National Geographic has written a relatively balanced and comprehensive article on the FLDS (Fundamentalist Mormon) communities throughout the American Southwest. They’re explicitly racial, have one of the highest fertility rates in the world, are completely self-sufficient, and leverage media and technology in defense of tradition and family rather than against it. The government and the media are becoming increasingly concerned about and focused on Latter-Day Saint movement for good reason: it poses the last credible threat to their hegemony in the West.
I know next to nothing about Fundamentalist Mormonism, but clearly their “tribal” lifestyle/mindset is worth emulating. I look at them as a “Christian Tribe” – our heathen ancestors were originally tribal and very much self-sufficient, we have to basically ‘re-tribalize’ to survive and again thrive.
Christianity de-tribalized our European ancestors, so it is interesting to see this Christian sect very much tribal (proving that ‘tribal’ is way for a future).
A closer study of this group should reveal much food for thought and possible practical applications for others who wish to start the process of ‘re-tribalizing’.
Perhaps a future article by Occidental Dissent could point out the winning features of Fundamentalist Mormonism, which could thus be put into service of WN groups.
This ‘liffe-style’ was taken to heart nearly three decades ago; the burgeoning White Nationalist movement had very close ties with CI and fundamental ‘mormonism’, bringing together the aspects of Negative white birth rates, a higher proportion of females to men, and the embryonic tribal collective of CI.
I think we are just at the threshold of a major turning point in our Culture, as opposed to our ‘future’.
I think these were the people who were raided and had some huge number of children carted off by Texas Rangers and children’s services because of a number of hoax calls from a black woman, one Rozita Swinton, who would call hotlines and claim to be a young victim of kidnap, sexual abuse, forced underage marriage, etc.
“She also has been accused making calls made to a crisis center run by Flora Jessop and pretending to be a girl in another FLDS compound. During the call, Swinton reportedly said in a little baby voice, ‘If you rescue me, and I get out of here, do you think the black people will hurt me?'”
Law enforcement were apparently prepared for this raid to have been another Waco, as they showed up with swat teams and an armored personnel carrier. More food for thought.
I think we must keep in mind these sorts of communities when thinking about separationism. It seems that separationism, as as subject, will be the concluding chapters of Takuan Seiyo’s book From Meccania to Atlantis, which will be published on paper once finished (see e.g., these excerpts of his chapter 10). “Atlantis” is the utopian city-state where some of us will have to move escaping from “Meccania”, today’s suicidal West.
The question is how could WNs start seriously to plan moving to, say, the Northam West in the U.S. when we are not living within driving distance of each other? I cannot imagine how this movement could get out of the obscurity without face-to-face with each other.
Just curious: Are any of you planning to go to the forthcoming American Renaissance meeting next month?
The government and the media are becoming increasingly concerned about and focused on Latter-Day Saint movement for good reason: it poses the last credible threat to their hegemony in the West.
And this explains why Mitt Romney is being held in reserve for use later as a trojan horse to enter what is left of the conservative movement, and possibly destroy what could be its last stand.
During his run for the Republican nomination Mitt Romney was advised by the same man who managed Bush sr’s first campaign for the Republican nomination in 1976. This same man who is advising Romney was also a staffer in Bush sr’s White House and was related by marriage to Bush jr’s chief of staff Andrew Card. This same man also sits on RNC as a committeeman from Massachusetts.
I should be there.
Racial preservation without the survival of its appropriate cultural symbionts is useless.
I don’t see how a nation-state filled with low-IQ White creationists that believe in inexistent sacred egyptian gold plates, jewish amerindians and in the words of treasure hunter charlatans is a desirable state of affairs.
If anything goes in the name of the survival of the Europid gene pool, consider instead designing a White racialist version of Islam, history has proven that the Mohammedan memes are the most conducive to improve their hosts’ biological fitness.
