Category: Nordicism

Alt Right Goes Arthur Kemp

Lulz crowd.

Yawn again (towards the end).

It is certainly not surprising that their commentators are ethnic fetishists, given that the gaggle of stolen valor frauds, lulzing retards, Trump fanboys, weasel-faced girls school field hockey coaches, and other paragons of White (non)achievement behave in the same manner.

Do we need any more evidence that the Alt Right is a blight on racial nationalism?  The Alt Right, particularly, requires more critical analysis, which will be forthcoming on this blog, on a more or less regular basis.


The Face of the Duce

Also: Introducing Racial Recapitulation Theory.

What can the phenotype of the young Mussolini tell us?

Let’s take a look at the physical appearance phenotype of the Northern Italian (from Predappio in Romagna) Benito Mussolini, as a young man, to dissect certain aspects of “movement” dogma about Italians.

Let’s be honest. If you showed someone those pictures, and if they didn’t know who it was other than being told “it’s an Italian,” you know very well they would immediately say “must be a Southern Italian,” “It’s a Sicilian,” etc. – the extreme non-gracile swarthoid qualities would give the impression that reflects popular stereotypes.  However, Mussolini was, as stated above, a Northern Italian.  I also note that General von Rundstedt once deeply offended Hitler by questioning Der Fuhrer’s friendship and alliance with the “Negroid Asshole” Mussolini.  Did the good general see ll Duce’s Swiss mugshots?

What conclusions can we make based on these photos?

I want to first reply to potential objections to this brief analysis:

1. “This is just anecdotal evidence, a single-point piece of data.”  That’s correct, but Der Movement does the same with all groups (especially S. Italians), using pictures of single individuals as representative of an entire group, so we can do the same here.  There are indeed N. Italians who look like the young Mussolini, so there’s some general utility in the analysis.

2. “I thought you value genotype over phenotype.”  That’s true.  But we do not have access to Mussolini’s autosomal genome.  We do have access to his physical appearance; I’ll use the data at hand.

3. “I thought you wrote that phenotype is an imprecise reflection of the underlying genotype, of the underlying ancestry.”  That’s true as well; however, that is most true for phenotype analyzed as a stand-alone evaluation, and when one ignores available genetic data in favor of a purely phenotypic analysis. In the absence of genetic information, combining phenotype with other pieces of information – such as an individual’s ethnic affiliation – can give some useful information.  It’s flawed and subjective, but insofar as I know, no one has genotyped Mussolini’s remains, so we use what we have.

So, what can we say?

Two major points.

First, it is almost certain that Mussolini could not have been of exclusive Celto-Germanic ancestry (remember that one of Der Movement’s memes is that Northern Italians are Celto-Germanic).

Second, even if Mussolini did have some Celto-Germanic ancestry, it is likely in the extreme that such ancestry was only a minority of his ancestry.  The majority of his ancestry likely derived from other sources.

So, we can ask: what were those other sources?

According to another school of “movement” “thought” (Duke/My Awakening, etc.) Northern Italians reflect ancestry from the original Romans (or at least the original peoples of Italy).  If so, Il Duce suggests that at least some of those original Romans/Italians were quite swarthy and non-gracile indeed.  That goes against that precinct of “movement” “thought” that asserts that the original Romans/Italians were all akin to Dolph Lundgren walking around in a toga.

On the other hand, if you deny that the original peoples of Rome and Italy – or at least some of them – looked like Mussolini, and instead assert that his Swiss mugshots reflect “the racial degeneration due to Roman slavery” then you have to admit that such degeneration spread to Northern Italy, and that the ancestral remains of such degeneration is still present there in modern times.

So, it would seem that Der Movement dogma is at an impasse. Il Duce suggests that either there were real swarthoids among the original Romans/Italians or that Northern Italians are not purebred Romans or not purebred Celto-Germanics, or not merely a mix of the two.  Is it one or the other? Swarthy original Roman populations or racial degeneration in Northern Italy?

The point is for Der Movement to get beyond kneejerk dogma and at least think and consider the implications of their mutually exclusive memes coming into contact with facts and logic.

I doubt that will occur though.

