Category: movement

None Dare Call It Hypocrisy

Well, actually, I dare.

I see it as highly hypocritical that the same “movement” “leaders” – all the quota queens – endlessly complain about being “deplatformed” (and use that as part of their equally endless tin cup panhandling), while at the same time these “leaders” behave the same way with respect to racialist dissidents who honestly critique the “movement” and its “leaders” – “ban” them, essentially “deplatform” them from the central media centers of (what passes for) “movement” discourse.

It is important to clear up some matters lest I be accused of hypocrisy or inconsistency.  First, I do agree with the argument – made, for example, by Bowery at Majority Rights when he and I were both participating at that blog – that freedom of association trumps freedom of speech.  I further made the argument at my own blogs that freedom of speech does not obligate anyone to host any specific type of speech at their own forum; again, freedom of association is above freedom of speech, as long as that speech has somewhere else to go. So, yes, I agree that a blog owner can “ban” anyone they want from their site, and that “banned” person can go and set up their own blog and do their own thing elsewhere on the Internet.  After all, that’s ultimately why this blog exists (and, if I remember correctly, for example, Majority Rights was established after its founders were essentially declared persona non grata at Gene Expression).  I have also argued, in like sense, that a blog can be viewed as a form of political warfare, and so why should political soldiers benefit their enemies by facilitating those enemies’ dissemination of their ideas?  There is no obligation to host your enemy.  Very good, but is a fellow racial activist really an “enemy” because they criticize some of your ideas and actions?  Because they state that you should be held accountable for mistakes (according to your own declared standards of behavior)?  Are fellow activists the functional equivalent of SJW leftists?

It is also true that there is a difference between being banned from a blog (or a set of blogs) and having a major (albeit privately owned) company, which is functionally equivalent to a public utility, banning its use by an entire class of people based on, for example, their political views.  However, the “why should you assist the enemy?” argument cuts both ways here.  The owners of Amazon, Twitter, PayPal, etc. can argue – why should they be obligated to support their enemies?  Oh, you say that they are so successful that they are equivalent to public utilities and so they must be obligated to serve everyone.  Very well.  Imagine the same principle is turned inward to the “movement” – some “movement” blogs, sites, groups, and organizations are so successful (within the “movement” itself) that they are equivalent to “movement” “public utilities” and so they must be obligated to serve all racial activists, even those they disagree with.  I’m sure that violation of freedom of association would be rejected, even though in principle the argument is the same (adjusted for scale between society-at-large and the “movement”).

I’m not making a legalistic argument in this post; instead, I’m making a moral one, based on principles, and based on character and integrity (or the lack therefore in Der Movement).  The basic truth is that these “leaders” are endlessly whining about being deplatformed by private companies, and they behave the same way to racial activist dissidents they do not like.  The scale is different, but the basic principle is the same, and most of the arguments as to why private companies should be obligated to interface with, and serve, the “movement” as a whole can be made to argue that the “movement” as a whole needs to interface with the dissidents within its ranks.

Basically, I see the behavior of the “leaders” as being one of cowardice – fear of engaging with dissident critics and those critics’ ideas – as well as the prima donna sense of entitlement that derives from being products of the “movement’s” affirmative action program – how dare anyone criticize them!  Why should they stoop to answering critics?.  Low character hypocrites: behold the Type I Quota Queen “Leadership” of Der Movement: fearfully hiding from those who would critique their flawed ideas and those who would hold them accountable for their failures.

Note: Someone may point out that my own blogs have traditionally never had comments sections.  That is true.  First, I’m not a fan of such sections, the signal-to-noise ratio is poor; most “movement” comments threads of full of asinine Type I activists, trolls, fetishists, defectives, and “antis.”  Second, and even more importantly, unlike our “fearless leaders,” I am not a full time professional activist (living off of supporters’ donations). I’m merely a part-time amateur; I simply do not have the time to deal with comments; to my mind, it is more important, and more prudent, to invest my limited time in producing new content.  However, our heroic leaders are indeed full time activists with free time aplenty, they are people who believe that comments sections have value, so there is obviously a difference between my blog and theirs in that regard.

Advertisements

American White Nationalist Definitions

Definitions of WN.

Beavis-and-Butthead White nationalism: The American Alt Right.

Silk Road White nationalism: The idea that Whites should be an enslaved subaltern low caste serving the interests of their Asian overlords.  Asians will colonize the West, and the borders of the West will be guarded by Chinese girls with guns.

Yarmulke and Chopstick White nationalism: HBD race realism. The Alt Wrong.

Tin Cup White nationalism: Most of American White nationalism; Der Movement in general.  This is best represented by the Happy Penguins and the Ethnonationalist ethnic cleansers.

Poolside White nationalism: Hello, Roissy.  Nihilistic hedonism, with a bit of race-mixing thrown in for good measure.  “Game” – pure “pussy pedestalization.”

Sieg Heil and Pass the Beer White nationalism: Nutzis in general.  “White nationalism 1.0” for the most part. Type I activists.

