Category: military

Sallis Right Again: Its the Dolt Right

How the Alt Right (Dolt Right) defames racial nationalism.

Long time readers of this blog are aware that one of my major warnings against the Alt Right is that by promoting themselves as encompassing the totality of racial nationalism, the Alt Right will taint the entire “movement” with their stupidity and mendacity.  Thus, whatever the Alt Right says and does will be construed as representing and reflecting all racial nationalists, even those of us who despise and oppose the Alt Right fad.

Read this, emphasis added:

Eli was in his mid-20s, from a middle-class suburban home, and he had led an unremarkable life, up until the Charlottesville rally launched him forward within the ranks of the loosely organized white-nationalist movement. He rose from a self-described “anonymous Twitter troll” to head of one of the largest groups in the so-called alt-right.

“I came to the realization around the inauguration that we must take this from an online activist movement to a real-life activist movement,” he told me. “I decided that was my calling.”

After a few phone calls, Eli agreed to give me an on-camera interview, at Richard Spencer’s apartment in Alexandria, Va. Spencer, 39, plays the big brother to many teenagers and 20-somethings drawn to the alt-right, and his one-bedroom apartment has become a frat house for white nationalists passing through the D.C. area. When I was there, a steady stream of young men (and an occasional woman) flowed in and out. Although Eli lives less than an hour away, he often crashes there on late nights spent drinking and planning the next event. He proudly told me he always gets the couch, while others sleep on the floor.

And then all the “blah, blah” about the military record.  And so the mainstream conclusion based on this latest Alt Right fiasco is, emphasis added:

The movement itself also relies on falsehoods. It includes Holocaust deniers and pseudo-intellectuals who spout unsubstantiated theories about the science behind racial difference. In order to reach mainstream Americans, white supremacists have learned to cloak their racism in disorienting terms like “white identity politics.”

Thanks a lot, you goddamn idiots.  

The mainstream’s deductive reasoning:

Premise (that you promote): The Alt Right IS White racial nationalism

Premise (based on facts): The Alt Right are a bunch of stupid, lying, incompetent, panhandling, drunken lulzers

Conclusion: White racial nationalism as a whole is composed of stupid, lying, incompetent, panhandling, drunken lulzers

Or:

Premise (that you promote): The Alt Right IS White racial nationalism

Premise: The Alt Right is based on lies, is full of liars, and peddles HBD pseudoscience

Conclusion: ALL the science asserted by White racial nationalists is pseudoscience

In other words, because Alt Righters are drunken liars, EGI is pseudoscience.

Irrational on the part of the mainstream? Perhaps?  But isn’t it YOU, dear Alt Righters, who preach that people – the “normies” – are inherently irrational, so that instead of constantly burying them with logic and rational scientific facts, we need to project strength and fine character to appeal to their irrational instincts?

How’s that working out for you?  The rest of us know how it is working out for us.  Exactly as I warned, the Alt Right is wrecking racial nationalism.

Time for another half-drunk Alt Right podcast.  Cue the Beavis-and-Buttthead sniggering.

And some advice: If you are a bunch of babbling imbeciles who can’t get your stories straight in the midst of your alcoholic haze, then please don’t give interviews to the mainstream media. Thank you.

Advertisements

Romans and Germans

Some notes about Ancient Rome.

We all know the “movement” dogma on Rome: originally a moral city state, founded by Dolph Lundgren look-a-likes, it became a morally corrupt, decadent, and degenerate Empire, as “racial mixing” destroyed the “original Nordic population” and repopulated the area with cringing swarthoid subhumans (i.e., modern Italians), to see the degenerate Empire crumble before the moral purity of those stalwart Germans.

Contra to “movement” dogma, it is difficult for normal people, informed historians, and the non-dogmatized educated, to consider the austere Christian Roman Empire of, say, Theodosius I (the last emperor of an undivided empire) as more “decadent” and “degenerate” than the early empire of the patrician emperors Nero and Caligula (Caligula!), or Tiberius, or of the later Republic of Catiline, Crassus, and Caesar, or the earlier Republic dictatorship of the bisexual Sulla (a favorite of William Pierce because of Sulla’s fair complexion- Pierce being nothing if not sophisticated in his historical tastes, Metrobius be damned [or sodomized]), or any of the earlier examples of corruption and rent-seeking avarice.

