Category: law

Run Silent, Run Deep: Helping the Community

Good news and bad news, and some constructive criticism.

The good news: some “movement” Nutzis understand the importance of community organizing and community outreach.

The bad news: they not only do it ineptly, but they broadcast it to the enemy.

Lesson: Never, EVER, have Type I activists monopolizing leadership positions in ANY racialist group, strategy, tactic, or endeavor. NEVER, EVER. For godssakes, do I have to draw you a picture?  You Do, and do QUIETLY, you don’t broadcast it at an early, embryonic stage. You don’t participate in blustering “interviews” with White-hating, anti-racist, yeastbucket shills.

Again, why is it that the allegedly “low-IQ, undisciplined, useless, low-time preference” Negro knows how to do community organizing correctly, and the White Superhero does not?

Some constructive criticism and suggestions:

The next time some idiot asks you for an interview, respond thus: “No thank you, I don’t have the time; I’m busy helping people.” Be discreet, don’t call attention to your actions.  It won’t stay undercover for long, but there’s a difference between word getting out because you are doing and accomplishing, and word getting out because hateful SJWs mock you publicly after you call attention to yourselves and invite the fox into the henhouse.

You should set up Euro-American help centers. These can be one or more on-site physical facilities and it can also be activists driving to meet those people who need help where they need it. Help real people – White people and White people only – who have real problems.  Don’t help those hostile to their race and our cause, but certainly do help apolitical normies who don’t know much about anything than their own life situation.  One doesn’t have to be on our side (at first) to get help – after all, there are so few of them – but certainly they should at least be neutral and not overly hostile. And of course, White activists should be helping each other.  By analogy with “god helps those who help themselves” we will be most effective in helping, and recruiting, White normies if we ourselves are all straightened out and doing well.  The same structures available for the normies can be used for activists.

Political education should be an integral part of the process, but it must be done prudently and patiently.  You do not want to be ham-fisted about it, pushing pamphlets (or websites) on people, wild-eyed, foaming-at-the-mouth, etc. Initially, it has to be about making a personal connection, establishing a rapport, and introducing the most basic ideas after that, all the time trying to connect those ideas to their personal issues, problems, and experiences. Of course, from the very beginning they should know who and what you are and what you stand for, be upfront about it.  They should know who it is who cares about them and wants to help them.  But be genuine in your desire to help, make that predominant at first, don’t use helping as a mere excuse to engage in Nutzi propaganda from the get-go.  If people think you are just humoring their problems, using that just in order to recruit them, they’ll be turned off and lost to you.

If possible, contact “movement”-connected lawyers to make sure your dot all your i’s and cross all your t’s especially in the event any activity may require that those you help sign liability waivers (or some other issue of which we may be initially unaware).  We who are racial activists need to pool our expertise to help each other do productive activities – those of us who are lawyers or doctors or plumbers of electricians or businessmen or scientists of mechanics or schoolteachers or soldiers or police or firemen or whatever – the expertise is out there.

What about the System co-opting your efforts?  Of course, the quieter and the more discreet you are about your efforts, the more you can forestall co-opting efforts.  However, more fundamentally, the best way to prevent co-opting is to offer something that cannot be precisely mimicked.  The System can certainly throw money and resources at a problem (if they wish to do so), but what they cannot do (and still be true to the System and its ideology) is to provide sincerity, authenticity, a genuine desire to help, the proper political education, and the ability to give Whites back their Identity and make them proud of that Identity. The System is more likely to send a bunch of condescending, arrogant, White-hating SJW blue hairs unable to establish a connection with the people they are supposed to help, and certainly unable to connect those people’s uplift with a positive self-image rooted in racial and cultural identity.  If you do it right, it cannot be co-opted; or to put it another way, if the System was able to precisely co-opt your efforts, then they’ll be working to spread pro-White activism.

And whatever you do, don’t engage in “movement” freakishness; real people with real problems don’t want to hear about “Savitri Devi” or “cephalic indices” or “Kali Yuga” or “subfractional admixture percentages” or “the men who can’t tell time” or “the racial provenance of Julius Caesar.”  Save that for the next “movement” circle jerk, and concentrate political education for “normies’ as the essentials.  Later, if they so wish, they can learn the esoterica.

And, again: don’t broadcast what you are doing to the System.

As the sub-mariners say: run silent, run deep.

Advertisements

Youth is Wasted on the Young

Talking to the wind.

Read here about some of the current legal troubles of Richard Spencer and the Alt Right.  This blog supports Spencer with respect to this situation and I hope it works out somehow, although I’m not very optimistic.  We’ll see.

One point I’ll make is that these guys had things reversed.  First, you build a presence in the community, you build an infrastructure, you spend the time – years – to build up a network of support (including lawyers) and then – after – you “go public” to the extent of participating in rallies such as Charlottesville – or organizing other public events – that have the potential for trouble and the potential for generating legal liability.