The Alt Yellow

Exposing the racial sexual fetishism underlying “movement” and HBD politics.

Sallis right again…and, no, I don’t get tired of writing that.

Readers of this blog are aware that I have been very critical of the pro-Asian precincts of the “movement.”

Thus I have continuously asserted:

1. Certain precincts of Der Movement – including but not limited to Alt Wrong HBD/race realists, certain Alt Righters, Type I activists, some Nutzis, and the Silk Roaders – are pro-Asian (mostly East Asian), are obsessed with Asians (particularly Asian females), and value Asians over either all Whites or over some subset of Whites (White ethnics).  Some actually call themselves “yellow supremacists.”

2. Pro-Asian “White racial activists” tend to be derived from ethnic groups associated with “high trust hunter gatherer” ancestry.

3. As suggested above, these tend to be people who are Type I activists ideologically, Type I activists as regards character (the Beavis-and-Butthead brigade) or the most pure Type I activist that combines both ideological and character components.  In fact, I would like to make an important modification of my typology scheme here.  Only people who are Type II in both ideology and character should be classified as Type II activists.  Everyone else are Type I.  Even though I believe ideology trumps character, the “taint” of Type I character is so strong that an activist with a Type II ideology and a Type I character is effectively, functionally, Type I.  

4. As suggested above, there is an underlying Yellow Fever sexual fetishism here; the pro-Asian attitudes are tied to a history of sexual interest in East Asian females.

5. Indeed, many of these types have a documented history of dating and/or marrying East Asian females.

How do the facts square with Sallistrian assertion?

Read this.  Emphasis added:

The white supremacists on the far right have “yellow fever” — an Asian woman fetish. It’s a confusing mix.

Andrew Anglin, the founder of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, once posted a video of himself with a Filipina he called “my jailbait girlfriend,” the young couple flirting as they sauntered through a megamall in the Philippines. Richard Spencer, a white nationalist, has dated a series of Asian-American women, according to one of his ex-girlfriends. (Mr. Spencer insists that it was before he embraced white nationalism.)

The right-wing agitator Mike Cernovich, the writer John Derbyshire and an alt-right figure named Kyle Chapman (so notorious for swinging a lead-filled stick at Trump opponents at a protest in Berkeley, Calif., that he is now a meme) are all married to women of Asian descent. As a commenter wrote on an alt-right forum, “exclusively” dating Asian women is practically a “white-nationalist rite of passage.”

Saint Adolf:

“I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves,” Adolf Hitler said in 1945. “They belong to ancient civilizations, and I admit freely that their past history is superior to our own.”

Of course, Slavs are “subhuman” but Chinese and Japanese are ever-so-superior.  Hitler: Type I Nutzi.

Then we have that “high trust hunter gatherer” Charles Murray (emphasis added):


Murray left for the Peace Corps in Thailand in 1965, staying abroad for a formative six years.] At the beginning of this period, the young Murray kindled a romance with his Thai Buddhist language instructor (in Hawaii), Suchart Dej-Udom, the daughter of a wealthy Thai businessman, who was “born with one hand and a mind sharp enough to outscore the rest of the country on the college entrance exam.” Murray subsequently proposed by mail from Thailand, and their marriage began the following year, a move that Murray now considers youthful rebellion. “I’m getting married to a one-handed Thai Buddhist,” he said. “This was not the daughter-in-law that would have normally presented itself to an Iowa couple.”
Murray credits his time in the Peace Corps in Thailand with his lifelong interest in Asia. “There are aspects of Asian culture as it is lived that I still prefer to Western culture, 30 years after I last lived in Thailand,” says Murray. “Two of my children are half-Asian. Apart from those personal aspects, I have always thought that the Chinese and Japanese civilizations had elements that represented the apex of human accomplishment in certain domains.


Of course, Murray’s own book on “human accomplishment” – despite his attempt to “cook the books” – tells a different story, does it not?  The apex of human accomplishment in almost all domains is a bit further west than China and Japan, no?


And…”youthful rebellion?”  Yeah, it produced two mixed-race children and a pro-Asian attitude “30 years after.” Murray: the Type I political scientist.  “Youthful rebellion”  – with consequences that last a lifetime.  How about some responsibility and accountability, Chuck? What a turd.


And will you all deny that HBD is a pro-Asian (and pro-Jewish) political movement in large part fueled by Yellow Fever enthusiasts (Murray, Derbyshire, Brand) and their associates (Sailer – who once claimed to be part-Jewish, the penis sized-obsessed Rushton, and pseudoscientist joke Lynn, never mind the “I come from an inbred group” HBD Chick and the triracial and part-Asian mongrel Jayman).

By the way, I’ve personally known quite a few White males (not men), all in STEM, married to Orientals.  Not a single one is “normal;” they are all – ALL – what Derbyshire self-labels as “awkward squad.”  All of them are socially awkward weaklings whose wives “wear the pants” in the family.  Yes, yes, I know: anecdotal evidence.  But how much do you want to bet that a quantitative psychometric study will demonstrate clear personality differences between Yellow Fever race-mixers and the rest of us?