Of course, don’t argue later if such a civilization shows little interest in the search for objective truth and space exploration and would rather instead live confined between camels and minarets. The Western Man is always expanding its intellectual horizons and is a man of craftsmanship and science, not of Semitic obscurantism (or of stupid North American Christian cults, for that matter).
@TrekBoer
I agree that this ultimately boils down to tribalism. Our ultimate goal requires that we study and borrow from successful tribalists.
@Agathon
These were the people whose community was raided and children kidnapped en masse. The FLDS raid was, I think, evidence that both separatist groups and the federal agencies were determined to avoid another Waco. The government protected its workers while having maximum military-style preparation. The families had the discipline to stand idle as the goons ransacked the village. Nobody was hurt.
@Chechar
It would absolutely require direct human communication at local or at least regional levels and it would require something more than merely WNism by itself.
I’m afraid I’ll be sitting this AmRen conference out.
@Ronduck
There’s a lot swirling around Mitt Romney, Glenn Beck, Cleon Skousen’s works, and the 9/12 project. I don’t dare say conspiracy, but I do feel that more is going on than meets the eye, here.
Just sayin’.
@Naturalist
Racial preservation without the survival of its appropriate cultural symbionts is useless.
It’s only useless when your goal is the survival of specific cultural symbionts. Personally, I believe that traditional Western culture, as received, has been demonstrated to be insufficient and in need of some radical changes in its cultural…symbionts. You have a great point about Islam, one which deserves a separate response.
While you raise some obvious concerns about the origins and foundations of the LDS movement, you’re evidently off base about its effect on our Faustian spirit. Mormons have proven themselves to be extremely creative, innovative, inventive, and entrepreneurial. Their ability to build a virtual utopia from scratch in the desert wilderness is a powerful testament to the vitality of the White race.
Christianity de-tribalized our European ancestors,
It wasn’t cities, roads, cars, factories, “the Enlightenment”, television and the Macy’s Day parade after all?
Christianity de-tribalized our European ancestors,
Is tribalism the default state? Is there some noble, tribalized White Savage I’m unaware of?
Christianity linearized history and tribalized Europeans.
Tribalism isn’t anachronistic. The very notion that organizing in a tribal manner is obsolete is a product of modernist programming. Despite all the modern things that work to dissolve the tribe, it’s still the natural way that humans instinctively and most optimally organize. The most successful population on Earth is one which has remained consistently tribal while adapting in strategic ways to new environments over the millennia.
The most successful population on Earth is one which has remained consistently tribal while adapting in strategic ways to new environments over the millennia.
That all depends on how you define ‘successful’ and ‘tribe.’ If you believe Jews are Khazars rather than the Jews of the OT then it hasn’t been millenia either.
Few in the anti-Semitic community continue to believe that Khazar Hypothesis. The recent genetic evidence simply fails to corroborate it, and it wasn’t well-supported before then. Even fewer question the origins of the Sephardi and Mizrahi subsets of global Jewry.
Then what happened to all the Khazars who did convert to Judaism? The Ashkenazim must have some Khazar ancestry. Of course the Khazar elite’s absorption wouldn’t have made a huge difference to the genetic makeup as a whole.
You’re right, Wikitopian. ‘Tribalism’ comes naturally to most humans. Whenever a new group of immigrants arrives in the United States they immediately begin to form ‘tribes’, aka gangs. They establish various territories of operation and a chain-of-command.
I have a hypothesis that Whites, although prone to rely on tribal instincts in certain situations (such as being transplanted in a new country), can more or less transcend these tribal instincts and exist perfectly well in an ‘open society’ where most transactions are between strangers. Just because I don’t know everyone in my local grocery store doesn’t mean I live in fear of being robbed in the parking lot. In non-White societies it’s different. If you aren’t a member of the ‘tribe’ in the part of town you’re visiting – you better watch out. Non-Whites, especially blacks and mestizos, are incredibly tribalistic. A secondary part of my hypothesis is that the tribalism is not a result of group cohesion but rather failure to empathize other beings. The more you can empathize with other beings the more cosmopolitan, trusting, and environmentally conscious you become. Sounds alot like the modern West, right? Blacks are the least empathetic of any race – this results in their high crime rates. Their tribalism is not a result of group cohesion – they hate each other as much as they hate anyone else.
