Category: trolls

Tarnished Silver, 11/6/16

Excerpts, emphasis added.

Silver recently at Radix:

silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ  WHAT • 4 hours ago
As exceedingly idiotic as the multicult west is, it’s still preferable to russkie overlordship.

Silver recently at Amren:

silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ  John Smith ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ • 2 days ago
I can’t say I’m a fan of Russian-style governance, but goddamit, if that’s what it takes to remove the influence of the complete and utter lunatics who are destroying our countries, then I’ll take Putin any day.

Once again: Silver is a real sanity litmus test for Der Movement and Der Movement “leaders.”  Anyone who allows this obvious trolling fraud on their blogs is an idiot.

Advertisements

Devlin on Brandolini on Refutation

Something to consider, emphasis added:

F. Roger Devlin
Posted June 15, 2016 at 9:01 pm | Permalink
It is dispiriting to observe how many people can be taken in by disguising partisanship as neutral expertise. Nearly every so-called expert on “right wing extremism” or “white racism” is an example of this.
Your essay puts me in mind of the famous observation of computer programmer Alberto Brandolini that “The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” By the time you have produced a cogent refutation such as this piece, Timmy will have come up with five more lies or fallacious arguments.
That is why it is important to emphasize that he is demonstrably dishonest. Once you understand the well is poisoned, there is no need to examine every bucketful drawn from it.

Looking at this from another perspective, this is why I believe that blog comments (*), particularly unmoderated ones, are worse than useless – actually destructive.  It doesn’t take much effort for idiots, trolls, Nutzis, etc. to spew “bullshit” on a comments section.  After which, you have  a choice. You can either leave those comments unanswered, which third party observers can see as a tacit admission that those comments are correct or that at least you are unable to mount an effective riposte to them, or you can answer them, expending that “order of magnitude” more energy (and time) doing so.  And the time wasted could have been better spent on other things, for example, on new blog posts.  Moderation of comments helps, but also takes time and energy.

This is not a free speech issue; if the trolls, idiots, and Nutzis want to set up their own blogs and spew their “bullshit” then they have that right.  But freedom of association means that no one is obligated to host the “bullshit” on their own forums.  And all the self-described “political soldiers” out there should take their own self-description seriously and consider all of this as memetic warfare, not as a polite debating society.

But, of course, don’t listen to Brandolini – he’s not “one of the boys.” Who cares what that negroid kebab has to say, right?

*But, hey, isn’t Devlin’s comment an example of a useful blog comment? Yes it is, but, putting aside the fact that Counter-Currents has a moderated comments section, we must consider the signal-to-noise ratio.  Looking at the entire “movement” blogosphere, for every useful comment, there is a large number of stupid and destructive ones.  The best option is for a thoughtful commentator like Devlin to have his own blog.

A Fascist Theoretical Journal?

Taking an updated look at Stimely’s idea.

The Keith Stimely interview of H. Keith Thompson, with a heavy emphasis on Francis Parker Yockey, is very interesting. Perhaps the most intriguing part is this exchange:

Stimely: One final question. Supposing that a group of young, relatively young, fascists – not conservatives, not [sneeringly] “populists,” not reformers not people who believe in working evolutionarily within the system, not people who believe at all in saving the system (and who may “work evolutionarily” within it only in order to undermine it) — suppose such a group were to get together and decide to publish their own little journal on the “right,” even in the modest form at first of an 8-page newsletter, entitled Thought & Action, which would be a very nearly explicit fascist theoretical journal working toward the explicit goal of a fascist revolution. Such a journal would explore in the realm of theory the contributions that have been made in political/social thought, and that should be taken into account by present-day revolutionaries, by such as Robert Michels, Vilfredo Pareto, Gaetano Mosca, Georges Sorel, even, Lawrence Dennis, Max Nomad, James Burnham, so many more . . . Yockey, Spengler, Carl Schmitt, Harold Lasswell, other prime thinkers on the subjects of power and revolution and social dynamics . . . and to explore all these things on a fairly high intellectual level. My question is: what is your realistic estimate of the number of people who would either understand, or be at all interested in, such a publication? Thompson:One hundred.