Also read this, emphasis added:

But Spencer’s evolution into a hardcore ethno-nationalist was perhaps not as seamless as he makes it seem. In late 2007, he dated a woman who is Asian American. The two met when she was working for Ron Paul’s presidential campaign.

“I am not the only Asian girl he has dated,” says Spencer’s ex, who spoke to me on the condition that her name not be disclosed. She said she’d initially been turned off by his talk of race-based behavioral differences, but she eventually softened to the idea. They dated for four months, including a trip she took with him to Texas to attend his high school reunion. She says she eventually broke up with him, but not because he was too politically radical. “We all have inconsistencies,” she said. “Especially with love. How can you control your heart?”

I asked Spencer about his Asian ex as he was digging into a bowl of Thai noodles at an eclectic restaurant in the quaint downtown of Whitefish. He seemed shocked that I’d brought it up, and peppered me with questions about how I’d found out. “I would rather you didn’t write about that,” he said, adding later: “You are probably going to nail me with this…I think some people in the movement would probably find that terrible.” He confirmed that she was not the only Asian woman he’d been with, but he said the relationships predated his evolution into a white nationalist.

Though Spencer now opposes interracial relationships, white nationalists have long looked east for inspiration—Hitler regarded Chinese and Japanese history as “superior to our own.” Jared Taylor and William Johnson, the leader of the white nationalist American Freedom Party, both speak fluent Japanese. “There is something about the Asian girls,” Spencer said. “They are cute. They are smart. They have a kind of thing going on. If I am looking at my own life objectively, it really doesn’t surprise me that much.”

Let me explain the problem, what is “terrible.” The real problem here is not that Spencer dated some Asians before he became a WN.  After all, he dated them, not married them, and he did not procreate with them. OK, fine. But please Richard, be a man, admit your error. You would get more respect from the “movement” if you would just say “look, I was young, I was not a WN, I used poor judgment, and I made some mistakes.  It was wrong, I regret it, and it certainly will never happen again.”  Instead, we get justifications: “There is something about the Asian girls,” Spencer said. “They are cute. They are smart. They have a kind of thing going on. If I am looking at my own life objectively, it really doesn’t surprise me that much.”

So…what?  If some female mudshark makes similar excuses for dating Tyrone Carjacker, should we just blithely accept that as well?  Yes, Negroes are worse than Asians, and, yes, female miscegenation can be considered worse since females are the bottleneck for reproduction.  But, as regards principle, it’s the same thing.  ADMIT YOUR MISTAKE.  DO NOT ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY IT.  Do you guys really need to be told that?

I mean, if Spencer “now opposes interracial relationships,” then obviously he has to consider those past relationships of his a mistake.  Therefore, it’s obvious that one must take responsibility for it.  But, alas, responsibility and accountability is not what the “movement” is about now, is it? And the Asian claims she broke up with him, not the other way around.  Accountability?

These are your “leaders” and heroes, by the way.  Good luck with a “pro-White” “movement” that values Yellow over White, and that consists of activists who think dating Orientals is a “rite of passage.”

Type I activists have dominated American racial nationalism and has led it down into the toilet.  Keep on supporting them though, that’ll do wonders to “advance the cause.”

Suckers.

The Betas Karamazov

Psychosexual insights from a Russian classic.

“The Battle of the Sexes” is fundamentally important for racial activism, particularly since we have White Knighting activists who expend their political capital on ditzy female airheads.

Now, before someone accuses me of hypocrisy by using “game” analyses here, let me remind you that I’ve always maintained that, as regards sex, “game” is essentially correct in the descriptive sense.  By opposition to “game” is prescriptive. In other words, I see the gamesters as correct in their description of women and of the sexual marketplace, but I disagree with their prescriptive suggestions on how men should behave based on these realities.

Thus, we can analyze a few characters of The Brothers Karamazov through the lens of sexual realism.

A “game” evaluation of the major female characters has already been done by someone else, and I see this analysis as sound.

The Wikipedia description of those characters are as follows (emphasis added):

Agrafena Alexandrovna Svetlova (a.k.a. Grushenka, Grusha, Grushka), a beautiful 22-year-old, is the local Jezebel and has an uncanny charm for men. In her youth she was jilted by a Polish officer and subsequently came under the protection of a tyrannical miser. The episode leaves Grushenka with an urge for independence and control of her life. Grushenka inspires complete admiration and lust in both Fyodor and Dmitri Karamazov. Their rivalry for her affection is one of the most damaging factors in their relationship. Grushenka seeks to torment and then deride both Dmitri and Fyodor as a wicked amusement, a way to inflict upon others the pain she has felt at the hands of her “former and indisputable one”. However, after she begins a friendship with Alyosha, and as the book progresses, she begins to tread a path of spiritual redemption through which emerges hidden qualities of gentleness and generosity, though her fiery temper and pride are ever present. 