Steve Sailer makes the same points, about half way down, in this piece:
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2007/jan/15/00007/
Ted Sallis has an article that goes into this topic… He believes there was a limited amount of intermarriage between Khazars and Jews.
http://theoccidentalobserver.net/tooblog/?p=112
This: That all depends on how you define ’successful’ and ‘tribe.’ was my main point.
Sam seems to define a tribe as a stationary, ethnically homogeneous group of predatory rogues. I’m not really interested in that kind of tribe. I also find the “success” of the Jews to be no such thing. I don’t get off on the idea of being a market dominant minority subjecting my host population to a psychologically brutalizing culture of critique.
The Germanic “tribe” is certainly doesn’t correspond to my idea of tribe either since they were a bunch of rootless, uncivilized, Pagan barbarians. I like hot water and electricity and I’m not gonna pretend that I don’t for the sake of my internet persona. The digital presence of everyone else here speaks volumes about what they too value. If somebody can find a way to harmonize the plowshare and the sword I’d appreciate it. The First Law of the Universe is that you cannot have your cake and eat it too.
danielj,
A primary point of this post is that these people have running water and broadband Internet yet fully embrace tradition and thrive in a world which is proving increasingly toxic to the rest of us. As TrekBoer suggests, we need to figure out how to succeed despite modernity, because these groups are proving that it is indeed possible.
A primary point of this post is that these people have running water and broadband Internet yet fully embrace tradition and thrive in a world which is proving increasingly toxic to the rest of us.
The problem, for me, is their Mormonism and their polygyny.
danielj,
Would you care to elaborate…on both points?
Only a little bit for now. All these comments are distracting me from the essays I want to write.
Mormonism is a false religion, riddled with contradictions and doesn’t provide a foundation for a logically coherent universe or internally coherent philosophy.
Monogamy is a fundamental building block of stable societies. It is also an important and definitional part of the West. Should we sacrifice it we have cut ourselves off from a source of our strength.
It is easy for internet nerds with no wife, no children, no family and no prospects to entertain fantastic notions like polygyny, but the reality is that it is immoral, psychologically and spiritually taxing, unfeasible and tends toward excessive inbreeding instead of the ideal which is the consanguinity of the extended cousinage.
The notion that Western Civilization is defined by its monogamy is the sort of fatal flattery that poisons our outlook.
I’m going to assume the insult about Internet nerds was directed at somebody other than me.
Whiteness is applied polygyny.
I’m going to assume the insult about Internet nerds was directed at somebody other than me.
It wasn’t directed at anybody here but at men without families assuming a position of leadership they don’t warrant. I don’t insult, slander, libel, etc. It isn’t worth the time.
The notion that Western Civilization is defined by its monogamy is the sort of fatal flattery that poisons our outlook.
Not even monogamy qua monogamy but the type of order it creates and the type of person it generates is what is important. It is an integral and definitional part of the Western worldview that is under discussion. It is not the defining characteristic of Western Civilization but it is a major one of them. I refuse to simply be a carrier for a collection of selfish genes. My racism isn’t simply the means to service the ultimate end of successful and unimpeded replication. I’m not a fucking copy machine. That type of thinking is for the birds… Nigger birds.
I wasn’t arguing for the Salterian reductionism which is so prevalent in our movement. I don’t have any patience with it, either. I’m striving for a synthesis of sustainability, tradition, and reason. All three seem to be at odds, but I believe they can be reconciled.