We can consider the 1942 classic The Roman Commonwealth by English historian Ralph Westwood Moore. With respect to the idea that Rome went from a virtuous city-state to a degenerate empire, Moore classified that as a “pious myth” and further stated: “Morality in the large sense was a thing which Rome achieved as she grew, not a Garden of Eden from which her destiny expelled her or a state of innocence from which she fell.”  Blasphemy!  That doesn’t accord with “movement” dogma so it must be wrong, wrong, wrong – or Moore was secretly Moori, a swarthoid with a Medish agenda!

And of course, there is Ferrill’s military explanation of the fall of Rome, which ironically enough, pins blame on the “barbarization” of the Roman military, as well as dubious strategic choices, as being primarily responsible, along with the obvious difficulty of maintaining such a far-flung empire for centuries against repeated assaults by determined and numerous foes.

Now, from an EGI standpoint, Rome would have been better off not building an empire and becoming a cosmopolitan city to begin with, but the storyline of moral degeneration and fall due to “racial admixture” is hogwash. 

In the battles between Romans and Germans (and Gauls) Der Movement of course historically sides with the latter against the former. There are a number of reasons for this: the typical Nord/Med divide (even though the original Romans are said to have been “Nordic”), that most activists are ethnically derived from stocks akin to Germans/Gauls rather than Romans, the whole dogma of a racially degenerate Empire trying to take the freedom aware from racially pure and noble Germanic “barbarians.” The Type I preference for barbarism over civilization, the knee-jerk Teutonophilia in all things.

We can ask though more objectively what’s going on there.

A more insightful pro-German view is to say that the existence of the Germans as an independent people is what was necessary for the creation of the Faustian Western High Culture after the Fall of Rome, that the Germans racially and morally revitalized a feeble and degenerate empire population, and that the racial integrity of Europe was endangered if Rome conquered Germania, since they would have populated those racially untouched regions with the degenerate cosmopolitan populations drawn from throughout the Empire.

Those arguments are not without merit, but they may be overblown. The Roman conquest of Gaul did not racially destroy the region, although a counter-argument is that France was later racially revitalized by settlement of Germanic peoples. Certainly, a non-ethnic fetishist view is that the demographic impact of Roman cosmopolitanism has been exaggerated.

Nevertheless, if we take seriously the argument that the future of the West as we know it was preserved trough the continued independence of the Germans, then we can reasonably view the Germanic victory of the Battle of Teutoburg Forest as being a positive outcome for the future of the West.  However, later military successes against the Germans in the early Empire period suggests that conquering and administering the region was considered negative from a cost/benefit ration; in other words, practical considerations, rather than the outcome of a single battle, is what led to the Rhine being set as the northeast boundary of the Empire.  Regardless of the reasons, again it can be stressed that the preservation of the Germans as an independent entity was important for the future development of the West.

But there is a difference between that and other battles.  In the earlier wars between Rome and the Germans, for example, the victories of Marius (and colleagues) in the Late Republic Period, it would take an extreme Germanocentric view to argue that the Germans were then on the side of the right, on the side of the West. This was not the case of peoples trying to preserve their freedom, but of barbarians attempting to conquer (and destroy) a civilization that was just them embarking on an imperialistic expansion.  The destruction of Rome at that point could well have short-circuited the progress of culture and civilization in Europe, lost to Europe the fruits of the Classical High Culture, and perhaps have prevented the West from ever coming into being.  It is perhaps not surprising that Der Movement typically forgets Roman-German warfare before Arminius.

What about later wars?  Was the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by the Germans good or bad?  If we take the traditional (and “movement”) view that the (later) empire was completely degenerate, then it was undoubtedly good; however, if we take the view, discussed above, that the later Western Empire was actually more morally sound than it ever was, then the question becomes more interesting.

Rather than frame it in the form of “good” vs. “bad” perhaps a counterfactual analysis would be useful.  What if the Roman Empire, the Western Empire, was able to act from a position of strength in the fourth and fifth centuries AD to reform the European situation to one of a power-sharing confederation mode? What if Rome has won the Battle of Adrianople, and had corrected certain deficiencies and regained some degree of vigor.  What if a wise Emperor had realized that maintenance of a far-flung centralized Empire was no longer feasible (note that the division into Western and Eastern halves was the beginning of this realization) and had reformed the Empire into a Confederation of Peoples – Romans, Germans, Gauls – with cooperation, considerable local autonomy and various common objectives (e.g., eastward expansion, defense against the Huns [Chalons as a crude example of what was possible], etc.).  That may have been unworkable given the attitudes of people of that time; on the other hand, the Gauls were Romanized after exhibiting such resistance centuries before; and, and, at this time, the Germans were no longer the same “barbarians” as in the past, some degree of “Romanization” had taken place, at least to an indirect degree. 