Such a journal would be very useful, but today, it would need to expand its focus to include the Salterian empirical view as well as the more political-social-spiritual “continental existentialist” view as emphasized by Stimely.  One could envision that the fusion of those two worldviews (Salter-Yockey) would be a main objective of such a journal.
Some would argue that blogs such as this one as well as Counter-Currents, together with publications such as The Occidental Quarterly (TOQ) fill this role.  While those forums do touch on some of the topics I am talking about, what I’m proposing is something more in line with Stimely; a more focused and specialized journal, for fascist/national socialist “revolutionaries” – combining both metapolitics and politics. Such a journal would be not only explicitly (actually, not just “very nearly”) fascist and national socialist, but also explicitly pan-European, Futurist, science based (both hard science and the best of political and social science), with a solid philosophical and epistemological foundation. This would be something for the “hardcore” – not for the run-of-the-mill “latrine flies.”  It would not be ‘public” in the free online sense, more of a TOQ format, but perhaps even requiring screening of subscribers, to eliminate infiltrators and trolls as much as possible. The typical “movement” dogma would be eschewed; this would be an attempt for a fresh start, based on the aforementioned key principles, perhaps based on the key fundamentals here.

Throwing Russians Under the Bus, Part 1

Majority Rights jumping the shark.

I have previously written about the despicable Silver’s contribution to the destruction of Majority Rights.  What’s going on in the rubble of MR land? They have an East Asian female (female – of course) – which, despite the Japanese-sounding anime name may well be that “Chinese Nationalist Maiden” creature haunting pro-White blogs in recent years – making such wonderful contributions such as this:

Siberia is Asian land. Hopefully there will come a day, many decades from now although perhaps not within our lifetimes, when after much attrition the Russian Federation will be sufficiently weakened to the point that it would not be able to mount a defence of that land. And when the daybreak of the Asian Century reaches Siberia, wherever the light from the East is spreading to, all the Russian and Jewish colonialist structures and institutions in those areas will be abolished.


Yeah, that’s great, Asiatrix.  However, before you go over to the Derbyshire residence in search of a bit of B and D play (measured groveling!), may I suggest that the following be a prerequisite for any discussion about the racial future of Siberia:

1. All persons of full and part Asian ancestry be removed from the West, regardless of “citizenship” or “place of birth.”

2. The Asiatic world population pays reparations to the European world population to compensate for the damage done to Europeans (including and especially those in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) by Asian colonization of Western nation states.

3. A discussion of how Asians are going to compensate Russians for the investment of human and material capital spent by Russians in the building up of Siberian infrastructure.

4. Mass trials in the future Western ethnostates of Asiaphilic White HBDers, after which the HBDers will be publicly and excruciatingly slowly tortured to death, reduced to shrieking masses of flesh, as their pleas for the mercy of a quick death are drowned out by the joyous cries of vengeance emanating from the vindicated White masses.

In the meantime, other “movement” blogs should consider the costs of tolerating obvious anti-White trolls.

A Telling Admission

A small ray of disinfecting light.
Here we see Silver stating his disagreement with Greg Johnson’s “overarching worldview.”  Johnson’s overarching ideology/viewpoint is that of a White racial nationalist, so opposing that worldview is disagreement with the fundamental tenets of WN.
What’s particularly eyebrow-raising about the comment is that Johnson is a particularly moderate WN, far less extreme than, say, William Pierce (or myself for that matter).  In the past, Silver would frequently harshly critique the more extreme elements of WN, but Greg Johnson’s ethnonationalist-oriented, non-genocidal, New Right, anti-“Vantard” form of “Left Coast Nationalism” is far from extreme.
So, here we have someone who opposes even a moderate and intellectual form of racial nationalism, and is a shill for predatory capitalism.  What’s the battle cry then?  Jeb Bush in 2016!

On Commenting

Commenting not good.
As I have made clear over the years, I am opposed to blog comments.  I find it ironic that a “movement” that is typically (and justifiably) skeptical of democracy and of mass/quantity, and which believes in hierarchy and the importance of elite quality, is so tolerant of the idea that the imbecilic ramblings of any idiot with an Internet connection is the equal of the carefully considered writing of a main blog post.

