Category: our affairs

The HBD Agenda

John Reed, Fred Derbyshire….it’s all one.

Question: How is Fred Reed any different than Derbyshire?  They are almost EXACTLY the same, defending multiracialism and miscegenation because of their own personal failings in that regard. Further, they are also exactly alike in making Blacks the main race problem – “look here, it’s dem dere Negroes that are no good, but my favorite non-White group is A-OK.” Even more – both praise the phenotypes of the racially mixed people their own families represent, and heap scorn on anyone who thinks otherwise.  The ONLY difference is that Derbyshire worships East Asians while Reed worships mixed-race “Latinos” (there are of course “Latin Americans” who are of European stock – Bolsonaro of Brazil being one example – but Reed is not really talking about them, is he?). 

The fact that Reed critiques Derbyshire only makes all of this more hilarious.  His attacks against Coulter are just icing on the cake, since she’s a known mudshark herself.  

This is the utter and complete disgrace Der Movement falls into when you have an affirmative action policy; after all, Derbyshire, Reed, and Coulter do have something else in common besides a predilection for inter-racial sex (and, possibly, male-level testosterone levels) – and that “something” is not Eyetalian or Romanian ancestry.

And anyone who criticizes Reed for his self-interested defense of multiracialism and miscegenation without also doing the same for Derbyshire is a rank hypocrite.

But there is a deeper issue here.  Note how most of these discussions – even those from the anti-Reed/Derbyshire side – solely focus on proximate issues.  So, the debate is about physical appearance, the perception of “robustness” and “sturdiness,” the problems or lack thereof of biracial children, “social consequences,” personal preferences and marital bliss (or “measured groveling”), criminality, IQ, etc. – but no real discussion of ultimate interests, of Salterian values, of EGI, of racial preservation, of genetic continuity. Thus, the debate is framed wholly within the HBD framework, it is wholly conducted via the values of HBD, and the value of racial preservation for its own sake is ignored.  IQ is considered, while EGI is not.  This demonstrates the power, the total victory, of HBD within Der Movement, Inc.

How was this victory achieved?  Consider the following. Why do you suppose the HBDers focus so much on intra-European differences?  Why does HBD focus so intensely on the alleged deficiencies of Southern and Eastern Europeans, with a particular concentration on Italians, especially Southern Italians? Why is the only exception to that South/East emphasis harsh critiques against the Irish?  Did you ever consider that the Irish and the (Southern) Italians constitute the main part of the “White ethnic” population of the USA (with Eastern Europeans like Poles making up most of the remainder)?  Did you ever consider how all of this is well designed to impede White solidarity in America – a clear HBD objective?

Further, why the constant harping about “Inner Hajnal” vs. “Outer Hajnal” (almost always in reference to Europe – the idea that Jews and Asians are “Outer” rarely if ever comes up), with the constant reminders that the Irish and the Southern Italians (and Eastern Europeans) are “Outer?”  And why the constant sniping against Frank Salter and EGI?

The HBDers want to replace racialism with cognitive elitism on the Far Right.  They hate and fear White solidarity, they hate and fear pan-Europeanism, they hate and fear the organic solidarity of Europe and of the West, and, most of all, they hate and fear anything that threatens the status of “Rosie and the kids,” Professor Hart, “Razib” and “Godless Capitalist,” and all the rest.  At best, they want White nationalism to be replaced by Jew- and Asian-accepting IQ cognitive elitism; at minimum, they want to ruin White nationalism to make America safe for Jews, Asians, race-mixers, and triracial Jamaican bloggers. They want EGI ignored, they want the genetic distance between Europeans and Asians ignored, they want genetic kinship and genetic continuity to be ignored, and they want only proximate metrics of benefit to Jews and Asians to be considered – with the exception that they’ll also promote any proximate metric that turns Europeans against each other.

The HBDers are not stupid; they have studied Der Movement and they know what buttons to push to further their objectives. They observe the ethnic divides and know how to exacerbate them.  They know how to appeal to Nordicists and other fetishists by bashing those groups the Nordicists despise, and they know how to appeal to the racial vanity of those factions of Der Movement by comparing noble and intelligent “Inner Hajnal” Europeans with the stupid and degenerate despised “Outer Hajnal mongrels.” They’ve been doing this for years, and while these tactics are laughably transparent, they know who and what they’re dealing with, and they know that “movement” reflexes will always win out over rational thought.

