Category: racial resentment

Sunday Movement Roundup

Race and Der Movement.

“Based” Poland!  Visegrad! Ethnonationalism!

Wrong, wrong, they’re always wrong.

And, hey, I thought that Poles are “ethnocentric ‘Outer Hajnal’ Eastern Europeans.”  What happened? Maybe, just maybe (consider it) all of this “Hajnal line” nonsense is just more HBD flim-flam designed to divide Europeans against each other.  Yes, there are biocultural-behavioral differences among Europeans, but these are gradients, not sharp distinctions.  Poles may be a bit more on the ethnocentric spectrum than, say, Swedes (which is not saying much), but it obviously doesn’t protect them from the blowback from multiracial globalism.  All of this HBD nonsense would never have gone anywhere among racial activists if it wasn’t for the fossilized dogma and ethnic fetishism of the Type I retards of Der Movement. They have a lot to answer for.

One theme here recently is how HBDers try to appeal to Type I ethnic fetishists in order to derail White nationalism.  The emphasis on “David Reich’s data say Aryans invaded India” is one such example – because the word “Aryan” means different things to different people. To legitimate scholars, essentially, the ANI component in modern Indians is from Central Asian steppe people who were most likely more akin to modern Iranians than to anything else.  To Der Movement, it all means “blonde Nordics built the Taj Mahal.”  The HBDers are aware of, and exploit, these differences in perception.  

Spencer criticizes Puritans (who he calls “the worst people of the White race” – “horrible people”) – criticizing a major segment of America’s New England founders.  What’s interesting is that someone like myself who has never made any comments like that was wrongly accused of “bashing the founders” – while I don’t recall anyone criticizing Spencer for actually – and vehemently – doing such bashing.  Those affirmative action protections for “movement leaders” are really airtight, huh?

I agree with Spencer about pessimism being more realistic than airhead optimism. Is the King of Hobbits and the King of Racial Phenotype listening?

Is Spencer’s personal problems making him more Russia-skeptical?

Let’s not stereotype Italians, Richie, it’s not all olive oil.  The relevance of comparing the economies of Russia and Italy is that Russia is much larger than Italy in land mass and population, Russia is resource-rich while Italy is resource-poor, and Russia is a major military power while Italy obviously is not.

I agree with the fellow (Jason I believe his name is) who said non-White anti-White racism is based on envy, and I have written on this before.  And I agree on the description of anti-White Whites as well – intra-racial envy.

It’s all about punishment and revenge.  And the comparison between numbers is true with respect to racial accomplishment.  Compare, for example, some of the swarthoid regions of Europe with China – the former having accomplished more for human progress than the latter despite the latter having 1-2 (or more) orders of magnitude more people.  We can productively enrage the HBDers with this.  I can think of one small area that between the world wars presented to us Evola, Gentile, Majorana, and Pirandello (Cannizzaro died in 1910) – and then we have China, with a population a couple of hundred times larger, which at that time produced who?  Mao?  

I’ll say that overall that was a good podcast and I note that Spencer is behaving somewhat more mature with these people compared to the Alexandria VA-Brewery Boys crowd – until near the end, when he started behaving like a Beavis-and-Butthead Alt Right jackass again.  He almost made it…too bad he couldn’t go the distance. Maybe next time.

The voice of WN 3.0, right Greg? How can we trust Johnson’s judgment?  About the “voices of WN 3.0” or about anything else, including Trump?  At least now Spencer is turning against Trump, while Counter-Currents regaled us about how the mid-term elections were really a win for their tin god, and scolded any of us who thought otherwise.


Allied to this growing militarism was an intense nationalism in most of the Great powers. Weltpolitik or the desire for world power status was very popular in Germany. The French desire for revenge over Alsace and Lorraine was very strong. In Britain Imperialism and support for the Empire was very evident. This nationalism meant that there was little resistance to war in these countries. Many welcomed what they thought would be a short, victorious war. For example the outbreak of war was greeted by cheering crowds in Berlin, Vienna and Paris. As A P J Taylor wrote “the people of Europe leapt willingly into war.”


More importantly, the EU was not in fact the source of Britain’s demographic problems. True, the indigenous English and Celts of Britain are being replaced by virtue of the EU’s free movement of people, but mostly by European migrants. For the most part, these are quite assimilable and hard-working, and represent relative demographic gain…British patriots need to keep their eye on the ball: national sovereignty, good relations with their fellow Europeans, and, above all, keeping Britain British!

So – we will keep “Britain British” by replacing native Britons with Poles and Romanians?