If these younger fellows would ever had asked advice and input from the dreaded over-50 crowd (and, no, Alt Wrong HBDers are not included in the group whose advice should have been solicited from), then perhaps some of these errors would not have been made.  And for those of you who say “oh, that’s 20-20 hindsight” you’re wrong: I’ve been writing about the need for building infrastructure, community, and networks for years, I’ve been preaching prudent planning and contingency preparation; further, more than 15 years ago, when I was interviewed for Griffin’s book, I made the following points (emphasis added):

I think the challenge is to heighten whites’ racial awareness — especially the sane, honest, hardworking, law-abiding whites — and convince them to form voluntary, private organizations in their own communities. These organizations would exist to do practical things. The problem now is you have racialist organizations and they say, “Join up and send us your membership dues,” and you get a little membership card and a newsletter once a month. But the members stay isolated and everything stays divorced from reality. We need racial nationalist organizations that help children with homework, and help old and infirmed people, and that clean up neighborhoods, and where everybody stands together when some outside force tries to push them around. Maybe these organizations could have youth auxiliaries.  

As it is now, we have white people thinking, “What am I going to do? I have got to send my children to the local school and it’s full of minorities and they are going to be taught all sorts of nonsense and they are going to get attacked, and my neighborhood is deteriorating, and my life is going to hell.” An activist comes up to them and says, “Let’s go protest against the United States’ foreign policy in the Middle East.” That’s great, our foreign policy in the Middle East should be protested, but there is still the question of what is going to be done to help the person scratching his head trying to figure out what he is going to do about what is happening in his life. At a very basic level we have to protect ourselves physically.  

The Nation of Islam may be an example of the kind of thing I’m talking about. It was founded in the 1930s, but it wasn’t until the early 1960s that most white Americans ever heard about the Black Muslims. They spent decades building a base of support in the black community by helping black people with whatever they were doing in their community. So when they started becoming vocal and white people in the early 1960s started saying, “Hey, these people are a problem, what are we going to do?” it was already too late. The Black Muslims were already firmly established and had become an integral part of black society. In a similar way, a white nationalist movement has to grow like a plant, with its roots firmly in the soil.

Sound familiar? Sound relevant? Build a base of support in the community.  Do that FIRST.  Have youth auxiliaries (putting Beavis-and-Butthead in their proper place).  Protect activists (and White people generally) physically.  Once you do those things, once you are firmly planted in the soil of the community, then you will have white collar and blue collar members and supporters – including lawyers – ready for when they are needed.  You’ll be grounded, on a firm foundation, you’ll have those deep roots so your trunk and branches won’t get blown away in a storm.  You have all these things and then you go out and do your rallies and protests.  Some would argue that the rallies and protests are needed to gain the supporters in the first place, to which I say that the type of supporters you need first and foremost are the ones gained by community organizing and not from rallies with cosplay actors dressed like Captain America, and also, why is it that low-IQ, low time preference Negroes did things correctly, but the ever-so-superior Whites did not, and cannot, do so?

Whenever these guys begin to realize they should get input from older people who have some useful perspectives, they know how to contact us. But it is a bit late now, these problems should not have went down like this to begin with.  If and when these legal problems are resolved, I’d advise the sort of careful, long-range, and strategic building of community, infrastructure, and networking described above, including a legal team, a security force, folks with business sense, and some older advisers to provide guidance.

Slightly off-topic, but still focused on the Alt Right and their errors and delusions, see this.  That is the most ludicrous stupidity imaginable.

In Der Movement, you don’t dominate anything.  Leadership? Ha!  Respect?  Ha!  (Just look at any comments thread to any post concerning the “Alt-Europeans”).  Interests considered? Double Ha!  Talk about delusional.

The Political Opinion Protection Act

Against social pricing.

This is a very crude, initiative draft of an anti-social pricing law (and explanation) that requires significant further development and refinement. Consider it a starting point.

Political and social opinions, beliefs, and ideologies, and the adherence and promotion thereof, now define a protected class of individuals, against whom business and institutions, private or public, cannot discriminate in employment or in the provision of services.  The only exception is where the opinions, beliefs, and ideologies are directly and overtly incompatible with the core mission of the business or institution, strictly defined by analogy to the examples that follow.

Now, there will be some examples – relatively rare – where sociopolitical opinions would disqualify an individual for employment (or service).  For example, the core mission of a conservative political foundation is the creation, analysis, dissemination, and promotion of conservative political ideas and ideals; a committed anti-conservative progressive can reasonably be seen as an unacceptable employee of such a foundation (and the converse is true: a hard core right-winger would be unacceptable in a progressive/liberal political foundation).  Planned Parenthood should not have to hire anti-abortion activists; right-to-life organizations should not have to employ abortion doctors or pro-choice activists.  These are clear examples where the core missions directly deal with sociopolitical memes and thus certain beliefs would be obviously incompatible.

However, indirect factors allegedly affecting core missions are not the same as the core missions themselves.

The core mission of a restaurant is to sell food to customers.  A restaurant may claim that “diversity helps business by expanding the pool of potential customers,” but promoting diversity is not the core mission of the business, selling food is.  Thus, opposition to diversity cannot be reasonably seen as incompatible with the fundamental core mission of the business.  A restaurant may claim that “immigrant labor is important for our profits,” but promoting immigration is not the core mission and hence an anti-immigration attitude cannot be seen as being incompatible for someone to work in that business. On the other hand, a steakhouse can have a reasonable rationale for skepticism in hiring a militant animal rights activist (and, conversely, PETA can reasonably have the same attitude toward, say, a butcher).

