Greg Johnson has penned an essay about Oswald Spengler and racial decadence that arrives at some pretty sweeping conclusions. A few days ago, Robert Campbell altered me to the existence of this article in a telephone conversation.
Three Senses of Race
Cutting to the meat of the essay, Greg Johnson starts off by arguing that race exists in three primary senses, the biological, cultural, and psychological:
1.) Race can refer to populations which vary by geography in gene frequencies and phenotype.
2.) Race can refer to having “racial consciousness.”
3.) Race can prefer to a primordial, life affirming, vital determination to expand and propagate and expand your tribe.
Nothing to argue with here. I would only dispute the idea that “racial consciousness” is “backward looking” whereas race in the psychological sense is “forward looking.”
In Colonial America, racial consciousness and race in the psychological sense evolved out of pre-existing English ideas and attitudes. Both were a response to the environmental conditions faced by Englishmen in the New World. The settlers took elements of their tradition (i.e., the concepts of just war and private property) and adapted them to their circumstances.
In the eighteenth century, Americans began the project of racial classification and interpretation of racial differences. “Science” itself (a method of understanding the natural world) is a tradition that stretches back into the Middle Ages and Greco-Roman Antiquity.
There is no conflict between “progress” and “tradition.” The only way to make “progress” is by working within the bounds of a tradition. This is most clearly seen in the history of technology where incremental advances in existing technology have led to new conceptual breakthroughs. Thus, the telegraph evolved over time into the cell phone, or the Kitty Hawk into the Columbia space shuttle.
Race and Culture
Having established the three senses of race (biological, cultural, and psychological), Greg Johnson moves on to argue that race informs culture, and vice versa. Nothing to argue with here either.
The societies built by Europeans are an extended phenotype. They reflect underlying heritable characteristics like intelligence and personality traits. At the same time, cultural memes (which are not heritable) are constantly influencing mate selection, which over time will change a population at the biological level.
Race Platonism and Race Traditionalism
Following Spengler, Greg Johnson next begins to discuss “Race Platonism” and “Race Traditionalism,” which he defines as 1.) that racial archetypes that are immutable forms and 2.) that the modern races have degenerated from ideal forms that existed in the distant past.
Both are easily dismissed.
“Race Traditionalism” is easily refuted by the fossil evidence of archaeology. “Race Platonism” is refuted by everything we know about modern biology and genetics.
If all racial minority groups were expelled from North America tomorrow, the White population would still evolve. Natural selection would continue to operate on mutations and genetic drift. In the absence of gene flow, Whites and non-Whites would eventually diverge into separate species.
Change is inevitable.
Outside of the “Radical Traditionalist” community, this idea is uncontroversial in White Nationalist circles.
Racial Preservation – Getting It Wrong
Having established the three types of race, the fact that culture informs race, and that genetic change is inevitable, Greg Johnson moves into more controversial territory. He declares that “racial preservation” is tantamount to “death.”
Johnson’s error begins in setting up a straw man of racial preservation. The ideal of “racial preservation” is not analogous to, say, killing a deer and having a taxidermist mount it on your wall, as everyone recognizes that gene frequencies change in each generation.
“Racial preservation” means nothing more than declaring that some traits (i.e., fair skin, fair hair, fair eyes, high intelligence, amiable personality, etc.) should be favored, selected, and encouraged in our culture.
This can be easily accomplished: Whites and non-Whites can be geographically separated, non-White immigration can be banned, the traditional American racial ideal can be promoted in all types of media, miscegenation can be outlawed, the tax code could be altered to encourage eugenic marriages, social services that deter family formation can be eliminated, etc.
If American culture and public policy was changed tomorrow, say, to reflect the White Nationalist racial idea, the United States would become more racially and culturally European over time, which is exactly what happened between Reconstruction and the the Civil Rights Movement. When JFK was elected president, America was almost 90% White; this happened by design, not by accident.
Racial Purity – Getting It More Wrong
After developing this idea that “racial preservation” is “death,” through an interpretation of Oswald Spengler, Greg Johnson goes on to attack the idea of “racial purity,” which he claims is incompatible with race in the psychological sense as a viral, life affirming world outlook.
Historically speaking, it only takes a moment’s reflection to dismiss this idea. In Colonial America, the ideal of racial preservation and race in the psychological sense evolved together and complemented each other. “Racial purity” meant nothing more than the determination of English settlers to preserve their European phenotype.
