Category: political opinion protection act

Friday News

In der news.

Spencer podcast.

I have some comments to make about the discussion at the beginning of the podcast, which was addressing “movement” critics, of which I am one.

Some points made I agree with, particularly concerning the stupidity of people celebrating Spencer’s failures; Spencer is correct in noting that the System doesn’t make distinctions – thus, Spencer’s failures are indeed seen as representative of the totality of White racial activism.  However, Spencer should reflect upon this – one reason why some people are so critical of Spencer, and are annoyed at him for his errors, is because those errors harm us all. Spencer can’t have it both ways – on the one hand saying that the failure of one (himself) affects all, and then, on the other hand, dodging responsibility for harming the “movement,” and instead complaining about his critics.

There are three major disingenuous and/or dishonest points made:

1. The critics are people who “are now blackpilled longer than they were redpilled” – all are recent activists who have become disenchanted.  Well, in my case, I am coming on a quarter-century, 25 years, a full generation, of racial activism. I for one have become completely disgusted with the “movement” from many years of experience – the same mistakes made over and over again, the stupid fossilized dogma, the endless cycle of failure and delusion. Other critics or skeptics of Spencer and/or the Alt Right in general, people like Johnson, Taylor, and Strom are all long-term activists. So, this point is plain wrong.

2. People may have bad motives.  Maybe some, but all of the people named above, whether I agree or disagree with them, are, in my opinion, sincere.  The Pepe-Kek crew should contemplate the possibility that not all – or even most – of their critics are insincere, are acting from bad motives.

3. No one has done better.  That’s true – but that is only relevant to the other affirmative action beneficiaries. Only those people seriously in the running for “movement leadership” – people who fit the “one of the boys” profile of “movement” acceptability – have on themselves the responsibility of proving themselves capable of being leaders. Other people are simply bloggers, commentators, analysts, etc. – in some cases restricted to those roles not by choice – and as such they should be judged by the criterion of leadership.  But I’ll agree – the Quota Queen crew have not taken advantage of Spencer’s absence from the stage to get anything meaningful accomplished. That gets back to point 1 – I have good reasons to be disgusted by Der Movement and its endless failures.

More from the podcast: An Internet Bill of Rights is not enough – we need POPA.

And, yes, we need to stop with the Man on White Horse Syndrome.

Moving on:

See this.

Greg Conte Twitter, 1/24/19:

Account suspended

Does Twitter follow Der Movement’s affirmative action policy with respect to who is allowed to have an account?  No wops allowed!  

The “down payment.”

The most self-non-aware tweet in human Twitter history.

Advertisements

Der Movement Marches On

More wreckage.

Whatever you want to say about Taleb, he’s at least forcing the Alt Wrong HBD fetishists to defend their premises – for the first time, in, well, forever.

Apparently, those 23ndMe results have real world consequences.

A bit behind the times:

December 2018.

August 2017.

Never fear – given enough time, Der Movement belatedly realizes, promotes, or understands many of the points raised here months or years earlier.

Does the taint of Arktos prevent book reviews?

Vincere Arkadin
Posted December 26, 2018 at 5:27 am | Permalink
What about Bolton’s Yockey bio? Did you read it by chance?

Greg Johnson

Posted December 26, 2018 at 5:37 am | Permalink
I have not been able to read it.

A Type II review is here.

Meanwhile, Johnson is now a writer for the Jewish-HBD Unz site.  Zman would be proud. Is this a paid position?  After all, moneybags Ron usually pays his writers.  Does Greg believe that Unz should be “driven out of White society” as he has stated for Jews in general?  Pay close attention, goys, pay close attention.

The young Pirandello.

The young Mussolini.

More examples for the “movement” cherry pickers:

Giovanni Gentile.

In phenotypic contrast, Lega Nord politician Maroni, born in Varese, Lombardy.  Undoubtedly, a Celt-Germanic Nordic.  As Roissy commentators assert – “geography matters in Italy, like a lot.”