By the way, Mussolini’s phenotype through his life reflects an observation I have made in that European-derived swarthoids tend to be swarthiest and most non-gracile in young adulthood and become lighter and more gracile as they age.  Hormones?  Some sort of racial version of recapitulation theory – “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” – at different stages of their life individuals reflect, to a greater or lesser degree, different aspects of their ancestry (*)?  Thus, for individuals of multi-component ancestry, they would look more like different components of that ancestry at different ages, at different phases of their life.  Would that be from actual differences in gene expression from various ancestrally-different gene segments that affect phenotype?  If so, what is the trigger for the switch – the aforementioned differences in hormone levels?  Some other age-related changes, possibly including epigenetics?  Or is it simply that phenotypic changes in physical appearance that normally accompany aging mimic the effects of looking more like various ethnic types?  This would require further consideration and study.  The former possibility is much more interesting than the latter, and more in keeping with “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.”  Perhaps both possibilities operate.  Again, this would seem to be a potentially fruitful area of inquiry.

Finally, the purpose of this post is to critique Der Movement’s rigid, unquestioning dogma, certainly not to cast any dispersion at a historical leader I admire – Il Duce.  Indeed, with respect to Mussolini, my opinion of him is the same as Yockey’s – Il Duce was a great man, one of the great leaders of history, a flawed man of course, but a man of vision and force.  He was ultimately betrayed by Italian laziness, ineptitude, and hedonism – and he knew it, given his comments about Italians with an analogy of Michelangelo being forced to work with clay.  Mussolini’s phenotype is simply Italian – a reality that Der Movement misses with its view of Northern Italians all looking like actor Dolph Lundgren and Southern Italians all looking like boxer Mike Tyson.

Here is another picture. A Celto-Germanic Nordic on the left, a Nigerian Negro on the right.

*Racial recapitulation theory!  You read it at EGI Notes first.

Der Predictable Movement


OK, I first saw this post when it had zero comments as first posted – early afternoon Saturday, 2/3/18.

Prediction: there will be comments here about “racial admixture” in Italy, “racial degeneration,” “Italians are not White,” “Southern Italians are no good,” etc.  Let’s see.  Keep in mind the original article was about some Italian guy shooting at Black invaders in Italy.

And here we go:

White crusader
Luca Traini, new minister of defense for Northern Italy (Padania)
Southern Italy and Arab populated in blood and snout!
See “cuomo” silvester stallone, al pacino, francis ford coppola, martin scorsese, nocolas cage, al capone etc
Italy is a state not a nation!
You have the niggers us the TERRONI (derogatory term towards the inhabitants of the south: criminals ignorant parasites)
Italians are generally of an Aryan subrace called Mediterranean. Still one can find some intermixing of Nordic and Alpine blood among the general population, but it has been so diluted since the 17th century that it is fair to say that most inhabitants of the peninsula which you call Italy are not European in the classical sense. They are a part of a race which has its base outside of Europe.
White crusader
if you take a group of locals in the center and north of Italy and PURE (since over 50 are emigrated from the south “millions”) starting from the 60s adding the mixture that led to mestizo with Arabic features and dark skin), and a group of TERRONI (inhabitants of the south), the differences of the faces are implacably noticed, the TERRONI have 90% Arabian faces…

Did you ever doubt it?  There will be more, no doubt, but that’s sufficient to make my point.  Der Movement, Inc. has nothing to offer White ethnics.  Nothing.  If the original story had been about racial distinctions in Italy then, yes, I understand, that’s like waving a red flag in front of a bull, a rather retarded and deranged bull.  But, again, the original story was simply about an incident that took place in Italy, had nothing to do with Kempian nonsense, which just spontaneously percolates out from the dimwit crowd.

Is it a Mexican bandit?  Is it a Syrian refugee?  Is it an Arabic Terroni?  No, it’s a Nordic Padanian!  Germanic in blood and snout!

One picture is worth a thousand words. Stop with the obsessive Trump fanboyism.

Whither the White Ethnics

Men or mice?

Considering all the usual “movement” shenanigans, which go on and on without end, it is clear that Der Movement, Inc. has nothing to offer to so-called White ethnics (Southern Europeans, Eastern Europeans, and Irish Catholics).