1) I should have said black birds…
2) I’m striving for a synthesis of sustainability, tradition, and reason. All three seem to be at odds, but I believe they can be reconciled. Me too. I find polygyny to be irreconcilable with all three. Genetic sustainability encroached upon by the threat of inbreeding, tradition trampled upon by the introduction of novel breeding practices and the overthrowing of an institution as old as Homer and reason cast down by virtue of ignoring the plain lights of the ancients, scripture and folk wisdom. I do acknowledge that the fertility of a man is essentially unlimited in scope and not bound by any constraint except available mates. Does this really imply polygyny for men and men only? Polygamy fractures a man and thereby fractures society. It interrupts the rhythm prescribed by the nature of female anatomy and thereby interrupts the rhythm of nature herself. The helplessness of women and children require the undivided energies and care of her man.
danielj,
If done in excess, polygyny can result in inbreeding. Monogamy can be dysgenic. Any breeding pattern has positive and negative potentialities. Patriarchal polygamy isn’t a “novel breeding practice” and there’s a wealth of direct historical evidence, including biblical evidence, of patriarchal polygamy. Additionally, there’s a wealth of genetic evidence that polygamy has been a pervasive characteristic of human societies for a very long time.
The success of this community appears to directly contradict your implication that polygamous communities are inherently unstable or deviant.
Any breeding pattern has positive and negative potentialities.
Yes but we are trying to figure out the overall trend.
Monogamy can be dysgenic.
The potential for outbreeding is greater which is why I explicitly endorsed the extended cousinage of the New England Puritans and the Chesapeake Bay Virginians.
Patriarchal polygamy isn’t a “novel breeding practice”
Instituting it as the rule would be. I didn’t mean it was entirely “new” like it has never been done before.
there’s a wealth of direct historical evidence, including biblical evidence, of patriarchal polygamy.
Yeah but the Biblical evidence points only to the strife it causes! Although it happened it was still against the law. In addition to the other points I’ve raised, I think the imposition of this institution as a rule would require an ungodly amount of coercion and generate considerable backlash among women. Setting aside the potential benefit it might bring toward the end of raising the birthrate, it is still moral regression
The success of this community appears to directly contradict your implication that polygamous communities are inherently unstable or deviant.
They are free riding on the rest of our coattails. They aren’t an independent nation. I’ve heard a bunch of them are malnourished and on welfare but I do not know that to be true.
I find the idea of “just trying it out” on the macro level does violence to my somewhat Burkean sensibility.
I didn’t suggest “trying it out” on the macro level, and I would ask you to offer some sort of evidence of:
* their dependence on society,
* their malnourishment, or
* their relying on welfare.
If you can show me a path to success which is more cogent with contemporary American customs and traditions, I would certainly be interested. Until then, I’ll continue investigating groups which have devised proven strategies.
In addition to the other points I’ve raised, I think the imposition of this institution as a rule would require an ungodly amount of coercion and generate considerable backlash among women.
It would generate a backlash among men. It is strange how few people understand that polygyny is awful for the vast majority of men. They seem to ignore all the men who end up getting shut out and instead only think about women and the men who have many wives. Monogamy is to the advantage of men.
I didn’t suggest “trying it out” on the macro level
All right. I’m sorry I assumed that you meant that.
Monogamy is to the advantage of men.
I just hadn’t got there yet. Some people would of course counter this suggestion by offering up that only the fittest men would breed with a choice cornucopia of females. The problem with this is of course the fittest men are defined circularly as the men who – so to speak – come out on top.
their dependence on society
They live in a country that is at odds with all of their espoused beliefs. They don’t generate anything of any value and their contributions to the wider (if we assume they are even part of it) culture are approximately nil. They are parasites. They aren’t capable of maintaining any institutions of any enduring value. They aren’t responsible for BYU.
Conversely, the strategy of monogamous, mainstream Mormons seems more successful and practical. It also seems to accumulate loyal adherents at a pace orders of magnitude higher than the fringe group under discussion. Despite the monogamy of these less radical Mormons they are still fundamentalists, generally conservative, implicitly racialist, high earning, high achieving and highly educated.
