In der news.
Answering the snide Dal Cerro as to what the purpose is for The Great Replacement for those responsible, I divide the problem people into two groups.
First, there are those for whom race replacement is the primary objective. This group includes:
- Jews who hate and fear Whites, have a historical animus against Europe and Western civilization, and who feel more comfortable among “diversity.”
- Coloreds who hate Whites and the West and who want to demographically expand at our expense; some of these also have a religious/civilizational imperative to conquer and convert the “infidels.”
- Hardcore leftists of all races have replaced class struggle with racial struggle; hence, race replacement is a core ideology.
Second, there are those for whom race replacement is a secondary side effect of other impulses:
- Humanitarians want to help migrants.
- Anti-racists want more multiculturalism and oppose discrimination against migrants.
- Women want alien males for sexual purposes.
- Capitalists want cheap labor.
- Politicians and others in power want to stabilize declining demographics and the consequences they think will occur because of falling native birthrates – they want more people and don’t care who they are (it is not they want to replace the natives but believe they have no other choice).
- Leftists want votes and don’t care where they come from – these differ from the leftists in the first group because this second group cares only about political power;; if they could get the votes from Whites they wouldn’t need migrants.
- Some Coloreds honestly want a better life.
- Any others who have an interest in the migration that is not directly based on the desire to replace Whites.
Note that the second group continues to promote the invasion even after seeing its effects, so they are not really better than the first group. Is Dal Cerro now satisfied? Can he stop the straw man characterization of the Far Right?
One of the things that reflects a defective and failing institution (including nations) is a lack of accountability, typically coupled with unequal justice, so that for some there is no accountability and for others, less favored, there is perhaps too much accountability.
This can be observed in mainstream society, where there has been little to no accountability for the violence during the George Floyd riots while Jan. 6 protestors are mercilessly persecuted. The corruption of the Biden family goes unprosecuted, and Fauci can openly like to Congress with impunity, as Senator Paul’s calls for justice are ignored. In contrast, Trump is indicted every five minutes.
Der Movement also exhibits a lack of accountability for itself as a whole and for its Quota Queen leadership – who cares about decades of endless failure and millions of dollars of wasted support? The poor judgment of these leaders is ignored or excused, and their constant “man on white horse syndrome” delusions (Reagan, Putin, Trump, RFK Jr.) are pathetic, and reached a level of absolute absurdity with their apotheosis of Kanye West. Accountability? None. How about the Hermansson Humiliation or the Pilleater tape? Zero accountability. With rare exceptions (Dickie Spinster’s antics finally proved too much for most activists), The Fearless Leaders are never held to account for wrecking White racial activism. On the other hand, that dastardly insane paranoid nasty piece of crap Ted Sallis is banned and blacklisted by the “movement.” And so it goes.
I may be a reactionary geezer wasteful of paper, but I prefer physical reading material to digital, not only books but journals etc. At least both options should be available. I believe there is something that builds connection by having a physical object (putting aside my ideological disagreements with American Renaissance, and just focusing on this issue, going to a purely digital form was, in my opinion, an error, although allegedly they claimed they had no choice). Related to this is how pathetic Der Movement in America is that (insofar as I know) it has no regular publication that has a physical option that comes out more often than The Occidental Quarterly (TOQ) (4 x year). There are no monthly journals, no weeklies, no daily newspaper formats, nothing. Decades of “activism” and millions of dollars of donations and, other than TOQ (putting aside that the content is usually typical “movement” garbage), there’s nothing except online sites that revolve around page views and fundraising. There’s not even the most indirect forms of community of members receiving and reading the same regular (print) journals or papers.
True story: In my last year of middle school, or first year of high school, we has an substitute teacher in English class – a young, 20-something, Eloi female with a general hippie-like appearance. We were reading a novel in which there was discussion of some weak, skinny boy being ruthlessly bullied. This female then made a quite remarkable speech to the class, stating her opinion that the boy in the novel deserved to be so bullied because he was skinny and weak, and then she looked with disgust at the 12-14 year old White boys (the Coloreds by that age being long ago fully grown and perhaps fathers) in the classroom, and then saying that she sees too many skinny weak boys in class and that her own husband is strong and muscular and be can come and bully us if he wanted to. Again – this is a true story. Milady marches onward.