Consider “Sallis’ Law.”  How could the HBD strategy be anything other than successful?  So the terms of debate are those of HBD; Yellow Supremacists go from strength to strength while White nationalism goes from weakness to weakness.  And Der Movement’s fetishes, obsessions, and affirmative action program makes all of this possible.

Yes, there are differences and disagreements between European peoples.  But, you know, those are issues for WE to sort out, among ourselves; we should not want or need others, who have malicious intent, to do their concern trolling to set us against each other in bitter squabbles that we cannot win – and that they cannot lose.

Call this “crazy and bitter” and “the paranoid style” all you want, but serious reflection of HBD activity in light of what is written here should illuminate the truth. The bottom line is that HBD is a political movement – politics is activity in relation to power (as Yockey told us) – and the power here is power for Jews, Asians, and White race-mixers.  

A Message for Eric Kaufmann

A brief message.

Following up on this, we read this:

Eric Kaufmann was born in Hong Kong and raised in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. His ancestry is mixed with a quarter Chinese and a quarter Latino. His father is of Jewish descent…

So, the person advising on how to ease the anxiety of Whites so that they can be more easily (slowly) dispossessed and, eventually, race-replaced by mixed-race individuals, is himself mixed-race and half-Jewish. I’m shocked, shocked, I say.

So, here is a brief message for Kaufmann:

Dear Sir,

I do not know your level of sincerity concerning your work on White interests. Regardless, taken to its logical conclusion, and from your own words, the ultimate outcome of Whites following your advice is their slow but inevitable demographic eclipse and their race replacement by a mixed-race population.

I note that your own ancestry is described as “mixed with a quarter Chinese and a quarter Latino. His father is of Jewish descent.”  Even if we were to assume that the “Latino” is Euro-Iberian, then that still leaves 75% of your ancestry of non-European descent. Therefore, by the standards of those who most closely exemplify the pursuit of White interests you pontificate about, you are not “White.”

Very well, you have the right to express your opinion.  So do I.  And my opinion, expressed here, is the same that I have expressed toward other non-Whites attempting to interfere with the expression of White interests by Whites.  

Whites have their own internal debates, their own conflicts (ethnicity, sub-race, religion, etc.), their own consideration of different strategies, and their own concerns. These are OUR affairs, not yours.  These are OUR conflicts, not yours. These are OUR debates, not yours.  And these are OUR interests, not yours.

How Whites relate to each other, how Whites decide to work together (or not), how Whites decide to strategize (or not) in defense of their own interests, that is something for US to do, not you.  Ultimately, WE have to be the arbiters of OUR fate. OURSELVES ALONE.

And, no, we do not need, or want, non-Whites with their every “helpful” advice, telling us that our best option is to slow down our displacement, replacement, and destruction; that we are “dying of Whiteness;” promoting intra-White division; that we need alliances with Asians in which Whites must grovel before their Yellow and Brown masters; that we must have a multiracial “White separatist state;” that we are akin to child molesters and are “latrine flies;” that we must accept the “racial status quo;” that racial preservation for its own sake is “insane;” that we must have a “Red State nation” that accepts “conservative Blacks;” etc. 

Maybe, sir, you can take your advice to Israel, and suggest to the Jews there how they can accommodate their eventual race replacement by Arabs through an increased short-term focus on Jewish interests (hard to say how they can go beyond what they already have), or you can go to China and spread a similar message there – although, contra Frost and the “Arctic Alliance” crowd, the Chinese are hardly in any danger of race replacement.  But, wherever you go and whatever you do, we can do without your proffered chalice, dripping as it is with carefully concealed poison.

Whatever the outcome of the White racial problem, I do not believe the outcome is going to be pleasant for the likes of you. If you are wrong, and Whites quietly go to extinction without any expression of self-interest, then the resulting Colored dystopia will ultimately not be of benefit for the Coloreds themselves.

What if you are correct about the situation? That you are correct that it is untenable to suppress the expression of self-interest by a group whose demographic majority is disappearing? Let’s say I agree with you – even the White omega race may well become ever more demanding of their racial self-interest.  Where I disagree with you is with the idea that this discontent can be effectively managed through a safety valve release of controlled, moderate expression of racial self-interest. 

As Suvorov wrote – revolutions do not occur during the time of greatest repression, but when that repression is suddenly relaxed.  Louis XVI learned that, as did Gorbachev. Once the expression of White racial interests is legitimized, once the pent-up fury of a wronged people begins to be released, how can it be safely controlled? Once the genie is out of the bottle, and the toothpaste is out of the tube, can everything be safely be put away again once things begin to spiral out of control?

