Category: traditionalism

A Dire Spectral Vision

Latest “movement” tragicomedy.

New from Counter-Currents!

Take that, Arktos and Richard Spencer!  Meanwhile, Counter-Currents continues to pretend that Bolton’s Yockey biography doesn’t exist.

Absolutely disgusting.

John Doe
Posted May 25, 2018 at 4:26 am | Permalink
Great to see that Jorjani is working with Counter-Currents and getting away from the unfortunate elements of the “movement”.

Let’s not forget this from that Swedish Counter-Currents forum speaker, Patrik Hermansson:

I manage to convince Jason Reza Jorjani, co-founder of AltRight Corporation and editor of Arktos Media, to meet for a drink. I’m sitting across from him in an Irish pub in the shadow of the Empire State Building. The first thing he said was: “You’re not in touch with Greg [Johnson], are you?”

I assure him I’m not, knowing he would leave if he ever found out I had spent the last month getting to know people on the other side of the split, some of whom had recently accused Jorjani of being a CIA agent. “It’s like the SA and the SS,” Jorjani said. “A Night of the Long Knives is coming though.”

Now Jorjani and Johnson are buddies again, because…Richard Spencer.

 

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.

Further, it is highly disturbing that the likes of Greg Johnson and Richard Spencer fail to understand the damage done to serious racial nationalism by their enabling of someone who peddles pseudoscientific nonsense and gnostic “traditionalist” fantasies.  Do they really think intelligent, well-read, educated, empiricists want to be associated with “the pyramids of Atlantis were built by psychokinesis?”  The Spectral!  The Spectral! (Theme music from Ghostbusters playing in the background).

The domination of the “movement” by Type I activists was, is, and remains an unmitigated tragedy.  They have no sense whatsoever, no common sense, no innate “feel” for what any reasonably same person would consider appropriate or inappropriate.  “Normies” will think racial nationalism – or ethnic nationalism for you knuckle-dragging ethnonationalists – is strange enough, if you are going to combine it with crazed ramblings fit for a D-grade sci/fi-fantasy novel, then forget about it. The System continuously tries to associate racial activism with pseudoscience and fantasy.  How much easier for them when Der Movement actually does exhibit those tendencies and taints the honest efforts of others.

Advertisements

Straight From the Horse’s Mouth

A tacit admission.

Greg Johnson writes the following, emphasis added:

“I am in fact a Hobbit.”—J. R. R. Tolkien 

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien is a favorite author of New Left “hippies” and New Right nationalists, and for pretty much the same reasons. Tolkien deeply distrusted modernization and industrialization, which replace organic reciprocity between man and nature with technological dominion of man over nature, a relationship that deforms and devalues both poles. 

But philosophically and politically, Tolkien was much closer to the New Right than the New Left. Tolkien was a conservative and a race realist. His preferences ran toward non-constitutional monarchy in the capital and de facto anarchy in the provinces, but he recognized that state control can be minimized only in a society with a deep reverence for tradition and a high regard for individual honor and self-restraint. 

Many of Tolkien’s most fervent New Right admirers are neo-pagans...The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, with their many themes from Norse and Celtic mythology, resonate especially with pagans… 

…For those who need no introduction, there is no better commemoration than to spend a winter evening snug in one’s own Hobbit hole reading the works of the man himself (or watching Peter Jackson’s masterly and inspiring movies of The Lord of the Rings).

That is of course the equivalent of Johnson saying: “I am in fact a Type I activist.”  And that’s a designation I already made, did I not?

Certain Alt Right ethnonationalists mimic Hitler to the extent that they are ideologically Type I but have the “bookish” and intellect-oriented Type II character.  

It is clear who I was talking about there.  Ideologically Type I indeed, and ideology trumps “character” every time.  It’s ideology that determines the direction of the “movement.”  Personality and character set a tone, but the actual content, the actual meaning, the actual outcomes – that’s all directly derived from ideology.

Some tell-tale signs to distinguish Type I from Type II fascists:

Serious sci/fi fantasy:

Type I: Lord of the Rings

Type II: Book of the New Sun

They who control Der Movement.

