)?

That these fellows want to regurgitate all my talking points dating back to the early 2000s is fine by me – if they were consistent.  But for all I know, a couple of weeks from now, Morgan will be raving again like his earlier piece.

These are serious issues that need to be discussed seriously and not based on inter-“movement” feuding.

As well, how can one separate race and ethnicity?  What is ethnicity without race?  Irishmen are White Europeans, not Black Africans.  Even racially mixed ethnicities (e.g., Latin Americans, Central Asians) are defined by the particular mix of the constituent races.  On the other hand, a race is composed of ethnic groups.  Even if there were widespread interbreeding between the ethnic groups of a race a complete and even panmixia is unrealistic, so that distinguishable sub-groups would still be present.

*Interesting how non-White enemies of White racial interests support ethnonationalism for us…while supporting pan-racial solidarity for themselves.