Let us consider academia. The core mission of academia is education and research/scholarship; basically to create and disseminate knowledge and ideas.  An academic institution can make (and they do make) arguments about how (demographic) diversity assists them in their mission, and that may be true or it may just be justification for social engineering.  True or not, promoting diversity is not the core mission of academia, and therefore opposition to multiracial/multicultural diversity cannot be seen as incompatible with the core mission.  Indeed, if we expand the definition of diversity to include types of (e.g., intellectual) diversity that can have a direct impact on exposing students to a more varied set of ideas, then one can argue that it is a good thing to have individuals opposed to multicultural diversity in academia; it is important to have a diversity of beliefs and opinions (perhaps we need affirmative action for the Far Right in academia?).

It is also important to prevent businesses and institutions from redefining their core missions so as to exclude opinions they do not like.  Core missions are those that derive naturally from the existential meaning of what the business and institution is, how they have been perceived and/or are perceived and/or will be perceived by reasonable people, and which can be organically associated with the “product” of the business or institution. Thus, attempts by, say, a college to redefine its core mission so as to include “promoting diversity” should be rejected, since that is an ad hoc extension of the natural and organic real fundamental academic core mission, and therefore can be reasonably seen as an attempt to evade the spirit and letter of this new law.

Services like Internet providers or transportation companies have a core mission in providing the specific service that defines the company; the opinions, beliefs, and ideologies of current or potential customers do not affect the core mission (indeed, one would think a business, valuing their core mission, would want to maximize their customer base and not arbitrarily exclude customers) and thus cannot be used as an excuse to deny service. Ad hoc redefining of the core mission to exclude “undesirable customers” is, again, forbidden.

Unite the Facts: Refuting the System Narrative

A semi-comprehensive analysis.

In light of the unprecedented sociopolitical, memetic, physical, social pricing, and economic/ corporate attacks against the American Far Fight, let’s briefly take a look at and refute some of the more common System arguments.

Let’s first consider that tried-and-true leftist meme that “racists” are stupid and uneducated.

Actually, higher cognitive ability is linked to a greater propensity for “social stereotyping.”

“Stereotypes are generalizations about the traits of social groups that are applied to individual members of those groups,” the authors note. “To make such generalizations, people must first detect a pattern among members of a particular group and then categorize an individual as belonging to that group.
“Because pattern detection is a core component of human intelligence, people with superior cognitive abilities may be equipped to efficiently learn and use stereotypes about social groups.”

Further, many White racial activists are highly educated.  Most of the leaders have at least a college degree.  William Pierce had a PhD in physics.  From what I know of today’s activists, the following have PhDs: Kevin MacDonald, Greg Johnson, David Duke, and Ted Sallis. Note I do not consider HBDers to be racial activists, but for those of you who do so consider them there’s Lynn and Rushton.  Jared Taylor is an educated man, multilingual, and cultured. Spencer is intelligent and articulate.  A number of activists are lawyers.

Racial nationalists in general are not stupid nor are they ignorant.  At the level of the more active activists, IQ and educational attainment is likely greater than that of the White American average, and almost certainly significantly higher than the general “American” average.

Another meme: racial nationalists are seething with “hate” toward members of other races. There may well be some for whom this description fits, just as there are many Blacks who hate Whites, Jews who hate Gentiles. Asians who hate all non-Asians (particularly Whites) – to say nothing of inter-religious hatred (I consider Jews an ethnic group, not a religion). However, being a racial nationalist has more to do with a desire to preserve one’s own people, and look out for their interests, than any sort of “irrational hatred” toward others. Diversity fatigue?  Yes.  Exasperation with the behavior of non-Whites and the White liberals and cucks who love them?  Yes.  Hatred for those who actively harm our people?  Certainly. But if you really want to see hatred, look at the opponents of racial nationalists.  Or, look at the hatred non-Whites have for Whites.

Another very tired meme: racial nationalists are against diversity because they have no experience with it, they dislike non-Whites because they don’t know any.  Actually, the opposite is the case: see the work of Putnam and Salter on diversity – two academics approaching the problem from very different directions but who come to very similar conclusions about the corrosive effects of diversity.  And didn’t Trump get a higher fraction of White votes in the primaries in more diverse areas? Trump’s popularity in the primaries – where most of the folks voting were White – was concentrated in the South (large numbers of Negroes) and in the Northeast/Rust Belt (large numbers of non-Whites of all kinds, particularly Blacks and Hispanics).  The more truthful stereotype is of the tolerant White liberal who lives in a mostly White neighborhood or state.

In my case, having experienced peak diversity growing up, that exposure to different peoples heightened racial views and distinctions.  The more you know them, the less you like them.