Behold the pathetic loser.  Exchange real-time amnesty for invasive scum in exchange for a “wall” that likely won’t be built or that will be only modestly useful if actually built.  The Quota Kings have more testosterone than does The God Emperor.

We need today what Oliver described as The National Youth Alliance 50 years ago.

While I despise Welton, the following should make all of the “but, but, but…Joan of Arc” white knighters weep:

Males must not be ashamed of being males. The downside of being male is inseparable from the upside: the fact that it is men who have been responsible for pretty much anything of consequence ever accomplished by human race.

A picture for the ethnic fetishists.  All are prime candidates to be let into an “extreme vetted” “movement” meeting.  Especially the one third from left.  He’s from southern Sweden. The far south. Or maybe he’s just a S. Italian immigrant?

Some possible Presidential/Vice-Presidential ticket combinations – all in jest of course:








Daniel S/Captain Chaos


Unfortunately, the Williams/Covington ticket has been derailed by Covington’s death.


White Privilege Bullying

Lessons of the schoolyard.

I have written on this topic before, but it is useful to set down a brief but comprehensive summary of the problem.  Therefore, here I make three arguments:

1. White Privilege, as defined by the Left as racially-specific advantages possessed by Whites, does not exist.

2. Even if White Privilege existed, it would be justified.

3. Attacks against Whites, re: White Privilege, are simply bullying against Whites because Whites, as a race, are a bunch of pathetic, mewling, cowardly weaklings.

1. The argument that White Privilege does not exist can be briefly subdivided into three parts.

A. A people being demographically dispossessed in their own nations – even in their ancestral homelands of Europe – are obviously not privileged.  Mass immigration into White nations, against the wishes of the populace and imposed by a hostile elite, is not “privilege.”  It is genocide. Declining White birthrates and increasing White suicide rates are not signs of “privilege” – they are signs of oppression and despair.  The opioid crisis among White Americans is not “privilege” – it is hopelessness and despair.  The fact that most politicians in White nations are racially White means nothing, as most of them are openly hardcore anti-White.  The question should be – whose interests do those politicians represent?

B. A people discriminated against de jure by law (affirmative action, hate speech laws in Europe that criminalize natives speaking up in defense of their own group interests) and de facto by political correctness, pop culture, and social pricing, is not “privileged.”

A people not allowed to organize on the basis of their own identity and in defense of that identity and its interests are hardly “privileged” – it is the complete opposite.  A people whose racial spokesmen are attacked in the streets with impunity, mocked by the leftist establishment, ridiculed in their own nation by aliens, deplatformed by corporations, and selectively targeted by the legal system – such a people are the opposite of “privileged.”  The English in Rotherham were, and are, not “privileged.”  White Americans and Europeans who cannot safely walk the streets of their own cities are not “privileged.”  Compare James Watson – reduced to selling his Nobel Prize after being “unpersoned” for merely suggesting the possibility of racial differences in intelligence – to Al Sharpton – whose activist career is summarized here – who was a friend of Presidents (Obama), speaker at political conventions (Democrat), a mainstream political commentator (MSNBC) – and we see the reality of Colored Privilege vs. the fantasy of White Privilege.

C. Although I disagree with Sailer about the census, he is correct about “The Flight from White.”  You see, Whites are so privileged that groups petition to NOT officially be counted as White.  South Asians previously successfully removed themselves from the White category, and the MENA group wants to do the same now.  People with any hint of “Indian Princess” ancestry in their family trees are desperate to be seen as non-White.  Whites pose as non-White, trying to “pass” in the other direction.  It is a strange sort of “privilege” indeed that people are so very eager NOT to partake of; it seems that the “invisible backpack” is a burden too heavy for anyone to want to carry.

2. Even if it did really exist, White Privilege would be justified, because it would not be “privilege” at all, in the sense of an undeserved largess (which actually describes Colored Privilege).  One would not call Bill Gates “privileged” at Microsoft – it is his company.  The Chinese are not “privileged” in China – it is their own country.  Likewise, Whites are not “privileged” in their own nations – instead, it are the alien peoples given advantages in White countries who are the ones truly privileged.  And if White Americans are “privileged” because they have a higher per capita net worth than Blacks and Hispanics, then Jews and Asians are privileged even more.  Oh, the latter have their goodies because of “intelligence” and “hard work.”   Yeah, and Whites are pretty smart and hard-working too, by the way – building nations that Jews and Asians want to migrate to.  