Katerina Ivanovna Verkhovtseva (a.k.a. Katya, Katka, Katenka) is Dmitri’s beautiful fiancée, despite his open forays with Grushenka. Her engagement to Dmitri is chiefly a matter of pride on both their parts, Dmitri having bailed her father out of a debt. Katerina is extremely proud and seeks to act as a noble martyr, suffering as a stark reminder of everyone’s guilt. Because of this, she cannot bring herself to act on her love for Ivan, and constantly creates moral barriers between him and herself. By the end of the novel, she too, begins a real and sincere spiritual redemption, as seen in the epilogue, when she asks Mitya and Grushenka to forgive her.

Thus, typical young women: cruel, capricious unpleasant, arrogant, shit-testing, and we see that  Dostoevsky falters in his story-telling when he has both characters show “redemption” toward the end of the book.  In reality, both would have continued their behavior until their looks failed, at which time they’d find some beta male to parasitize off of (“marriage”) complete with nagging and general nastiness (“married life”).

Let’s now consider the main male characters, along with their Wikipedia descriptions (emphasis added).

Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov is the father, a 55-year-old “sponger” and buffoon who sires three sons during his two marriages. He is rumored to have fathered an illegitimate son, Pavel Fyodorovich Smerdyakov, whom he employs as his servant. Fyodor takes no interest in any of his sons, who are, as a result, raised apart from each other and their father. The relationship between Fyodor and his adult sons drives much of the plot in the novel. 

Dmitri Karamazov

Dmitri Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Mitya, Mitka, Mitenka, Mitri) is Fyodor Karamazov’s eldest son and the only offspring of his first marriage, with Adelaida Ivanovna Miusov. Dmitri is considered to be a sensualist, much like his father, spending large amounts of money on nights filled with champagne, women, and whatever entertainment and stimulation money can buy. Dmitri is brought into contact with his family when he finds himself in need of his inheritance, which he believes is being withheld by his father. He was engaged to be married to Katerina Ivanovna, but breaks that off after falling in love with Grushenka. Dmitri’s relationship with his father is the most volatile of the brothers, escalating to violence as he and his father begin fighting over the same woman, Grushenka. While he maintains a good relationship with Ivan, he is closest to his younger brother Alyosha, referring to him as his “cherub”.

Fyodor the father and Dmitri the eldest son, the rivals for the “affections” (sic) of Grushenka, are both complicated characters.  Although they both – particularly the father – have some of the “dark triad” traits so believed by the gamesters, ultimately both  men are hardcore Betas – pussy pedestalizing obsessives, with infinite fucks given (IFG) – contrary to the assumed zero fucks given (ZFG) attitude of the Alpha – with a case (particularly for Dmitri) of “oneitis.”  Thus, both men are easy prey for the malevolent Grushenka, playing with them in the same manner that a spiteful (female) cat would torment a mouse.  Thus: Fyodor and Dmitri: Beta Males.   They are both classic Roissyite Gamesters as well: IFG pussy pedestalizers, making their entire lives revolving around women.

Ivan Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Vanya, Vanka, Vanechka) is the 24-year-old middle son and first from Fyodor’s second marriage to Sofia Ivanovna. He is disturbed especially by the apparently senseless suffering in the world. He says to Alyosha in the chapter “Rebellion” (Bk. 5, Ch. 4), “It’s not God that I don’t accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return him the ticket.” From an early age, Ivan is sullen and isolated. His father tells Alyosha that he fears Ivan more than Dmitri. Some of the most memorable and acclaimed passages of the novel involve Ivan, including the chapter “Rebellion”, his “poem” “The Grand Inquisitor” immediately following, and his nightmare of the devil (Bk. 11, Ch. 9). Ivan’s relationship with his father and brothers are rather superficial in the beginning. He is almost repulsed by his father, and had no positive affection towards Dmitri. While he doesn’t dislike Alexei, he didn’t have any deep affection for him either. But towards the end of the novel, his relationship with his siblings gets more complicated. Ivan falls in love with Katerina Ivanovna, who was Dmitri’s betrothed. But she doesn’t start to return his feelings until the end.

Ivan – rebellious, intellectually dissident, cold – is closest to being an alpha in the book, but his “oneitis” for Katerina Ivanovna and his “brain fever” – a sign of weakness – classify him as a Beta, a high Beta, but a Beta nevertheless.

Alexei Fyodorovich Karamazov (a.k.a. Alyosha, Alyoshka, Alyoshenka, Alyoshechka, Alexeichik, Lyosha, Lyoshenka) at age 20 is the youngest of the Karamazov brothers, the youngest child by Karamazov’s second wife and thus Ivan’s full brother. The narrator identifies him as the hero of the novel in the opening chapter, as does the author in the preface. He is described as immensely likable. At the outset of the events, Alyosha is a novice in the local Russian Orthodox monastery. His faith is in contrast to his brother Ivan’s atheism. His Elder, Father Zosima, sends him into the world, where he becomes involved in the sordid details of his family. In a secondary plotline, Alyosha befriends a group of school boys, whose fate adds a hopeful message to the conclusion of the novel.