Rome could have at some point attempted to cut its losses, preserve itself as an independent “Mediterranean” power, and come to an accommodation with other European peoples.

Would that have hastened the development of the West, bypassing the Dark Ages?  Or would it have inhibited the development of the West by preserving the fossilized remnants of the Classical past its expiration date?  These are all interesting questions, ones that are never asked by a (itself fossilized) “movement” steeped in inflexible dogma.

That last point is the present relevance of this analysis.  Whether or not ancient historical events meant “this” or “that” are not directly issues of importance.  Getting the “movement” to break free of its blind adherence to fossilized dogma, and develop an increased flexibility of thinking – that is important.  And if at least questioning dogma on the ancient past – mere questioning, not necessarily even any profound change in opinion, but at least an honest consideration of the possibilities – can effect such increased flexibility, then such ruminations are all for the good.

Silk Road News: Heavenly Palace Falling Down

Very cognitive, very elite.

Read this, emphasis added:

The tail end of 2017 was packed with interesting asteroid sightings and near-misses that gave skywatchers a reason to look up, but the biggest threat from above in 2018 might be manmade. China’s Tiangong-1 space station has been completely out of control for months now, and space agencies from all over the world are expecting it to come crashing down to Earth in early 2018. Unfortunately, nobody knows exactly when or where the massive hunk of space junk will land.

Tiangong-1 — which means “Heavenly Palace” — hosted a number of Chinese astronauts during its brief life span, but after its extended mission ended in 2016 the Chinese space agency revealed that it had lost communication with the spacecraft and that its decaying orbit would eventually result in it plummeting to Earth. That’s not great news.

Tiangong-1 is Scientists who have been monitoring the space station’s troubled existence have been attempting to forecast where it might slam into our planet but have only been able to narrow it down to an area between 43 degrees north and 43 degrees south. Most of that area is covered by ocean, but there’s still around a 1 in 10,000 chance that the debris lands on a populated area, potentially injuring people or damaging structures.

The space station weighs 18,740 pounds, and while much of the material that makes up the craft will burn up in the friction of Earth’s atmosphere, thousands of pounds of debris is expected to survive reentry. With no way to control where or when the Chinese vehicle reenters, it’s impossible to predict the exact location where all that debris will land.

According to a FAQ about the Tiangong-1, the actual impact of the debris might not even be the most dangerous part about its tumble towards Earth. Potentially hazardous materials including hydrazine, a highly toxic chemical used in rocket fuel, might survive reentry. If any humans or animals come into contact with the substance, it would be very bad news.

The spacecraft is expected to finally fall to Earth sometime in March, though observers have only been able to narrow its date of descent down to a two-week window, which isn’t particularly reassuring. When it eventually does begin to fall, scientists will have precious little time to predict the area of impact, but you can be sure that every space agency on the planet will be monitoring it closely.

And for those HBDers who wish to defend their gods by invoking the memory of Skylab’s descent, I make three points:

1. That was almost 40 years ago; you’d think that the big-brained, high-IQ cognitive elitists from The Land of the Gods would have improved upon 1970s technology and protocols (assuming that the human photocopiers haven’t just essentially copied absolute American technology.

2. Note the part about “China’s Tiangong-1 space station has been completely out of control for months now…”

3. Whether hydrazine contamination was part of the Skylab debris threat was never discussed back then, but it sure is certain that the Chinese are going to be spreading toxic chemical wherever their “heavenly palace” comes crashing down.

In summary: complete Chinese irresponsibility.

Also, it’s interesting that we are told that the USA is capable of intercepting and destroying North Korean ICBMs, but we are helpless against a meandering piece of Oriental space junk.  We’ll be told: “Oh no, attempting to destroy it will just create a greater amount of small debris scattered over a larger area.”  My answer is that utilizing a nuclear warhead for the interception will destroy the “Heavenly Palace” completely (too bad it couldn’t have been done when it was in use).  We need to get over this hysterical aversion to everything nuclear.  Of course, this assumes that American nuclear weapons will actually work – the only nation that is empirically testing their weapons, and who can affirm they actually work IRL, is North Korea.  No amount of “computational modeling” can substitute for actual testing (including the occasional above ground detonation).  We need to scrap all these “test ban” treaties, as well as the “outer space ban” for nuclear weapons, and start testing the weapons, building more and better weapons, and expanding the nuclear arsenal (including bigger bombs).  The decline of America and the West perfectly coincides with the advent of the extreme risk-aversion we see about everything, and the extreme pansification of all things (including downgrading American warhead yields to popgun levels, while other nations combine both yield and accuracy).

