What Have We Learned?

Imagine the overthrow of our usurper class. It’s easy if you try. Throughout the West, establishment parties are acting like they’re losing faith in their works and have shifted their focus from long-term strategic goals to short-term opportunism.

This is especially evident in the case of putatively conservative parties. And in the case of the leftist apparatus — the political, corporate, and media/entertainment complex — we are witnessing an extinction-burst of id incontinence that points to either panic or hubris, in either case a fatal error.

Donald Trump’s storming into the epicenter of American politics has been no less than the cleansing of Augean stables that is the Republican Party, now exposed as a club of disgraced half-men who had sold out to cuckservatism. And on the Democratic side of the bifactional ruling party, Bernie Sanders is the socialist dreamers’ last gasp of faith, tired though it is like the old man himself.

We have been living through a silent spiritual and demographic war since 1954, with 2015 bringing on an acceleration of events in the West. The nationalists may yet win this and secure their respective homelands and a future for White children.

The hollow world of the materialistic globalists is no match for what can be offered through group struggle.
28Sherman

What will we have learned from the Long Silent War?

***

A lot, certainly, across wide swathes of political, economic, and philosophical lessons-learned. For starters, here is brief list of practical reminders:

  • Blood matters. Immigration + integration = no future for your  children. It really is that simple.
  • Beware women in public life, which includes the voting booth. Single women in particular, and especially beware the mischief wrought by childless post-menopausal women.
  • Never let them disarm you; look at what surrendering their guns got the English. If it comes down to it, “Μολὼν λαβέ (Molon labe), motherfuckers” better be either the last words you speak, or the last words they hear.
  • There is no such thing as cheap labor; mow your own lawn (better yet, grow vegetables instead of grass).
  • The blackmail of politicians: elect men of integrity to public office, who cannot be blackmailed. Failing that, elect ones who either possess the honor to step down or the guts to defy their blackmailers.
  • “Tolerance” is just another word for cowardice.

But the above points are no news to AltRight-wise readers. What I provide next, is my thoughts on how we were fooled into letting ourselves become dispossessed and how to avoid those errors when the merchants of lies inevitably once again hiss into our ears:

1. Speak the Truth.

I always thought that there was something prophetic in the tagline of Château Heartiste, “where pretty lies perish.”

A classic example of truth overcoming an edifice of lies is the effect that Vaclav Havel’s essay “The Power of the Powerless” had on anti-Communist movement in Poland. Below is a quote from a former Solidarity activist reflecting on the impact of that essay. The passage I bolded below, I think, speaks to us with special immediacy today.

This essay reached us…in 1979 at a point when we felt we were at the end of the road…we had been speaking on the shop floor, talking to people, participating in public meetings, trying to speak the truth about the factory, the country, and politics. There came a moment when people thought that we were crazy. Why were we doing this? Why were we taking such risks? Not seeing any immediate and tangible results, we began to doubt the purposefulness of what we were doing…Then came the essay by Havel. Reading it gave us the theoretical underpinnings for our activity. It maintained our spirits; we did not give up, and a year later — in August 1980 — it became clear that the party apparatus and the factory management were afraid of us. We mattered. And the rank and file saw us as leaders of the movement…

Theodore Dalrymple’s well known observation ties Communist propaganda in with modern political correctness:

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
– Theodore Dalrymple

My emphasis above as well. In practical terms, speaking the truth entails:

  • Saying what you mean. Speaking clearly from first-causes. Conservatives lost all race-related battles because they objected to immigration, for example, on debatable and ultimately irrelevant economic grounds, rather than on identitarian principles.
  • Valuing your own extremists. Timid moderates are uncomfortable with the direct words of the extremists, which trigger a fear of provoking the adversary whom they’d rather appease.
  • Hating the lies and not tolerating liars.

2. Don’t Get Seduced by Alien Philosophers.

Because they are not one of you, and because they have conflicts of interest with your interests, don’t trust them to tell you how to think or how to live. The catastrophies of the twentieth century are a testament to the errors of following the counsel of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Same goes for the Neocons, whose hijacking of the American conservative mind bore fruit during the disastrous George W. Bush administration.

Another example of alien counsel, this time for young women watching Sex and the City:

“Enjoy yourself – that’s what your 20s are for. Your 30s are to learn the lessons. And your 40s are to pay for the drinks!”

And your dusty uterus will spasm every time you see a baby.

When someone tells you that children are not important or directs you down a path of barren, empty-headed hedonism, or wants to run out your motherhood clock, he just may be someone who dreams of a future without you in it.