Individuals who have dropped out of the “movement” and who now shill for the System promote the meme that White nationalists suffer from personal pathologies; thus, they get involved with racial nationalism because they are “frustrated, feeling hopeless, needing guidance, with a longing to belong” not because of any deeply held beliefs and realistic interpretation of facts (of course, similar accusations are never made against the thuggish left).  This is of course pure projection; these individuals are talking about themselves. Indeed, selection bias rears its head: it are those individuals who join the “movement” because they are “frustrated, feeling hopeless, needing guidance, with a longing to belong” who are exactly those who will leave the “movement” once the System gives them a better deal (of whatever sort).  All the other activists – those with deep beliefs and who do not become turncoats – are not heard from; instead, we only hear from those traitors justifying their own inadequacies. Looking at this objectively: if you have ideological convictions based on reality, then how can you suddenly decide that objectively factual demographic and cultural trends do not exist?  Or if they do exist, go from being an existential threat to no threat at all (or even something to be welcomed)?  It seems to me that the real pathology – bordering on some sort of sociopathy – is to parrot dissident views without really believing them and then turn 180 degrees in the other direction as if the preceding memetic reality never really existed.  That, my friends, is truly sick.

The white supremacists marching in Charlottesville, Virginia, this past weekend were not ashamed when they shouted, “Jews will not replace us.” They were not ashamed to wear Nazi symbols, to carry torches, to harass and beat counterprotesters. They wanted their beliefs on display.

How about the counter protestors there, carrying clubs and flamethrowers, actively harassing and beating rally goers?  The epitome of mental health and love, no doubt!

It’s easy to treat people like them as straw men: one-dimensional, backward beings fueled by hatred and ignorance. 

See above.


But if we want to prevent the spread of extremist, supremacist views, we need to understand how these views form and why they stick in the minds of some people.
Recently, psychologists Patrick Forscher and Nour Kteily recruited members of the alt-right (a.k.a. the “alternative right,” the catchall political identity of white nationalists) to participate in a study to build the first psychological profile of their movement. The results, which were released on August 9, are just in working paper form, and have yet to be peer-reviewed or published in an academic journal.

Why should any White nationalists participate in a study designed to delegitimize their beliefs?  Do you need more evidence of the immaturity of the Alt Right?

A lot of the findings align with what we intuit about the alt-right: This group is supportive of social hierarchies that favor whites at the top. 

Really?  It seems like most White nationalists do NOT want a social hierarchy with “whites at the top” – they want a society that consists of Whites only and no other group. Separation, not supremacy.


It’s distrustful of mainstream media and strongly opposed to Black Lives Matter. Respondents were highly supportive of statements like, “There are good reasons to have organizations that look out for the interests of white people.” 

Shocking!  White folks have interests!  There should be organizations that look after the interests of Whites, the same as all other groups have! Horrors! Whites shouldn’t be subaltern kulaks!  We are all shocked!  Shocked!

And when they look at other groups — like black Americans, Muslims, feminists, and journalists — they’re willing to admit they see these people as “less evolved”… ….The alt-right scores high on dehumanization measuresOne of the starkest, darkest findings in the survey comes from a simple question: How evolved do you think other people are?
Kteily, the co-author on this paper, pioneered this new and disturbing way to measure dehumanization — the tendency to see others as being less than human. He simply shows study participants the following (scientifically inaccurate) image of a human ancestor slowly learning how to stand on two legs and become fully human.
Participants are asked to rate where certain groups fall on this scale from 0 to 100. Zero is not human at all; 100 is fully human.
On average, alt-righters saw other groups as hunched-over proto-humans.

Don’t non-Whites dehumanize Whites?  Don’t Jews refer to Gentiles as “supernal refuse?” And what if there is scientific evidence that some groups actually are less evolved?

Dehumanization is scary. It’s the psychological trick we engage in that allows us to harm other people (because it’s easier to inflict pain on people who are not people). Historically it’s been the fuel of mass atrocities and genocide.

Yes, indeed.  You mean how the entire System dehumanizes the Far Right? Do you mean how the System dehumanizes Whites as a race by denying us the same rights of self-interest and self-preservation accorded to every other group?

The alt-right has high support for groups that support and work for the benefit of white peopleThis is — unsurprisingly — the largest difference Forscher and Kteily found in the survey. They asked participants how much they agreed with the following statement: “I think there are good reasons to have organizations that look out for the interests of whites.”

Whites are not allowed to organize to defend their own interests?  


The alt-right wants and supports organizations that look out for the rights and well-being of white people. Historically, such groups have done so by striking fear in the hearts of immigrants, Jews, and minorities.

How about “immigrants, Jews, and minorities” striking fear in the hearts of Whites?  Ever hear of White flight?  And if Whites can defend their own interests only by “striking fear in the hearts” of non-Whites, then that proves that the races are incompatible and that separation is the only solution.  Or should Whites continue to indulge in masochistic self-abnegation so as to avoid “striking fear” in anyone?

The alt-right is more willing to express prejudice toward black peopleThese survey questions ask respondents the degree to which they agree with statements like, “I avoid interactions with black people,” “My beliefs motivate me to express negative feelings about black people,” and, “I minimize my contact with black people.”

Given Negro behavior, minimizing contact is quite prudent.

Alt-righters are willing to report their own aggressive behavior

The Alt Right are grossly naive.  Again, why cooperate with your enemies? Why cooperate with anti-White academics?

Personality traits that frequently show up among alt-righters: authoritarianism and MachiavellianismAlt-righters in the survey scored higher on social dominance orientation (the preference that society maintains social order), right-wing authoritarianism (a preference for strong rulers), and somewhat higher levels of the “dark triad” of personality traits (psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism.)