The frontiersmen had the will to power to seize land, clear it of Indians, and erect towns and cities. As White settlement expanded along the Atlantic seaboard, the first anti-miscegenation laws were passed; a racial caste system emerged; an elaborate code of racial etiquette began to govern racial interaction.
The “healthy men of race” – the American settlers – were expansionists who still thought of themselves as Englishmen, increasingly thought of themselves as Whites, and eventually codified their ideal of racial preservation into law. Like Americans have always done, they thought about the past, present, and the future.
There is no opposition between “vitality” and “racial purity.” If that were the case, 350 years of American history would be incomprehensible.
White Nationalism Is Degenerate – Jumping the Tracks
Greg Johnson concludes that “racial preservation” is “death” (from 1665 to 1967, America was dead) and that “racial purity” is somehow opposed to “vitality” (like when we conquered the North American continent). The next logical step is to conclude that White Nationalism is “overwhelmingly a degenerate movement.”
White Nationalism is condemned as degenerate … because, somehow, White Nationalists don’t want to Whites to evolve into the Talosians from Star Trek or Elves from Lord of the Rings. By advocating racial preservation (i.e., erecting barriers to non-White admixture), we are “murdering” and “mummifying” our race.
Well, I disagree.
Greg Johnson is condemning the healthy elements of White Nationalism as degenerate. By healthy, I mean White Nationalists advocate America’s traditional racial and cultural ideals over modern progressive ones, which is to say, we select for European phenotype.
Among other things, White Nationalists want to separate the races, ban miscegenation, increase the birthrate, and promote aesthetic images of White beauty and health in the media. What is degenerate about that?
Progressives advocate miscegenation, race anarchy, White guilt, transfers of wealth from Whites to non-Whites, third world immigration, multiculturalism, affirmation action, and diversity. If there is something “healthy” about the progressive agenda (the first interracial kiss occurred on Star Trek), I certainly have never seen it.
White Nationalists are degenerates, but not for the reasons Greg Johnson describes. The problem is that White Nationalists, even the ones who have given up America (yours truly included), are still culturally American themselves. Even the most diehard racialists are only a few degrees mentally removed from the American cultural mainstream.
The same degeneracy that afflicts American culture in general (expressive individualism being the best example) has deeply penetrated the White Nationalist movement. When Neo-Nazis parade through Toledo, they are simply carrying on the long established avant-garde tradition of shocking the bourgeoisie. When White Nationalists get piercings and tattoos, they are merely aping their aracial peers.
I could continue to list examples, but the two above are sufficient to establish my point. White Nationalists are not immune to their cultural environment. It is a constant struggle to separate ourselves, mentally and physically, from the sewage that pulsates through our culture. Even the best of us are subtly influenced by it.
A “Vital” White Nationalism
Now that “racial preservation” has been labeled “death,” “racial purity” called “mummifying the race,” and White Nationalism has been pronounced “an overwhelmingly degenerate movement,” Greg Johnson wants to create a new vital White Nationalism, and has a few ideas as to how to go about this.
His starting point: the “animal vitality” of a Star Trek convention. I’ve known Trekkies in the past. None of them have struck me as particularly virile. Quite the opposite.
Johnson diagnoses the problem: White Nationalism is “conservative,” which is to say, “backward looking,” devitalized, decadent, decadent, and gloomy. Star Trek is “progressive,” which means forward-looking, optimistic, and hopeful.
Come on, Greg.
This isn’t even a good interpretation of Star Trek. In TOS, Captain Kirk fought the Klingons. In TNG, the show bombed until the Borg were created as a villain. The Deep Space Nine series was entirely about war with a race called “The Dominion.” Voyager bombed until the Borg returned as the major villain. Finally, Enterprise was a flop, even after the directors tried to revive the show through a grab bag of conflicts with the Klingons, Borg, Xindi, and Romulans. In the latest Star Trek movie, a Romulan time traveler destroys Vulcan, the home planet of Spock.
There are no social penalties (aside from nerdiness) with being labeled a Trekkie. No one loses their job or goes to prison for watching Star Trek. No one utterly dehumanizes Trekkies. They are not socially ostracized by their own families. This is a really bad analogy.