3. Don’t Concede the Moral High Ground.

“I’m not a racist, but…”

When confronting an armed home invader, do you say “I’m not a bad host, but…”? Ok, I can see that being a fittingly wry thing to say before you dispatch him with a single round from your .38 Smith & Wesson. But people who defend their communities from Anti-Whites with the words “I’m not a racist but…” are essentially saying that they no moral authority because their very self-defense is immoral.

Ceding your moral authority often takes the form of appealing to the enemy’s values. Here is a hypothetical example:

  • Timid Conservative: “We shouldn’t be letting Muslims into Europe because they oppress women.”
  • Leftist Snake: “The Neonazis also want women kept under Kinder, Kirche, Kuche.”
  • Timid Conservative: “But… but…”

This exchange would have gone better if it had begun on a forthright note, with clarity and conviction. Like this:

  • Nationalist: “We shouldn’t let Muslims into Europe because as racial and cultural adversaries, their descendants would pose a mortal danger to our posterity.”
  • Leftist Snake: “Racist! Xenophobe!”
  • Nationalist: “Enough of that. Go slither away.”

4. Defend Your Public Space.

Public space, on the micro-scale: here is a tragic example of a man who wanted to assert his right to define his public space. Several years ago in Florida, a man was fueling his car at a gas station when a Black driver pulled up to do the same, but with loud rap thumping from his car. I’m inferring from the facts that were provided that the White driver asked the Black one to turn the noise off or down, which escalated into a confrontation that resulted in the White man shooting and killing the Black. Today, what is likely a good man is in prison because he refused to lower his head in face of savage displays.

“Liberty” means to have an undisputed dominion over your public space, keeping it in your own image to reflect who you are. “Community” means sharing that space with like-minded people. When groups of people with conflicting aesthetics, existential goals, moral values, and temperaments share the same jurisdiction, one or more of the following scenarios is inevitable: (1) open conflict, (2) a demoralizing imposition of one group’s values on the other, or (3) a bilateral withdrawal from the public space, as shown by Robert Putnam’s study, which demonstrated that diversity erodes civic life.

Public space, on the macro-scale: this is something I witnessed in the early 1980s upon arriving in the United States in time for my first Christmas here. Television news programs were reporting on the removal, under court orders, of Nativity scenes from the grounds of government buildings. Almost a teenager then, I felt uneasy about the developments. “How can a free, Western nation deny its people a public affirmation of their most joyous holiday?” I thought in slightly different words. “Didn’t we just escape a Communist country that did exactly this?”

Separation of Church and State is just a code word for “this ain’t your country.”

5. Balance of Order with Chaos.

Man has a wild side that compels him to find life under perfect order stultifying. Life needs an element of chaos to remind us that it all hangs on a thin string and to steer us clear of Eloi-like complacency and softening of character. Passion and creativity come from the darker recesses of our soul and thrive under a touch of danger.

This leads me to the subject of crime, diversity’s most talked-about burden. Violent crime is something that conservatives pin on Dindus, as a plea for freedom from Dindus. While the statistics on violent crime starkly follow race-based patterns, it is a mistake to hang one’s nationalistic case on crime, or to renounce it as such. It’s a Ned Flanders trap because a healthy society includes a reasonably contained criminal underclass. The wilder of our girls need someone to crave. We need the wisened older men who know what it means to steal or worse. We are better-off for having our own reserve army of muscle and balls. And importantly, we need someone to rule the rougher streets; best it’s our thugs than their thugs.

Looking from the perspective of a future victory, we would not have repelled the invaders and hanged the traitors without our own rough young men — like European nationalists — being the first to stick their necks out and take it to the streets.

Related: value and protect your working class. They really are all you’ve got.

6. Cultivate an Extended Family.

I’ll start this with a personal note. I have a very large extended family but from late childhood through my late 20s, I had no contact with them. This includes my grandparents, whom I only met once as an adult, in the final months of their long lives.

The extended family is a fallback means of support and the primary giver of a sense of identity. The placed importance of family ties varies by ethnic groups, and Western Europeans have been less reliant on kinship ties than others. But you really do need uncles to help you develop an identity as a boy and cousins to have your back when you are in trouble.

Don’t be alone.

***

History never ends and as human beings, we are bound to repeat our mistakes, over and over. Satan stands behind you in the shadow, always watching. But there is Truth that blazes our path through the darkness. Not losing sight of that light is our hope for making it through just far enough to let our sons and daughters, in turn, walk yet farther onward, straight and true.

Advertisements

49 thoughts on “What Have We Learned?