Fascist Typology

Bardeche’s Type I and Type II

Coogan’s Dreamer of the Day includes a quote from Bardeche’s Suzanne et le Tandis (Suzanne and the Slums), in the chapter: “Le Fascisme International” that seems more complete and accurate (and free from spelling and grammar errors) than the version popping up on the Alt Right.  This quote includes:

I have known, after Clarence, very many “fascists,” for the race is not dead. Some of them had boots, they were familiar with the runes, and they camped out on the night of the solstice in order to sing under the stars the beautiful solemn songs of their ancestors. The others did not have boots, they held up their skinny reformers’ heads severely, they wore glasses, they collected cards, and they made furious speeches. All were poor, they believed, they fought, they detested lying and injustice.

The precise translation is less important than the general point being made; an important distinction between different fascist archetypes, even though it is made in a bemused fashion, in jest, and even though I’m sure Bardeche didn’t mean to focus on that distinction in his  quote.  Nevertheless, regardless of intention and style, there is food for thought here.

Thus, Bardeche correct identifies two archetypes of fascists; thus:

Type I: Some of them had boots, they were familiar with the runes, and they camped out on the night of the solstice in order to sing under the stars the beautiful solemn songs of their ancestors.

Type II: The others did not have boots, they held up their skinny reformers’ heads severely, they wore glasses, they collected cards, and they made furious speeches.

To translate into a context more familiar to the racial nationalist “movement” of today: Type I would be a pure representation of a type that would tend to include: ethnonationalists, Nordicists, Traditionalists, ethnic fetishists, and Hitler worshippers; while Type II would be a pure representation of a type that would tend to include: pan-Europeanists, Futurists, and Imperium-oriented Yockeyites.

Type I, in its purest representation, would tend to be an extroverted, action-oriented mesomorph; Type II would be an introverted, intellect-oriented ectomorph (not sure where endomorphs would fit in, as so many of them tend to be leftists to begin with).

That is not to say that Type I activists are never intellectual, nor that Type II activists are devoid of action, simply that on a spectrum, Type I are relatively action > intellect and Type II are relatively intellect > action.

Bardeche classified both types as: All were poor, they believed, they fought, they detested lying and injustice.  That may be true, although I think the “they detested lying and injustice” part applies mostly to Type II.  It are the Type II activists who would tend to be more of the Moralpath type.  Type I activists would tend to be more pragmatists, being as they are more action-oriented in any case.  While both types include Vangaurdists, Mainstreamers are almost exclusively Type I.  Type II activists, with their severe affect and furious speeches (or, today, blog posts – “crazed and bitter,” eh?), are hardly the Mainstreamer type.

While most activists would tend to have some traits of both types, they would be skewed in one direction or another.  

Some more or less “pure” types exist.  Your host, Ted Sallis, is a more or less a pure Type II. Francis Parker Yockey himself was a Type II.  Most Anglosphere activists in Der Movement are definitely Type I, certainly in the USA. The Alt Right, with all its intellectual pretensions, is actually heavily represented by Type I activists, at least among the rank-and-file.  In general, Type I’s will outnumber Type IIs, the latter being a distinct minority.

Leaders are a mixed bag, and historical fascist leaders have shown mixed characteristics of both types.  Most interesting is when there is a distinct mismatch between ideology and personality; the person has the ideology of one fascist type, but the personality of another.  This is a crucially important point.  While Bardeche’s quote delves mostly into personality, it bleeds into ideology: those boot-wearing activists obsessed with runes, ancestral songs, and the solstice (as well as Viking horns and mead, eh?) would tend to gravitate toward ethnonationalist and/or Nordicist ideologies, and be enamored of “traditionalism,” while those idealists with their skinny severe reformer heads, furious speeches, glasses and other introvert tendencies (card-collecting being a metaphor for introverted intellectualism) would tend to gravitate toward pan-Europeanism, Futurism and other manifestations of avant-garde politics, and visions of Imperium.  

Personality and ideology are often linked, but when the linkage breaks down, all sorts of strange fascistic hybrids are observed.  For example, Hitler politically was Type I, but his personality was more Type II.  Certain Alt Right ethnonationalists mimic Hitler to the extent that they are ideologically Type I but have the “bookish” and Intellect-oriented Type II character.  Conversely, some pan-European Alt Righters are the opposite: politically Type II but with Type I personalities. 

On the other hand, when personality and ideology more or less perfectly coincide, then from that synergy you get the “impossible” extreme Moralpath types – a Ted Sallis or a Francis Parker Yockey.

There is no doubt more to analyze on this topic but this is a useful beginning.

Counter-Currents In the News, 4/29/16

Some items.