In Johnson’s view, a “vital White Nationalist movement” would be a “utopian, progressivist, eugenicist mythical-cultural phenomenon.” Maybe something like a combination of Star Trek and Lord of the Rings. I think this prescription speaks more to Johnson’s aesthetic and intellectual tastes than it does to reality.
History: Our Guide
Greg Johnson thinks we should look to the future as our guide. I think we should look to our past. What factors motivated White Americans to seize their racial destiny and conquer a continent?
Answer: it was a combination of things.
The American colonies were established out of religious, commercial, and geopolitical motives. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the English wanted to rid themselves of a swarming underclass, compete with France and Spain in the New World, create an outlet for their industrial production and a source of raw materials, and bring the Gospel to the New World.
As Virginia and the other colonies matured, Americans expropriated land from the Indians. The Indians were considered savages, heathens, and non-Whites. They were squatting on land which the colonists could develop and build into a free society. For racial, ethnic, religious, moral, and economic reasons, the Indians were dispossessed and pushed further West.
In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, science labeled non-Whites inferior, and studies were produced that convinced the brightest minds to support segregation. Greedy settlers motivated by self-interest poured into Indian lands. Racial idealism and geopolitical rivalry with Britain motivated Americans annex Texas and seize the West from Mexico.
In sum, Americans conquered North America for commercial, religious, geopolitical, cultural, political, moral, racial, ethnic, intellectual and self-interested reasons. Everything from racial idealism to religion to science to morality to divine providence was cited to justify the expropriation.
The lesson to be learned from this is that White Nationalists should appeal to the full suite of human interests, not any specific one, to justify the reconquest.
What crippled the American project?
One European bad idea after another: liberalism, anti-slavery, natural rights ideology, communism, democracy, capitalism, millenarianism, anarchism, fascism, anti-racism, expressive individualism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, nihilism, humanism, etc.
The effete sons of rough frontiersmen became infatuated and possessed by these abstract ideas. These abstractions were pushed to ever newer extremes at the expense of common sense, self interest, and tradition. When combined with material abundance, they produced the moral rot which has always been the source of republican decline.
Oswald Spengler can be included in this category: Western Civilization is doomed, cultures go through life cycles, we are living in the terminal phase of civilization. I can’t think of a better prescription for helplessness and inaction than Spenglerian historical determinism.
Revitalizing the White Nationalist movement lies in recapturing the racial attitude of our pioneer ancestors. The solution does not lie in the dust covered books of long dead European philosophers.
David Myatt is now Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt.
I think of lot of what is going on here is revolving around semantics and is the kind of thing that can’t really be clarified on the Intertubes. This whole thing strikes me as more heat than light as when all is said and done I still don’t know what the hell everyone is actually arguing about.
Does anyone think ideological meetings like the London New Right or journals like TOQ are bad? No. Does anyone think that we need less activism like the CCC or that it should be framed in pro-American terms? No.
Of course, I’m also a crappy blogger as I don’t have the attention span for comment wars.
Here’s a challenge:
In defense of European intellectuals and their ideas, show me the book that will motivate American White Nationalists to act in the real world to change their circumstances.
If this book successfully turns anonymous posters in cyberspace into real world activists, I will purchase copies of the book and distribute them for free on this website at my own expense.
The book that inspired me to transition from a “race realist” into a committed advocate and steward for my people can already be ordered for free online. We’ll even hand-deliver it!
My great grandparents had over half a dozen children with nothing like the income and modern conveniences that Whites enjoy today.
True, very true Hunter.
However, back then they had “Community” to fall back on in tough times… most importantly, a White Community.
Now if a White family (especially a White father) does not have enough money or resources to protect his children from the “wonders of diversity” — his White children are like sheep before the wolves.
Again, I don’t mean to necessarily complain or bemoan this, just to point out that it is, however, a serious issue for White parents in consideration of the type of social environment their offspring will be growing up in.
“It will rely on American symbols, themes, and ideals. ”
And I just named the TWO most prominent of these and the two that most Americans subscribe to on another thread. If you doubt that I am correct, then just walk outside and ask the first American you see.
“Savitri Devi died childless and married to an Indian. Rene Guenon renounced the West altogether, converting to Islam and moving to Egypt. Spengler established an elaborate historiography with no mechanism that consigned the West to an inescapable death spiral. Hitler lost, his regime amounting to little more than a cult of personality that evaporated within months of his demise.”