The future is chaos. And your stage-managed attempt at orderly White extinction will only add to that chaos. Enjoy.

Best regards,

Ted Sallis

Advice For the Young Activist

Navigating the madhouse.

What advice would I give a (real, not infiltrator) newcomer, particularly a young one, to the “movement?”  Since most, albeit of course not all, such newcomers would be expected to be relatively young, and since younger, less experienced, individuals would be more likely to be vulnerable to errors of judgment, I entitle this piece: “Advice For the Young Activist,” although it applies to all people who find themselves in The Movement Madhouse.

Based on plenty of experience (most of it negative), I would start off with the following.

Be careful of who you deal with, who you have confidence in, who you trust.  In more than 20 years involved with racial activism, I can honestly say that there have been only two people I’ve known in the “movement” that I have had complete confidence in, who I would consider 100% trustworthy.  One of these is someone I’ve known for nearly 20 years, the other is someone I worked with very closely for several years before he passed away. That’s it.  Two in 20+ years, of the dozens and dozens (if you can online commentators, hundreds) of people I’ve encountered.  If we relax the criteria and ask how many people in the “movement” I have reasonably solid confidence in, people I’d be willing to invite over for dinner, interact with personally – maybe half-a-dozen total (including the two already discussed).  The point: be very careful who you associate who you trust.  You will meet some of the best people you will ever know in the “movement,” but also some of the worst, and the latter will outnumber the former.  A dissident movement will by its very nature tend to attract marginal personalities, and that has been amplified by freakish dogma, lack of quality control, and piss-poor leadership.” Combine that with outright trolls infiltrators, and agent provocateurs, as well as the weak-minded who join for dubious reasons and then leave – without being able to keep their mouths shut about it – and you have a recipe for disaster unless you are very careful. Then one hears rumors of “homosexual grooming of young boys” at “Alt Right pool parties” – I have no idea if that is true or not, but young men should exercise caution.  The same applies to young women entering the “movement” who may be the center of attention from the sex-starved heterosexual activist contingent.

Don’t fall in with personality cults.  Note to the “movement”: there are no “rock stars” – or there should not be any; no one is infallible; and although there are some important personages who have done real solid work, which should be respected and appreciated, no one is above criticism.  The idea that we should, on the one hand, critique “the personality cults of Jewish intellectual movements” while, on the other hand, mimic the same type of personality cult among racial activism, is outright hypocrisy and demonstrates a stunning lack of self-awareness.  If you read or hear “rock star” in reference to anyone, if you see, read, or hear anything that tells you that criticism of certain people is forbidden, then run as fast as you can.  That’s a cult, not a genuine movement.

Think for yourself, don’t mindlessly swallow fossilized “movement” dogma. The same admonitions against cultism applies to dogma that is above criticism.  We all know the official dogma: Nordicism, ethnic fetishism, Ostara-like “racial history,” HBD, etc. If there is something you are not allowed to criticize, then that’s a cult, not a real political movement.

Be wary of real-life public meetings and rallies, know very well what you are getting into and be prepared.  There are a number of dangers here.  First, even in the absence of leftist opponents, you will likely be exposed to some “sincere” unsavory characters.  Second, the leftist problem exists and comes in two flavors.  There’s the “infiltrator” flavor and then there’s the overt “in your face” flavor, the latter of which runs the spectrum of merely loud protests, and the taking of pictures and filming, to actual physical assault. Most likely, your personal self-defense will be your own responsibility, and don’t expect any real security to weed out infiltrators or to even to prevent someone sticking a cell phone camera in your face.  Weigh the costs and benefits of such meetings, look at your own personal situation carefully, understand the implications and consequences, and go from there.  If you do attend meetings at which there is no confidence of security (most of them), you at least would want to consider investing in some “technics” to obfuscate identity if you do have that cell phone camera in your face.  It goes without saying that unless you want to play a leadership role – and you know you would be accepted as such based on your merits (see below on “affirmative action”) – then do protect your pseudonymity.

