Category: John Morgan

A Duel of Wits

Between unarmed opponents.

See this.

There is some good here, but also considerable nonsense. If the characterization of Richard Spencer’s racial views is correct, then Johnson’s racial views are sounder from an empiricist-materialist standpoint. However, there is much lacking here from a more hardcore scientific standpoint (the wages of “Traditionalism” I suppose). 

The whole “transplanted brains” scenario is absurd and meaningless intellectual masturbation.  What could one do? There are racial – and subracial (cue Durocher’s heavy breathing) – differences in brain structure that can be identified via imaging methodology.  If one were really determined to obtain a definitive identification, a small brain biopsy can yield DNA to assay for genetic ancestry and thus prove whether or not the brain tissue was of Negro origin. As far as the ridiculous question as to why build a community on race instead of other characteristics, I point both interviewer and interviewee to Salter’s On Genetic Interests. Adaptive fitness is the ultimate interest of evolved organisms (such as humans), and any group that promotes their ultimate interests will outcompete and replace those who do not. And, after all, one can always form these narrower communities within your racial group while preserving EGI, but the opposite is not possible.  One can form your little group of Tolkien fans among Whites in an all-White ethnostate, but a multi-racial Tolkien group that is not stratified by race (by definition, if it is multiracial and stratified only by Tolkienism, it will not be stratified by race) will constitute a loss of genetic interest.  Smaller groups within a White ethnostate will retain the advantages of a concentrated EGI; on the other hand, smaller groups of Whites in, say, a multiracial Tolkien Fanboy state, will suffer as a result of a loss of EGI, itself a consequence of the multiracialism of such a state. In the latter case, the situation can be retrieved only by racial separation – so why not  divide on the basis of race to begin with?

Stupidity about gender-specific nations also fails – I remember Bowery writing (correctly) long ago that gender/sex is not a genetic interest.  A man has more genetic commonality with female relatives and co-ethnics than with male non-ethnic strangers. One could subdivide a racially pure state by gender (for what purpose?) but the racial stratification must come first if one is concerned with biological fitness. If you are not concerned with fitness, fine, but that’s not an evolutionarily stable situation. You’ll end up in the dustbin of genetic history, replaced by more ethnocentric others. These are reasonably obvious arguments.  I would also point out that sexual reproduction has evolutionary advantages via increased genetic diversity. No doubt that a sufficiently advanced technology could artificially impose independent assortment and recombination on a single-sex artificial reproduction regimen, but, again, for what purpose?  While eliminating the yeastbucket requirement would no doubt be advantageous in many ways, what would be the sexual outlet for such an all-male society?  Widespread homosexuality?  I’ll take a pass on that. There are probably some things best left unchanged in human nature and the division between two sexes for reproduction is likely to be one of those.

And what’s with this obsession with Rushton and Lynn?  Look, the broad theories of both of them are likely true, but that’s as far as it goes. R-K theory on race (that I independently came up with in the 1980s after reading an ecology textbook) is undoubtedly true on the general level of – Blacks and Browns have more offspring and invest less in them; Whites and Yellows have fewer offspring but invest more in them. And, as well, Blacks and Browns have faster life histories (earlier maturation and reproduction and earlier death) than do Whites and Yellows. If Rushton had stuck with that, instead of trying to shoehorn every racial characteristic (including penis size) into the formulation, he’d be more respected today. Likewise, Lynn is likely correct that there is a general association between national IQ and economic productivity (as measured by GDP) and general accomplishment; the problem occurs when he falls too much in love with his theory (as did Rushton with his ideas) and tries to fit every data point into the pattern, with ludicrous “estimates of IQ,” racial history fairy tales about admixture, and hand waving “just so stories” to explain anomalies. The problem, I suppose, is that the broad theories are a bit too obvious and common sense, plain to any reasonably intelligent and honest observant individual, and so there isn’t much “intellectual prestige” in merely stating the obvious.  Therefore, ego-driven “intellectuals” have to build castles of sand to demonstrate how very clever they are.

Counter-Currents commentary:

Craig
Posted July 1, 2019 at 8:07 am | Permalink
Yang was a joke who never should have had any support from the Dissident Right in the first place. Those who did have made public fools of themselves.

Craig, meet Greg Johnson. And Richard Spencer. And many more.

Also, what’s the big deal about Gabbard? Oh she’s good on foreign policy. But so is Trump. He not once, but twice, averted war by outmaneuvering the warhawks in DC. First with Syria and now with Iran. He’s the peace candidate you should be voting for.

There’s no reason to pay attention to any of these clowns with a (D) in front of their name.

Craig, meet David Duke.  And Richard Spencer.