With respect to being an Orthodox novice, and his spending more time with young boys (maybe he should have become a Roman Catholic priest?) than young women, Alexei is MGTOW.  However, when he does interact with women, he typically does so in a bashful, clumsy, hand-twisting manner.  Hence, Alyosha = Beta.

Pavel Fyodorovich Smerdyakov, widely rumored to be the illegitimate son of Fyodor Karamazov, is the son of “Reeking Lizaveta”, a mute woman of the street who died in childbirth. His name, Smerdyakov, means “son of the ‘reeking one'”. He was brought up by Fyodor Karamazov’s trusted servant Grigory Vasilievich Kutuzov and his wife Marfa. Smerdyakov grows up in the Karamazov house as a servant, working as Fyodor’s lackey and cook. He is morose and sullen, and, like Dostoyevsky, suffers from epilepsy. The narrator notes that as a child, Smerdyakov collected stray cats to hang and bury them. Generally aloof, Smerdyakov admires Ivan and shares his atheism.

Pavel is a MGTOW Omega male.  At his best, he’s a low Beta.

Father Zosima, the Elder Father Zosima is an Elder and spiritual advisor (starets) in the town monastery and Alyosha’s teacher. He is something of a celebrity among the townspeople for his reputed prophetic and healing abilities. His popularity inspires both admiration and jealousy amidst his fellow monks. Zosima provides a refutation to Ivan’s atheistic arguments and helps to explain Alyosha’s character. Zosima’s teachings shape the way Alyosha deals with the young boys he meets in the Ilyusha storyline.

The character of Father Zosima was to some extent inspired by that of Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk.

Father Zosima as an Elder monk is obviously MGTOW.  Before entering the monastery, as a young man, he was somewhat similar to Ivan Karamazov, a high Beta with some Alpha traits. More importantly, the “all responsible for one another” philosophy of Father Zosima, as well as the outlook of Alyosha (the author-proclaimed “hero” of the novel), is that if Dostoevsky himself.  This is a form of Russian (The Third Rome) messianic Christianity, reflecting the aspects of the Russian soul discussed by Spengler in The Decline of the West.  Thus, Father Zosima asserts a form of collectivist Brotherhood, mutual care and love horizontally across society, in a leveling egalitarian manner, independent of social rank – the expansive horizon, the horizontal plane, as discussed by Spengler. While this is not our Nietzschean “cup of tea” so to speak, it does reflect a type of “will to power” = the idea of the inevitable victory of this worldview, the memetic conquest of humanity (Russian Bolshevism – a secularized version of Father Zosima’s philosophy?).

Ilyusha, Ilyushechka, or simply Ilusha in some translations, is one of the local schoolboys, and the central figure of a crucial subplot in the novel. His father, Captain Snegiryov, is an impoverished officer who is insulted by Dmitri after Fyodor Karamazov hires him to threaten the latter over his debts, and the Snegiryov family is brought to shame as a result. The reader is led to believe that it is partly because of this that Ilyusha falls ill, possibly to illustrate the theme that even minor actions can touch heavily on the lives of others, and that we are “all responsible for one another”.

If this child did not die and became a man, he’d most likely be a Beta or an Omega.

In summary, the Karamazovs were a bunch of Beta males who were manipulated, and ruined, by horrific nasty females. The only Karamazov who ended the story not badly ruined was Alyosha, not coincidentally the MGTOW Karamazov.  There’s a lesson there, I think.

Consider that young men typically have very strong sex drives.  Then further consider that increasing numbers of young heterosexual men are going MGTOW.  How terrible must today’s young women be to trigger such a reaction, to make men go against their most powerful biological drives.  This is something that women would do well to reflect upon.


Men in the “movement” themselves should reflect upon The Nature of Woman, and not waste their time and energy, and expend their political capital, defending what is not worth defending.  Although none of the male characters in The Brothers Karamazov are admirable from my perspective, some are worse than others.  Let’s not have “movement leaders” channeling Fyodor and Dmitri (hopefully, no Pavels are among us), turning themselves inside out for sly, malicious females.

