Rephrasing Durocher, 12/6/15

Tough man Durocher needs to be rephrased.

Durocher on Berger:

No, you are a racially-motivated, hair-splitting, sophistic, mendacious, lying, anti-White communist You-Know-Who. And after the Revolution, I dare say, such mendacious and ultimately genocidal hate propaganda against our people will be severely punished.

Sallis on Durocher:

No, you are a politically-motivated, hair-splitting, sophistic, mendacious, lying, anti-White mainstreaming traitor. And after the Revolution, I dare say, such mendacious and ultimately genocidal hate propaganda against our people will be severely punished.

Durocher Doubles Down

But then backs off.

At first, this seemed like just another one of Durocher’s breathless love letters to Orban. But then (perhaps during the orgasmic refractory period), a glimmer of sense appeared:

The conservative populists will not, in themselves, save Europe, even if they successfully impose a solution to the current migrant crisis. Their opposition to non-European immigration is as a rule instinctive and electoral, not ideological and principled. They oppose immigration, to the extent they do, because it pays and will cease to do so when it no longer pays. Indeed, Orbán’s poll numbers have shot up thanks to his successful crisis management and it is hard to say the extent to which his position is really ideologically principled or merely politically opportunistic. The conservative populists’ objective role — visible especially in France, Germany, and Belgium — has often been to steal votes from the nationalist far-right, without actually addressing the underlying problem of immigration.

While it is possible that Orban may personally prefer Hungary to stay Hungarian, I believe he is an opportunist whose current position is solely due to pressure on his political right from Jobbik. His constant waffling in the face of EU pressure is not consistent with a principled position. Then we have his attack on the NPI conference. No one was asking him to endorse the conference, much less promote or even attend it, but just to leave it alone. But, no, with all the fervor of a “point-and-sputter” SJW, he made sure to crush the conference and harass Spencer. Is there still any doubt about his “principles?”

A correct attitude toward Orban would be brief and infrequent mild and skeptical praise when he says or does (preferably, does) something useful, but to always “hold his feet to the fire” and never trust him to do the right thing on his own. The onanistic frenzy of the mainstreamers about Chicken Wire Vik is as unseemly and embarrassing as the traditionalists with their hands in their pants over bare-chested Vlad, or “the Donald’s” army of dreamy-eyed PUA girls lying in the grass wetting themselves over “the Trumpening.”

As to why the mainstreaming excitement over Orban:

Barring a bloody revolution, the only way for us to achieve the policies necessary to halt immigration and save Europe from destruction is by restoring that junction between our ruling elites and the ostracized nationalist dissidence. Thus our peoples’ interests and right to life would again be secured, and our ruling elites might again be legitimate leaders of the people they govern. 

EGI Notes is of course a peace-loving and pacifist blog that preaches a strict doctrine of non-violence. I – no doubt, no doubt! – absolutely abhor any thought of anything other than bookish intellectualism as a solution to our problems. However, I unfortunately realize – with deep regret, shaking my head sadly – that to solve the race problem will very possibly require “bloody revolution” and that “our” ruling elites in such a scenario would be made to learn to “play the piano” real fast.  The mainstreamers, on the other hand, horrified by the thought of soiling their dainty hands with any of that, refuse to consider the possibility. Let’s leave the traitors and opportunists in power; after all, anything else would be “radical” and “bloody.” Thus, the mainstreamers eagerly grasp onto Orban or any other established conservative figure that offers hope that a partial compromise solution can be found that would not require any dreaded bloodshed.

Breezy and Merkel’s Boner

Affirmative action keeps on rolling along.

Read here.

Once again, Sailer is outspoken and correct in his criticism of the genocidal lunatic and criminal Merkel, while the “movement’s” silence is deafening.

As much as I dislike Sailer, I must be fair: his coverage of the current European “refugee” invasion has been accurate, hard-hitting, and very useful.  The “movement’s” reaction to it has been dishonest in its omissions and in its contortions to avoid pointing fingers in unwanted directions. Instead of criticism of Merkel, all we get is fanboy breathlessness over Saint Viktor and his chicken-wire fence.

I disagree with Breezy on one thing however.  He uses the term “Merkel’s boner” to refer to her great error in inviting the colored flood into Germany and Europe.

Instead, the term “Merkel’s boner” is better used to describe the “movement’s” physiological reaction to Merkel’s ethnicity.

In a future White ethnostate, it shouldn’t only be race traitors, HBDers, gamesters and others who face the gallows. Some of the feckless “movement” leadership should have the opportunity to “play the piano” as well.

Playing the Piano

What does the term mean?

At my various blogs, I make reference to “playing the piano” and it needs to be stated, for those who do not understand, that this refers to hanging miscreants from meathooks with piano wire. Very well, but I think more analysis is needed.  Thus, read here, excerpts, emphasis added:

They were not hanged with piano wire. This is a myth as is the idea that they were impaled on butcher’s hooks. They were hanged using nooses of thin cord, double-looped with slip knots. One loop went around the victim’s neck, the other over a butcher hook which was affixed to a steel beam imbedded at each end in the brick walls of the execution chamber. The noosed victim was lifted by two assistants and the executioner, in this case Wilhelm Rottger, slid the other knot of the cord over the hook. The victim was then lowered, the knot tightened and the victim strangled. 

The conspirators were not hanged with piano wire. Thin cord was used. Piano wire would have cut the jugular, causing rapid death, exactly what Hitler did not want. The thin cord and the short drop would not break the neck (causing unconsciousness) and would produce maximum suffering. See Hoffman’s benchmark book on the resistance for details provided by witnesses at the executions. 

So, what I have in mind is the slow execution that would result in “maximum suffering.” Therefore, piano wire per se may need to be replaced by a “thin cord” – but I have a possible compromise that could optimize the procedure.

What if piano wire was bundled into a cable?  What I have in mind is an instrument with the following properties: first, like the thin cord, the cable would NOT cause a quick death, but instead result in a slow, agonizing, maximum suffering strangulation death (if performed as described above). Second, a piano wire cable would cut into the neck to some degree (this is what I hope to be the case), but not so much as to cut the jugular and cause a quick death. Instead, I envision the cable as cutting into the neck in a non-lethal fashion, to add a further layer of agonizing pain and suffering, but not in any way detracting from the main event of slow strangulation.  Indeed, the opposite is the hoped-for outcome: the cable slowly cutting into the neck would amplify the incredible agony of the slow strangulation as described above. Here we have the “best of both possible worlds.”

Thus, “playing the piano” should be construed as a short-hand description of the procedure outlined in the preceding paragraph.

Before using on anti-White lefties in a future White ethnostate – all of course having been properly convicted in a trial by a legally convened tribunal – the technique should be perfected through experimentation on other enemies of the state who also would have gone through trial by legally convened tribunals. Here I have in mind various VDARE HBD conservatives, HBD academics, HBD bloggers, “game” advocates who promote nihilistic hedonism, trolls who haunt pro-White blogs – the “label” for this post gives the flavor as to who would be standing trial – all perfectly legal and proper! – to provide subjects for experimentation.

Thank you.