My firsthand knowledge does suggest that these types abandon the faith in droves upon reaching young adulthood, college and independence if they don’t marry young. This is true of almost all uncloistered religious folk though. They do tend, in my experience, to return to the faith of their upbringing after getting through college, settling down and having a kid or two though.
* their malnourishment, or
* their relying on welfare.
I said that I heard it somewhere. What I meant was that I read it somewhere and had I had the link readily available I would have posted it. I don’t however and that is why I clarified that it was just speculation.
If you can show me a path to success which is more cogent with contemporary American customs and traditions, I would certainly be interested.
You believe secession and polygamy to be cogent with traditional American custom? Or is it the apple pie, white picket fence thing they got going on?
We are all here trying to figure out what the path is and my argument is simply that this isn’t it.
Until then, I’ll continue investigating groups which have devised proven strategies.
As you rightly should by all means. Keep us posted.
The fundamentalist Mormons seem to be organized in two different ways, one leading to relative stability and one leading to child abuse and state interference.
The second way is typified by the FLDS which had a “one prophet” rule of one man, Warren Jeffs, and may as well been a matriarchy. The only man with any power was Jeffs himself, all the other men completely obedient slaves. Of course, women have their own kinds of power in family situations and unless you are willing to resort to Taliban-style woman slavery, this system develops a core set of matriarchs.
The other groups have a typical low church polity controlled by a council of (male) elders; groups like AUB are close to mainstream in parts of Utah.
danielj is correct above that these groups are “freeloaders” off of “us” because they are not self contained states, but this can be said of all white groups in the US, certainly of any WN groups.
Mormon fundamentalists are not shielded from the outside world – their women and children are. The men work and the companies own businesses that compete for non-Mormon fundamentalist customers just like any business does.
Polygamy is a loser, what do you do with all the excess males? Fundamentalist Mormons send them off the Las Vegas to join street gangs, Muslims turn them into suicide bombers. Plus, any tight knit groups shielded from the public need to have serious sexual strictures otherwise you’ll see the thirteen year old girls becoming the 4th wife of the 50-year old Patriarch, traded by her budding Matriarch mother for social power. This stuff is deeply dysfunctional. Polygamy should only be accepted when there is a real shortage of males. (And don’t buy the LDS transparent “justifications” for their polygamy, the first Mormon elders had dozens of teenage wives, and you don’t need theology to understand their motivations.)
Monogamy works; early marriage and children, keep the women at home, the kids out of public sewer-schools and no jew-tube. Men work as a network either in cooperating independent businesses or employees of the same business. The church provides the legal framework see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Love#The_United_Effort_Brotherhood
That’s the lesson to learn from groups like fundamentalist Mormons, not anything theological nor about unique sexual arrangements. There is no secret to normal European family values. What kind of idiot culture sends their best women in their prime breeding years to study “art history” – and *pay* for it? Instead of making babies? 18 is baby time.
For those who are against religion or Christianity, you still need some sort of historical mythology, why not a home-school curriculum based on Greco-Roman pantheon and heroic tales?
wiki says “There’s a lot swirling around Mitt Romney, Glenn Beck, Cleon Skousen’s works, and the 9/12 project. I don’t dare say conspiracy, but I do feel that more is going on than meets the eye, here”
Indeed, Mormons compete with Jews. Mormons have been recruited by the FBI since Hoover’s days and since 911, the top levels of US intelligence. Beck and Romney are a new Mormon offensive into mainstream media. And Skousen … well I had no idea he was a Mormon when I read his two must read populist-right classics Naked Communist/Capitalist but it makes sense, he’s a modern Mormon prophet. See also Orson Scott Card.
Mormons are good people, I like Mormons.
