I very strongly urge you to read the whole thing. A few excerpts (emphasis added) and my own comments to these:
According to Henry Scott Stokes, in my opinion Mishima’s best biographer as well as being the only Westerner invited to his funeral, almost as soon as Mishima was born his grandmother (Natsuko) “resolved to take personal responsibility for his upbringing and virtually kidnapped the little boy from his mother,” raising the child almost entirely in her sickroom. Natsuko brought up Mishima “as a little girl, not as a boy,” and he was forced to stay inside, was prohibited with playing with most of his environment, and was told to be almost completely silent due to his grandmother’s complaints of constant head pain. After some years, his mother was permitted to take him outside, but only when there was no wind.There is some suggestion that he was beaten, or otherwise severely psychologically abused, with the result that he suffered a sequence of psychosomatic illnesses involving the retention of urine. There is also some suggestion of sexual abuse or “obscene” treatment at the hands of his grandmother’s nurse. Quasi-incestuous closeness in indicated by his later description of his grandmother as a “true-love sweetheart”, and on his death his mother described him as her “lover.” Mishima was generally regarded by those around him as “an unusually delicate child.”
I have read about male-to-female transgenders who regretted their choices (in one case leading to reversal of sex-assignment surgery), and a common theme is their childhood feminization by female relatives or female friends of the family. Those people were White; Mishima was Japanese. Thus, the female urge to ruin and destroy masculinity – even at the maladaptive cost of ruining their own male relatives – seems to be a cross-racial characteristic. Hail MGTOW!
By contrast, as a homosexual, Mishima nurtured fantasies of himself as a member of an elitist minority.
We can think of a number of “movement” “leaders” and “activists” for whom that description fits as well.
One could add speculations that Mishima’s military fantasies were an extension of his sexual fixations, including a possible attempt to simply gain power over a large number of athletic young men. But this would be laboring an all-too-obvious point.
The Mannerbund awaits!
Fuse explains that suicide in Japan essentially originates from a servile position within a highly anxious and neurotic society.
After the Schettino incident, HBDers like Brand and Ray pinned the blame on “anxiety” and “neuroticism” among Italians. Of course, being HBDers (and Brand married to his own “Rosie”), the extreme anxiety and neuroticism among East Asians is ignored.
Durocher comments “You’re either the kind of boy who is challenged, energized, and inspired by this sort of film, or perhaps you’re not a boy,” which I can only regard as laden with irony given that the film’s subject was raised as a girl and once remarked, on being expected to act like a boy: “the reluctant masquerade had begun.”
Durocher attempts to normalize his own Asiaphilic HBD fetishism and pathologize those who refuse to kowtow before the Altar of Asia.
We come back to the central questions of how and why Yukio Mishima should be relevant to us. No answers can be found in the life, politics and actions of a figure not only non-European and profoundly un-fascistic, but who was also strangely un-Japanese. I contend that there is simply nothing genuine to learn from him, and few people who have written in support of Mishima can point to anything tangible beyond the amorphous outlines of the Mishima Myth and a film heavy on style and low on authenticity. There is no single piece of text, no treatise, and no piece of authenticity beyond a final, radically un-European and sadomasochistically-inspired act of self-destruction and death-embracing nihilism. Mishima’s monarchism was servile and parodic, his militarism homoerotic, disingenuous and ludicrous, and his death-as-political-statement was psychosexual and ultimately lacking in logic. Otomo is probably correct in viewing the coup attempt more as a sexually inspired method of “politicising art rather than expressing a belief in ultra-nationalism.”
The question thus arises as to whether associating ourselves with such a figure, surely a clownish homoerotic wignat in today’s vernacular, brings more positives or negatives, both within the Dissident Right and within broader considerations of “optics” or public image. In particular, we should question whether we want to place our politics in a nexus that involves, to borrow the terminology of the Japan scholar Susan Napier, “the interrelationship between homosexuality, politics, and the peculiar form of violence-prone psychosexual nihilism from which Mishima suffered.” I’d argue in the negative.
Two brief criticisms of Joyce’s piece. First, as these guys always do, Joyce is careful not to offend a “movement” figure that he had no prior “beef” with; thus, he grovels a bit to Durocher:
I rate Durocher’s work very highly…Much as I was intrigued by Durocher’s piece… (which is suitably measured in the assessment of Mishima’s fiction)…In the following essay, I offer not necessarily a rebuttal or rebuke of Durocher…
As my forthcoming essay on Greg Johnson will make clear, “movement” “activists” who have a “standing” or the possibility of a “standing” in Der Movement – that is, people, who, like Joyce, are of “acceptable” Northwest European ancestry – need to be skilled at the political game if they are to advance their interests and maintain their status of “leadership.” Despite that the HBD-Nordicist Durocher is an incompetent and obsessive hack, a gaslighting liar, and a writer for a Jew site, Joyce states differently. Of course, Joyce may actually differ from me in his opinion of Durocher (after all, they both have Nordicist tendencies, even if Joyce seems less enthused by Jew-loving and Asian-loving HBD), but, no doubt, Joyce sees no advantage in taking Le Grand Frog to task for his many deficiencies.
The second criticism is that Joyce concentrates on Mishima’s homosexual sadomasochism, but ignores themes of heterosexual sadomasochism, such as Kyoko’s House. As the latter is a key toward understand the White embrace of both HBD and of Silk Road White nationalism, any comprehensive analysis of Mishima’s work must understand it. It also sheds light on Mishima himself, given the details of his childhood as outlined by Joyce.
Posted January 7, 2020 at 10:12 am | Permalink
I think that if Iran were nuked, Jews would be lynched from the lampposts of New York City. Their power is ocean wide but very shallow. The smart ones know that. But it would not be the first time they overreached. But such a course as you describe would not be a carefully calculated one but a gamble or a blunder.
This is hysterical nonsense. True, if Iran were “nuked” there would be significant social and political repercussions in America (probably only lasting until the next football game, though), but does any sane person really believe that “Jews would be lynched from the lampposts of New York City.” Why, oh why, do all you nitwits out there support Johnson?
Posted January 7, 2020 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
Groyperism is just the flavor of the month. Fuentes’ MO is to tear down the movement to build his own cult of personality. He can do that for a while, because a huge part of the movement consists of bored online nihilists who want to join the latest sociopath’s cult of personality. But fundamentally selfish people can’t build anything that lasts. It didn’t last for Spencer and it won’t last for Fuentes. After trashing people’s lives like a tornado ripping through a trailer park, Fuentes will crash and burn, and his followers will move on.
Johnson is less a tornado than a chronic disease, like a cancer. He’s here for the long haul, and Der Movement is being terminally sickened by him.