Pathologizing dissent. Back to the USSR!

Alt-righters aren’t particularly socially isolated or worried about the economyAmong the measures where the alt-right and comparison groups don’t look much different in the survey results is closeness and relationships with other people. The alt-righters reported having about equal levels of close friends, which means these aren’t necessarily isolated, lonely people. 

Hey!  I thought people get involved in”hate” because they are frustrated, isolated freaks?

It goes to show: The alt-right is motivated by racial issues, not economic anxiety.

Wow, what a discovery!


But it goes deeper than that. The survey revealed that the alt-righters were much more concerned that their groups were at a disadvantage compared with the control sample. The alt-right (and white nationalists) is afraid of being displaced by increasing numbers of immigrants and outsiders in this country. And, yes, they see themselves as potential victims.

It seems like they are victims if the System is interested in leveraging psychological technics against perfectly legal, and biologically adaptive, viewpoints.

Knowing the psychology of the alt-right may be the key to stop white supremacist views from spreadingThis is the quixotic hope behind a lot of social science research: The first step to solving a problem is defining the nature of that problem.

I see.  So “social science research” is all about promoting anti-White viewpoints and delegitimizing White racial self-defense?


Once we understand the psychological motivations behind the alt-right worldview, maybe we can learn to stop it.

Is the purpose of psychology to impose ideological repression on dissident viewpoints?  Isn’t that similar to the abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union?


In their preliminary analysis, Forscher and Kteily found that willingness to express prejudice against black people was correlated with harassing behavior. “If we can change the motivation to express prejudice, maybe that gives us a way to prevent aggression,” they say.

Given how Blacks harass Whites, there must be a huge amount of anti-White prejudice among Negroes.


Again, this is all early work. Forscher hopes to track some of these survey participants over the coming months and years, and see if they remain adhered to the alt-right. Or if not, he hopes to learn what caused them to ditch the worldview.

We need to understand how to get people interested in the racial nationalist worldview.  We need to reverse engineer this psychological abuse.

Another issue, and one of particular interest to me, is the System’s focus on White nationalists and genetic ancestry testing.  Apparently, the Establishment is studying White nationalists (they really are obsessed with us, aren’t they?) and the reaction of these nationalists (e.g., on Stormfront) to the testing results of themselves and others.  The System can hardly contain its glee over the fact that there have been some disturbance and controversy over the fact that many racial activists do not test as “100% pure” (as any reasonably informed person – and anyone who has read my work – could have predicted). Indeed, Establishment operatives chuckle that they wish they could pay for genetic testing for all White nationalists, who would abandon their “hateful” beliefs as soon as they find out that they have 1% of this or 0.5% of that.  And the Cobb case is also joyfully described in these articles.

Now, you can’t say you haven’t been warned about this.  I have written, repeatedly, that the “movement’s” obsession with (a mythical) absolute racial purity will come back and haunt it, since basing racial identity on absolute purity means that this identity will be delegitimized by the System once data are obtained that confirm a lack of purity.  I have also pointed out how such purity is unrealistic and has nothing to do with scientific descriptions of group populations (i.e., ethnies, races, etc.).  While some listened to, and agreed with, my arguments, others – adherents of the Old Movement Pierce-Kemp absolute purity school of thought – labeled my (scientifically valid) arguments as “sophistry” (even while admitting they didn’t fully understand the arguments they dismissed).  Once again, I have been proven correct, as the System is making a concerted effort to use genetic ancestry testing results to ridicule White nationalists and to delegitimize their beliefs.

However, all is not well in System-land.  While some White nationalists take a typical lunatic Old Movement view toward (possibly spurious) sub-fractional “admixture” (“don’t breed”), others take a saner and more nuanced view, which distresses the Establishment.  Some activists interpret the data as meaning that Europeans have sufficient genetic diversity and therefore do not need any non-Whites; thus, European peoples as a whole encompass all the diversity that we could ever want or need (good work here, using the System’s own rhetoric against it).  Other activists make use of “more scientific” arguments against some of the tests and/or over-interpretation of the data.  Thus:

But some took a more scientific angle in their critiques, calling into doubt the method by which these companies determine ancestry — specifically how companies pick those people whose genetic material will be considered the reference for a particular geographical group.

While none of these arguments are specifically cited in System articles, no doubt some of these arguments derive from my own writings on this subject (e.g., I’ve seen my Counter-Currents article about racial purity on Stormfront).

So, in the end, Establishment joy dissipates and they acknowledge that maybe genetic testing won’t save them against “hatred and bigotry” after all.  