For Greg Conte – an Italian politician of Calabrian ancestry.  Another purebred mountain wop, no doubt. Arya…arya….

Go away, Parrott.

This is the future you choose for your children when you mumble on with your excuses and reservations.
Yes, it’s worth some people getting doxxed, fired, and arrested over. It’s a real struggle, not an internet hobby.

Rewritten:

This is the future you choose for your children when you tolerate outrageously incompetent quota queens, freakshows, and online grifters.
Yes, it’s worth some “movement leaders” being mocked and ridiculed. It’s a real struggle, not a panhandling scheme for people who want to live off of follower’s donations.

Der movement marches on.  The voices of WN 3.0?  Say it aint’ so!  Let’s see now.  Trolling, “shitposting,” and generalized juvenile jackassery: all WN 2.0 activities.  Another fail.  Is Greg going to try and blame this fiasco on WN 1.0 as well?

And this is another example why Parrott and all the other quota queens are so wrong in their “suggestions” and “advice.”  Rallies, trolling, beer bellies with their muskets, and all the rest mean nothing, absolutely nothing, when there is no infrastructure, no one embedded in the System, not a single lawyer on call ready to defend, absolutely nothing, nada, zip, zero – nothing except drunken podcasting, Pepe and Kek, trailer park cuckolding, “Proud Boys” chased out of LA boys and then abandoned by their founder, and “leaders” constantly with their hands out demanding “D’Nations.”  There’s nothing.  Absolutely nothing.  And if anyone asserts that we need something, then the good old boys emerge out of the woodwork and – aping their retarded God Emperor – lash out with tweets.  Pathetic.

We’re stuck in an eternal negative feedback loop.  The freakshows of Der Movement repel high quality people.  The lack of high quality people leads to a “movement” dominated by freaks, incompetents, and jackasses. This in turn further repels high quality people.

Only when the rank-and-file activists rebel against their “leaders” will this ever change.

A Stunning Lack of Self-Awareness

The Gaslighting Greg Show.

First, a short take: Trump utterly humiliated in the mid-term elections, Roissy softly weeps, and the God Emperor has feet of clay…and a belly of lard.  And I’d like folks like Johnson, McCulloch et al. to explain how their “metapolitical education” has been succeeding, and will be successful, when so many Whites currently vote against their interests that even a Negro-loving and Jew-loving civic nationalist cuck like Trump gets “repudiated” as a “fascist racist” in midterm elections by a coalition of highly educated White professionals, White women of all educational levels, and non-Whites?  

Read this.

And this.

Remember the quota queens in 2016: Trump is the last chance for White America, he’s an American Caesar preserving White demographics, etc., etc., etc.  Who was telling you from the beginning that Trump was a fat, lazy, witless, moronic, vulgar, ignorant buffoon?

Long take: Greg Johnson is possibly the most self-non-aware person in human history.  Emphasis added:

In the short run, we need an internet Bill of Rights to protect dissidents from censorship and deplatforming. Beyond that, we need an across-the-board ban on politically-correct terms of service and employment, so we are free to dissent without threatening our livelihoods and social capital. If we can get such legislation in place, I am confident that we can win, and sooner rather than later.

Remember this?

Freedom of speech is a value because we are all fallible and vulnerable. Fallibility means that we can make mistakes. We can have false or inadequate pictures of the world which can be improved upon. Vulnerability simply means that unforeseeable contingencies can upset our best laid plans. To overcome mistakes and misfortunes, we first need to know about them. That means that we need the freedom to be the bearers of bad news. We need freedom of speech, because it makes genuine intellectual and social progress possible.

Unfortunately, not in Der Movement.  There, the quota queens squelch any free speech that threatens the queens’ sinecures.

A society that lacks the ability to change lacks the ability to preserve itself. But a society can’t change if it lacks the ability to communicate bad news to its leaders. This is why we should want to protect freedom of speech, even when we are the ones in power.

That coming from someone who constantly “bans” critics from commenting on his blog.