Greg Johnson writes:


There are plenty of people in this movement who behave like cult members. The best way to appreciate that is to try to have a rational conversation about certain topics, like the importance of revisionism, and watch them descend rapidly into insults. Why? Because their views are essentially religious dogmas that they can’t question or defend.

Well, Greg is 100% right about that, but of course it’s not all about revisionism. A major point of EGI Notes is that a very large fraction of “movement” memes is nothing more than “essentially religious dogmas” that result in rage and insults when these are questioned. This blog questions those dogmas; much of my output for the last 15 years or so has questioned those dogmas, which is, I believe, one of the two major reasons my message has been poorly received by Der Movement.
In addition, one reason why Der Movement and HBD go along so well together, like peanut butter and jelly, is that they are so much alike: mindless dogma, a complete lack of reflection and self-criticism, an inability to question their own beliefs and to even consider the possibility of ever being wrong, straw man arguments, a stolid lack of introspection, an intolerance for anyone questioning the sacred beliefs, and their own quasi-religious pantheon of saints (Saint Adolf of the Swastika, Saint Dickie Lynn of the Altar of Asia). And Der Movement’s God? Well, Der Movement mocks the Jews with the (correct) claim that the Jews have made a religion out of worship of their own ethny. Are the quota queens of Der Movement any different?
Someone named “Slav” writes:

The moderates are attacking the radicals.

Quite right. Much of this is the mainstreamers “punching right.” It is mainstreamer aggression that provokes Vantards (such as myself, I guess) to “punch left” in response.
And then we have this majestic misunderstanding of how science works:

Evolutionism is sometimes a great epistemological tool, but it should not be used too much. There are at least four reasons to that. 

First, evolutionism itself is a progressive position. Cultural Marxism may reject the importance of genes, but the dispute between evolutionism and CM is an opposition between two progressive narratives. It is but a false alternative between two modern decoys. 

Whether or not “evolution” is true or false is independent of what some folks politically attribute to an “evolutionist” mindset. Now, perhaps the question is instead – “is evolutionary theory useful?” Well, one major point that racialism (racialism in general, NOT Der Movement) has on its side is that it speaks the truth. Being “evolutionist” is more speaking truth, and hence empowering, as opposed to going into traditionalist cul-de-sacs of esoteric nonsense.
Speaking of which:

We should aim at getting out of modernity, out of the pseudo-progressive narratives that negate esotericism, initiation, spiritual consciousness, and so on.

Which is all laughable nonsense, with no empirical basis, or appeal to the sorts of elites we require. And so on….

Second, evolutionism is necessarily false because, as said René Guénon, it is impossible that the superior appears from the inferior. 

No, retards like Guenon are “necessarily false” because evolution says nothing about “superiority” or “inferiority” (by human standards), it’s all about adaptive fitness in changing environments. In one environment (presence of the antibiotic), bacteria containing a plasmid that confers resistance to an antibiotic will outcompete those that do not; in another environment (no antibiotic), the bacteria without the plasmid will outcompete the others, as they will grow faster unencumbered by those extra genes (indeed, the plasmid will here be lost by the bacteria to increase their fitness). No values of “superiority/inferiority” need to be invoked.
Most critics of “Darwinism” (including Yockey) have a profound misunderstanding of that idea that they are criticizing.

Colours cannot appear from something that does not contain, at least, the potentiality of colour. Complex animals cannot appear from mere molecules. Only something which contains all the possibilities ever can be the true origin of complex beings and properties. Emergentism is but a modern position to not recognize the metaphysical truth.

As Pilate would say, “what is truth?’’ Is it the navel-gazing, solipsist mumblings of a brain-addled traditionalist, or is it objective facts bolstered by rigorous hypothesis testing? Metaphysics is religion. Get thee to a nunnery. Colors by the way are different wavelengths of visible electromagnetic radiation (light). 

Third, evolutionism does not allow for a true hope. If the world reduces itself to Darwinian competition, what can we hope for? The mere survival of White peoples? I would like something more.

Scientific validity cares not for what you hope for, you solipsist retard. Who are you to decide that your hopes determine reality? Oh wait, a typical Der Movement imbecile. Carry on. And why can’t “evolutionism” lead to the White race outcompeting others?