  1. I’m not a racist, but…”

    When confronting an armed home invader, do you say “I’m not a bad host, but…”? Ok, I can see that being a fittingly wry thing to say before you dispatch him with a single round from your .38 Smith & Wesson. But people who defend their communities from Anti-Whites with the words “I’m not a racist but…” are essentially saying that they no moral authority because their very self-defense is immoral.

    Yeah, but America isn’t a monoracial society, unlike the one you left to come here. I mean, i agree with your logic and thrust but not your particular place for such a circumstance. Thus, i would arm myself and fight for white, black and biracial enclaves in north america, because all have well-earned soveirgnty here, IMO.

    I’m thinking this is obvious and damn-near goes without saying, but you don’t seem to ackowledge as much. So let me just ask: do you think blacks and biracials (the tow racial factions of the american populance that i’m pretty sure you don’t relate to and have political fealty toward) should be allowed to reside in this country and determine their fate? or does your white nationalism beliefs supersede their right to exist.

    And to be clear, i’m literally asking, not moralizing via rhetoric.

  2. Nik, I’ll give my view on this (and mine only, as I’m sure there are a wide variety of opinions within the White Nationalist movement). I think some form of Balkanization is inevitable in North America. Obviously, we can’t know at this point exactly how it will go down, but as a practical matter I’d guess that a variety of nations will emerge, some racially homogeneous and some mixed. America, as you understand it, will cease to exist. It will remain as a powerful memory of a past golden age for some, a bitter reminder of hateful oppression to others. For many of us, it will be both.

    But what you seem to really be after is an acknowledgement at the moral level that blacks have a claim to territory in North America. I can give that to you – sort of.

    If the Balkanization were to be carried out more or less peacefully, with blacks working in good faith toward such a separation (or at least not unduly opposing it), I would certainly work with them and reciprocate in good faith. I don’t see this as particularly likely, because blacks have too much of an interest in keeping the empire going and feeding off of whites.

    I predict that they will strongly support centralized control against any secessionist movements that may arise. They will be among the central government’s most aggressive, bloodthirsty cheerleaders and politically reliable enforcers, for the simple reason that they are net beneficiaries of that central government. Not to mention that many will immensely enjoy the federal boot coming down ever harder on the white throat. “Whites deserve it!”

    But really, mostly blacks just prefer the status quo, with a slowly dwindling and relatively pliant white population that they can extract resources from, all enforced by an anti-white central state. A paradigm of white decline coupled with black advancement suits them just fine.

    But hey, stranger things have happened, and at a certain point blacks may be happy to see a certain portion of whites go their own way, especially if those whites behave in such a manner that it makes sense to let them go. After all, there would probably still be enough whites in thrall to “diversity,” so blacks could potentially have their cake and eat it too – get rid of the more troublesome whites, while retaining a more pliant white population to extract benefits from and keep the lights on – at least until everybody turns into the Coloureds of South Africa.

    In any event, if it ends up being similar to the Soviet breakup, everyone can get a reasonable piece of the pie, and I would encourage different parties to deal with one another in good faith. But if imperial collapse turns into a chaotic, bloodthirsty mess, if blacks instead push for White Genocide and do everything in their power to deny us sovereignty, then all bets are off. No “moral” claim that they may insist upon will supersede the grotesquely immoral crime of White Genocide.

    At that point, things revert to the age-old rule: territory belongs to those who can take and hold it.

    Again, my view only, and only as it applies to North America. Every single black (and all other non-whites) must be removed from every square mile of Europe. You may not like that, but it should demonstrate that I make a distinction between American blacks and those that have colonized Europe in recent decades.

    Another way of putting it is that whites and blacks have both been in America long enough to constitute legitimate, indigenous peoples. They have created their own cultures, and in so doing have become distinct. This gives them something to work with, and it also gives a “moral claim” of sorts. Whether they will behave in such a way as to have that moral claim respected or repudiated is an open question. It could go either way.

  3. I made a rather lengthy comment (in answer to Nik) that seems to have been eaten by the system. Do I need to break it down into two or more posts?

  4. Speaking clearly from first-causes. Conservatives lost all race-related battles because they objected to immigration, for example, on debatable and ultimately irrelevant economic grounds, rather than on identitarian principles.

    Thank you for this. I get frustrated when the European Nationalist parties bend and suckhole to the current spectrum of permissible opinion. No, you don’t want them to “integrate.” What are you thinking?

    The current fascination with HBD stuff is also frustrating. Not that it isn’t interesting, and fun to tease Political Correctards with. It just misses the point.

    This is why I’ve never been or called myself a “Conservative”. It’s not how I think.
    Conservatism is a winning mindset if you want personal success. But it’s a loser if you want to change the world. You need “dreamers” for that.