Yes, I know the Tolkienites – who want us all to be eating twigs and branches in the woods while the Chinese launch “Heavenly Palaces” – won’t like all “dat dere nuk-a-leer stuff” but who cares what they “think?”

Genetic Engineering Humans for Ethnoracial Preservation

Also, a note about weaponized CRISPR.

Some relevant excerpts:

There are at least three semi-successful techniques for de-extinction so far.  1) Selective back-breeding of existing descendents to recreate a primordial ancestor is being used for the revival of the European aurochs, among others.  2) Cloning with cells from cryopreserved tissue of a recently extinct animal can generate viable eggs.  If the eggs are implanted in a closely related surrogate mother, some pregnancies produce living offspring of the extinct species. 3) Allele replacement for precisely hybridizing a living species into an extinct species is the new genome-editing technique developed by George Church.  If the technique proves successful (such as with the passenger pigeon), it might be applied to the many other extinct species that have left their ancient DNA in museum specimens and fossils up to 500,000 years old.

As someone concerned with actual genetic fidelity, and not just “form and function” I am not enthusiastic about approach 1, which does not actually reproduce the original creature but merely a functional analog of it. Approach 2 is certainly sound from my perspective; approach 3 in theory could be equally sound if the “precisely hybridizing” means a full and complete allele to allele replacement so that the original creature is actualized with full genetic fidelity.  But note the following:

Even with exponential advances in bio-technology, de-extinction projects will not produce species that are 100% genetically identical to the extinct species, due to the constraints of working with incomplete ancient DNA.  It is expected that the revived species will be nearly identical genetically, and “functionally identical” ecologically.

I’m not thrilled with that, obviously.  In some cases, if that is the best that can be done, fine, but if it is possible to produce a ~100% identical reproduction, then that should be pursued, and not just a “quick-and-dirty” “functionally identical” analog. Now, I’ve read that, for example, the Woolly Mammoth genome has been fully sequenced, with multiple reads, so I don’t see why in that case an attempt for ~100% fidelity can’t be attempted.  I say ~100% rather than 100% because there’s always a possibility of some error or artifact, but at some point, if we approach 100% to a degree within methodological error, then we can assume the goal is achieved.  

But, that’s ancient samples.  If we want to “de-extinct” or re-populate (to increase numbers and/or genetic diversity) of extant, endangered species, then we have the full genomes available and these data must be carefully compiled and curated. There’s no excuse for not being able to reproduce with 100% genetic fidelity currently existing organisms.

Now, we get to the meat of the issue: human ethnoracial preservationism.  European ethnic stocks are endangered, all eventually if current trends continue, but some faster than others.  These are extant, currently existing subspecies, and there is no excuse to not being able to reproduce these in the future – we can get the genetic data, accurately, today.  The genetics of extant European ethnies need to be compiled and curated, in the event it should be necessary and possible to “de-extinct” or re-populate particular types.  Am I talking about genetic engineering humans?  Yes, I am, and I am not interested in hysterical fainting fits over “ethics” or “morals.”  Euro-genocide is not ethical or moral, yet it is occurring, so leveraging science in the service of ethnic and racial preservation is highly ethical and moral.  And we need full genome sequencing of many, many, many representatives of different ethnic groups, to cover a range of sub-types, and to recreate a reasonable amount of genetic diversity for each curated ethny.

Getting back to ancient samples – could we reproduce ancient human stocks, it necessary?  People talk about Neanderthals, and that’s all well and good, but if we have autosomal genetic data with full, or close to full, coverage, can we reproduce, say, Ancient Egyptians?  Spartans?  Vikings?  Romans?  Can we recreate Medieval or Renaissance man?  Or certain prominent individuals?  Assuming the DNA is available?

Getting back to modern humans – can we also curate certain Euro ethnic hybrids?  Yes, we should.  And the data could be used to devise Euro hybrids of our own choosing, or, conversely, could be used to “clean up” ethnic genomes of low-level admixture (if such is desired).  Again, let us have no qualms about genetic engineering of humans for ethnoracial preservation and/or to expand the scope of European ethnic stocks.  We should view this ONLY as a methodological problem, not a “moral” or “ethical” one.  Whose morals and ethics do we appeal to, anyway?

De-extinction is not a “quick fix” science.  Most species revival projects will take many decades.  First, extensive research about a candidate species is conducted before moving into a lab setting for genomic work to revive the species.  Then, once the initial revival is completed, the species will be bred in captivity, preferably with genetic variability introduced from the genomes of a range of specimens or fossils.  The growing population will be studied and then eventually moved to quarantine areas for further observation and analysis.  Getting the okay from regulatory agencies will be required before the animals are ultimately re-introduced to the wild.