This comment is hypocritical as well.  What about the idea that the “superior” can never come from the “inferior?”  What about self-improvement?  Where is the “true hope” in that? The “inferior” are doomed! No hope!  No hope!  I would like something more.  Of course, the answer would be: “the inferior who improve themselves were truly superior all along, they just needed the stimulus to allow their natural superiority to express itself.”  But of course. Der Movement is never falsifiable; it always has an explanation for every seeming contradiction.  Which is why it is a religion, and not science.


Four, Darwinism is ultimately antisocial. It implies that the essence of our world lies in competition, in perpetual struggles for life. 


Again, reality is what it is independent of whether it upsets our delicate sensibilities or not.

Darwinism exists too in capitalist markets, in the “economy of attention,” and if we trust Dawkins it goes down to each gene competing against each other. If we accept the world to be like this, how can we pretend to found a society? Societies only make sense in antagonisms against other societies. Pull that away and the antagonisms come back between individuals.


Dawkins is a fraud.


Everything we can hope for is perpetual struggle. This is not very tempting.

Irrelevant.

I think it goes without saying that I consider all this esoteric traditionalism, all the crazy house gibbering of Evola, Guenon, “Savitri Devi” et al., all the mumblings about Kali Yuga and the man who can’t tell time, ages of Gold and Iron (what about Tungsten and Tin?), etc . – I consider that all complete and utter nonsense. It’s religion, and religion is a fantasy for weak-minded people who can’t handle reality (or, more accurately, the extent to which humans can understand the objective reality they find themselves in).

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.

Christian Filth

Behold a REAL enemy.

Read here.  In a rare spasm of good sense, much of the American people and some politicians oppose the “refugee” invasion. But, dem dere Christians know better!

About 70 percent of all refugees admitted to the U.S. are resettled by faith groups, according to the U.S. State Department office for refugees. The bulk of the work is done by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services. World Relief, the humanitarian arm of the National Association of Evangelicals, and Church World Service, representing Protestant and Orthodox groups, are each responsible for about 10 percent. The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and Episcopal Migrant Ministries also handle several thousand cases.

Most resettled by Christian groups. Only a few by Jews.  But, but, but…the “Evangelical” leadership is better, right?  No:
The Rev. Russell Moore, head of the public policy agency for the conservative Southern Baptist Convention, the country’s largest Protestant group, said screening is crucial and “we should insist on it,” but he said evangelicals should not “demagogue the issue as many politicians are doing right now.”  
“Evangelicals should be the ones calling the rest of the world to remember human dignity and the image of God, especially for those fleeing murderous Islamic radical jihadis,” Moore said.

But, no doubt, the “Orthodox” “traditionalists” are better, right?  No:
The Orthodox Union said “we encourage a sensible process of reviewing and enhancing security,” with the goal of “getting to yes” on admitting asylum seekers. But the group said, “Neither partisan politics nor xenophobia can have a place in that debate.”

Christianity is the enemy. Supporters of Christianity are the enemy. Christianity must be eliminated, root and branch, from the West. Crush the infamy!  Crush it!

Now, as a peaceful and pacifist blog. EGI Notes of course does not advocate a future White ethnostate Imperium to blow up the churches, put all the priests and reverends in work camps, and hang the Pope. No, never! This blog abhors, rejects, and eschews any hint of such actions whatsoever! Indeed, if an outraged White race were ever to do such things, I would shake my head sadly. Let there be no doubt about that!

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.

Brilliant Greg Johnson Book Review

Will we be in those in submission or those others submit to?


If our race is to be saved, then White Nationalists need to bring our societies back into harmony with nature. Whites must be forced to submit to our own nature, or we will end up submitting to aliens. And to do that, White Nationalists need to become an even more formidably vital — and intimidating — force than Islam. Clearly we’ve got work to do.


For WN to become this vital, intimidating force, it must eschew the dead past, religions of weakness, mainstreaming compromise, sex-addled hedonism, and any aracial cul-de-sacs (traditionalism, HBD) that distract from the core focus on racial and cultural survival and ascendance.

NO: to the “game” crowd, the HBDers, the Christian whiners, the traditionalist esoterics and weirdos, the mainstreamers, the Judeophiles, those mired in the dead past, the rigid ethnonationalists, and the Spenglerian pessimists (with the notable exception of a re-interpreted Yockey, who was a great man and a positive, future-forward thinker, despite his Spenglerian taint).

YES: to national socialism, pan-Europeanism, futurism, science and technics, eugenics, the conquest of time and space, triumph of the will, authority and discipline, hardcore ideology, and victory.