    Idea blip. Someone needs to write a version of that John Lennon’s ditty with Nationalist lyrics. Imagine…

    Imagine I’m too tired right now.

  5. Nikcrit – “do you think blacks and biracials […] should be allowed to reside in this country and determine their fate?”

    Trainspotter’s long comment that was in mod pretty much covers my answer as well. Here is the rub, though. Whites and Backs giving each other space would not be like Czechs and Slovaks separating amicably because Blacks would be unable to run a state without descending to African savagery at worst or a heavily White-supported shitty corrupt banana republic at best. The side-by-side contrast of White post-America with Black post-America would always be there as a perception thorn.

    The natural state for Africans is not the same as for everyone else. It seems to me that Blacks are created for life in small tribal units, culled to stable numbers by Africa’s tropical climate and regulated in behavior by heavy superstition (Pagan Africa: “muh-dikking an infant will get me haunted by its spirit so I ain’t doing that shit;” Monotheistic Africa: “No such thing as haunting. Muh dik!”). Exposing Blacks to modern material civilization was like taunting them with something they could never achieve or maintain on their own. The Talented Tenth among them possibly could, but they’d not survive a week among the Untalented 90%. See the slaughter of Mulattos in Haiti.

    A realistic Nationalist solution in America, without getting into any population-engineering scenarios, would either involve reservation-like separation in which Black areas are heavily managed and sponsored by Whites. SOBL had a quasi-satirical post about giving Blacks their own country in the state of Georgia.

    But here is where I think a realistic solution lies, absent liberalism: a paternalistic White supremacy, Rhodesia/Apartheid/Dixie style. It’s an observation, not an endorsement. Lawrence Auster wrote at length about how Blacks today are angry for having been effectively abandoned by their former caretakers. In Jim Crow South, the argument went, an old Black man tips his hat to a White teenage boy and calls him “mister.” In old Rhodesia, a White farmer had a dog sit next to him in his pickup truck and Black laborers back in the truck bed. But Blacks had cultural autonomy and felt at peace that they are taken care of and policed enough for their benefit. The violent buck niggers were dealt with, and the Talented Tenth had some access to White civilization.

    As to Mulattos today: it’s unclear to me if there is any new identity forming. They are relatively few in number, culturally they identify Black, many don’t have children regardless, and in my observation — most date Blacks.

  6. Infowarrior “Perhaps it has gone even longer than that”

    Certainly the currents go way back. The global White dispossession is a very low intensity, glacially-moving project without spectacular battles like you would see in a hot war. I choose 1954 as the starting point (Brown vs Board) because it’s an event most people know about and one that marks a point when the unofficial doctrine of the US government became hostile to Whites.

    Trainspotter – Not sure if comment length or something else triggers mod. WordPress seems to be that way, given how many of us had their comments eaten at CH. If your comment goes to moderation, I’ll see it when I glance at my smartphone and can easily approve it. But if it disappears (gets eaten), I have to actively go into the WP dashboard and look for it. I just freed a long comment by Heretic at the “Shots of Wisdom” thread, which had been siting there. So if your comment is eaten, it’s best to post a short follow-up note to alert me to it.

    In any case, a very good thorough breakdown in your post above.

  7. Heretic – Believe it or not, I’ve been mulling Nationalist lyrics to “Imagine” for some time. Didn’t Heartiste do that several months ago? Years ago, I’d ask in blog comments “where is our ‘Imagine’?”

  8. re: Every single black (and all other non-whites) must be removed from every square mile of Europe.
    @trainspotter: thanks for your reply; still, i have to point out: most of the non-whites in Europe are there for the same vintage reason non-whites are in the Americas; slavery, either imported to white homelands or deployed in native lands via colonizing white political rule. I think you have to distinguish recent migrants in Sweden vs., say, Afro-brits in Brixton and Tottenham? The latter’s predicament are similar to that of African-Americans. I think the reason WN’s don’t make that distinction is because they’re disenchanted or at least disinterested in either group —– but their interests alone isn’t really the only factor to be considered IMO.

    Euro-history ignorance alert! To what extent where African slaves brought to Britain? I know the practice ended some 30-to-50 years prior to American Emancipation, but it’s not clear to me, eg., those undergrad days are becoming distant memories.

  9. As to Mulattos today: it’s unclear to me if there is any new identity forming. They are relatively few in number, culturally they identify Black, many don’t have children regardless, and in my observation — most date Blacks.