Of course, there are some positives about allowing commenting.  Every once in a while, a comment is interesting and useful.  Commenting can create a sense of community (although community is more properly built in real-life, rather than online), and can project a sense of “power,” in that it shows that the blog has built up a cohort of followers.  Further, sometimes the rare thoughtful commentator can be recruited to be a blogger themselves.

But the negatives outweigh these putative positives.  The majority of comments tend to be of poor quality, and drag down the tone of the blog and taint the original post with the whiff of typical “movement” stupidity and freakishness.  At best, the comments will be mediocre rambling; at worst, they will be factually incorrect, illogical, destructive to the memes promoted by the post and by the blog, incitement to “flame wars,” or, at an extreme, ripe for trolling or even the more serious problem of Sunstein-style “cognitive infiltration.”  It is a rare event that a comments thread elevates the discussion of the original post; it is a very common event that the comments thread degrades the post, and may “turn off” potential readers and recruits.

Moderation is an option, but that has costs: quality moderation is time-consuming, it opens the moderator up to accusations of bias (e.g., only allowing comments supportive of one point of view), and a skilled and determined troll/infiltrator can do a lot of damage to the blog and its objectives before the moderator “wises up” to what is going on. I’ve seen all of this play out before: unmoderated commenting is a disaster that ruins the blog through a form of “Gresham’s Law” – the bad commentators drive out the good; moderated commenting is a bit better, but it’s very difficult to maintain the proper control, particularly when confronted with those skilled at disruption.

One particularly asinine argument I have heard is: “Well, if people don’t like the comments, they don’t have to read them, they can just ignore them and stop complaining.”  Certainly, any individual can ignore the comments.  But they will still be there – and our target audience will be reading them; after all, the purpose for having the comments is for them to be read, isn’t it?  When destructive comments go unanswered they attain a degree of legitimacy.  It is obvious that they cannot be left ignored (and certainly not by the person who wrote the original post!) because uncorrected error may eventually be accepted as truth.  Therefore, ignoring comments is obviously not a stable option, and one can question the intellectual seriousness of anyone who asserts otherwise.

On balance, therefore, I see commenting as a net negative.  Possibly, with very strict moderation this could be overcome, if the moderator is able to effectively deal with the potential problems of moderation listed above.  But, even so, if time is limited, and moderation is not feasible, better to have no comments than the type of sewer flow that characterizes unmoderated commenting on some blogs.

One other possible solution is to have multiple blogs – a “sandbox blog” for the nitwits, nutcases, and trolls to comment on, unmoderated, to their heart’s content, and a serious blog with no comments (or very strictly moderated) at which the important matters are discussed. Trying to mix important discussion with unmoderated commenting will lead to the “behavioral sink” taking the blog down the drain.  It’s a terrible mistake.

Racial Nationalists Beware – Silver/Verlis

Racial nationalists need to be aware that the anti-racist, anti-nationalist, and anti-preservationist troll/infiltrator “Silver” is attempting to spread his Sunstein-style “cognitive infiltration” to various nationalist blogs, sometimes using (pathetically transparent) alternative pseudonyms – an example being “Verlis” at Counter Currents.

As a public service, information on “Silver” dating back to 2009-2010, and which is still very relevant today is stored at the mothballed “Western Biopolitics” site and can be reactivated when necessary.  But, don’t worry – an excellent summary of Silver’s agenda is here, linked to from the EGI Notes blog, and that is permanent.

Update:


Recent quote from Silver on the blog Majority Rights, from this comments thread:


Too true.  What a damnable fool GW turned out to be.  Even as early as 2005 and 2006 some were wondering whether he didn’t have a screw loose, but a great deal of quality material was being turned out in those days so the danger didn’t seem so obvious.  The arrival of DanielS on the front page unquestionably signaled the end; I hope there’s a special circle of hell reserved for that lunatic.