At the height of McCarthyism, it was not a wise career choice to be an open Marxist. However, the McCarthy threat was eliminated and it was not so long after his downfall that academics, including American university professors, could be open Marxists and no one would bat an eye. Certainly today, being a Marxist is perfectly acceptable; however, anyone who is an open Fascist/National Socialist/White nationalist cannot show their face in public without the threat of getting “Spinstered,” much less be a college professor or anything of the sort. Even MAGAtards are under threat, and yet Marxists do their thing with complete impunity. So, this difference cries out for an explanation, and I am not going to give any quick, glib answers here, other than to say, as I have in the past, that the Right essentially ceded all American institutions, and popular culture, to the Left without putting up much of a fight. The Left marched through the institutions unopposed as the naive Right thought winning occasional elections had meaning, and as the Right basked in self-righteous anti-intellectual reverse snobbery. This is an issue that needs to be analyzed, discussed, and debated, but fat chance of that in your “movement” where Greg #1 tells you “we’re winning” before rattling the tin cup, and Greg #2 tells us how bad everything is, with no solutions in sight. There are consequences when people like me are banned and blacklisted, and a lack of serious discussion is one of them.
See this. I suggest that just like individuals can have this “instant dislike” for each other, based on the reasons cited in the article (and, likely, other reasons as well), so to can ethnies have such an innate disdain. The relationship between Anglos and Italians, for example, can be viewed through this lens (and, more generally, Eloi vs. Morlock tensions).
The idea that (White) racism is inherently bad and that being a (White) racist is the worst thing someone can be, worthy of social ostracism (or worse), needs to be deconstructed. I assume that a major argument against racism is that it causes people to be unjustly treated badly based on innate characteristics over which they have no control. If so, why is it socially acceptable to attack people on the basis of being White and/or men? Why is it considered “good sport” to ridicule, say, a male political candidate for (allegedly) wearing heel lifts because of short stature? Why do we make distinctions between people based on innate characteristics for fitness with respect to various jobs and positions? Can a blind person by an airline pilot? Can a spastic weakling be a professional athlete? Further, why is negative racism (“hate”) always stressed rather than a positive attachment toward those more genetically similar, which is an extension of family? Is it by extension always unjust to favor family? And if “people have done terrible things because of racism” can we not say the same about equality, religion, or many other ideas? Why the selective outrage? Do we go back to the innate characteristics issue, already discussed above? And what about positive things done on the basis of preferring one’s own kind, often celebrated as “patriotism” (and hijacked by civic nationalism)?
We are now seeing the Nikki test. If after everything, after Trump and MAGA and everything else, will White GOP voters backslide and not only support a neoconservative but a non-White female neoconservative? Are Whites really that stupid and feckless? So far, the test is being somewhat failed. Someone like Haley shouldn’t be getting any support whatsoever; who knows, if Trump has to bow out, she may become the frontrunner. But “we’re winning.” I’m disappointed; I thought that we had moved on from the neocons, but I underestimated the Eloi vote.
Speaking of Trump and politics, back in 2016 the Quota Queens were saying that Trump was the last chance, the last hope, for White America. Well, Trump was elected, betrayed his White base for four years (as even many in Der Movement now admit), lost in 2020, we’ve had years of Biden, Trump is facing multiple indictments, etc. So, is all hope lost for White America? If so, why do the Quota Queens tell you “we’re winning” and ask for more money? If not, when will they admit that they were wrong with their previous statements, once again demonstrating poor judgment and hyperbolic language?
An American Renaissance commentator writes (emphasis added):
I’ve been reading AmRen since ’91 (a year after you started) when you were a newsletter mailed to your house. Occasionally, I’d write in a comment and occasionally you’d publish it in the next installment.