Two major take-home points from the genetic ancestry testing paradigm. First, the System is so desperate to delegitimize White nationalism that they will indulge in the most outrageous hypocritical inconsistencies – e.g., saying that race has no biological basis and so cannot be determined by genetic testing, and then saying that hopefully we can use genetic testing to show White nationalists that they are not racially pure.  Second, if I may “toot my own horn,” the “movement” needs to get over its “hate the messenger” attitude and sometimes listen to what I have to say.  In the end, I often turn out to be correct, and it would save a lot of time, energy, effort, and avoided failure if people who know what they are talking about are actually listened to and accepted, rather than being ignored or summarily dismissed. This is one example – those White nationalists who accept the scientifically valid definitions of race as involving genetic kinship and genetic distance (and who view Identity as having both biological and non-biological components) are impervious to these sorts of ancestry testing-based System attacks, and those who think March of the Titans in the “word of god” are going to continue to find themselves vulnerable to the System’s memetic-genetic attacks. Your choice – scientific validity and strength or racial pseudoscience and weakness.

Read this nonsense. Better title: “What the Left Gets Wrong About Antifa…and the Alt Right.”  The ludicrousness of all the Establishment heavy breathing is beyond measure, but I’ll make a few brief points about this leftist effort.  First, whatever violence is now coming from the Right is a pale imitation of many years’ worth of extreme violent thuggery and outright domestic terrorism coming from Antifa and other flotsam and jetsam of the “Alt Left.” The Right has endured endless years of street attacks (championed by the Establishment – e.g., “punch a Nazi” and note that the unprovoked punch of Spencer was met with glee while Damigo’s self-defense punch was met with unbridled horror), cancelled meetings, break-up of lawful public assembly, leading up to the recent Unite the Right event where a legal rally was met with the usual vicious violence. Second, attempts to justify leftist violence because it is, in the opinion of deranged leftists, in the service of more palatable ideologies, is self-serving nonsense; particularly since some of these leftists are Marxists, representing an ideology that has murdered more human beings than any other, and anarchists themselves have built up their own body count over the years.  Third, the idea that the Alt Right “has more power” than Antifa is the height of leftist madness. Curiously, apart from perhaps the ignorant buffoon sitting in the White House (who himself denounced “racists” and “White supremacists”), the entire Establishment of the entire Western world, from Mitt Romney to Angela Merkel, from movie stars to professional athletes, from Senators and Congressmen of “both” parties to major corporations and CEOs, ALL speak in one voice: against the Alt Right and in favor of the “protestors” (Antifa/Alt Left).  Even Bannon called the Alt Right “clowns.” That’s a fascinating juxtaposition, as is the fact that while Unite the Right attendees are losing jobs just from being photographed attending the rally, none  of the club-wielding, brick-throwing, chemical-spraying, and flamethrower-shooting leftist thugs have suffered a similar fate, much less being arrested or otherwise harassed by the police (who, mysteriously, sided with the “powerless” Antifa against the “powerful” Alt Right, possibly at the instigation of local authorities who, also mysteriously, sided with the poor, powerless waifs of Antifa against the big, bad bullies of the Alt Right).  Fourth, talk of a history of “White Christian Supremacy” in America reminds me of Sailer’s point that the Left ignores the last 50 years of American history.  Hey, leftists: you guys have been in charge for the last half-century, and you are so entrenched in all of the institutions of power that you are effectively blocking Trump’s initiatives. So, who are these guys kidding?  They have the power, they are the System, and Antifa is the Establishment. 

Corporations, Internet entities, and others who have no problem with child porn or terrorism have a problem with White nationalism or “race realism.”  In other words, according to the System, a Jared Fogle is better than a Jared Taylor, and an Osama Bin Laden is better than, say, a Richard Spencer.  Tell me again: who has the power?

Counter-Currents has been booted by PayPal and our Facebook page has been deleted.
Both Red Ice servers were hacked, as were the site owners’ Twitter accounts, and still have not recovered.
VDare, AltRight.com, and AmRen were bounced from PayPal.
VDare’s conference next April has been shut down by the venue.
TRS was taken down by their webhosting company, but got a new host and were back online in 3 hours.
Mike Enoch was banned for the fourth time from Twitter.
KickStarter, GoFundMe, and IndieGoGo have all vowed to shut down campaigns related to White Nationalist concerns.
Pax Dickinson’s Twitter has been shut down.
Hatreon is offline.
PolNewsForever’s Twitter has been shut down.
The Daily Stormer has been targeted with massive DDOS attacks.
The Daily Stormer domain registration was dropped by GoDaddy, transferred to Google, and then seized by Google.
The Daily Stormer discord server has been shut down.
The Altright.com discord server has been shut down.
Vanguard America’s WordPress and Facebook accounts have been shut down.
Spotify has removed 27 “hate” bands as defined by the SPLC.
GoFundMe has taken down campaigns to help James Fields.
RootBocks has been taken down by its hosting company, but is back online.
Xurious has been removed from Bandcamp and Soundcloud.
Daniel Friberg and Christopher Dulny, both Swedes, have been barred from entering the United States because of their presence at Unite the Right.
Lauren Southern’s Patreon account has been taken down.
Lauren Southern’s Instagram has been taken down, but is now back up.
NPI’s Paypal account has been shut down.
Two upcoming speeches by Richard Spencer have been canceled.
Identity Europa’s PayPal has been shut down.
Christopher Cantwell’s Facebook, PayPal, and website are gone.
Weev’s LinkedIn account has been shut down.
The Paranormies and other podcasts have been kicked off of Soundcloud.
YouTube had demonitized controversial videos, making it impossible for dissident video bloggers to make a living from their work.
Airbnb combed through the social media of people with Charlottesville-area registrations on Unite the Right weekend, and canceled the reservations and accounts of Unite the Right attendees
Uber has cancelled Baked Alaska’s and James Allsup’s accounts.
Squarespace is dropping multiple Right-wing sites.
A Toronto free speech event with Faith Goldy, Jordan Peterson, and Gad Saad has been cancelled.