Trump, Bannon, Der Movement, and Ted Sallis

Right again…and again…and again…

Long time readers of this blog know that I have been critical of Trump for a long time, labeling him during the campaign as a vulgar and ignorant buffoon, a beta race cuck, a fraud, and a person who very clearly showed signs that he really want to be President. This post from October 2016 sums it up (emphasis added):

But, no, just like Der Movement that adores him, Trump is an incompetent affirmative action case, with no restraint or long-term strategic thinking. Some leftist criticisms of Trump are correct: he is intellectually and temperamentally unfit to be President.  But, Clinton is far more unfit, and, anyway, I’m not going to vote for Trump because I think he would be a good President.  I support Trump solely to send a message, solely to unleash the dogs of chaos, solely to throw a monkey wrench into the creaking machinery of the multicultural consensus. What we need more of: misery, despair, hatred, anger, distrust, racial and cultural balkanization; these are all things growing as a result of Fat Don’s unapologetic politically incorrect civic nationalism coupled to SJW hysteria and Colored entitlement.  
Let’s be honest though: Trump the man is a disaster, easily the worst general campaign candidate in my lifetime.  I’ve never seen such a combination of joyful ignorance, in-your-face laziness, unpreparedness, delusion, inability to learn from mistakes, the hysterical lack of restraint one would expect from one of Trump’s Negro friends (or even worse: a swarthoid Afrowop) – what is this Trump?  He’s a goddamn embarrassment.
And if the Trump lovers think I am being too harsh on their hero, consider the following. When Trump eschewed doing a mock debate, we were assured that he was being adequately prepped by his advisers while riding the campaign plane, advisers who were imploring Trump not to let himself be baited and side-tracked by Clinton.  And look what happened. What an idiot.
I do wonder what those psychologists told Clinton on how to handle Trump. Maybe something like this: “This guy Trump deep down really does not want to be President, he doesn’t want the responsibility, and he doesn’t want to give up his lifestyle.  He went into it for his ego, because he was angry at Obama.  But he is inwardly rebelling against becoming President, which is why he is constantly sabotaging himself.  All you need to do is set him up to self-destruct and he’ll inevitably detonate in an explosion of unrestrained tweets.”
Despite all of this, Trump can still win: after all, Clinton is also a historically terrible candidate and there’s lots of anger out there in White America.  But, let’s “keep it real” – anyone who says that Trump is “the last chance of White America” is more of an idiot than is Trump himself.

Note that I was correct about the chaos that Trump would bring.  Just look at 2017.

Der Movement’s take on Trump was quite different.  To the quota queens, Trump was “the last chance for White America,” an alpha male hero, The God Emperor, an American Caesar and we are fearful he may actually stabilize the corrupt System since he’ll be so good, someone who will enact real pro-White demographic change, a master of 4-D chess, having Sessions as Attorney General alone is worth Trump’s victory (that before Trump started feuding with Sessions and the Trump fanboys suddenly decided Sessions was a “boomer cuck”), Bannon will really get things moving for us (before Bannon was fired and the Trump-Bannon feud heated up, solidifying the power of the Jarvanka Jewish Globalist faction in the Trump administration), In Trump We Trust…well, you get the picture.

Recently, there have been some interesting revelations, based on a new book, which has led to the anti-Bannonism of Trump [Note: Bannon is an idiot himself for making the comments he did.  Notice how the Left never acts like these juvenile, retarded “rightists”].

Based on my reading of Trump, I believe that most of the “revelations” that follows are true.  Let’s look at these and compare them to the views of Trump of Sallis vs. Der Movement.  In all cases, emphasis added.

Read this.

“I’ve known Steve Bannon a long time. If I thought he was a racist or alt-right or any of the things, the terms we could use, I wouldn’t even think about hiring him,” Trump told reporters who questioned Bannon’s white nationalist following on November 26, 2016.

Gee, so much for the Alt Right having great influence in The God Emperor Administration.

In February, Bannon was dubbed “The Great Manipulator” and the “second most powerful man in the world” on the cover of Time magazine. Later that month, a campaign titled “postcards to President Bannon” was initiated, joking that the Breitbart native was the real head of state.
Two months later, Bannon was removed from the National Security Council.
“I am my own strategist,” Trump told the New York Post in April. He then told the Wall Street Journal that Bannon was just “a guy who works for me.”

Hey, I thought Bannon in power was a crowning achievement for the Trump Presidency.

After the white supremacist protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, Trump defended Bannon by saying: “I like Mr. Bannon. He is a friend of mine … He is a good man. He is not a racist. I can tell you that. He is a good person ... We’ll see what happens with Mr. Bannon.”

Note to Alt Right: According to Trump, being a “racist” and being a “good person” are completely incompatible, completely orthogonal.  Cuckadoodledoo!  All Hail the God Emperor!  Hail Kek!  Pepe!  Pepe!

Also read this.

According to Wolff, Trump didn’t want to become president. The ultimate goal of his bid for the White House was to become a “martyr” to Hillary Clinton and to become “the most famous man in the world.”
For those involved in his campaign, the goal was to lose by as small a margin as possible and then, after November, parlay their raised national profiles into bigger and better opportunities.
“His daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared would be international celebrities,” Wolff wrote. “Steve Bannon would become the de facto head of the Tea Party movement. Kellyanne Conway would be a cable news star. Melania Trump, who had been assured by her husband that he wouldn’t become president, could return to inconspicuously lunching. Losing would work out for everybody. Losing was winning.”

Gee, that sounds familiar.  It’s almost as it some Far Right blogger actually suggested back in October 2016 that Trump really didn’t want to actually be elected President.  

