Against both The System and The Movement.
To see “through a glass” — a mirror — “darkly” is to have an obscure or imperfect vision of reality.
New readers to this blog may be confused about its purpose, its underlying objective. Is it just to heap mocking ridicule on the “movement?” Of course, there is other material discussed here – including important material directly related to EGI, population genetics, political strategies, etc. – but the quota queens like to pretend that this blog is simply the “bitter” and “crazy” rants of some nutcase constantly attacking the “movement” for no good reason. So, let us back up a bit and reconsider what the fundamental approach of EGI Notes is.
The purpose of this blog is promote a certain metapolitical worldview. This blog engages in mocking ridicule not for its own sake, but for the specific purpose of deconstruction. If you consider Nietzsche’s camel, lion, and child paradigm, then my previous pre-EGI Notes work for the “movement” (with the exception of Legion Europa) was the camel phase, EGI Notes is the lion phase of defiance and deconstruction, and the creative child phase is represented by Western Destiny. Legion Europa can be viewed as having been a mix of both lion and child, both destructive and creative.
It is my judgment – and long-time readers of this blog know that my judgment is sound and I am usually correct – that on its current course Der Movement will utterly fail to achieve its objectives. Even worse: It will may impede or even prevent those objectives from being achieved through the actions of others or even through spontaneous currents of human history. Der Movement constitutes one of the biggest threats to White survival extant today. Therefore, it must be analyzed, ridiculed, and deconstructed. The weeds need to be cleared away before anything useful can grow on long-neglected activist soil.
One fundamental premise of the Sallis Groupuscule is that BOTH the System and the Movement exhibit a defective perception of reality; as the title of this post suggests, both System and Movement see through a glass, darkly – they “have an obscure or imperfect vision of reality.” They are mirror images of each other, distorted funhouse mirrors; their inability to perceive reality without distortion causes both to become distorted themselves, and not only do they see through a glass, darkly; but, we, without a proper understanding of both System and Movement, see those entities through a glass, darkly, and hence fail to comprehend their respective realities.
The Movement attempts deconstruction of The System, with varying degrees of success, while The System profoundly misunderstands The Movement; however, in neither case do we observe a principled, consistent, and rationale understanding of either, nor do we observe any much needed Far Right deconstruction of Der Movement – until now. What the dimwits and the rent-seekers of the “movement” see, or proclaim, as “crazy and bitter” mocking ridicule is actually the deconstruction of Der Movement Inc. This blog makes no claim to be a comprehensive deconstruction; indeed, I hope that others will join in and together we can create a comprehensive and lasting deconstruction that finally finises off the grotesque monstrosity of Der Movement. At the current time, this blog is the only outpost of such an effort; EGI Notes is the icebreaker, leading the way. Whether or not others follow, this blog will continue in its efforts to expose the intellectual, moral, ethical, and spiritual bankruptcy of Der Movement, Inc.
I typically criticize “movement” dogma, starting from the earliest days of racial activism up to today. This naturally includes what the current crowed sneeringly dismisses as “WN 1.0.” Casual readers may confuse my position with that of Greg Johnson, based on the following misunderstanding. I assert that the Alt Right – essentially “WN 2.0” – was nothing more than the same old, tired, fossilized dogma of the “movement” – all of the memes originating with “WN 1.0”- dressed up with a veneer of “youth culture.” Johnson claims that WN 2.0 was corrupted and ruined by the “attitudes” of WN 1.0. Isn’t that the same thing? No, it is not.
First, we have the difference between the dogma, the fundamental beliefs, of a “movement” and what Johnson terms as “attitudes.” These are not the same thing – the former is that of content and the latter is more that of presentation and behavior. Second, even if were to grant that by “attitudes” Johnson was in fact specifically referring to the actual content and dogma of Der Movement, our positions are still fundamentally different, since I assert that WN 2.0 reflected WN 1.0 dogma from the very start, but added to that all of the Millennial juvenile jackassery. Johnson, on the other hand, asserts that WN 2.0 started out well and was later corrupted by WN 1.0. In my case, I suggest that the failure of WN 2.0 was due to its own inherent nature of being nothing more than Pierce/Kemp with Pepe/Kek/Trump added on, while Johnson believes that WN 2.0 was fundamentally sound at its origin and then became ruined by later adopting the worst aspects of WN 1.0.
