Tuesday, September 27, 2016

How Conservatives Think...



I tend to stay away from "mainstream" anything, left or right, as they are usually just oligarch funded propaganda, but I came across this nugget and had to point it out. It's representative of the divide between the way Conservatives see the world compared to the Alt-Right. I'm not going to link to it because I don't want to help their traffic-count. The article is called 'Mainstream Conservatives and The Alt-Right'.




(((Ben Cohen))) of AmericanThinker writes,

Meanwhile, West Virginia which is almost exclusively white has the second lowest median house hold income in the United States. If you believe the key to keeping America great is keeping America white, it's hard to explain why Hawaii is thriving and West Virginia is not.

You know Ben, you might just be perpetuating jewish stereotypes by linking gold to paradise.

Actually you’ve just single-handedly justified the genocide of native Americans, who, as we all know, had a significantly lower median household income level compared to European settlers.

What about handicapped people, Ben? What about mentally challenged people, Mr. (((Cohen)))? How do they fare on your pyramid of human value-as measured by ability to generate wealth?


What about the elderly, many of whom live on fixed incomes which = low median household income?




Jesus H. Christ!  Is this conservative thinking?

Evidently.



As to Keeping America great, well, great is subjective. What is great for some is not for others. America is neither really good or really bad. It’s average. It’s just another country. That’s all it’s ever been, that’s all it can ever be.

Human beings form societies. They diverge and form distinct and unique communities/nations/tribes/etc. that reflect their inherent qualities and values. Those societies might be rich or poor, but their value as living organisms is not deduced with a pie chart from the chamber of commerce.

If a tribe of people in the Amazon live in grass huts and eat weeds for dinner, who the f*@k are you to decide that that is not "great" and that therefore you can burn down the rain forest? Oh, I forgot, CEO's have higher median household incomes.



Maybe this is why mainline conservatives seem to cheer on mass slaughter in the middle-east? I mean the median household income there is pretty low compared to Long Island.


Conservatives? Hello? Is this you? Is this how you think?

I'm afraid of the answer.






...

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Peace, Stability, Order...







You can either work to attain Peace, Stability, Order or you can have the polar opposite: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.

The former builds cities, the latter burns them down.









...

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Outdated...



“Outdated Notions/Ideas” is another one of those slogans that gets tossed around frequently but that have no actual concept in support of it.

Human institutions, for example, do not come and go like hair fashions. They are foundational and fundamental because they are natural and thus not subjective to personal or group taste.



Or consider the five fundamentals of human existence: Sleeping, Breeding, Eating, Shitting and Death.

Are any of them outdated? Can you toss aside one of them as out of touch with the world today?

No, of course not.

They are a gravity of reality and you are subject to their pull whether you like it or not.

The fundamental reality of life does not wax or wane based on the whims of a person or persons finite lifespan.

Government, Family, Marriage, County, Race, Gender, etc. are absolute and unchanging because mankind is absolute and unchanging. There is no human progress. Again, the Five Fundamentals are the same today as they were 5,000 years ago. No progress, no change. They are exactly the same. They always will be.

So when someone tells you the fundamentals of existence are subject to change or progress you know you’re talking to either a con-man or a delusional man.

Unfortunately the world is full of both. And they have a tendency to seek power and influence.





...


Sunday, September 4, 2016

The Alt-Right Is The Fellowship Of The Ring...



I’ve touched on this before, but it really does get to the heart of the matter.

The term/label “white supremacist” comes from (((Leftists))). And it reveals their mind set.

The left are globalists who can envision no future that is not comprised of a monolithic global government, culture and identity. And naturally they believe that everyone else wants the same and will compete to rule over this “end of history” system.

That there are people (including White people) who not only do not want to rule over such a system but who don't even want to be a part of it, is unfathomable to the left.

The Left are like the Dark Lord of Mordor. It is beyond their capacity to comprehend that anyone having found the one ring would seek to destroy it rather than to wield it.

So the left can only conclude that Whites must want what they want, which is supremacy over all of Middle Earth.

And thus they don’t perceive that the Alt-Right intends to toss the one ring into Mount Doom, so that they can live their own way, in their own lands, keeping The Shire, The Shire!



How your adversaries define you reveals more about them that it does about you.

Today's advocates for a diversity, multiculturalism and a world without borders are the descendants of yesterdays builders of colonial empires. And yes, Social Justice Warriors are indeed the posterity of self-righteous Puritan witch-burners. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if that weren’t literally true. It would be interesting to have them take some DNA tests and match it with the remains of....oh, never mind.


...

Friday, September 2, 2016

Affirmation Consultation...



Liberals, Conservative, Libertarians, Social Justice Warriors, Missionaries, Etc,

Where do they come from?

What drives them?



Who cares.

But they are all of the same vine in one way: the need to have their beliefs affirmed by other people.

Whether it’s social justice warriors, new atheists or bible thumpers, they just can’t be content in themselves with what they assert. They have to find the nearest soap box.

That’s because they “lack faith” in what they preach.