At best, you’ll be nothing more than a subaltern step-and-fetchit caste; at worst, you are “the niggers of Europe” (Irish), “Euroniggers” (Italians), “Asiatic subhumans” (Slavs), “Med filth” (all Southern Europeans”), “Tatars” (Russians), “hora-dancing Gypsies” (Romanians), or “greasy Gypsies” (the Hungarian Orban, of all people, has been called that).  And if you say that “movement leaders” don’t believe that or use that language, I’ll tell you that at best they tolerate it (wink, wink, nod, nod) at their websites and in their organizations, and at worst, they really do believe it and encourage it (typically indirectly so as to keep enough “cover” to maximize tin cup panhandling among their White ethnic adherents).

What then to do if you are a racially aware White ethnic?  Indifference or hostility to racial nationalism is maladaptive. Narrow ethnonationalism is a self-defeating dead end. So is any sort of makeshift subracialism or regionalism. Staying within Der Movement, Inc. and accepting it as it is means that you really are the cringing racially degenerate inferiors the fetishists claim you are.  

What is necessary is for all pan-European-minded persons of European stock worldwide – both the Anglo-Germanic pan-Europeanists and the White ethnic pan-Europeanists – to together reject the Old Movement, and build a New Movement, based on sound principles (my suggestions are here).

Unfortunately, I suspect that for the most part this will fall on deaf eyes and blind eyes, and many White ethnic racial activists will be content to fil the role of “movement” court jesters, vying for table scraps, the target of (in this case) well-deserved contempt and disdain.  Why should you expect Anglo-Germanic pan-Europeanists to be concerned if you won’t lift a finger to help yourselves first?  A pan-European Movement cannot be a mirror image of the EU – or at least, popular perceptions of the EU – where hard-working and disciplined Germanics have to carry along lazy, undisciplined, and incompetent PIGS peoples. I’ve tried to do my part for two decades; why can’t the rest of you demonstrate that there are some men left among the micks, wops, dagoes, and hunkies?  

Men or mice?  You decide.

Now, let’s flip the analysis, and look at it from the perspective of the “movement.”  What I say to Der Movement is this.  If you want to restrict your ingroup to Anglo-Germanic Europeans, if you want to repel and eschew White ethnics, then by all means continue doing what you are doing, full steam ahead, you’re doing a great job.  However, if you want to appeal to, and recruit, White ethnics, I must tell you in all sincerity that you are sabotaging your efforts on a regular basis. Typically, the way to appeal to, and recruit, people is not to constantly and gratuitously offend them, distort their identities, and go out of your way to use dubious (at best) or obviously ludicrous (at worst) memes to undermine your target audience and say, in so many words (and sometimes more or less directly), that they are worthless.  It’s also not conducive for recruitment when you use dubious or ludicrous memes to denigrate those you ostensibly want to recruit, while suppressing genuine, objectively verifiable memes that focus negative attention on outgroups like Jews and Asians.  If your alleged objective is to appeal to all Whites, then you are digging a deep hole for yourselves.  Maybe the first step to remedy the situation is: stop digging.  

An amusing side note: on a pussy pedestalization website, a post about The Godfather.  Excerpt of a comment left, re: “Don Corleone”:

He was a Saracen rape baby and so was his son. 90% White America was a stranger to a not-at-all White Sicilian.

Sallis correct again.  It is impossible for there to be even one post, anywhere in any precinct even tangentially related to Der Movement, about White ethnics without the usual kneejerk response. 

Keep on digging your hole.

More Brief Comments on Crowley

Type I follies.


Concerning the Etruscans and their origins, I’ve found the works of Prof. Cavalli-Sforza to be the most convincing. Specifically, he posits that the Etruscans developed in an autochthonous fashion from the earlier Iron Age Villanovan culture.

…support the hypothesis that the genetic structure of Italy still reflects the ethnic stratification of pre-Roman times.

And these are those autochthonous Etruscans – who portrayed themselves as darker than even modern day S. Italians.

There’s a very good possibility that the original peoples of Italy were swarthier, and more dissimilar to Crowley, than are the Italians of today.