    Well, it’s early, and a lot of this has been touched upon in the past, but that isn’t necessarily so. And you know I do tend to see a lot of rainbow-generation youth of all classes more than most who post here, i’m pretty sure…. first, there are a lot of mulattos, ‘biracial’ goes the current argot; 2) they don’t necessarily consider themselves ‘black’; they use terms like ‘mixed’ as shorthand for ‘mutli-ethnic’ or multi-influenced physically and culturally.

    Something i wanted to mention for a while here, with a bit of particular irony to you, given your particular ethnic origins: In my town particularly and nationwide overall, the range of Hispanics, from European-looking ‘Mexicans’ to more South American-appearing Indians, among today’s youth, Hispanics are the hyper-aggregators of racial mixing; in my mid-American city, Hispanics have so thoroughly mixed with blacks and, especially, white working-class Poles and Germans that one cannot easily sit back and say ‘that person is white’ and ‘that person is black’ and ‘that person is Hispanic,’ etc. (btw, those two white subsets are the primary ethnicity of white stock in Brewtown). In the city proper, i would guess that there are more mestizo pole-hispanics than there are purebred poles at this point. It’s recent enough a trend to be amazing to me in that my city’s southside was once a charming enclave of Old World Europe charms and solidly Polish with many of those poles monolingual, while today it’s all but a modern-day lower-to-lower-middle-class barrio, with plenty of the storefront signs in Spanish. To be clear, I’m not heralding the demise of vintage pole and german culture here; i miss it in many ways. I’m just noting that if you look at b-w miscegenation, it really isn’t that big a numerical force. But if you consider the role of hispanic mixing as a mitigator in that force, said force becomes quite considerable, with the demographic flux i just described evidence to that fact.

  10. Whatever Euro-stock Americans are mixed with Hispanics, they are now simply Hispanics. If La Raza wants them. The one-drop rule keeps a clean pool. I appreciate your comments, but let’s conclude the subject of mixing in this thread.

  11. ”We have been living through a silent spiritual and demographic war since 1954”

    Perhaps it has gone even longer than that:

    Ahh, yes; most certainly, as there ain’t nothing new under the sun….. there’ve been progressive-populist movements since the country was formed —– some that would be lauded here, some not.

    I’ll leave it at that; most of y’all know as much.

  12. My new year’s resolution: bring racial peace to the world —— and then learn how to spell ‘sovereignty’; ‘sove-reign-ty’; it’s easy! (i’m also going to do 30-second once-overs of my comments and clean up sub-verb disagreements)

  13. I’ve thought about this before, supporting a black ethnostate on the N. American continent, but that prospect brings with it myriad problems. For starters, we can acknowledge with certainty the black state will be absolutely dysfunctional even with a mulatto class ruling it.

    I think deep in the American-African psyche exists a profound attachment to Whites that reflects the parent/child relationship and this attachment will be the primary source of their separation anxiety. You can glean this attachment even in the NOI. They want their African state in N. America but also want Whitey to foot the bill for 50 years!

    It will never end.

    Ultimately the best solution is humane repatriation. In their ancestral homelands, with the passing of a couple generations, their mental and physical attachments to Whites will be severed, but it will take complete geographical separation for the American-African to achieve this state of independence. In the midst of Whites the Negro will always find himself in a state of psychological subjugation, and in that regard our people have done them a great disservice.

    Separation will replace enmity with amity.

  14. This comment reflects the gist of my comment above, although modern separation is preferable to antiquated styles of segregation.

  15. Addendum to the original post: we’ve learned a lot more than what I wrote, obviously. I divided the post into a list of practical things that are no news to anyone here (ie., female suffrage), and expounded on six more philosophical points. More than six, certainly can be discussed. One in particular that occurred to me would be “7. Violence Works.”

    I think it is implicitly covered in other points, especially in “4. Defend Your Public Space.” But the idea merits more attention. For example, in Sweden judges give child-raping immigrants ridiculously lenient sentences. And then there was that child-services abduction case in Norway I posted about. If lower-level public officials who are responsible for those abuses feared the wrath of their people, they would not behave the way they do.

  16. In a nutshell…. There is no such thing as a genuine black Supremacist of which “separation” is a necessary effect in relation to Modernity and its subsequent nigger ghetto. Collectively, MRKN “blacks” are perpetuating self-annihilators and it is now well known that the “crime” of segregation is in the inevitable exponential increase in collective “black” self-annihilation relative to any separation from “white supremacy.”

  17. Nik, the vast majority of non-whites in Europe have arrived in recent decades. It’s true, as you’ve pointed out, that there are small populations which predate that, but they are marginal – and they belong somewhere else.