Is that power?

That’s great.  I say: bring it on, GOP.  Try and win elections, especially at the national level, without the long-time core supporters that you despise and, truth be told, have always despised. Forget about the “Alt Right” – without the “Bunker vote” the GOP is toast.

Let’s get those Bunkers to abandon the GOP, and the cucks can try and get Antifa votes 


As the “Unite the Right” crowd was dispersing, they were forced by the police into the path of the peace-loving, rock-throwing, fire-spraying antifa. A far-left reporter for The New York Times, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, tweeted live from the event: “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.”


MARK STEYN: Absolutely. Freedom of speech enables you to argue for other freedoms, and that is the point of it. So if you don’t have freedom of speech, all you can do is, as they do in unfree societies, is blow things up and shoot people. And it is interesting to me that the less freedom of speech we have, the more we have what we saw over the weekend. We have guys rampaging through the street.
It doesn’t really matter what side they’re on, the minute you say that you can’t book a conference room and hold a debate, you can’t have a YouTube channel, you can’t go on Facebook, then the logic of that tends towards smashing stuff in the street…

The System and the Left (really the same thing) in their outrageous hypocrisy first want to deny the “Far Right” the right to peacefully assemble, to hold conferences, to express dissident opinions, to have dissident websites, to be activists without being subjected to social pricing, to attend rallies without being confronted with flying bricks and flamethrowers – and then they criticize when the Right, with its back against the wall, fights back and uses “violence.”   If you do not allow people to lawfully engage in the political process, if you deny them access to the marketplace of ideas, if you stifle debate and free inquiry, then all that pent up dissident energy is going to go somewhere.  Repressing the non-violent activism of the Right increases, not decreases, the probability of rightist violence (is this the intention?). If Unite the Right would have been allowed to have their rally without the tag-team repression of Establishment politicians/law enforcement and the Antifa who work closely with the politicians and police they pretend to oppose, then the car ramming and the helicopter crash would not have happened.  To deny this fact then leads to the logic that any manifestation of the pursuit of White interests is so forbidden than pro-White activists are always morally responsible for the violence committed by their opponents.  That “logic” by the way does nothing except reinforce Far Right memes about the anti-White System and White genocide.  Who has “the power” again?  One has to be borderline insane to argue that the beleaguered (to use Trump’s word) Far Right has any amount of real power whatsoever.

This all deals with the social pricing problem.  I have written about this issue extensively over the years (as has, e.g., Dr. MacDonald and others), and I wholeheartedly agree with Greg Johnson’s latest proposals for making political opinions a protected category in the private workplace and for treating Internet companies as public utilities that cannot discriminate based on dissident views.  The problem is that the System, deriving enormous power from social pricing, will be especially loathe to give that power up. Indeed, I have been reading many Establishment articles crowing about the success in imposing social pricing hardships on Unite the Right attendees, on the principle that it is “society acting to impose standards of acceptable belief and behavior.”  Of course, these are the same people who scream and cry about the “horrors of McCarthyism” – apparently being supporters of genocidal Marxism and being traitors during the Cold War is admirable, but defending the interests of your race is not.  The fight against social pricing in America mirrors the fight against hate speech laws in Europe: absolutely essential, but one that faces an uphill battle due to the vested interests of the System in maintaining the status quo.  We need to do a better job of formulating memes to support these legal/political initiatives, and we will need allies along other areas of the political spectrum to drum up support. Of course, with the current “CharlotteGate” hysteria, it doesn’t look likely that such allies will be forthcoming right now.  Maybe later.  But we need to prepare now. We need people with legal training, with knowledge of law drafting, to start looking at approaches for formulating these anti-social pricing initiatives.  It will need to be done in a way that balances free speech and free association – for example, Planned Parenthood should not be forced to employ a rabid antiabortion activist; on the other hand, what one’s politics are shouldn’t affect employment at a pizza restaurant or what have you. On the other, other hand, we need to be wary of places of employment making grasping arguments about how diversity is somehow fundamental to their mission (“we serve people of all races, so therefore….).  That’s why we need careful thought in drafting initiatives that cover various contingencies and legal tricks, so a document exists that can later be peddled to others when the current furor dies down.

While we can criticize the Left, the Right – and here I mean the Far Right – can be criticized as well. But that can be a subject for another day.

Rotten Orange News: CNN Blackmail

Deeper meaning.

I’m sure everyone has heard of this by now.

CNN and the rest of the MSM can do all the “spin” they want; the overall picture of what happened here is crystal clear…and quite disgusting indeed.  Even some guy from Vox of all places blasted them about it.

Further, one can ask a more basic question: why did CNN need to “investigate” the whole video incident to begin with?  Why did they act if it were an outrageous case of lese majeste, rather than as a juvenile joke?