First, some people think they already have the truth. This truth is, moreover, absolute: it is complete and not subject to revision. Any contrary position is, therefore, a falsehood. This is why religions in the Abrahamic tradition — including Marxism — have opposed freedom of speech. They claim to be absolutely true. Therefore, all other religions are false — or, at best, semblances of the truth — and must be suppressed.

And criticisms of “movement” dogma and “movement” failure must also be suppressed.  Ban, ban, ban!  Moderate, moderate, censor!

Second, people with a vested interest in a given political and economic system don’t like criticism because it threatens their power and peace of mind.

Just like “movement leaders” have a “vested interest” in preserving that system as well, right Greg?

We all make mistakes. We all suffer misfortunes. But only some of us are destroyed by them. Others learn from them and overcome them. But, again, the first step to overcoming a problem is knowing that one has it.

Earth to Greg: Look in the mirror.

Narcissism is a problem, though, when one puts preserving a positive self-image ahead of positive self-actualization.

And preserving your tin cup income.

Everyone makes mistakes. 

Some more than others.

The path to self-actualization requires that we acknowledge our mistakes, take responsibility for them, learn what we can from them, and then rise above them. 

Greg, do you actually read the things you write?  For godssakes every time someone leaves a comment on your blog that irritates you, or is mildly critical of you, they get the “this is your last comment here” treatment.  Is it possible for anyone to be so overtly non-self-aware, or are you just “trolling” us?

The narcissist, however, seeks to preserve his positive self-image at all costs. So when confronted with his mistakes, he denies them and doubles down on them. 

Yes, after all….the Hermansson and Lewis infiltrations “didn’t do any real damage,” right?  Being wrong about Donald Trump, wrong about the Alt Right….let’s ignore or double down, right?  Blaming the failures of WN 2.0 on WN 1.0 – that’s not “doubling down” or “blaming others,” right?

Or he blames others for his mistakes. 

It’s…WN 1.0.  Or…the “crazy and bitter” Ted Sallis.  The dastardly Richard Spencer (who behaves in the same  manner, by the way) is always an easy target.

Or he goes on the attack, particularly against the bearer of bad news. Anything, really, to avoid taking responsibility and acknowledging that he might have some room to learn and grow.

This is exactly what Johnson did to critics of his behavior on Hermansson and Lewis, as well as critics of he and the Alt Right/WN 2.0.  At this point, this has to be a “troll” job; Greg is laughing at us.  I simply cannot believe an intelligent and educated person on the Right can be so painfully non-self-aware.  This level of pathology simply isn’t possible.

Narcissists may be highly attractive people. 

Or not.

They may have enormous potential. 

Or not.

Unfortunately, they think they are perfect just the way they are, and such complacency is deadly to personal growth. So as time passes, you will notice that narcissists seldom actualize their potential. Instead, they come off as dilettantes with a smooth patter. Older narcissists also seem increasingly puerile when compared to their contemporaries.

Oh, yes, indeed.

Narcissists also have difficulty maintaining friendships. 

Hmmm…can we name one prominent “movement” “leader” who has the reputation of eventually alienating, and feuding with, almost everyone they know?  Maybe Counter-Currents has the answer to that one.

Friends tell you what you need to hear — even if it is painful. 

For example – that the Hermansson infiltration reelected horrific judgment and also was a direct result of Der Movement’s obsessive Nordicism.  Even Hermansson openly admits that Steadman opened the door wide because of racialist fetishization of Scandinavian heritage.  Don’t you dare write that on Counter-Currents comments though.  Time to get banned!

Flatterers tell you what you want to hear. Friends aid self-actualization because they will tell you bad news. Flatterers encourage complacency because they only tell you how wonderful you are. Friends threaten a narcissist’s positive self-image, whereas flatterers reinforce it.

Anyone you know who fits those descriptions, Greg?  Do you happen to know any “movement leader” who “bans” people who (mildly) criticize them and their “movement,” even if the person is someone who was a writer for that “leader’s” blog?