We can then extend this to Taylor’s assertion that while the young activists of today are wonderful, the activists of the past were, in contrast, weird and undesirable. My objection to that is not with the characterization of the older activists, but the assertion that the Pepe/Kek/drunken podcasts crowd of today are in some way superior. I also object in that the “youth” of today are essentially recapitulating the content of the past, so why should they pose as being superior to that past? Is obsessing over a cartoon frog, screaming “Kek,” or drinking gallons of milk as a racial statement, somehow better than the poses of past “movement” retardates? No, it is not. And if the dogma is essentially the same, and if that dogma originated, as Taylor suggests, with the weird and undesirable, what does that imply about the dogma? Now, we do not want to descend into ad hominem; just because the original promoters of the dogma were in some way socially undesirable does not logically imply that the dogma is wrong. However, at the very least, it would suggest to us we had better at least subject that dogma to review, to rigorous proofing, to ascertain whether or not it is sound. Such review is wise even if its originators were socially adept paragons of civic virtue; that its originators were in large part (according to today’s “movement leaders” themselves!) the weird and the botched is even reason to consider that extensive review and revision of the dogma is required.
Thus, the Sallis Groupuscule is opposed to: the Alt Right, Millennial “youth culture” taking over (American) racial activism, mainstreaming, the “Big Tent,” Nordicism, narrow ethnonationalism, traditionalism, fossilized dogma and solipsist fantasies, HBD pseudoscience, race-denial, invented racial histories and sweaty ethnic fetishism; while it is for: pan-Europeanism, empiricism, futurism, vanguardism, science and technics, genuine racial science, authenticity, prudent analysis, and seriousness and long-term planning. The latter list is the positive aspect of my work, the sort of growth that can occur once the “movement” weeds are uprooted and cleared away.
I would like to point out that an opposition to the aforementioned “isms” and fetishes does not mean that this blog is afraid to document difficult topics concerning intra-European relations. Nor does it (unlike Der Movement) “play favorites” among European ethnies. This blog is as critical – if not more so – about “White ethnic” types such as “swarthoids” and “hunkies” as it is about NW European Celto-Germanics. Everyone is fair game for criticism if that criticism is justified; unlike Der Movement, we do not label ethnies as either Gods or Devils (or “angels” with a destiny, eh?), but instead look at all with a critical eye, the cold eye of hard realism. Stereotypes exist for a reason; stereotypes contain a kernel of truth, and that maxim applies as much for intra-White comparisons as it does to comparisons between Whites and non-Whites, or between different non-White groups themselves.
Stereotypes can be extended into the past of our race’s history, and analogies can be made to the present day. Thus, in the Classical civilization, particularly in its later stages, and in the interregnum of the Dark Ages, the stereotype was that of the peoples of the Mediterranean basin being effete and over-civilized, while the Germanic barbarians of the north were healthy and vigorous, albeit loutish. Today, in the Winter of the West, by analogy, it are the Celto-Germanic peoples of NW Europe who are stereotypically effete and over-civilized with their xenophilia and pathological universalist altruism, while the peoples of Eastern Europe now play the role of the more vigorous and healthy barbarian louts. Southern Europeans of today I suppose are analogous to the peoples of the Near East in the later Classical civilization – decayed and degenerate fellah peoples.
It is not necessary to indulge in Lynnian pseudoscience in order to study real differences between European types, differences that have important functional consequences and significance.
This puts the lie to the mendacious flim-flam of the fundamentally dishonest “Desmond Jones,” who asserted that my commitment to pan-Europeanism means I believe all Europeans are fungible – an outright falsehood, as such sentiments have never been present in any of my work. However, I do assert that, despite differences, all Europeans should be preserved and promoted, and Europeans as a whole constitute a broad racial-cultural group. Familial relations do not equate to fungibility; I make no apologies for my militant pan-Europeanism, which also seeks to preserve ethnic and sub-racial differences that exist among the European peoples.
Let’s look through the glass clearly and with plenty of light. Der Movement, Inc. needs to be utterly destroyed in order for us to show this clarity, this light, to others. That’s what this blog is all about.