Reading over this site, I am getting the impression that Occidental Dissent is hermetically sealed off in its own little world. The vast majority of recent posts are about White Nationalism and the Jewish Question. There is little engagement with popular culture, mainstream politics, or even other sectors of the far right. In 2010, I plan to strike more of a balance.
Comments are closed.
It’s easy to forget how far one is out of the mainstream sometimes in the blog world. Also things in the real world, like the financial crisis or the possibility of massive terrorism and Obama’s disastrous leadership, do affect us and our lives and those of our countrymen. It’s true there are meta factors at work, such as the culture, the media, and the like that drive and feed off all of these events, but they do matter, and it’s a bit ideological and sealed off from real life to pretend they don’t.
Oh, btw, interesting post at my sight that relates to your last posting.
Good post. We ought to have an exchange of views sometime about Paleoconservatism and White Nationalism.
Perhaps the continued threat of Russia and China to the US (the West) could also be explored. The Obama Administration seem to preach and practice a course of nuclear disarmament – and thus effectively pulling the US’s “nuclear teeth” – in favour of a friendlier smile.
TrekBoer, do you actually think that sort of “geopolitics” is more urgent than the race-replacement crisis? That stuff had its place when the U.S. was actually the U.S., Britain actually Britain, France France, Jewrmany Germany, etc. Do you think that stuff should occupy us now when all the above are guaranteed, on present trends, to turn very soon into one variety or another of Negroland? Does anyone care if China threatens Brazil, Mexico, or Nigeria? Of course not. So why in the hell would anyone care if China threatened the new Brazil-North or Mexico-North which will shortly replace what used to be the U.S.?
I plan on offering a White Nationalist perspective on the treatment of our various issues (identity, immigration, affirmative action, HBD) by conservatives and libertarians. I really want to explore and critique the libertarian mindset.
Genau, post #4. It never ceases to bewilder me every time I see and hear the geopolitical inanities on the MSM, where the short sighted bloviators keep re-hashing the old power politics meme, while their nations are racially melting out from under them. The blind are still trying to lead the blind. Will they ever get real? Why worry about China now, when, because of ‘our’ self-destructive, Jewish driven system of state sponsored dysgenics, in another 50 to 70 years they will be here knocking kinky heads around with rifle butts, trying to restore order anyway?
There is little engagement with popular culture, mainstream politics, or even other sectors of the far right.
I also think we (the entire movement) have a lack of serious pieces on practical activist strategies. Hopefully you’ll find my latest post to be a welcome step in resolving that.
Send me email sometime Hunter. It should be accessible on your dashboard for wordpress. Maybe we can do an interview, joint discussion, or some kind of structured debate.
You need to go with where your audience is and your audience isn’t typpycull whiggers. Rather, it is the-m-asses of kollidge edjewmacated neo-whiggers playing at waycism and wanting it to be ‘respectable’ — which is an impossibility.
But, if you want, you can try to go Edgar Steele on us and becum the latest ‘neo-Whigger Whimperer,’ this time to the GenY edjewmacated whiggers.
Pastor Martin Luther Dzerzhinsky Lindstedt
Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations of Missouri
http://www.whitenationalist.org/forum
“I really want to explore and critique the libertarian mindset.” ( — HW)
“Send me email sometime Hunter. […] Maybe we can do an interview, joint discussion, or some kind of structured debate.” ( — Roach)
Are you saying, Roach, that you’re a libertarian? I thought you were a tradcon or some other variety of trad?
“playing at waycism and wanting it to be ‘respectable’ — which is an impossibility.” ( — Pastor Lindstedt)
“An impossibility”? It’s respectable everywhere in the world except whitedom and was respectable in whitedom from Adam & Eve till the aftermath of WW II.
It can be respectable again.
But I don’t call it “racism.” The Jews call its “respectable” Jewish form “Zionism,” for example. We whites can find plenty of “respectable” terms for our version of it.