DanielJ
“Mormonism is a false religion…” All religions are mythic in that they depend on received truth. Seems truth can be divided into two broad categories, religious and objective truth. Mosaic and Greek truth. No religion expresses the latter. Mormonism is similar to Islam in that it tribalizes a foreign religion. Islam may have its roots in mosaic law but no one can deny its essential Arab character. Mormonism may have its roots in mosaic law but no one can deny its essential American character.
All religions are mythic in that they depend on received truth.
Yeah but I think one of them is true, true.
This truth I can agree with. I think it is a very good way to frame the issue. Mormonism is definitely American if nothing else.
Like it or not, monogamy is an integral part of Western culture and has been for thousands of years. It is part of what makes us who we are. I would not consider a white polygamous society “Western,” or “occidental,” nor would I consider it worth fighting to save. A genetically white convert to Judaism or Islam ceases to be a Westerner and is no longer “one of us”– same with polygamists.
I recommend highly recommend KMacs essays on monogamy.
ski,
KMac’s brilliant, but his work on monogamy and the West are inconsistent with historical and genetic evidence of pervasive polygyny.
You’re correct that a genetically White person who adopts a GES incompatible with Whiteness must be regarded as functionally non-White. I disagree with your determination on what is and is not compatible with Whiteness/the West/occident.
“The helplessness of women and children require the undivided energies and care of her man.”
Thanks. Modern feminism-warped society forgets just how dependent a pregnant woman / new nursing mother is.
She not only is physically incapable of doing hard labor, but separation from the infant while she earns a living then causes dependency on all sorts of other technological support systems: Either formula (possibly contaminated /cause infant GI morbidity due to allergy / leave infant vulnerable to respiratory illnesses from lack of immune system factors) or high-tech pumps (which can break / milk spillage) and systems of daycare centers which leave the infant vulnerable to serious respiratory illnesses (RSV, for ex.)
But she’s also emotionally vulnerable. The hormone level shifts and exhaustion from round-the-clock infant care can can cause post-partum depression / possible suicide / infanticide.
And the sleep deprivation, alone, can be as severely impairing to her driving as being drunk. So, you know, take out a few innocent co-travelers on the freeway on her way to work when she falls asleep driving.
In a post-American society where ethnic conflict has caused the collapse of gov’t services / technologies that today’s female having-it-all fools depend upon, when a polygynous hubby has traipsed off to cavort with his newest virginal honey while new mom struggles, the infant survival rate is going to be enhanced, how, again?
Any reading recommendations contra KMac’s work on monogamy?
Surely people break the rules quite a bit in any society, but monogamy definitely was one of “the rules,” for a long time and still is for the most part. The notion that monogamy is not an integral part of Western tradition seems dubious to me. Why are “family values” talking points some of the most potent and commonly used by politicians? Why is polygamy even less socially acceptable than homosexuality? Why do I, and millions of other Americans cherish memories of growing up within the nuclear family and wish the same for my children? Why do almost all young men prefer long term commitment to, ceteris paribus, a non-slut?
Even the most socially liberal people I know, who are quite accepting of divorce, abortion, homosexuality, youthful promiscuity etc. almost universally disapprove of polygamy and hold the nuclear family to be ideal.
barb,
What are you talking about? This particular plural marriage environment is vastly superior to modernity in terms of maternal support. There are a lot of criticisms of this lifestyle, many of which demand an answer. But that one is totally out of left field…
almost universally disapprove of polygamy and hold the nuclear family to be ideal.
I would hope that in the future we elevate the extended family to its rightfully lofty, former position after we’ve salvaged what is left of the nuclear family.
ski,
Polygamy is the one alternative lifestyle which remains culturally taboo because it’s the one which is MORE traditional and optimal than monogamous marriage. To propose that it remains taboo because it’s more degenerate than homosexuality, orgies, and all the other behaviors which have become acceptable is highly dubious.
What does this have to do with preferring to avoid sluts?
Please hold regarding the traditionality of it. I’m working on that.