3. If accusations of White Privilege are absurd – and they are – why do they exist?  It is the lesson of the schoolyard: those who are weak and allow themselves to be bullied will continue to suffer so.  Accusations of White Privilege made in the context of White Oppression and White Powerlessness are a form of bullying from the Left/Colored Alliance.  Because Whites are a race of pathetic mewling cowards and never push back against this bullying they can expect more of it, just like the boy who allows himself to be pushed around in the schoolyard can expect nothing but more abuse.  If the boy fights back, even if he loses, the bullying will likely stop, especially if he gets some good “licks” in; bullies do not like victims who fight back, since they prefer the meek and powerless.  The abusive bullying of Whites as a race will decline in proportion to the extent that Whites actively and explicitly defend their interests as a race.

Ironically, it is precisely because Whites are not privileged that they are accused of being so.  If Whites had true privilege no one would dare bring it up in fear of the consequences.  It is only because Whites are a subaltern low-caste group that they can be bullied and gaslighted by being accused of having “privilege” while they are in reality a vilified powerless group losing their nations and their future.

I suppose that the real, hidden meaning of “White Privilege” is the privilege of being born as someone of European descent, and all that means racially, and with respect to being a legitimate heir to the Classical and Western/Faustian High Cultures.  There’s racial envy and resentment involved, and a desire to tear down those that the Guks view, at least subconsciously, as better than themselves.

Racial Envy Once Again

More on racial envy.

The Hutu have always resented the tall, imposing, attractive Tutsis, who had dominated them on-and-off since the 15th century. When Hutus picked up machetes to slash to bits nearly a million of their Tutsi neighbors in the 1994 Rwandan genocide, they were, on a deeper level, contends Richburg, “slashing at their own perceived ugliness, as if destroying this thing of beauty, this thing they could never really attain, removing it from the earth forever.”

That is very similar to what I’ve written about before on racial resentment and racial envy. The bottom line is that much of anti-White animus has its genesis in envy of Whites, White accomplishments, and White characteristics. Separation would help, but with globalism, there’s probably no way for non-Whites to fully escape feelings of racial inadequacy.  But at least Whites won’t have such resentful and embittered people living amongst us.

Separation: The Cure For Racial Resentment

Separation is the solution.
Given this recent story I’ve decided to reprint an old essay (slightly edited) I used to have up on one of my previous blogs (which starts with “The following analysis…” – see below).  I think the essay is relevant to the unfortunate story of the White man attacked by the Black mob.  The question here is a sense of racial resentment due to a feeling of racial inferiority.  Look at the picture, on the right, of one of the suspects.  Take a long look at that phenotype. Imagine having to live looking like that, having to see that in the mirror; the lips alone are enough to make the most unpleasant impression.  Now, I’m no mind reader and neither, dear reader, are you, but less us speculate.  If one takes a realization (hidden or overt) of physical repulsiveness, coupled with an equal realization of the mental and behavioral defects of particular groups and their low productivity and achievements throughout history, and the frustrations of this cognitively limited group to make their way unassisted in a modern technological society – could that cause resentment? Rage? Bitterness?  Envy toward those groups who are more attractive, intelligent, disciplined, creative, productive, useful and successful in every way possible? Is it not plausible that this envious rage can boil over into violence, when the less valuable group is confronted by the more valuable? 