Case in point: the other day I found myself conversing with one of the Brides of Christ and he-she (it was a man, but he is a bride of jesus, so...) attempted to go all C.S. Lewis,

Bob-the bride of Christ: ‘Do you believe in God?’

Me: ‘No’.

Bob-the bride of Christ: ‘Why not?’

Me: ‘Gut Instinct’.

He-she dropped the matter. It was an insurmountable brick wall for a member of the harem of Jesus.

But it also works for the other ideologues.


It’s a devastating blow to the presuppositions of post-enlightenment nut-cases, but logic and reason not only do not factor into how people live their lives, it also does not persuade people to “change their minds” on anything.

People are driven by instinct: Hunger, Desire, Need & Want. Emotions such as love and hate are utilized by instinct for function -which is why they come and go, based on Needs and Wants.

Logic and Reason are used and applied in much the same way. The use of them is driven by Gut Instinct and applied wildly as befits hunger, desire need or want.

You can make special appeals to “muh jesus” or “muh science” all day long, but the reason you are even making the appeal is your own personal hunger, desire, need or want.




“Just Because” is, actually, the most honest answer to the challenge of “why”.


People believe in something or disbelieve in something on gut instinct alone.



Evidence is not applied to appeal to reason to persuade. Evidence is a crude weapon you wield when your gut shouts, “Charrrrrrrge!”



...




Thursday, September 1, 2016

Race & The Alt-Right...



Perspective: Whites are just 8% of the population of the world.





Racism. 


There is no such thing as racism. Simple as that. The definition of what racism is is completely subjective. There is literally no definitive definition of racism. And thats a problem as the definition of definition is definitive.

If someone wants to believe in racism as an aspect of their own private belief system, so be it. But thats all it will ever be, a quasi-religious belief, not an objective reality. So the answer to the charge of racism, is “there is no such thing as racism”. Which should come as a welcome relief to all those vexed about it! And the same applies to homophobia, misogyny, etc. They don’t exist. The assertion that they do is just a modern manifestation of good old Puritanism style witch hunts without “muh Jesus” driving it.



Nation.

Nation means ethnic group. A nation is not a place, its a particular people. A tribe, a clan, a family.  Thus nation of emigrants is an oxymoron.

The who-was-here-first argument doesn’t work then. “Here” is not always the same place. The United States was a political construct that didn’t exist until the 1780‘s. None of my ancestors immigrated to the United States as there was no United States when they moved to this part of the British Empire in the late 1600‘s to early 1700‘s.

If current legal definitions are the sole metric and can be projected retroactively, then Geronimo should be listed on the historic roster of the Arizona Cardinals since he once roamed the land where the football team now resides.

And in following that line of thought, why does immigrating to the United States make you an American? Why wouldn’t it make you, say, a Cherokee indian instead? Same piece of dirt.



Neo-Nazi’s, White Supremacy, etc.

1st: We don’t want to be supreme over other races. We want to be separated from them. The entire underpinning of the “white supremacist” label is the notion that we want to share a space with other races and then dominate that space. Sorry, non-Whites, but we have no intention of vying for dominance of the same space. We want to live apart from you in our very own space and society. Our way of life: of law & order, of morality, of ethics, etc, is different from the other races who each have their own ways of such things. Each is good for each race, but certainly different and fundamentally incompatible.


2nd: Those labels imply a world in which ideological constructs are the base of identity. The Alt-Right, however, is not really an ideological movement. It’s simply people who observe material, physical reality and acknowledge it. Human beings are not White or Male or Female or members of a nation by choice, but by physical, biological reality. If there is to be an official tenets of Alt-Right it could start with, ‘We acknowledge and accept the law of Gravity. We affirm that the earth moves around the sun,’ etc.

3rd: By all appearances some of the other races are beginning to form their own versions of Alt-Right. Those of you who use the term “white supremacist” are attempting to imply a world that doesn’t exist and a constituency that you ain’t got! YOU are the problem. It is you and your evil fucking totalitarian “one world order” that peoples from all races are rejecting and going their own ways to escape from. You are on the wrong side of history.

“And how would you make that happen?”  This question underlies the difference between those who view life as solely ideological choice and those who see it as primarily physical reality. We aren’t social engineers. We don’t have to “make” this happen. If you remove the threat of physical force and political coercion the races will self-segregate, as that is the gravity of human nature.



Progress & Equality.

Neither equality nor human progress exist. (and I’m not talking about technology here)

The races aren’t equal. The genders aren’t equal. White men aren’t equal. Equality does not exist under any pretext or context; not legally, not physically, not intellectually or otherwise. It never has and never will, because it can’t. For the same reason there can’t be a square circle.


The same is true of human progress. We are no different today in terms of basic intellect, reasoning, morality, ethics, general cognitive abilities, etc, than man was 1,000 or 10,000 years ago.

The pretext of equality and progress exist solely for the purpose of justifying a Bolshevik style totalitarian state. This isn’t news. It has in fact happened before. In the 20th century over 100 million people were murdered in the name of equality and under the banner of progress, all carried out by small groups of insane ideological fanatics and on behalf of a few megalomaniacal oligarchs.