Passenger pigeons, for example, will initially be bred in captivity by zoos, then placed into netted woods, and then finally re-introduced to portions of   their original habitat—America’s eastern deciduous forest.  Before that happens, The US Fish and Wildlife Service and regulatory agencies in the relevant states will have to agree to welcome the resurgent birds.

he same basic principles can apply to humans as well.

.

On a related note, consider the following. Of one remembers all the talk of years past about ethnic-targeted weapons, the possibility of weaponized CRISPR should be grounds for careful reflection.

As the degenerate West collapses into a multiracial morass, rest assured the more homogeneous Orient will pursue technologies for warfare that the decadent Occident would have SJW fainting fits over.  One can envision a CRISPR-type system targeting European-specific gene sequences, delivered by a transmissible virus.  And, there is, insofar as we know, no stockpiles of anti-CRISPR therapeutics (e.g., CRISPR inhibitors in an efficiently deliverable form).  We may be headed towards a genetics weapons arms race, one that is actively pursued by cunning Yellows and inanely eschewed by milksop Whites.

Silk Road News: Misleading Asian IQ

More Asian stupidity.

While Negroes are uneven, I’ve found that I’ve always been professionally disappointed with Asians outside of a classroom environment – barring one exception.  By Asians, this means the whole of the Far East, from Korea down to Laos and Cambodia, though I’ve never really worked with Japanese. One colleague of mine who had lived for years in Asia insisted to me that Asians make a good impression for about two months and then they fall apart professionally.  Even after I knew this fact, I still once nearly got marooned in Newark, New Jersey on a business trip because an Asian I was stuck working with had run into [h]is two month use-by-date and absconded in a surprising, unprofessional way.

I know that Asian societies appear to be prosperous and “high IQ,” but historically they do tend to fall apart.  South Vietnam collapsed after the Americans left them to their own devices very quickly 1975.  China has gone from order to anarchy several times in the 20th Century and there was a severe famine in 1961.  North Korea is Korean culture without the Americans. Cambodia is a wreck.

Censoring Winne-the-Pooh Is over-inflated Asian self-esteem their “Achilles heel?”

Mind-numbing hatred of Asians toward Whites – why should academia be any different?\


Asians displacing Whites – Silkers celebrate.  All according to plan!


More stereotypes proved correct: the anti-White Asian and the ugly, mannish lesbian.


Another law-abiding Asian cogelite.

Silk Road News: The Other Shoe Drops

This just does not make any sense whatsoever.

In all cases, emphasis added. From Majority Rights:

Kumiko Oumae works in the defence and security sector in the UK. Her opinions here are entirely her own.


How many Japanese females work in “the defence and security sector in the UK?”  Why would such a person, who has participated in what the System would label “a racist and extremist blog,” publicly declare their work in that System itself?  Does this make any sense on the face of it?  Imagine an anti-Semitic Nigerian blogger who openly declares they “work in the defence and security sector in Iceland.”  If the self-description was true, would such a declaration make any sense whatsoever?  Wouldn’t any sane and sincere blogger keep their System affiliation secret?

And then we have Majority Rights having a self-proclaimed deep state (non-White) worker involved in their ostensibly “dissident, nationalist” blog.  We’ll be told it’s good to have “moles infiltrating the system.”  Yes, indeed, when such are of your own race, of the native stock, keep their infiltration secret, and, more to the point, what kind of genuine mole publicly announces the fact of their infiltration?  Nothing here passes the “smell test.” 

And then we have her openly declaring her enmity to the White men at Alt Right.com and again openly declaring working for the “defence sector” – 

Kumiko Oumae  JLawrence • 2 hours ago

Not interested in being productive for you in any sense. I’m the enemy, silly. The comments I make here are mostly for my own amusement, and to get a gauge on what you think.

If I were interested in actually helping anything, my behaviour would be completely different.

Also, regarding men having to ask or not ask. I work in the defence sector. I’m part of that thing which you refer to as ‘in power’. This is part of why your smugness has no real effect on me. This whole conversation is a farce. The fact that you have a penis does not place you above me, and it never will.

– again someone who writes for an alleged “nationalist blog” and who tosses around terms like “motherfucking Jews” is a Japanese woman who works in the “defence sector” in the UK, and repeatedly open declares that fact.

If I’m the only one who thinks something here doesn’t add up, then Der Movement is infinitely more moronically dense and imbecilic-scatter-brained than I ever imagined.