You have here just told us that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. What else is new?
“Just a few days ago, you declared that racial preservation was degenerate because … White Nationalists didn’t have the vitality of a Star Trek convention and refused to evolve into elves from the Lord of the Rings.”
No, he did not declare that, you did. That article did not come close to resembling what you describe. And that is just what I was talking about on the other thread about you being so gung ho to criticize that you spin words like the worst of the New York Times journalists. You are misquoting, misrepresenting, and mischaracterizing work and people. And you are doing it dishonestly. If you want to criticize, then do it right and stop misrepresenting work.
Nothing closely resembling what I described:
The book that inspired me to transition from a “race realist” into a committed advocate and steward for my people can already be ordered for free online. We’ll even hand-deliver it!
Which book might this be?
I second Mr. Garver’s question.
Randy and notuswind,
I’m a Mormon, one baptized in the church as a child but who spent most of his life up until a couple years ago as an avowed atheist. It’s not so much that reading the Book of Mormon stirred my racial pride, it’s that the church, in its entirety, inspired me to stewardship and patriarchy in Christ’s example. Reading Rushton and knowing the facts is kind of like getting a positive paternity test. That makes you a father. But it takes something more than that, something that transcends the mere biological reality of fatherhood, to turn a male into a man, a man capable of being a dad.
I don’t push this. I’m convinced at this time that it would only be a distraction from both my religious and political work, and am by no means in the kind of standing with the church yet to be speaking for it or holding myself out to the public in association with it. I have countless things I would like to say about how it relates to so many of the issues being raised, here. But it’s not appropriate.
I don’t think this thing they’re looking for isn’t really a biological or racial thing. There’s nothing innately transcendent about one’s biological race. I agree with Spengler that there’s something a bit decadent about building one’s core philosophy on it. The compulsion to fight for my people is something that came to me after my religious conversion.
But if you’re interested in scoring a free book, here it is:
Yes, Hunter, you are STILL misrepresenting. And I now understand how you manage 15 or 20 books per week.
You make a good point. I think that the movement is unhealthy and needs criticism and self-examination to grow. I am willing to take my lumps like anyone else. But unhealthy movements don’t know how to give or take constructive criticism, either.
If someone comes up with a really intelligent critique of what I do at Counter-Currents, then I will publish it . . . at Counter-Currents.
What really rankles me about HW — beyond the disingenuousness of his populist posturing, beyond the fact that he is obviously less interested in getting to the truth than being hoisted on the shoulders of fools and being declared the winner of an argument — is that he seems to think he needs to justify himself by denigrating me. That is the behavior of an enemy.
Well, I am not the enemy. The enemy is the enemy.
There is a whiff of the fratricidal surliness of Alex Linder here. Is HW is going down the path that made Linder a pariah?
If you don’t like what I do, then tune me out.
Woah. Hold on a minute. I never said anywhere that you are the enemy. I never said what you are doing is worthless either.
Isn’t the best way to publicize your work to discuss your ideas? I thought I was helping you by treating your commentary on the White Nationalist movement with the seriousness and attention it deserves.
It just so happens that I disagree with you on this particular point. That in no way implies that you are enemy and must be destroyed at all costs. I’m not out to injure you or do you harm like Alex Linder.
If you had criticized something I wrote, as you have done in the comments here, I would not get offended by it. I like to discuss ideas too. I enjoy the give and take of argument and analysis as much as you do.
All bullshit aside … let’s get at the truth.
You haven’t responded to my challenge. Show me the book written by a European New Right philosopher (presumably, you have read them all) that won’t lead to reading another book, but instead to an American White Nationalist taking direct action in the real world.
What book can I purchase and send to you that will turn you into a real world activist? Surely, if there is a deficit of ideas that is causing this problem, it can be rectified with an Amazon.com purchase in less than 90 seconds.
Turning you into a White Nationalist activist is a worthwhile investment that I would be more than happy to make.
Is there an American book that will do this? And isn’t there a flood of books, movies, talk, tradition etc., about the men and their character who conquered America, and that conveys exactly what you are talking about, and haven’t we all in one way or another been exposed to these all our lives?