With no desire to win the White House, Trump had little plan for how to proceed with his post-election transition. Ailes, a longtime friend and confidante, recommended former House Speaker John Boehner to serve as his chief of staff. To which Trump replied: “Who’s that?”

Ignorant as in Vulgar Ignorant Buffoon.

According to Wolff, even Trump’s daughter has mocked his hair privately to friends and associates:
“She often described the mechanics behind it to friends: an absolutely clean pate — a contained island after scalp-reduction ­surgery — surrounded by a furry circle of hair around the sides and front, from which all ends are drawn up to meet in the center and then swept back and secured by a stiffening spray. The color, she would point out to comical effect, was from a product called Just for Men — the longer it was left on, the darker it got. Impatience resulted in Trump’s orange-blond hair color.”

Buffoon as in Vulgar Ignorant Buffoon.

And read this as well.

11. As a candidate, Trump had no interest in learning about the Constitution, which he knew very little about. “I got as far as the Fourth Amendment, before his finger is pulling down on his lip and his eyes are rolling back in his head,” said Sam Nunberg, a former adviser to the Trump campaign.

Ignorant as in Vulgar Ignorant Buffoon.

16. Trump never reads. “He didn’t process information in any conventional sense. He didn’t read. He didn’t really even skim. Some believed that for all practical purposes he was no more than semiliterate,” the book says. 

Ignorant as in Vulgar Ignorant Buffoon.

17. Trump would mention getting in bed with other women. “Trump liked to say that one of the things that made life worth living was getting your friends’ wives into bed,” the book claims.

Vulgar as in Vulgar Ignorant Buffoon.  I’m sure the Gamester-Roissy crowd thinks that this behavior is wonderfully “alpha” – to me, to the extent this is true, it shows that Trump is a moral turd, a despicable human being.

19. The president’s lifestyle followed many unusual routines. “If he was not having his 6:30 dinner with Steve Bannon, then, more to his liking, he was in bed by that time with a cheeseburger, watching his three screens and making phone calls,” the book says.

No comment.

Some may think that the well-balanced (not crazy and bitter) Ted is insufferable, but when you are right, you are right, and pointing out the track record of this blog vs. Der Movement is perfectly defensible when making points about the latter’s incompetence and undeserved support.

Meanwhile, all you “movement” rank-and-file continue to support all the “leaders” who are wrong time and again, idiots who once again fell for the “man on white horse syndrome.”  What we have in Der Movement is a form of reverse natural selection” you guys support the failed, the botched, the incompetent, while spurning those who have the good sense to understand things before they are obvious to the unwashed masses.

Straight From the Horse’s Mouth

A tacit admission.

Greg Johnson writes the following, emphasis added:

“I am in fact a Hobbit.”—J. R. R. Tolkien 

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien is a favorite author of New Left “hippies” and New Right nationalists, and for pretty much the same reasons. Tolkien deeply distrusted modernization and industrialization, which replace organic reciprocity between man and nature with technological dominion of man over nature, a relationship that deforms and devalues both poles. 

But philosophically and politically, Tolkien was much closer to the New Right than the New Left. Tolkien was a conservative and a race realist. His preferences ran toward non-constitutional monarchy in the capital and de facto anarchy in the provinces, but he recognized that state control can be minimized only in a society with a deep reverence for tradition and a high regard for individual honor and self-restraint. 

Many of Tolkien’s most fervent New Right admirers are neo-pagans...The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, with their many themes from Norse and Celtic mythology, resonate especially with pagans… 

…For those who need no introduction, there is no better commemoration than to spend a winter evening snug in one’s own Hobbit hole reading the works of the man himself (or watching Peter Jackson’s masterly and inspiring movies of The Lord of the Rings).

That is of course the equivalent of Johnson saying: “I am in fact a Type I activist.”  And that’s a designation I already made, did I not?

Certain Alt Right ethnonationalists mimic Hitler to the extent that they are ideologically Type I but have the “bookish” and intellect-oriented Type II character.  

It is clear who I was talking about there.  Ideologically Type I indeed, and ideology trumps “character” every time.  It’s ideology that determines the direction of the “movement.”  Personality and character set a tone, but the actual content, the actual meaning, the actual outcomes – that’s all directly derived from ideology.

Some tell-tale signs to distinguish Type I from Type II fascists:

Serious sci/fi fantasy:

Type I: Lord of the Rings

Type II: Book of the New Sun

They who control Der Movement.

What’s In Store For 2018?

It’s an uncertain and volatile situation.

What is likely to occur in the American scene (and in the “movement” as a whole)?  Needless to say, I do not see any realistic chance of progress as defined by the EGI Notes-Western Destiny groupuscule: therefore, little or no chance that the ideas, memes, strategies, and paradigms promoted here will be accepted by, and influence, Der Movement to any significant degree.  The American scene, and Der Movement as a whole, will continue to be dominated by Type I activists and all their associated stupidities.  I am doubtful that any grand epiphany will strike “movement” leadership, or its rank-and-file, no lightning flash illumination of their errors and the direction, the correct path, which they should take.

