Category: moral cretin

Starbuck’s Moral Cowardice

The Moby Dick character, not the coffee company named after him (who are, ironically enough, also moral cowards).

I have always considered chapter 123 of Moby Dick to be of the most pivotal points of the story, in which Starbuck must make a choice between being authentically moral by his own standards (here I make no judgment of whether or not I see Ahab’s quest as right or wrong, the point is Starbuck very clearly considered it both practically wrong as well as immoral and “ungodly” – blasphemous even) or being a moral coward.  He chose the latter.

…outside Ahab’s door, Starbuck sees a loaded musket, and debates openly whether he shouldn’t simply shoot the captain and take over command of the ship. Although Starbuck knows that to kill is evil, he wonders whether it is not ethically preferable to kill Ahab and save the rest of the crew from certain doom. But, at the last moment, Starbuck lowers the “death tube” of the musket and puts it back—he does not have the heart, or the mind, to kill Ahab…

…he reasons about his possible murder of Ahab and mutiny in morals terms—weighing the life of one man versus the lives of many. Yet within that moral reasoning is also a question of conviction or willingness to act boldly, and Starbuck’s moralizing ultimately comes to be connected with a lack of will, a lack of exactly that over-riding sense of self….

I make an analogy between the moral cowardice of Starbuck and that of racialist activists who know that Der Movement and its “leaders” are failing not only those activists, but the entire White race and its civilization, but who do nothing.  It’s easier, you see, to just “go along and get along,” appease the quota queens, and maybe get “rewarded” with a metaphorical (or literal?) pat on the head, praise for a comment, perhaps even an invitation to write a post or attend a meeting.  The moral weaklings do not have the strength of character (or just, perhaps, a lack of self-interested dissimulation) evidenced by the child in The Emperor’s New Clothes – to state the truth even if it is unpopular or makes those in power uncomfortable.  Now, here I talk about those activists who have enough sense to realize that decades of endless failure is a problem, who recognize one wasted opportunity after another, who understand the enormity of “movement” uselessness and ineptness, and recognize the rent-seeking behavior of the useless panhandling “leadership.”  True, a fraction of activists are so dim and/or deluded they do not realize this, and for those people we talk of cognitive deficiency, not a lack of moral courage. But for those who know better, and anyone (sane) with a triple digit IQ should really know better, then this is a deficit of character, not of intelligence or sanity.

It’s just too comfortable to engage in hobbyism, to be conformist, to fit in with the crowd, to make believe black is white and wrong is right, than to stand up, speak out, hold the failures accountable, and demand that the cause is what is sacred, not the personality cults and not the nutty dogmas folks feel obligated to pay lip service to so as to “fit in.”
It will be interesting, for example, to see the reaction to the horrific and disgusting revelations about Rushton.  Assuming for the moment that the evidence against him is solid – and it has been discussed at the pro-HBD TOO blog of all places – then this is a betrayal of the first order, not only a complete moral collapse on Rushton’s part, but utter racial hypocrisy, as well as confirmation about all I’ve been saying about the mendacious perfidy and pseudoscientific lies of the anti-White HBD political movement. Will any of Rushton’s buddies among Der Movement’s leadership admit they were wrong about him and his work?  Will they denounce him and his behavior?  Will they distance themselves from the HBD scam, which as I have long discussed here, is based on a foundation of lies that go far beyond Rushton?  Or will they “circle the wagons,” and at most mumble something about being “disappointed” and move on, move on there’s nothing to see here?

There are many Starbucks in Der Movement.  And they’ll all go down with the racial ship, just as Starbuck and the crew went down with the Pequod.  And, unfortunately, the rest of us will go down as well, since we are all passengers on the same ship of race and civilization.

Moral cowardice has costs, and we will all pay in the end.

Derbyshire, Child Porn, and VDARE

Derb the moral turd.

First, note that Derb implicitly tries to associate himself as similar to Bukovsky as heroic “awkward squad” truth-tellers. In reality, Derbyshire, opponent of White nationalism and proponent of miscegenation, is, to borrow a phrase from another HBDer, “a pillar of the Establishment.” More importantly, Derbyshire, father of two, makes this rather remarkable comment: 

Why should it be a crime to have child porn on your computer?

Let’s see, Derbyshire, you stupid bastard: consumers of child porn create the demand for it. That demand in turn motivates scum to produce that filth for profit, often resorting to the sexual torture of young children, and always involving sexual exploitation of children. Understand, you morally obtuse turd? 
I must say: many years ago, a foreigner, observing the number of White male-Asian female couples, noted to me that “yellow fever” among White males may be sublimated pedophilia, given the neotonic nature of Asians, particularly Asian females (on average small, with muted secondary sexual characteristics). Yes, the Derb states that enjoying child porn is “weird and creepy” – but that is coming from a man who is a self-described (or, quoting his own mother) “awkward squad” and a man who is a proponent of inter-racial marriage, which most of us would consider “weird and creepy.” Despite being “weird and creepy,” Derbyshire apparently believes possession of child porn should be legal, based on his comment quoted above. Derbyshire has also written: 

Added to that sadness is the very unfair truth that a woman’s salad days are shorter than a man’s — really, in this precise context, only from about 15 to 20.

To put that in perspective, consider that a typical adult East Asiatrix is less sexually developed (i.e., secondary sexual characteristics) than is a typical 15 year old female of other races. 

One wonders what “Daddy Dragon” Brimelow thinks of Derbyshire’s opinions on this matter. If VDARE does nothing, says nothing, about this, then that’s a tacit endorsement of Derbyshire’s opinion. Conservative contributors to VDARE’s panhandling take note. 
Also: There are some who may accuse me of hypocrisy because I critique Derbyshire here, but have never commented on a Der Movement figure who’s been through the legal system over this issue. My rationale for not commenting on this other case is: (1) The individual in question has denied the charges and given an explanation of the guilty plea; (2) I do not have the full facts of that case so as to make an informed judgment; and (3) Unlike Derbyshire, that other individual has never publicly questioned the validity of child porn possession being a crime. Therefore, the issue here is that of Derbyshire, and not of anyone else.

A Moral Cretin

SJW Derbyshire spewing nonsense at the Neo-Marxist VDARE site.

Laugh at this:

In New York and Pennsylvania there are more clannish, tribal groups — Americans of Italian, Irish, and Jewish origins — and Mrs Clinton will naturally do better among those, as will Trump.

Jews supporting Trump? Wops and micks yes, but Jews? It’s clear that Jews, including Jewish Republicans (both of them) view a Trump nomination as a “dilemma.” 

…Trump is a shock to the system for a Jewish constituency that has prided itself on shaping the party in recent years as unassailably correct on Israel and open to diversity. Fleischer co-wrote a report after the last election on how to reach out to minorities. 

“He’s given a lot of people a lot of reason to pause and question whether he is a supporter of Israel,” Fleischer said. 

The word neutrality is fingernails across a chalk board in the Jewish community. It screams at you, and it sends up all kinds of warning flags about who he is and what he believes.”

Indeed, MacDonald (who Derbyshire crudely smeared as “The Marx of the Anti-Semites”) has clearly outlined, in a number of posts, the fear and loathing Jews have for Trump.

So why does Derbyshire lie about it? Because that’s what far-left HBDers do: lie, lie, lie. Anything that promotes HBD’s political objective of enslaving Whites to Jews and East Asians – complete with “measured groveling” – is fair game for the cadres of HBD activist extremists.

And then we have this excellent analysis of other Derbyshire screeds.

Moral cretin is a good description, but I prefer to view Derbyshire as a pile of dog shit molded into a vaguely human form.