Yet, that, too, has not got the job done. And that brings us to my own criticism. It is not that I don’t like your idea and instead prefer European intellectual ideas. It is not that I do not like America and all that it means and is to me, and prefer a foreign country and culture. I love this land so much that I despise having to devote so much of my time to what we are doing here instead of doing what I like best about America, things like hunting varmints with my rifles and contenders out in Wyoming and the like, things like singing 5 inch long minnows out of a chest high creek to use for bait out on the fishing boat on large lakes. Those and a thousand other things that I like about this land above all others in this world. No, my critique is more in the vein of once again hearing another new voice from the back of the room cry out that he has a new and novel plan that is better, and that he doesn’t understand why us dummies have not thought of it before now.
1.) I never said there was an American book that would turn anonymous posters in cyberspace into activists.
2.) I pointed out there was no correlation between reading a lot of books and action. The people who created America – the frontiersmen, the settlers, the Continental Army soldiers – were not particularly well read.
3.) Intellectuals like to read lots of books … because they are intellectuals. It is what they do. Naturally, they turn to books to look for answers. They analyze and critique ideas. They use their intelligence to discern patterns.
4.) I’ve gradually come to the realization that understanding and acting are two different things. There are plenty of people who read this website who understand the need for a White ethnostate. They understand the Jewish Question in incredible detail. They have read deeply into philosophy and history.
5.) Acting in the real world requires more than just raw intelligence. It requires moral character, physical prowess, actual balls, and the guts to stand up for what you believe in.
6.) Give me people who have moral qualities like courage, fortitude, determination, patience, perseverance, and loyalty, an understanding of the situation we are facing, an understanding of the solution that is required, and the physical prowess to bring that result about.
7.) I haven’t claimed to be any “new voice” with a “new and novel plan that is better.” Harold Covington, for example, has harped endlessly in his podcasts about how the character deficit is the major obstacle to the success of his plan. He happens to be right on that issue.
I apologize if I incorrectly stated that Savitri Devi had a few brown-skinned babies. My memory failed me; I thought she had. Regardless, she still married a macaca, which makes her suspect in my book, and changed her European name to a macaca name, which makes her even more suspect.
That a few white mystics Romanticized “Aryans” in India does not make it something to be emulated. Like Brazil, India is a place of widespread miscegenation. That a few NW Indians may have a little white blood in them does not make them allies — Mestizos, Mulatto Brazilians and Ashkenazi Jews also have a little white blood in them.
Cavalli-Sforza and other geneticists have found India to be a “distinct genetic cluster” — different from European populations.
Perhaps Revilo P. Oliver summed it up best:
“[India probably was] a territory that was…conquered by the Aryan invaders and ruled by them…. The inevitable result was miscegenation, both biological and cultural. The consequence of the long and intimate association of the dominant Aryans with their subjects of a different race…was that “a spirit alien in nature,” corresponding to the dilution and hybridization of the racial stock…. What happened, in other words, was a kind of spiritual mongrelization that, in all probability, largely preceded and certainly facilitated the biological mongrelization.”
~ Revilo P. Oliver, “Ritual and Aryan Worship”
For the record, I’m in agreement with you on the European – European American (white) divide. Such a division is superfluous and unnecessary. It’s creating a division where one needn’t be. We whites do not need to be fighting among ourselves. The game of dividing European Americans (whites) against Europeans is a game the Jew has been playing now for over 75 years. It’s time for it to end.
Also the man-of-action vs. bookish man is also a false divide. A successful movement needs both types.
This entire debate is a waste of pixels.
Savitri never claimed that modern Indians were of European racial stock. That is a straw man. It is obvious that you don’t know very much about her, or her husband. She did not assume a “macaca” name, but an Aryan name/title, rooted in the oldest extant sacred text of our people.
Do you tell every WN with a biblical name that they are scum for using “Jew names?” That would contain some actual truth value, since biblical names are completely foreign to Europeans, whereas ancient Aryan names are just that: Aryan names. The quote by Oliver that you employed only substantiates my assertion in that regard.
Since you acknowledged that you were incorrect on the facts and apologised (half-heartedly), I will drop the matter. As you said, all of this is a waste of time and energy.
There are a lot of people who legitimately deserve your contempt or derision. Savitri Devi isn’t one of them.
You are asking the wrong question. Your challenge is like demanding a screwdriver that will drive a nail. The ENR is not about exhortations to activism or practical advice about how to change the world. It is about understanding and criticizing the bad ideas, and the historical and cultural trends, that have brought us to the present situation. It is about understanding how the world works, so we can determine what actions are necessary, possible, and productive and which are not.