Fred, I was responding to this, “Good post. We ought to have an exchange of views sometime about Paleoconservatism and White Nationalism.”
I think libertarianism is a joke that takes itself remarkably seriously considering that almost no one is a libertarian, no one votes libertarian, and most economic libertarians or free market anti-welfare types that are also pretty skeptical of social change, equality, etc. In other words for instinctual conservatives, our liberty views run in parallel with our restrictions on liberty views and vice versa to the libertines/liberals who want to be allowed to screw but don’t want the rest of us to be able to hire whomever we want.
I find libertarians generally a bit too clever for their own good. They take themselves very seriously considering what utterly useless armchair quarterbacks they all are. Mostly, I think their ideas make no sense and ignore that one of the things people “want” is not just what they can get or buy but also they want you and others to behave a certain way. In other words, they want a community with rules and expectations enforced as appropriate by laws and ostracism. I’ve never met libertarians tremendously ready to ostracize anyone other than those with old fashioned views on race. Then they all of a sudden get pretty serious about the morality they usually deny.
Even a fully libertarian system, were it possible to implement one, would require force to maintain, since libertarianism itself isn’t what significantly large communities of people have ever wanted for themselves. So the promise of giving each person whatever he can get for himself is a hollow one, since one of the things people want is to live in a community that reflects their own desires and hierarchy of values, and invests those things with some authority. Libertarianism says people shouldn’t want that, or at least that they aren’t justified in insisting upon it, but this is an assertion based on their deductive premises. Either Morris Dees or I can have the kind of society that we want, but not both, and to concede to him everything he claims about the good of society, while claiming to be neutral on the question, is to decide the issue in the most dishonest possible way.
Fred Scrooby – post #4.
I definitely agree with your sentiment – I simply think that “tunnel vision” or “tunnel thinking” for that matter is not advisable. Keep an eye on everything.
A brief example:
Growing up in South West Africa – my parents’ generation were focused only on the local political issues (the Angolan War, the South African Administration of S.W.A., etc.). With time the local political issues were eventually pushed aside and rendered impotent by the International Community’s bigger political moves – that dictated a capitulation to SWAPO. No one saw that coming. The South Africans had sold us down the river – probably to curry favour with the aforementioned International Community (which simply led to more capitulation for the South Africans, in the form of a complete handover of power to the ANC-SACP-COSATU alliance in 1994). Please learn from our mistakes. Our leaders negotiated poorly – and were too eager to please, and placed too much good faith in their enemies’ future intentions.
Negotiate only to win.
The New International Community will probably be countries like Russia, China and India (or not). These countries might be making some big moves in the future.
Surely it makes sense to keep an eye on the rear view mirror while driving to your destination, because you never know what that 10 ton gorilla on a tri-cycle is up too.
Libertar(d)ianism is a Jewish ideology.
“There is little engagement with popular culture, mainstream politics, or even other sectors of the far right. ”
Some White Nationalists try and put different spins on movies.
Edgar J. Steeles view on ‘Into the Dust’ ( http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/dust.htm ) and Trevor Lynchs review of ‘Inglorious Basterds’ ( http://www.toqonline.com/2009/08/inglourious-basterds/comment-page-1/ ) are example of this.
Anyone checked out Avatar previews yet? It is a sci-fi flick about human beings going to an alien world of blue aliens and taking all of their vital resources whilst also trashing their beautiful jungle habitat. Apparently the vast majority of human beings in the flick are Whites and so the flick is supposed to be the typical ‘evil whitey’ stuff.
There may be another interpretation though: imagine that the pale blue aliens are supposed to be just pale White folks and that the actual human beings are instead representations of illegal immigrant mestizos, bent on sucking up Social Services and welfare as they move further and further North into a new land.
When one considers that it is pretty much only White folks who care about the enviroment ( http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/03/how_can_greens.php ) and this interpretation perhaps becomes more apt!
After reading the comments at this article:
Aloha, Segregation
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574412832314714444.html
We are definitely in our “Own Little World”.