...

Sunday, August 28, 2016

No, Vox. No...



Voxday has a list up on his blog of his definitions of the Alt-right. As I’ve pointed out here numerous times  the alt-right, for all the good it can do, is far too broad a gateway for its own good. Or maybe it would be best described as inviting the undecided to boldly sit on the fence. In the early days of the Alternative Right blog (now called Radix) there were articles by everything from jewish “transhumanists” and jewish “intellectuals” to robe wearing neo-pagans, to, I believe, an injun.

This was asinine. There is so little White advocacy that to invite non-Whites into one of the few fortifications is contra reason to the nth degree.

Vox himself likes to say that he is part indian and mexican. I’m guessing that though that may be technically correct (a small percentage of Mexicans are White and “Indian Princess Syndrome” is notorious) it is done mainly to troll/deflect accusations of racism. Which itself is unwise. As I’ve pointed out before, there is literally no such thing as racism, and that is the best tact to deal with those who sling the word. But that’s another topic.

Back to the list,

Number 4 on Vox’s list is fundamentally problematic, and contradicts some of his other points. It states, ‘The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Rule of Law.’



Problem 1: “Western Civilization”. Now I’ve used the expression myself, but the fact is that Western Civilization is hard to define. Most east-Europeans (historically Orthodox) don’t think of themselves as Western. Most of us in the U.S. use the phrase as synonymous with White people, but Russians, for example, certainly do not. Catholics like to claim that catholic christianity created Western Civilization and yet the vast majority of Protestants don’t see catholicism as christian.

Another problem with “Western Civilization is that it connotes a phase of the White man’s history, not its totality. Europeans have been around for tens of thousands of years. What historians usually classify as Western Civilization didn’t begin to come into existence until around 7th and 8th centuries A.D., and then slowly moved north and north-east over the next 500 years (the Northern Crusades). And many would argue that it ended with WWI, while others claim it ended with the onset of the Enlightenment.

Referring to ‘The West’, as in the direction -the western part of the old world, is fine, but confuses many.

Western Civilization, as it is thought of historically and culturally, is more like bell-bottoms or the mullet: a fad. The better expression is ‘European Civilization’ -that which is inherently created by Europeans wherever they are, in place or in time, be it 2000 A.D., or 20,000 B.C.



Problem 2: “Pinnacle of Human Achievement”. No! Absolutely bad understanding. If you want to argue it was the pinnacle of European achievement, fine. But Africans, Asians, jews, hispanics, Arabs, etc, have their own conception of accomplishment and civilization. Their idea of family, community, order, law, form & function is fundamentally different from Whites. It's valid for them, but we have our own. Our pinnacle is not their pinnacle. What Polar Bears consider paradise is hell for alligators.




As for the Three Pillars,


Christianity is a toxic mix of three of the worst elements of antiquity: Roman politics, Greek Philosophy and west-Asian Monotheism.

Rome was a blight on Europe -a cartel king-pen’s mansion surrounded by favela-level slums, filled with garbage, disease and crime. It was a manifestation of the same globalist  multi-cultural gulag/slum that we are fighting against today. But it did promise the potential for the conquered to become citizens of the kingdom.

Greek Philosophy was nothing more than an attempt to conceptualize distinctly European traits, such as altruism, as some sort of universal virtue/imperative. Once articulated and written down it could be ‘preached to every creature under heaven’. Behind every cuck there is an Aristotle.

Oriental Monotheism is the inevitable outgrowth of natural Asiatic despotism and west-Asia’s historically complex sexual socio-politics. Which, to thumbnail, is: Yahweh/Jesus is the Sheik and the “Brides of Christ” are his harem.

Once again, Jesus would have been a brown, Asiatic midget from the deserts of west Asia. He was a jew -jews are Asians. He wasn’t a god and he sure as hell wasn’t one of us.


Put the three elements together and you get anti-Europe. Europe has survived in spite of Christianity, not because of it. Just as it survived in spite of Rome and the bullshit that came out of Greece(1).


The 2nd pillar, European Nations, is obvious, as nation means ethnic group. It’s Europeans, not “western civilization” that we are fighting to protect and preserve.

The 3rd pillar, Rule of Law, needs to be further understood as the rule of law as Europeans know and experience it. The other races have their own inherent understandings of law, order and morality. And each is valid to each race.




In other words, beneath the surface of Vox’s number 4 is the beast of universalism. I suspect point 4 was conceived of as an attempt to save and rehabilitate christianity. And in so doing it contradicted some of his other points (such as 6,7 & 9) and undermines the whole project.


Remove 4 and the list is okay.





Note (1): Aristotle, Socrates, Plato and the rest of those Greek philosophers did not represent Greek thinking. They represented the pontifications of a small clique. We really don’t know much about  what the average Greek (or Roman, for that matter) thought or believed about the world about them. We only know what the George Soros and Angela Merkel-types of their day thought.




...