But not to waste an opportunity to plug Counter-Currents, here is a title we are publishing that certainly points in the direction of real-world activism, as well as away from the philistinism and conservatism that you have been touting of late:
Your comment that the O’Meara book “points in the direction of real-world activism” is a telling remark. If it merely points in that direction, then obviously you didn’t find it sufficiently compelling to act on its ideas yourself.
I’m convinced I am asking the right question: what book leads to real world action as opposed to reading another book and another one after that? There obviously isn’t a book which you can point to which is persuasive enough to compel you to exit your preferred comfort zone.
As I said above, understanding the problem and taking action to do something about it are two different things. There are thousands of White Nationalists like yourself who completely understand why we are in this predicament and what the solution to it is.
You are ready to move on to the next stage of the struggle, but balk at taking the next step. Look at this way: Adolf Hitler, whom you admire so greatly, was not content to read books about the Jewish Question and talk about it with likeminded people all day in beer halls.
Why did Hitler act on his ideas? In contrast, why do his modern followers (some of whom worship him as a god) talk and fantasize about White Revolution, but then go back to reading the next book or writing the next essay?
Timidity – The trait of being willing to undertake things that involve risk or danger; the trait of lacking boldness and courage; fearfulness in venturing into new and unknown places or activities.
P.S. The dumbest kosher cons in this area do more in the way of practical activism than the entire White Nationalist movement in the State of Virginia. They somehow manage to do this without reading Oswald Spengler, Francis Parker Yockey, Norman Lowell, Guillaume Faye, or Savitri Devi.
This entire thing is personal because you guys don’t like each other anymore. None of this should be on the internet. This entire thing strikes me as semantics, mixed with insults. I’m sorry guys but below is how I feel about most everything that has been posted in the comments
Your analysis is all too true, Mr. Hood.
Hunter Wallace wants a book written by Americans that will move thinkers to action!
Such a book USED to exist.
That book was called … The Loompanics Mail Order Catalog!
Loompanics offered everything from Holocaust Denial to the Unabomber Manifesto to the Marquis de Sade.
Loompanics was the cutting edge of the First Amendment in the USA, until it went out of business in 2006.
I encourage Hunter Wallace to read some interviews with Michael Hoy, the founder of Loompanics, which contain gems such as the following:
I sell a lot of books on things like starting up little businesses, making money on the side, breaking free of the work/consumer economy. What might be swell for one person might not be a good idea at all for another. But if your mind is closed to the possibility of doing anything except traditional work, you will not be able to recognize an opportunity, even if it bites you on the ass.
Q: What do you look for in a book to publish or sell?
What I really like to see is for someone who knows what he’s talking about to take a subject that is little-known, or even abhorrent, and then write a straightforward how-to-do-it book about it. Books such as The Art & Science of Dumpster Diving, Methods of Disguise, Making Crime Pay, Rancho Costa Nada: The Dirt Cheap Desert Homestead, If We Can Keep a Severed Head Alive…, How to Start Your Own Country, Did Jesus Exist?, Practical LSD Manufacture, Combat Knife Throwing, The $51 Fantasy, etc., etc. I love this sort of thing, and I always have, and I always will.
I like challenging books, funny books, exciting books, crazy books. Sometimes reporters have asked me “What kind of people would buy books like these, Mike?” I always answer, people like me. When I am putting together the Catalog, or a Supplement, I always imagine what books I would like to see for sale, what books I would buy, and I look for those kinds of books. Useful books, outrageous books, beyond-the-pale books, over-the-top books. How to Build Your Own Log Home for Less Than $15,000, Stealth Juror, Home Workshop Professional Lock Tools, How to Make Driver’s Licenses and Other ID on Your Home Computer, They Were White and They Were Slaves, Everything You Know is Wrong, How to Be an Ass-Whipping Boxer, Guns Save Lives, etc., etc. I literally cannot get enough of this stuff.
Michael Hoy was a man who mobilized far more action in a few short years than most politicians ever see in a career of decades.
More of us should be hanging with the Tea Party Patriots. There’s your group right there, and they aren’t going anywhere, because they are the hungry, pissed off, overtaxed petit bourgeouis, as Trotsky called them. The petit bourgeouis are the class from which fascism comes from. The Left knows this, but we haven’t figured it out.