That’s interesting on many levels.  First, it’s pure chutzpah.  More than any other commentator at Majority Rights, the trolling fraud Silver is himself heavily responsible for the decline of that blog. I don’t know much about this “Daniel S” one way or another, but if there is any lunatic with a special circle of hell reserved for them, it’s Silver.  Indeed, it was Silver’s arrival as a commentator at Majority Rights, and Guessedworker’s damnably foolish decision to tolerate Silver’s Sunstein tactics, that really signaled the end. Which leads us to the second point: ingratitude.  Guessedworker wrecked his blog in order to welcome and accommodate Silver; Guessedworker chose Silver over other commentators and actual regular bloggers; Guessedworker, for some bizarre reason that escapes the rest of us, made Silver into that blog’s cherished pet.  So, once the inevitable happens and the blog descends into terminal decline, Silver turns on his benefactor.


The only thing in the comment I agree with is that Majority Rights is indeed in terminal decline and that it had reached its peak in the 2005-2006 period (or perhaps, stretching it, 2005-2007). But, as stated, Silver, and Guessedworker’s tolerance of Silver, greatly contributed to the decline.  And, now, Guessedworker is, in Silver’s words, a “damnable old fool” for letting Silver destroy Majority Rights.  And when another commentator calls out Silver for his dishonorable behavior, Silver claims that he doesn’t “owe” Guessedworker anything, since he (Silver) merely contributed to the blog’s discussion.


An example of Silver’s contributions:

Who cares what that shiteating asshole thinks? Are you that goddam thick, Dave Johns, that you can’t understand what a pure, unadulterated asshole that vermin is? Are you that damn thick that you can’t realize the only reason he can’t fairly characterize my position is that I mock his absurd attempts to whiten himself with his“tests”? That the whole reason he’s such a grouch is that he feels vulnerable about his whiteness and feels compelled to savage and ridicule anyone and everyone even a smidgeon less white than what his exacting standards require, even though doing so is not remotely required for advancing a pro-white agenda (*), and is, in fact, counterproductive? Are you that damn thick? Sadly, I think the answer is yes, you are that damn thick. Try this, Davey boy: think for yourself. If you can pinpoint anything I say (now, not one year ago—which is the only thing shiteater has to go on) which you think compromises white interests, let’s have you bring it up. Otherwise, pay attention to what I actually say; not to what self-interested shiteaters claim I say.

I don’t discuss that here because nutzi dumbfucks like Braun and Rienzi are the greater problem. I don’t care what label these assholes give themselves. They are the purest of human shit imaginable, to me. 


Which is why folks strongly advised Guessedworker, repeatedly, to rid his blog of this anti-racist troll.  And when he didn’t, folks left – not because of Silver himself (who is an obvious fraud for anyone with a triple-digit IQ), but because of frustration at Guessedworker’s foolishness for tolerating Silver (and the rest of the peanut gallery).

So, to summarize: Silver comes to Majority Rights with the intention to disrupt (admitted in his first comment posted there).  He ingratiates himself with the naive Guessedworker, in order to be given free reign to cause maximal damage.  And then, once the blog is a wreck – and, contra Daniel S, it is a wreck – here along comes Silver, to give his one-time benefactor Guessedworker the twist of the knife.  No worries – Silver (or Verlis) has already been attempting to metastasize on other blogs, where the same scenario will be repeated.

Of course, there were times Guessedworker was sorely tempted to ban Silver – see the following quote.  And I believe that at one time he may have actually tried it, or at least more seriously threatened it. But, alas, despite provocations that even the overly tolerant Guessedworker couldn’t fully accept, the ban was never enforced and Silver was allowed to come back, again and again, like a recurrent tumor:

silver, 

You do yourself nor your arguments no honour by that kind of display of bile. I really wonder, sometimes, what is going on in Nordicist’s heads. Very disappointing. 

An apology to Fred wouldn’t go amiss, if you are at all troubled by your own excess. And one to the readership too, for making them plough through such dross. 

I won’t ban you unless you abuse our hospitality like that again. But you can be sure what will happen if you do. 

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, July 7, 2008 at 08:37 PM #