Then there’s John Morgan:

John Morgan
Posted July 1, 2019 at 6:33 am | Permalink
Rep. Gabbard seems to be the least bad (notice I’m not saying good) of all these people. It’s also worth mentioning her connections to/support of Hindu nationalist groups in India like the BJP and RSS (since she is a practicing Hindu herself). This doesn’t necessarily equate to sympathy for nationalism for white people, but it suggests she may at least have the vision to not be completely averse to it. In practice that may not mean much, however. But as Mr. Hampton wrote, she has no chance of getting the nomination this time around, anyway.

You know she supports reparations for Negroes, right?

A one, a one, a one two three….

Ted Cruz at least spoke up about this.  Antifa Don Trump, The God Emperor?  Silence.

MAGA!  Pepe! Kek!

Readers of this blog know that I am no apologist for homosexuals (of either sex) but I’m no apologist for hypocrisy either.  I mean, really….  Apparently, “homophobia” – “vile” or otherwise – is perfectly acceptable in the service of “movement” feuds.  Perhaps, Antifa can be critiqued in other ways than their penchant for sending gay Asians to the hospital.

Advertisements

The Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup Alliance

Black, Brown, and Yellow United: The “Arctic Alliance” in America is refuted by data

Read here.  Note how Asians generally track with non-Whites in these metrics; indeed, in a significant fraction of cases, Asians are akin to Blacks and more extreme than are Hispanics.

Indeed, instead of a mythical “Arctic Alliance” we instead see The Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup Alliance – Black/Brown with a Yellow core.

So much winning!  Pepe! Kek!

This is ethnonationalism.  We need those skilled Blacksters and Brownsters!  Poles out! Beautiful Commonwealth immigrants in!  Hail Brexit!  Hail Farage!  Hail ethnonationalism!  Hail!

The Counter-Currents and Amren crew are all with this, I suppose.  Just as long as the non-Hungarian ethnonationalist Morgan can live in Hungary, the non-Romanian Munro can live in Romania with his Romanian “wife” telling us how horrid Romanians are, Farrell mocking wops in wopland with his wop “wife,” and Deasy being traumatized by Bulgarian faces…in Bulgaria.

HBDers groveling before Jewish IQ.

A better religion than Christianity.

Hey, Richie – someone was calling Trump a Negrophilic race cuck BEFORE the election.  It wasn’t you…or Johnson, or Taylor, or Duke, or MacDonald, or all the rest.  Yes, I find con men contemptible as well. All of them; all of you. MAGA!  Pepe! Kek!

Even More Winning

Endless losing.

The two things I bothered to listen to here was the Anarcho-Tyranny airport incident and about the Derbyshire Yellow Supremacist speech.

The major point not mentioned in regard to Anarcho-Tyranny is that this harassment of people on the Right is taking place under the regime of The God Emperor Trump. Johnson’s “sincere” Trump, the avatar of White demographics, is presiding over a Radical Left Dystopia in which WNs are persecuted by his DOJ, banned from traveling, harassed, deplatforming, physically attacked in the streets, etc. Don’t ever admit that you were wrong, Greg, you wouldn’t want to mar your impressive record of zero self-awareness and zero accountability.

About the “remarkably witty” Derbyshire, at least they have it right that Derbyshire’s talk had “the least amount of substance” and that Derbyshire’s “Arctic Alliance” “sounds like his marriage” and that they are confused about “what is the purpose” of it all.  Johnson is correct that Derbyshire is an “IQ supremacist and cognitive elitist” – and further, that cognitive elitism is extremely dangerous in that high-IQ immigrants are more of a danger for displacing natives and for miscegenation (the HBD plan).

Johnson is wrong that Asian immigration is a “small demographic problem” – China has long been one of the leading sources of legal immigration to the US; Korea provides many invaders as well.

Derbyshire “wasted a slot” – blame Taylor for that.

Morgan’s anti-pan-Europeanism is disgusting and hypocritical. Can you please leave Hungary, since you are not an ethnic Hungarian?  Anglo-Saxons are not quite ethnically and culturally congruent with Hungarians from the ethnonationalist perspective you espouse. Of course, as I’ve talked about in the past, when these guys talk about ethnonationalism they really mean ethnocolonialism. Morgan living in someone else’s nation while pontificating about the virtues of narrow ethnonationalism; Munro living in Romania with sexual access to a Romanian woman (“wife”) while telling us how horrid Romanians are, Farrell living in Italy with sexual access to his Italian “wife” while shaking his head sadly at woppish ineptitude, Deasy visiting Bulgaria and regaling us with the deficiencies of Bulgarians and how their faces “take getting used to.” You see, our betters will live among us like feudal lords, telling us how bad it will be for there to be any political equity and cooperation among our peoples. Sort of like those British who love Brexit but who for some reason move to Spain, southern France, Bulgaria, Italy, Greece, etc. while “Commonwealth” Negroes and Pakis flood into the UK (as long as it is not Poles, A-OK).

So much winning.

A bit of Negritude.

More and more winning.

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.

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!