I’ve also been reading 90+% of the articles on AmRen (and Vdare) since you went on the Net and have commented on a ton of them.
I hate to say this, but every now and then, I feel like NOTHING I’ve ever said has made a damn bit of difference. Things have just kept getting worse and worse (part-time since LBJ was first elected and full-time since ’67-’68). Maybe you feel the same way; maybe you don’t. AmRen is banned from almost everywhere and Litigious James (NY AG who’s suing Trump) is trying to shut down Vdare.
I won’t stop reading and I might comment here and there, but it won’t mean a damn thing. It’s just a way to let off a little steam, but other than that, it won’t mean a damn thing..
That’s correct – “it won’t mean a damn thing.” Der Movement, Inc. is merely an entertainment brand. Just accept the harsh truth, folks.
I believe I have figured out why Der Right positively obsesses over the work of Tolkien (e.g., The Lord of the Rings) and Herbert (e.g., Dune) but ignores Wolfe (e.g., The Book of the New Sun) and Vance (e.g., Dying Earth works) even though all of these books focus on more traditionalist societies that are either non-technological, post-technological and/or archaeofuturist, or skeptical of technology. Tolkien and Herbert present their societies in fundamentally positive terms, while for Wolfe and Vance their societies are obviously negative. The worlds of, e.g., Severian (Wolfe) and Cugel (Vance) are dystopian, unpleasant, and dangerous – in both cases, literal dead ends. That negatively conflicts with “movement” fantasies and prejudices in favor of anti-technological, traditionalist societal constructs. Thus, after reading Wolfe and Vance it is difficult to get excited over Der Ethnostate, in which sturdy Nordic peasantry will use crossbows to shoot down Chinese ICBMs.
In theory, in an optimal situation, all pro-White activists of every ideological permutation – Pan-Europeanists, Ethnonationalists, Nordicists – would be united in the attitude of rejecting Color and telling non-Whites to mind their damn business and keep out of White racialist activist space. However, only the pan-Europeanists adopt this approach. My own attitude is clear. Yockey labeled all non-Westerners as “Guks.” I’ve never seen Lowell grovel to Color. It’s only those other “ists” who eagerly grasp onto whatever Colored “ally” who tells them what they want to hear and who engages in ethnoracial flattery to stroke the egos of those “ists.” Vanity, all is vanity.
Some right-wing commentators assert the Left pushes transgenderism on children because leftists like to harm people. Yes, but we need to dig deeper. Observing who primarily pushes this agenda among “colleagues” I unfortunately know, and correlating that to national trends, these pushers are heavily: women, sexual deviants (and thus women + deviants = lots of lesbians), and other assorted Bioleninist flotsam and jetsam. So, yes, they want to harm others, harm society, and in particularly harm what could have been heathy members of society out of resentment toward those not as botched as they. One suspects that homosexual White Knghting has its origins in a spiteful passive aggressive resentment against heterosexual men. Milady’s participation in porn, e-thottery, OnlyFans, etc, is likely motivated by envy and resentment toward men. Then there is the “misery loves company” factor – if Bioleninist freaks can help create many other Bioleninist feaks, then the freaks will not feel so isolated and alienated from society.
It is imperative to keep all such people away from the levers of power, and from societal influence – otherwise they will wreck society (as well as wreck healthy political movements).
Finally, you should judge someone’s intentions toward you based on whether they promote adaptive or maladaptive memes toward you. I, for example, am harshly critical of many White ethnies, and some people may be offended by this. But my criticism is precisely because those ethnies are behaving maladaptively, while I promote the idea that they should behave adaptively (e.g., racial nationalism, homogeneity, healthy social values). In contrast, those who are cheerfully friendly (on the surface, no doubt fake) toward particular groups, but who promote maladaptive memes to those groups (e.g., mass migration influx, multiculturalism, deviancy) do not have those groups’ best interests at heart. Beware, and understand the difference between surface attitudes and fundamental intentions.
eginotes 
You must be logged in to post a comment.