Given the preponderance of defectives in American racial activism, the dismal and flawed “leadership,” the lack of long-term strategic thinking and prudent contingency planning, and the “do nothing” attitude of the cuck Trump regime toward leftist extremism in America, one can reasonably expect that something – at least one thing – will go significantly wrong for Der Movement in 2018 (I realize such a prediction is almost as bland as saying “I predict the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning”).  Will it be a failed rally, beset by violence?  Will some Alt Right personage be physically targeted akin to what was discussed in a breathless schadenfreude email between a certain blog editor and his Jewish correspondent? Will it be another outrageous case of infiltration?  A major betrayal?  A feud gotten out of hand?  As I am “out of the loop” in Der Movement, functionally “blacklisted,” it’s difficult for me to predict more precisely what is likely to go wrong, as I am not privy to “movement” plans for 2018 and the latest trends or gossip (thankful for the last).  I just see it as highly unlikely that a “movement” as dysfunctional as the American scene can stumble through an entire year without some sort of disaster – at least one.  After all, 2017 saw several: Charlottesville, deplatforming, hysterical feuds, and, perhaps, worst of all, the infiltrations (and subsequent denial of accountability).

A real long-term prediction, not one restricted for 2018, is that the other shoe will drop, and at some point some major “movement” “leader” will be revealed as a mole, an infiltrator, an agent provocateur, or will be someone who started out sincere and then has a change of heart, shockingly betraying his (we’ll assume that activists will have the sense not to follow female leadership now or in the future) followers and supporters.  

Der Movement will be well served to develop antifragility; the ability to prosper from the chaos that will continue (note: if I predict anything with any certainty, it is that the chaos unleashed by Trump, and the continued multicultural morass of America and the West, will continue.  The toothpaste is out of the tube, trends are in motion).  Chaos will continue; the question is whether the “movement” will benefit from it.  To give Der Movement some credit, it has demonstrated a greater degree if antifragility that heretofore assumed (by me, or by most people).  Der Movement has benefited from Trumpian chaos, but not to the extent it could have, and whether this can continue is open to question.

On a positive note as regards predictions, if Der Movement can be led with just the slightest degree of competence and imagination, then the inevitable chaos will lead to at least slow growth.  We’ll see.

Given my distinct failure in correctly predicting the outcome of the 2016 Presidential race, I will not make any predictions for the 2018 mid-term elections.  In any case, much can change, politically speaking, between now and November.  I will make one prediction about the election, in the form of IF-THEN.  Therefore, IF the GOP does poorly this November, THEN Trumpism, right-wing populism, and the Alt Right will be (unfairly) blamed for it.  Of course, the reverse did not occur; the aforementioned memes and entities were not credited for the unexpected successes of 2016; the narrative ratchet only moves in one direction.  That’s the power of having the “megaphone,” and it is to the everlasting discredit of Der Movement that it squandered decades, and millions of dollars, without investing in practical matters such as greater access to information dissemination.  And with the power of the Internet, the omission is even more glaring.

I can predict more betrayals from the Trump administration coupled with more crackdowns and deplatforming from the System’s “private” arm, with the Trumpians looking on benignly as their real supporters are suppressed.  Trump will do a good job alienating and dispiriting his working class and middle class White supporters.  The Trump coalition will end up in the dustheap of history with the Reagan collation UNLESS new right-wing populist candidates come to the fore, and take the mantle of resistance away from the cuck fraud Trump.  There is plenty of room to Trump’s right in American politics, viable room, if someone were to seize that territory, occupy that political niche.  Trump himself has ceded the moral high ground (which he never truly occupied), someone must take that ground, and do so quickly.

The overall situation overseas, particularly in Europe, will most likely be even more static than in America.  In four words: more of the same.  More migrant invasions, spiking in the warmer weather; more terror attacks; more SJW hysteria and a lack of a proper response to all the events from sissified and deracinated (Western) European pansies.  Oh, they may well protest in the streets: protest in favor of MORE immigration, protest in favor of migrant rights and against “Nazi racists.”  Of course, one or more unforeseen “Black Swan” events can change the situation dramatically – and of course the same applies to America – and it’s also possible I’m being unduly pessimistic.  I’m much better predicting things based on insights into the character of people – Trump, “movement activist,” Whites in general – than in trying to predict events that may or may not occur, or that may occur eventually, but not in 2018.  Who knows?  Based solely on the attitudes, character, and trends inherent in European populations today, I simply do not see the potential for significant breakthroughs in 2018.  But, watch out for the Black Swan…after all, my assumption of stasis may be “normalcy bias.”

I realize these predictions are not tightly focused, but I’m better, as stated, at making more tightly focused predictions, not general ones for a given year. I will make such more focused predictions, when relevant as time goes on.