This blog is critical of Trump, so if a pro-Trumpite (Roissy perhaps) wanted to make a video of Der Touchback wrestling someone with “EGI Notes” written on them, fine – that would be funny.  Who cares?  

One good thing about Trump is that he has exposed the soft underbelly of the Establishment – their humorless over-inflated sense of self, their pathological ego, their unjustified monumental self-esteem.  They are unable to stand being mocked without lashing out (ironically, like Trump himself) – thus they can be baited into making mistakes (like this).

The bad thing about Trump is that there are no real consequences when the Establishment mucks it up.  We have the “God Emperor” as President and “America’s Senator” as Attorney General, and neither one does a damn thing about anything.

Antifa runs wild in the streets for months, the government has the power to crack down if they had the will and desire to do so, but the Justice Department can motivate themselves only for those who rioted during His Majesty’s Inauguration. As regards the rest of it, Trump’s supporters just have to fend for themselves.  Indeed, Nathan Damigo’s fist made more of an impact – in more ways than one, eh? – on that whole situation than anything Fat Don or Howdy Doody Sessions has done or likely will ever do.

One problem is that Trump’s fanboys never criticize him.  He gives de facto amnesty to the “Dreamers” and the fanboys instead drain their prostates spontaneously ejaculating about a “Congressional Picnic.”

CNN has nothing to fear from the likes of them.

It’s Der Failure

Digging deep into the “movement” woodpile.

I’d much rather Anglin would use this money for living expenses and to expand his business rather than throw it away on a lawsuit that he can never win. Basically, I tells the SPLC that all they need to do to drain the movement of capital is file nuisance lawsuits against our public figures. It is sad that our movement would not support Anglin to this amount until he got sued, and then only to raise money for lawyers, not for him.

Greg is correct about the danger of nuisance lawsuits.  However, we need to dig deeper here into this.  Anglin did not ask to be sued. Now, one could assert that Anglin’s actions against Gersh invited the suit, and fault him for that.

Let me be clear: in my opinion, Anglin did nothing wrong legally, and he did nothing wrong morally.  From what I’ve read, the only wrong incurred was against Spencer’s mother, who was – based on online public information and discussion – apparently the victim of a crude extortion plot against her property.  

But just because something is legally and morally justified does not mean it is wise.  Der Movement has a habit of starting fights it cannot win, of constantly backing down (hello, Mudshark Annie), of constantly being on the defensive, of constantly losing.  The whole Anglin lawsuit mess is another self-inflicted wound.

But let’s dig even deeper.  Perhaps the reason Anglin and followers engaged in juvenile jackassery – typical Alt Right lulzing trolling – was out of frustration that nothing could be done to remedy the injustice done to the Spencer family.  And whose fault is that?  Meet Der Movement.  If Der Movement had a proper legal infrastructure, Gersh could have been sued (instead of being the one suing Anglin).  If Der Movement had deep ties to the community and to law enforcement, and had people in poltical office, then pressure could have been put on the authorities to investigate if Gersh was, or was not, legally culpable for the situation with Spencer’s mother.  If the “movement” had something – anything – to show for decades of support, reaching into the millions of dollars, then it would be the other side who may well have been on the defensive, instead of once again having the “movement” on the defense, scrambling for support.

Let’s dig deepest of all.  Given the cucks of Montana, probably nothing could have been done, even though legal means.  But, but, but…I thought that all these “red states” are Whitopias, full of ethnically superior Hajnalites who are the salt-of-the-earth foundation of America’s racial renaissance.   Robert Mathews thought so – that is, before he got burned alive by the Reagan administration (you remember Reagan, the other Man on White Horse – “we won” Der Movement crowed in November 1980) in Washington state, that other bastion of the Northwest Imperative.

So, perhaps at the heart of the matter is an ethnic-genetic-biocultural phenomenon.  Who knows? Maybe the Alt Wrong have been right all along with their heavy breathing about “high trust hunter gatherers” – but rather than being a sign of racial superiority/strength, to the extremes exhibited by Montanans, it’s a cucking weakness.  And what about Der Movement’s failed leadership, its decades of unremitting failure and wasted millions of dollars? If (American) racial activism wants to lose the scare quotes and become a real movement, it needs to ditch the affirmative action program and draw leadership and top activist cadres from a broader base of the European-American population.

Something Positive About the Alt Right

Spencer victorious, Brimelow and his Jewish friends weep.

I am often criticized for being too negative and critical, but here I want to praise a prominent “movement” figure and elements of the Alt Right in general.

Based on this account, Spencer and his team did virtually everything right.  I praise not only Spencer here but all the individuals and groups named, particularly those handling issues of law, security, and logistics, for thinking ahead, planning strategically, and executing efficiently.  Indeed, it is refreshing to read of a “movement” event that doesn’t quickly descend into a chaos of failure and stupidity. Most encouraging here was the forethought, planning, and contingency alternatives in place.

I have previously cited Spencer’s potential as a leader, and it was on display here.  I also said that one of the positives of the Alt Right was its ability to mobilize “ground troops” in real life, and that was on display here as well.

I will continue to criticize when such is warranted, but this is a case where encouragement and positive reinforcement is appropriate.  If things like this continue moving forward, some real progress can be made.