    The process of ethnogenesis is complex and, necessarily I think, somewhat subjective. Clearly black Americans and white Americans qualify as distinctive ethnic groups – and there are those who would subdivide it further.

    Let’s talk about diaspora whites. In Africa, clearly the Boers have been through the process and now constitute a distinct white ethnicity, but what about English speaking white South Africans? I would say yes, kind of, sort of, but it’s less clear cut. What about the tiny, marginal white populations scattered throughout certain other African countries? Or Asian countries, for that matter? Meh…not really. Some would insist otherwise, of course.

    It’s a judgement call. I don’t recognize the right of a single non-White to remain in Europe. Not one. For example, there were some small black communities in certain English ports that go back long before the current non-white influx. O.K., so there were some black dockworkers. So what? Does that constitute a people? A nation? Does that community have the right to live in England for the next thousand years? For all eternity? To poison white bloodlines for all eternity – just because it worked on the docks for awhile? Because a handful of goofy (probably greedy) Englishmen decided to bring them in generations ago? To be indelicate: fuck that.

    Because that’s what you’re asking for when you demand that non-whites remain within white communities: the right to not only reside in the territory of a given nation forever, but to forever alter that people’s gene pool – to literally transform what they are.

    I reject that out of hand as being utterly unacceptable. Far too much is at stake.

  18. “But here is where I think a realistic solution lies, absent liberalism: a paternalistic white supremacy….” PA

    Sounds as though “we” are, in fact, in need of genuine white Supremacists… Preferably fathers themselves, no?

    PA, I sense your distance from Vox Day’s modus operandi which reduces to the ironic absurdity of a “Dark Lord” that trips up all over himself denying his “white supremacy.”

    It’s weird because many years ago I said your choice was genuine white Supremacy or radical autonomy… It has all come to pass with your above solution to a SELECTED environment.

    So when do you attach to yourself the correct label?

    When do you recognize that to totally embrace white Supremacy is to absolutely reject Liberalism?

  19. Thordaddy,
    Well, i see you’re as cryptic as ever to converse with….. so, ‘mrkn’ is ‘american’ or some derivative of ‘merica,’ that the alt-right references?

    However, i did dig up an old comment of yours that i found quite pithy in characterizing a observation i myself gradually perceived but could never quite articulate; it has to do with how the ideal, evolving african-american is both stilted yet developmentally stunted by the context of the American democrat ‘liberal’

    To wit, you said on AlanB’s blog:

    “You have now drawn us into a debate where we determine nefarious external machinations versus the self-annihilation of the “black” collective. Where is the line between true victim and agent of one’s own demise?
    But better yet…
    How have white people become so psychologically invested in such an intractable dilemma?
    What is the most despicable aspect of the radical “black” collective?
    Is it not its rabid insistence that “it” is the genocidal victim of the “white man?”
    IN REALITY, the radical “black” collective is avant garde in destroyng any genuine notion of a black man withbroad acceptance. The radical “black” collective is in a symbiotic regression with self-annihilating “white” liberals.
    You can’t stop it. You can only try to withdraw from the pull of its media amplified corrupted psychology.”

    FWIW,
    Despite the fact that you often annoyed the fuk out of me with your roundabout and intentionally enigmatic commenting approach, i find that that last bit, the part about the ‘radical black collective,’ which is more or less code for the black american democrat, to be one of the most insightful readings of the modern black predicament in western political society; i really do. IMHO, you should ditch your ‘man-on-the-mountain’ proverbial wiseman approach and seek clarity in conveying your views; a fount of wisdom runs dry when few can drink from said fountain.

  20. FWIW,
    Not that anyone asked my opinion, but i’m wondering just how alone i might be on this issue re. blog format: I do not like the “nested’ reply-to comments; imo, they’re hard to follow and you find yourself overlooking replies (at heavily attended blogs and comment strings, they’re a total nightmare and seem to trigger random and unasked for blog-format commands.

    perhaps i’m just used to it, but i much prefer the straight-ahead chronological-sequence format for comments, in which to signal who or what comment you’re referring to you simply cut-n-paste some italicized quotation from that comment at the top of your own.

  21. I’m not a fan of nested comments either. A reader requested these, so I gave it a try, assuming it’s a popular choice. BTW, with relatively few comments, it is unnecessary, and rarely used here thusfar. I may disable that setting.

    On this subject, any other reader input on the format? For my part, I think it’s perfect on the smartphone but the post and comment typeface is a bit small on a laptop.

  22. In my opinion a single thread, without nested branches, encourages more thoughtful and topical comments, and is easier to follow.

  23. When confronting an armed home invader, do you say “I’m not a bad host, but…”? Ok, I can see that being a fittingly wry thing to say before you dispatch him with a single round from your .38 Smith & Wesson.