Since Crowley is so obsessed with “Viking Supermen” he can reflect on the absence of such men in contemporary Scandinavian populations, which are generally characterized by racial liberalism, pacifism, feminism, openness to invasion, and sociopolitical conformity.  Changes in culture and behavior can occur without Kempian fantasies.  

Frost’s genetic pacification is a more realistic possibility:

Over the last 10,000 years, the human genome has changed at an accelerating rate. The change seems to reflect adaptations to new social environments, including the rise of the State and its monopoly on violence. State societies punish young men who act violently on their own initiative. In contrast, non-State societies usually reward such behavior with success, including reproductive success. Thus, given the moderate to high heritability of male aggressiveness, the State tends to remove violent predispositions from the gene pool while favoring tendencies toward peacefulness and submission. This perspective is applied here to the Roman state, specifically its long-term effort to pacify the general population. By imperial times, this effort had succeeded so well that the Romans saw themselves as being inherently less violent than the “barbarians” beyond their borders. By creating a pacified and submissive population, the empire also became conducive to the spread of Christianity–a religion of peace and submission. In sum, the Roman state imposed a behavioral change that would over time alter the mix of genotypes, thus facilitating a subsequent ideological change.

So, pacified Romans of the 5th century passively watched as Germanic barbarians sacked Rome; today, pacified Scandinavians watch as non-White barbarians sack Stockholm. 

How does that square with the idea that the “high trust hunter gatherers” evolved to be egalitarian altruists from the very start?  No fear, Der Movement Spindoctors will get out Occam’s Butterknife and spread around some more pseudoscientific speculation and it’ll all work out just fine.

How immigration destroyed Rome.  No, not all the “slaves” and consequent “racial degeneration.”  Instead it was the acceptance of unassimilable hordes of German tribes.  The Merkelization of Rome. 

And with that, enough with Crowley and the TOO disaster.

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.

Meet Chad Crowley: Anti-White Activist

Another Type I fetishist.

I am postponing the post originally scheduled for today, to make some brief comments about Chad Crowley, the latest Type I Alt Righter who regurgitates warmed over Kempism, deluded that some novel insights are being made.

Crowley’s all-too-familiar, and, from a general “movement” standpoint, boringly repetitive and grossly unimaginative, ramblings on Rome are both non-historical as well as anti-scientific (*).

I know I’ve seen the name “Chad Crowley” before, and a cursory search brings up sweaty mumblings about “Indo-Europeans” that laughably accepts Gunther as some sort of serious scholar, instead of the embarrassing crank that he was, at, and we can also observe more juvenile Alt Right nonsense at Counter-Currents.  Let’s examine a piece about “Viking Superman” (of course).  Emphasis added:

Viking — the word itself still conjures up the stereotypical image of bloodthirsty blonde barbarians, whose rage can only be sated by acts of pillage and rapine. Fortunately, this dated historical perspective has been somewhat revised, and establishment historians now tacitly acknowledge that Norse civilization was much more complex than previously thought, and a lot less one-dimensional. 

If only Der Movement could consider the history of Rome and the rest of the Classical World, as well as that of “modern” Southern Europe, in a manner that is “much more complex” and “a lot less one-dimensional.” Alas, that would entail some original thinking and a break with fossilized dogma (blasphemy) so such revised “historical perspective” will not be forthcoming from the babbling zombies of “movement” discourse.

If you are familiar with any of my writings, you’ll know that I firmly advocate the study and superimposition of past historical experiences onto present circumstances. Julius Evola

Who was of course a non-Indo-European, non-White, subhuman mongrel (which doesn’t prevent the Type I crowd from being fascinated with Evola and his insipid ramblings)

…presents my view of the usefulness of history succinctly when he posits that exploration of the past isn’t done for the ghoulish resurrection of long-dead peoples or cultures, but rather for the perennial spirit that animates and gives life to both. 

Or to engage in the usual “movement” ethnic fetishism.

The Vikings were many things — warriors, poets, explorers, statesmen — and in the dark days to come, I can think of no better “spirit” to invoke and study than that of our intrepid and oft-misunderstood Norse brethren. Like White Nationalism, Norse culture and the ‘Viking Age’ are still a sadly misunderstood phenomena, and this makes their examination all the more relevant.