Take care of yourself first.  When you travel by plane, you are told than in case of emergency, you put your own oxygen mask on first and then you help the person next to you.  The same principle applies here.  If you and your life are a mess, you’ll be little help to anyone, including “the White race.”  Education, career, financial security, family, health – all come first, racial activism comes second.  That’s not “selfish individualism”  – is it just good sense and putting yourself in the position of being the best you can be, which will be of benefit to everyone around you.  Be wary of the siren song: “I don’t know why people bother going to college or saving for retirement – don’t they know that the System is going to completely collapse in five years?”  They’ve been saying that same nonsense for more than 50 years now.  Ignore them.  Essentially what they are saying is: “Don’t take care of yourself – take care of ME instead.”  They want your time, your effort, and, above all else, they want your MONEY.  Don’t fall for it.  In many cases, calls for “selfless altruism” are actually self-interested appeals for the altruist to sacrifice himself for those doing the calling.

Don’t buy into the “Armageddon” rhetoric that “the collapse of the System and the revolution” is just around the corner, within five years it’ll all collapse.  As noted above, they’ve been saying that for more than 50 years

Don’t waste time with online comments threads flamewars.  That speaks for itself.  That’s all a waste of time, unproductive, revolving around personalities and not issues, and this time sink will get you more involved with activist freaks than you would ever want.

Don’t have unrealistic expectations and then get “burnt out” when you don’t see victory right around the corner. I’m not necessarily echoing Spengler’s “Optimism is cowardice,” but you must be realistic.  This is a long-haul endeavor, anyone who promises quick fixes ad immediate gratification is either delusional or a charlatan.

Be persistent but know when to change strategy and tactics when a “dead end” won’t budge.  Don’t be a fossil.  Be flexible.

Don’t throw good money after bad. Many “movement” outlets have their hands out; they are very good at pan-handling.  You may feel like: “I’ve already invested so much into these people, I can’t give up now.”  No, it’s a sunk cost, accept it and move on.  This applies to the investment of time and effort as much as the investment of money. Avoid the “denial of sunk cost” trap – which you are afraid to “break” with a failed group, etc. because of the perception that you’ve sunk too much into it to leave it now.  You will just sink deeper and deeper into failure.  Accept sunk costs and move on.

If some individual/group/organization is unable to clearly define who their “ingroup” is, who they are for, run as quickly as you can.  In particular, if you are in any way unsure whether you yourself are “in” why would you waste any investment of time and resources if a group of mendacious liars or indecisive dithering idiots?  You have the right to invest in your own genetic interests.  You are not there to be the extended phenotype of someone else, defending their genetic interests at the cost of your own.  Demand transparency and reciprocity regarding interests, and if you don’t get it, take your business elsewhere.  Don’t fall for the “we’ll sort all this out after the revolution.”  No, sort it out NOW.  And if you find some individual or group trying to renegotiate the ingroup after the fact, suggesting that maybe you don’t belong after all, AFTER you’ve already invested your time, effort, and money with them, then they are utterly devoid of character, and you need to leave them ASAP, regardless of what they “decide” about ingroups.  Deciding on the ingroup is the FIRST thing – the DEFINING thing any group must do.  The definition of a group is meaningless without a clear “in/out” and if the “in/out” is going to be redefined midstream, then the definition of the group is also meaningless.  Don’t waste your time with meaningless groups….or with meaningless individuals.

Don’t waste time with “man on white horse” syndromes, magical thinking about quick fixes, and that mainstream leaders are “secretly on our side.” They’re not.

Don’t be afraid to call out “movement” “leaders” when such fail time and time again. They’ll get hysterical, “ban” you from their sites, call you names (the pot calling the kettle black), they’ll do anything to protect their money stream.  After all, we can’t let the rubes know how they are getting fleeced now, can we?  As a corollary don’t buy into, or yourself promote, the “movement’s” ethnic affirmative action policy. If any “movement” precinct declares that groups A-M are part of their ingroup, and groups N-Z are not, well and good, but then leadership of that precinct should be able to come from any qualified person derived from that ingroup (A-M).  Any “movement” group that has a caste system within their ingroup – run.  They are being disingenuous; they really want an ingroup narrower than they outwardly proclaim, and are just fishing for more money sources and other forms of support.  Again, don’t be someone else’s extended phenotype.

If I think of any more advice, a follow-up to this post will be produced in the future.

Our Affairs

An important observation.
Of course, there are real differences between Europeans, real differences of interests between Europeans. But, the key words are “between Europeans.” These are our issues to sort out between ourselves.  They are our affairs, to deal with as we decide. We do not need, nor should we want, self-interested others – arrogant Desis, cunning Jews, demented mestizos, or whomever – dictating to us what our relations should be among ourselves. Just as we should not dictate to The Rest, so should they not dictate to The West. 
Our affairs are for ourselves alone.