    Worthy of Eastwood. No scratch that – better than.

    No seriously – when i (finally) get famous, and use that line, … you will get credit, … somehow.

  24. These epic original posts? well so then.

    Beware women in public life

    Public Life is more than what it seems. It is every last little interaction.

    Women need curtailing.

    I put ‘em in the rape zone

    Women don’t respect us, if when we are not fucking them.

  25. Beware women in public life

    The masculine is always the chore, it is always the thing.

    The theme i would relate, is the “Matronizing Effect”.

    “Oh look at him.”

    Excuse me for not being a nobody. Excuse me for having something on hand. Excuse me for shining my shoes.

    And could you women stop making a spectacle on the street. Could you women sorta shut the fuck up.

  26. Nikcrit…

    You know, there is a receptive audience for all types of media…

    First Law of “black” liberation….

    White Supremacy equals white degeneracy necessitating “liberation” by any means necessary…

    BUT…

    “We” NOW understand that “any means necessary” is by perpetuating self-annihilation EVERYWHERE!

  27. What we’ve learned is that “white guilt” is the very diabolical smokescreen that high IQ jewhites homos utilize to daze and confuse a mass of young white males AWAY FROM genuine white Supremacy. So the reality is that young, average “white” Joseph has fully embraced the “white guilt” meme for the very self-justifying reason of rejecting genuine white Supremacy. In other words, the reality is an expomentially accelerating pathology where the liberal “white” collective not only falsely burdens itself with the degeneracy of the radical “black” collective (and all “other” collectives), but in that self-imposed burden is the double mindfuq of rejecting “white supremacy” as testament to embracing that “white guilt.” So it is like digging one’s own grave having rejected a shovel all the while inexplicably using one’s fingers to continue to dig.

  28. What we’ve learned is that the Narrative is a high IQ jewhite creation rooted in sexual degeneracy and anti-white Supremacy AND the contributors to this Narrative extend from extreme left to extreme right thus nullifying a political spectrum. ALL THE WEST is now firmly AGAINST the greatest of white men leading at the helm…. And in a sane world, such white men would be known as white Supremacists.

  29. What we’ve learned is that all white males in MRKA have been “educated,” shamed, harassed, manipulated, cultured, socialized and politicized into a state of anti-white Supremacy….

    What we’ve learned is that if the zeitgeist has put a proverbial gun to your head and forced YOU TO BE an anti-white Supremacist…

    Then what we’ve learned is that high IQ nerd logic NECESSITATES RAPID TRANSFORMATION into genuine white Supremacist….

    And the beauty is one need not know anything but simple rebellion.

  30. What we’ve learned is that the next really radical step FOR EACH AND EVERY white male is either genuine white Supremacy or Final Liberation…. It is radical autonomy –> total self-annihilation… Or it is radical autonomy –> genuine white Supremacy….

    There is no Neo’s reaction…. Another meme of the high IQ “white” male class ever so resistant to a conversion that is imminent or annihilation is inevitable per their own ways of being.

    Anti-white Supremacy = “white” self-annihilation…. And no high IQ jewhite can deny the equation and not lose absolute two-face.

  31. “Liberty” means to have an undisputed dominion over your public space, keeping it in your own image to reflect who you are. “Community” means sharing that space with like-minded people.

    That’s really good.

    Community is totally a hot topic. Amongst everyone – reactionaries, tough guys, liberals, faggots – everyone wants community. That is what is missing, from all our lives.

    In terms of practical politics – i think that the reactionaries and tough guys have to sell their version of things, to the liberals and faggots – and the issue on which to do that, is Public Space.

    Someone has to be in charge of it. And not “someone” but, … some thing, some people, some guiding principles, some values.

    We don’t have values in common. There are different survival strategies, out there in play. All these healthy rabbits don’t want to fight, because they got plenty of clover – and they know we’re all going to be dead soon enough, so let’s not fight and enjoy what’s left.

    Whatever. To go all epic post, times will change, and survival strategies will change too.

    *********

    I would like to, uh, examine the question of Public Space ad nauseam. It is kind of a sore spot.

    White People built these suburbs with no allowance for public space. What were they thinking?

    We are not able to direct our societies. It is just a pipe dream. We’re animals, and things will run their course.

    However, in terms of practical politics, we can sell.

  32. Thanks SOBL. Something you wrote about wanting your thoughts to be compiled in one place so that your children could read them later, is what finally spurred me to start this blog. That, and one too many eaten comments at CH.