The Roman period, particularly the Later Western Roman Empire, is still “a sadly misunderstood” period (misunderstood by Nutzi nitwits); I plan to read up on that period and eventually share my insights here (which you should not read if disagreement with “movement” dogma gives you fainting fits).

Furthermore, for centuries the Vikings were feared and hated by their non-Norse contemporaries, and later despised by generations of the anti-White academic establishment. All of this has only changed within the past several decades. What does this tell us? It illustrates that like our Viking kin, we White Nationalists will too someday be vindicated retrospectively, because nature favors the victorious, and our cause is glorious.

Please don’t say “we White nationalists.” I neither consider you a White nationalist nor part of “we.”

The White/European predisposition for heterodox thinking

Oh, the irony!  Someone who parrots decades of rigidly fossilized “movement” dogma with nary an original thought anywhere to be found talks about the “White/European predisposition for heterodox thinking.”

… is rooted in our people’s unique ethno- and evolutionary history. The great prophet of decline Oswald Spengler

Who would vehemently disagree with the bulk of your writing, including the confusion of Apollonian with Faustian.

 speculated that the Nordic (Aryan/Indo-European/European) soul was forged in the “harder struggling” environs of the “Nordic steppe,” and though I am not an environmental determinist, I would hold that this is partially true.[4] In the early Indo-European world, and even later in the Norse world of the Viking Age, the love of competition, permeated by the struggle of low-intensity conflict and in conjunction with the extreme climes of Northern Europe, gave birth to an inegalitarian and hierarchical society of aristocratic-warriors and heroic individuals. 

At the same time, the HBD-Nordicists tell us that Germanic Northwest Europeans are egalitarian altruistic universalists, uniquely helpless against immigration, being descended from “high trust hunter gatherers” who evolved in “the extreme climes of Northern Europe.”  The fact that these internally inconsistent views cause no cognitive dissonance is clear evidence that we are not dealing with rational analysis, but with a form of secularized religious faith.

These individuals favored deed and action over the pettiness of mere physical existence and material comfort. The cumulative tempering effect of all of these forces gave shape to the White/European man, whose desire to transcend the biological and the material…

That coming from someone who is a biological-minded materialist, albeit one peddling pseudoscience.

…whose penchant for a grounded abstract, became a proclivity for transcendence through self-overcoming. The White race’s ability to think clearly and creatively, harnessing our inner ‘Faustian’ nature has always been our people’s greatest strength, and we would be wise to continue to harness that which has always made us strong.
As White Nationalists…

Crowley is an anti-White activist, not a White nationalist (see below).

..we’ve dedicated ourselves to representing the highest, most transcendent attributes of our race, and the utilization of our ‘Faustian’ spirit in the service of a cause greater than our individual egos should be one of our greatest ideals. Ernst Jünger proclaimed that the underlying principle of the modern world is the centrality of pain. By experiencing and embracing hardship we have much in common with our Viking and Indo-European ancestors, and as such possess the potential for yet-undreamed-of greatness. 

Such greatness not manifested by the likes of Crowley.

Adolf Hitler once said that the Aryan “is the Prometheus of mankind” and I can conjure up no better epithet to describe the collective awesomeness intrinsic to our blood.

“Collective awesomeness.”  Cue cries of Pepe!  And Hail Kek!

Crowley is just another run-of-the mill, dime-a-dozen ethnic fetishist; same old, same old. By peddling distortions and untruths to divide Whites against themselves, Crowley does the dirty work of the System, and therefore can be considered a dedicated anti-White activist, not a White nationalist.

Sadly, The Occidental Observer has degenerated into a highbrow version of Chateau Heartiste, being a mix of Trump fanboyism, HBD pseudoscience, Nordicism, and juvenile AltRightism. More evidence that Der Movement, Inc. corrupts everything it comes in contact with, including otherwise intelligent and well individuals (TOO blog founders, not necessarily all of the contributors).

*Further, looking at Novembre’s “genes mirror geography” study, we can see that Italian samples, derived from various parts of that nation, fall exactly where one would expect given the geographic cline of gene frequencies.  There is no significant shift, as one would expect if the population base of the nation had been significantly replaced by others from origins outside the European genetic cline.