Obviously it is disastrous to put narcissists into positions of power, because they end up making important decisions based on false or incomplete information fed to them by flatterers. It is no way to run a society.

Or run a “movement.”

Der News, News, News, 3/5/18

It’s Der Movement!

First: an unannounced odyssey.  Every couple of months I search Amazon to see if Bolton’s Yockey book had been published (as well as checking Far-Right sites for an announcement).

Lo and behold!

I’ll read that Kindle when I finish the sets of books I’m tackling now (Late Western Roman Empire, and also a new Hitler biography is gathering dust here and I need to get to that at some point). But for now I ask: why hasn’t this book publication been announced and promoted at various Far-Right sites?  This is an important development and we have to search it out as if it was being hidden.

Sometimes Der Movement baffles me, it really does.

So let EGI Notes make the announcement:

BOLTON’S YOCKEY BIOGRAPHY HAS FINALLY BEEN PUBLISHED

Nicholas Farrell, who is not an ethnic Italian but lives in Italy, sighs loudly once again about those stupid and unruly Afrowops:

The Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, comparing himself to Michelangelo and Italians to marble—the raw material the Renaissance genius used to fashion his sculptures—once complained to German journalist Emil Ludwig: “It’s the raw material that I lack. Governing the Italians is not impossible. It is useless.”
Since the fall of Il Duce in 1945, Italy has had 65 governments, and today the Italians return to the polls to choose the 66th. Incredibly, for non-Italians at least…

Yeah Farrell, it’s all like real terrible and all.  How about leaving Italy then?

A new “movement” disease called the Farrell-Munro-Deasy Syndrome: live in, or at least visit, someone else’s nation (as an ethnic alien), complain about and insult the natives, with marrying a native woman optional (while mocking the men…an omnidominant ploy? Perhaps those “farther from human origins” are more “omnidominant?”).

So far I have no reason to include that Leonard (AltRight.com) fellow in this syndrome; while he lives In Italy he so far has not attacked the natives.

Read this.

This is a vehemently pacifist blog, advocating complete non-violence in the grand Gandhian tradition, a beacon of human love and compassion, unalterably opposed to the use of any force whatsoever.  Turn the other cheek!  However, on a purely theoretical basis, purely hypothetically, what if, the next time some “extreme right leader” is “violently attacked by protestors” that some identified extreme left activist thug simply disappears?  Vanished, never to be seen again. What happened to them?  A mystery it all is!  Such a course of action is of course despicable and denounced by this blog in the strongest possible terms, it must never happen, we denounce it utterly, but, hypothetically speaking, purely theoretically, it may make the thugs think twice the next time they decide to do their usual ten-on-one “sucker punch” style attacks on rightists.  But self-defense for rightists contravenes the hardcore humanist views of this blog so it must of course never ever occur. Never, never, never!  Rightists must of course be attacked with complete impunity, with the Left fearing no payback whatsoever.

After all, why should a “movement” ostensibly based upon concepts of national greatness, masculinity, virility, force, and Faustian overcoming ever defend itself?  Do nothing, meekly allow yourselves to be assaulted, and then cry for the authorities (who hate you) to step in – that’s the ticket!

By the way, that happened while a “hardcore conservative” is President of Sicily.

Sound familiar? Just like how Trump and Sessions look the other way when Antifa run wild in the streets of America, even though Der Touchback and Der Howdy have the power to declare that group a terrorist organization and fully unleash federal law enforcement on them.

In any case, isn’t it clear that “extreme right” leaders need bodyguards when venturing out in public?  It’s even obvious to an ultra-pacifist and lover of humanity as me that the “extreme right” needs to form paramilitary groups to defend their politicians, speakers, and leaders, within the scope of existing law. 

Read here. That is why we need POPA.

Defending POPA

Defending the Political Opinion Protection Act (POPA).

Of relevance to this, I state the following.