The petit bourgeouis, despite the demeaning name, are the hard core civilization builders and maintainers. They are the strongest people. Owning your own business requires MENTAL TOUGHNESS. Try it — you’ll see.
They are getting taxed to death and they see a fatly subsidized society all around them. They see someone like Shirley Sherrod and millions of overpaid gubmint workers, discriminating against people like them while taking their tax money and laughing at them.
You want to do activism? Become part of the petit bourgeouis and join the Tea Party patriots. The reason the Tea Party Patriots have the time to go to protests is that they are either retired, or they own their own business and can take time off when they please. They aren’t a bunch of cubicle slaves.
The Tea Party infrastructure shall mature and divide and multiply into many right wing factions. It’s our chance to build our own within it’s greater structure.
G. Hood: [WIN]
Thank you for sharing your personal story. I hadn’t really considered that a link might exist between Christianity and ethnic nationalism, but upon further reflection, I can see how the concept of love and stewardship for one’s neighbor could have a parallel in the socio-political arena.
Kievsky — I have nothing to add. I totally agree.
Randy: if you look at the 10 commandments in context, it was merely meant as a rulebook for internal, tribal relationships…all of that ‘thy neighbor’ stuff should be read: thy fellow Israelite. At the very least, they certainly didn’t apply it to their treatment of their enemies.
HW: “I’m convinced I am asking the right question: what book leads to real world action as opposed to reading another book and another one after that? “
That question has nothing to do with your original complaint, which was that Greg Johnson wrote (more or less) that racial preservation is tantamount to death.
It’s obvious that books, both intellectual and practical, are interesting in themselves and can help the white nationalist movement. It’s great to have smart people on our side who are able to write like Greg Johnson. But when he starts writing that racial preservation is tantamount to death, it means that he needs to take a vacation. There’s no doubt that intellectualism can be a problem.
Again, you are just grandstanding to a gallery of fools whom you hope will hoist you on their shoulders and parade you around, declaring that you are the winner.
So really, what is the point of engaging you any further? You are not interested in getting to the truth or even advancing activism. You are just interested in experiencing an artificial sense of efficacy, one step higher than winning a video game.
I now know what a dog must feel when he eyes his pile of vomit and, for some reason, concludes that maybe one more try is in order.
But no, only conservatives, populists, philistines, and dogs return to their own vomit. I’m through.
It’s great to have smart people on our side who are able to write like Greg Johnson. But when he starts writing that racial preservation is tantamount to death, it means that he needs to take a vacation.
He’s trying to run a fairly extensive website in his spare time without much help. Conversely, OD has a team of writers to divide the workload and provide moderating influences on each other.
you are just grandstanding to a gallery of fools
Well, this is the Internet, after all. Everyone on the Internet is grandstanding to the gallery.
Internet chatter is not local activism, and it can detract from local activism, but Hunter is clearly trying to put boots on the ground.
By Counter-Currents is a book-selling operation.
Just two guys, trying to keep their balance sheet in the black by selling books – it’s a tough job. I don’t think they need a vacation so much as they need to thrive and grow as a media business. That might include white music, white memorabilia, white movies. I don’t know, I’ve never run a business.
@ “For me, that goal is Nietzschean: the creation of a perfected, god-like white race that will give meaning and purpose to this godless, meaningless universe.” Greg Johnson
@ Taken to its logical conclusion, this is not racialism, but transhumanism. What the hell…? Captainchaos
With all due respect, I doubt you’ve grasped what Johnson might have been trying to say. I talk about this very subject, visually, in my last post of my blog: which must be understood in the light of futuristic novels where whites rule a billion year cities (cf. Arthur C. Clarke’s The City and the Stars).
racism has always been a problem that even when there is the claim of establishment it still lingers, not to talk God like one
“If there is something “healthy” about the progressive agenda (the first interracial kiss occurred on Star Trek)”
You can’t have it both ways. Citing the Kirk/Uhura scene as the first interracial kiss does not hold up to scrutiny if one views Jews (which Shatner was) as non-white. As such, that kiss transpired between a non-white Jew and a black woman with a Caucasian admixture. Therefore, that kiss was actually between two racial mongrels, and not between a negroid and a caucasoid.