  33. “I would like to, uh, examine the question of Public Space ad nauseam” -Elk

    You and I circled around that subject as far back as at Chuck R.’s a few years back. We both grok that it’s not about the fucking crime, but something more basic.

  34. The key psychological struggle is maintaining the false notion that all these competing liberationist collectives seek “community” either in consensus or in the individuated sense. The reality is that our “default elite” sell the equalization of public space due a personally gratuitous amount of private sphere TO A RABID collective of self-annihilators who’s primitive conception of “public space” equals “my own private space wherever I want.”

    If one says he desires The Land of white Supremacy then it is easy to conceive of such place automatically excluding chosen jews, niggers, miggers, jihadists, homodykes and “white” self-annihilators. And then when one is able to conceptualize this Land of white Supremacy and the diasporic collective outside its gates then one can see a chaotic conglomerate with no real tense concept of private/public space. The whole concept of “public space” as separate yet intimately connected to the private space is a concept of the white race. Perpetuating self-annihilators simply cannot think in terms of public/private space. They only know how to devour.

  35. We both grok that it’s not about the fucking crime, but something more basic.

    We will take it back. Nature will not endure a vacuum.

    One of the funniest things, in these last five or ten, was down the local park. Tennis courts which have been modified into that new racket ping-pong thing, next to some old basketball courts.

    And some old school blacks were down there with “nigger this” and “nigger that” … and all the while these gentrified white peoples playing pongball on the tennis courts.

    Were i a better man? would have called them nigger bucks on their bullshit language, rather than instead posting here.

    There will come a point.

  36. It is aggressive posturing, on their part.

    I know black people, and love them.

    They want us to shoot their ass, and show them.

    I resent the fuck out of how you make me do that.

    We will be judged before Big Dog.

  37. The radical “black” collective…. Like ISIS…. Like the homodyke mafia…. LIKE ANY VIOLENT collective of sexually degenerate anti-white Supremacists…. Scream, “ANNIHILATE US!!!”

    And it matters nothing whether these cancerous collectives were “evolutionarily”-designed over last 500 years and socially engineered in real time…. Their meta-function in relation to UncleBeast and AuntieFeast is paralysis/trigger…. Paralyze the sheep., ie., minimize their autonomy.. And trigger the lone (white) wolves SO AS TO crush them into the ground and then perpetuate a media crafted Narrative that turns lone wolf into either sheep or just rabid dog in need of a public put down.

    So that’s the game for all white males circa 2016, filled with all pills, setting aside the Matrix and recognizing that comfortably sitting on a fence means you have no balls.

    But the order of business is PLACING to annihilate these societal vermin right where is belongs AND THAT CANNOT ALWAYS be at the white man’s feet…

    But yeah SE…. At ground level, every white man must be prepared to annihilate a multitude of nefarious individuals.

    But the virtual dialogue is where the Overton Window is opened wider and the “default elite” is forced to confront all perceptions gone viral…. The black Supremacist SHOULD annihilate the nigger, but only the latter ACTUALLY exist…. With the added understanding that PC attempts to make the nigger invisible by taking his name off our tongues and thus creating a lethal killing machine. This is a diabolical pathology.

  38. ^^^ But the order of business is PLACING [THE RESPONSIBILITY] to annihilate these societal vermin right where [it] belongs AND THAT CANNOT ALWAYS be at the white man’s feet…

  39. @Heretic Phi, “Someone needs to do a version of John Lennon’s Imagine ditty, with White Nationalist’s lyrics”

    Here ye go…..

  40. Pingback: America’s Greatness – PA

  41. Pingback: Freedom – PA

  42. Pingback: 100th Post – PA

  43. A woman (whose manners betray the wish to be pulled and taken) asks on a forum whether “you” feel better with an “assertive” (polite society term for giveordersmachines) or “passive” (polite society name for takeordersmachines) partner.

    80% of women say they want someone “assertive”
    75% of men say they want someone “assertive”

    After a little, I noticed 90% of the 25% who didn’t want an “assertive” woman were not white… (and whites were a wide majority of voters, to be sure).

    Then you have
    “Jesse Jackson’s 1988 visit to Stanford University to lead a chant of “Hey hey, ho ho, Western Civ has got to go.”

    and the mind goes to how many whites must have been in the audience.
    It’s not only that they did nothing. It’s that they remained comfortable. And they have always, as of then.
    Because they no more have a culture of their own.
    A culture is the father and mother one has when he is an adult. We all needed a guiding lodestar, even when we ourselves can guide others and are adult.

    (To connect this to your reasoning: that’s what is so alarming about Trump for some: that he has the attributes of a guiding figure)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s