Free speech is meaningless if expressing dissident opinions makes life in a modern society completely untenable.   In this manner, “private” social pricing attacks against dissident beliefs, opinions, and activism have a chilling effect on free speech, particularly today when “private” businesses and institutions rival governments with respect to power and influence. Outsourcing speech suppression from the public to the private spheres – transforming the “private” into a tool of public coercion – violates the First Amendment in spirit and this problem needs to be rectified through legal and political change.

The Political Opinion Protection Act

Against social pricing.

This is a very crude, initiative draft of an anti-social pricing law (and explanation) that requires significant further development and refinement. Consider it a starting point.

Political and social opinions, beliefs, and ideologies, and the adherence and promotion thereof, now define a protected class of individuals, against whom business and institutions, private or public, cannot discriminate in employment or in the provision of services.  The only exception is where the opinions, beliefs, and ideologies are directly and overtly incompatible with the core mission of the business or institution, strictly defined by analogy to the examples that follow.

Now, there will be some examples – relatively rare – where sociopolitical opinions would disqualify an individual for employment (or service).  For example, the core mission of a conservative political foundation is the creation, analysis, dissemination, and promotion of conservative political ideas and ideals; a committed anti-conservative progressive can reasonably be seen as an unacceptable employee of such a foundation (and the converse is true: a hard core right-winger would be unacceptable in a progressive/liberal political foundation).  Planned Parenthood should not have to hire anti-abortion activists; right-to-life organizations should not have to employ abortion doctors or pro-choice activists.  These are clear examples where the core missions directly deal with sociopolitical memes and thus certain beliefs would be obviously incompatible.

However, indirect factors allegedly affecting core missions are not the same as the core missions themselves.

The core mission of a restaurant is to sell food to customers.  A restaurant may claim that “diversity helps business by expanding the pool of potential customers,” but promoting diversity is not the core mission of the business, selling food is.  Thus, opposition to diversity cannot be reasonably seen as incompatible with the fundamental core mission of the business.  A restaurant may claim that “immigrant labor is important for our profits,” but promoting immigration is not the core mission and hence an anti-immigration attitude cannot be seen as being incompatible for someone to work in that business. On the other hand, a steakhouse can have a reasonable rationale for skepticism in hiring a militant animal rights activist (and, conversely, PETA can reasonably have the same attitude toward, say, a butcher).

Let us consider academia. The core mission of academia is education and research/scholarship; basically to create and disseminate knowledge and ideas.  An academic institution can make (and they do make) arguments about how (demographic) diversity assists them in their mission, and that may be true or it may just be justification for social engineering.  True or not, promoting diversity is not the core mission of academia, and therefore opposition to multiracial/multicultural diversity cannot be seen as incompatible with the core mission.  Indeed, if we expand the definition of diversity to include types of (e.g., intellectual) diversity that can have a direct impact on exposing students to a more varied set of ideas, then one can argue that it is a good thing to have individuals opposed to multicultural diversity in academia; it is important to have a diversity of beliefs and opinions (perhaps we need affirmative action for the Far Right in academia?).

It is also important to prevent businesses and institutions from redefining their core missions so as to exclude opinions they do not like.  Core missions are those that derive naturally from the existential meaning of what the business and institution is, how they have been perceived and/or are perceived and/or will be perceived by reasonable people, and which can be organically associated with the “product” of the business or institution. Thus, attempts by, say, a college to redefine its core mission so as to include “promoting diversity” should be rejected, since that is an ad hoc extension of the natural and organic real fundamental academic core mission, and therefore can be reasonably seen as an attempt to evade the spirit and letter of this new law.

Services like Internet providers or transportation companies have a core mission in providing the specific service that defines the company; the opinions, beliefs, and ideologies of current or potential customers do not affect the core mission (indeed, one would think a business, valuing their core mission, would want to maximize their customer base and not arbitrarily exclude customers) and thus cannot be used as an excuse to deny service. Ad hoc redefining of the core mission to exclude “undesirable customers” is, again, forbidden.