Leftists would assert the (in their eyes, justifiable) rage is due to “White racism” and “White privilege” and “an unjust society.”  However, given decades of catering to Blacks (and other minorities) in every way, decades of affirmative action, trillions of dollars of handouts, myriads of special programs, endless pro-Colored and anti-White propaganda, forced integration, endless White guilt and White surrender, de jure and de facto sociopolitical realities that make Whites into a low-caste, subaltern group according to law, culture, and custom – all the left-wing excuses fall flat. Being constantly pushed up and pushed forward, the Negro could – and should – have been very successful if they had the same innate qualities as Whites. But they have failed and they know it – they know it themselves even if they would never publicly admit it.
One could even be – in a very objective sense – sympathetic to the psychic pain felt by the less valuable group.  But this pain is not the fault of the more valuable group (unless you assign blame for causing the two groups to occupy the same territory to begin with, which of course is a reasonable historical blame to consider).  Both are ultimately victims and separation is best, to prevent the less valuable to constantly have to come up against reminders of their limitations, and to prevent the more valuable group from suffering the consequences of the resentments of the less valuable.  Thus we can consider the following.
The following analysis specifically deals with African “Americans;” however, the same applies to all non-Whites (including NECs), who seem to have an instinctive aversion to Whites that borders on the irrational.
What are the roots of Black hostility, including crime, directed against Whites and White society? Certainly, there is likely a genetic element which leads persons of sub-Saharan African ancestry towards violence and crime in general. It’s like a duck taking to water, very natural.
However, in addition, are there any real and honest psychological explanations that contribute to this? Some commentators note that the constant talk about “White racism” and the alleged crimes of Whites against Blacks and other “people of color” is bound to incite hatred toward Whites, a hatred which can lead to violence.  The late Lawrence Auster had talked about this on his blog, and it makes sense that if a naturally violent people are constantly told that another group has been oppressing them, then the outcome will be predictable.
Others come closer to the topic of this essay when they suggest that constant Black failure compared to White achievement is something which contributes to hatred – and envy.
I believe the jealousy angle – racial envy so to speak – needs to be further examined, which is the subject of this post.
Consider this “hair incident.”
From a Western, White perspective, the “outrage” felt by these Negroes is, of course, absurd (*).  Imagine getting angry at someone for touching their own hair!  Incredible!  Nevertheless, it is a real phenomenon. These Negroes were actually so offended by a White woman touching her hair that one of them actually had the nerve to suggest that he would complain to the White woman about her “outrageous” behavior! One wonders if similar hyper-sensitive “outrage” likely informs the attacks in which White girls are viciously assaulted by female Negroes, sometimes with the White girls’ hair being pulled out of their heads (e.g., the March 30, 2005 incident in Marine Park, Brooklyn).
Now, one could attempt to rationalize this in a number of ways, but the hypothesis here is that it is jealousy, a burning sense of racial inferiority that, in certain cases, can project itself as animalistic violence towards the subject of the envy.
In other words, at some level, Blacks realize that they are less intelligent, less attractive, less capable, and less evolved than Whites. This inner realization runs up against the well-documented inflated sense of self-esteem that Blacks have. The cognitive dissonance generated by this conflict between harsh reality and an unjustified sense of self manifests itself in a deep and bitter hatred to those perceived (accurately) as being superior.
Blacks are jealous of Whites for the simple fact that Whites are racially White/European (with all that implies about innate characteristics) and that the Blacks themselves are racially Black/African (with all that implies). To an unintelligent, violent people with an unnaturally high overt sense of self-esteem, the inner, secret, covert knowledge of this envy has no other outlet than animus directed toward Whites.
This hatred often erupts into violence. Other times it manifests itself in non-violent anti-social behaviors (targeted to “the man”) or in anti-White social and political activism. When one sees some grotesque Black “reverend” or “pastor” or militant pontificating about “White racism” or “White devils” – is this perhaps the cry of a tortured soul, secretly wishing to be White, hating being Black, and lashing out at those Whites who possess the one thing that these Blacks can never possess? What is “White privilege” really about? Certainly not treatment by society, as Whites are third class citizens in America, discriminated against both de facto and de jure. No, the privilege is the racial fact of “being White,” of being of European heritage, of the “aristocracy of the skin,” the “nobility of race.” It is the “unfairness” that some belong to a race noted for intelligence, achievement, culture, civilization, and physical attractiveness, while others belong to races noted for cognitive deficiency, violence, lack of cultural achievement, non-productivity, and a lack of physical attractiveness.
Likewise, when some Black militants praise Hitler in the midst of their otherwise constant denunciation of “Whitey”, is this what they are really thinking: “That guy Hitler was lucky. Look what he had to work with – Germans! And look at what I am stuck with!” – is that really it?
Now, again, I am not a mind reader. This is of course speculation, a hypothesis. We cannot know what really goes on in the minds of Blacks in these situation. Do they really think as I suspect they may do? Who knows? However, it is a plausible hypothesis (how it can be tested, I am not sure). Read again that link about the “hair incident” and consider everything you know about Black behavior and attitudes and come to your own conclusions. Again: very plausible.
Now, these putative feelings of bitter envy can become mixed with contempt, as coloreds see Whites bizarrely giving away their nations and their civilizations to other races, with Whites allowing themselves to be displaced and discriminated against in their own nations. This contempt can then turn to delight, a rare joy, with the realization that many Whites are fearful of Blacks. The privileged superior afraid of the resentful inferior! What could be sweeter than that?
The only solution to this problem is racial separation. Dwelling amongst their own kind, Blacks will not have to suffer the “indignities” of seeing White women running their fingers through their “long, flaxen hair,” and will not have to be reminded through such daily encounters about what they are and what they are not. Whites, on the other hand, would no longer be the victims of the envy of others, and all races can develop their own potential (such as it is) in a more mentally healthy atmosphere, free of lingering grudges and imagined slights.
What could be wrong with that?
*Once again, with respect to balkanization strategies: if African “Americans” can become so offended by a White woman touching her hair, imagine their reaction to steadfast, productive, pro-White sociopolitical activism and community building.