This particular plural marriage environment is vastly superior to modernity in terms of maternal support.
How so? How do multitudinous pregnant women dwelling in one house, sharing one man’s resources demonstrate superiority in any way? How is it possible for one man to care for so many?
Polygyny is parasitism. There is no avoiding it. Some men will labor intensely without the reward of female devotion to increase the fitness of the – probably undeserving – fat bastard at the top of the pyramid. It is a rapacious form of family formation and shares ominous parallels with capitalism as is it presently organized; it improperly distributes the wealth of the womb, it fails to recognize and respect the psychological limitations of human beings, it is concerned primarily with quantity, it is hell bent on undefined and explosive expansion, it concentrates vitality and energy which weakens by agglomeration, it is top-heavy and immobilizing.
It is the monopolizing of human beings and it makes me wanna throw up.
These were the people whose community was raided and children kidnapped en masse. The FLDS raid was, I think, evidence that both separatist groups and the federal agencies were determined to avoid another Waco.
The raid was conducted by agents of the State of Texas, rather than the Feds. There’s your difference.
The Feds massacred the Branch Davidians. If the State had handled that matter, the sheriff would have gone by himself, knocked on the door, and executed the warrant.
“s particular plural marriage environment is vastly superior to modernity in terms of maternal support”
I don’t buy it. Just as polyandry is a non-starter for men (except for rare cases where the men are brothers) because men don’t want to provide for unrelated children, so, too, only if the women blood relations does polygyny lead to more help for the new mom. Otherwise, a woman’s instincts are going to be to sabotage the chances of survival for the other woman’s offspring so her own can have more resources from the Big Man.
But, if the wives are sisters, then the offspring are both half siblings and cousins. If the wives are mother-daughter, then their children are both half siblings and grandchildren, aunt/ uncle. If mother or daughter leaves the group, then there won’t be any new mom support. In not too many generations even 3rd or 4th cousin marriages means, in a very small reproducing populace like FDLS, the inbreeding stacks up quickly. Not sustainable.
But bringing in outside women means the moms don’t get the pregnancy / birthing / new mom help they need if the Dad is off cavorting, so more infant deaths due to new mom being overwhelmed and unsupported by the now-unavailable technologies.
Monogamy is desirable because it, simply, works.
“If the wives are mother-daughter, then their children are both half siblings and grandchildren, aunt/ uncle.”
Let me rephrase. If the wives are mother-daughter, then their children will be, half siblings and also half aunt/uncle, half niece/nephew
Who can deny polygamy is anti western? but so is extreme population decline. We are lucky if Whites get married and have one child between a couple. And then there are the mixers, of whom there are far too many. In these catastrophic times any group that has White babies at the rate these people have White babies deserve praise.
barb,
I could argue that it’s impossible to make cornbread because corn explodes into popcorn when heated. That’s what you’re doing when you argue that polygamists result in neglected babies. The babies aren’t being neglected, so you’re wrong. Just like the delicious cornbread I made disproves the popcorn hypothesis. No matter how well you argue that polygamous marriage results in neglected babies, you will be incorrect. No?
In any small breeding population, the inbreeding can stack up. The Amish struggle with the problem while being entirely monogamous. The fumerase deficiency situation is certainly something they need to manage intelligently (and they are), but the community doesn’t appear to be choking on its inbreeding “problem”.
The strategy pursued by the Fundamentalist Mormons and other similar groups (Amish, etc) is exactly what millions of racially-aware White Americans ought to pursue in the future; we must remove ourselves from the anti-White (Jewed) macrosystem as much as we can and seek to build a parallel society in which we can take care of ourselves and our own. However, I do not recommend outright cultish balkanization and total withdrawal from the overall culture and society, but rather a ‘soft removal,’ i.e. being removed but still engaged in politics, the economy (especially locally/regionally), and so on — this way we can still work to try to change the culture to our favor (in a more general pro-White direction). Internally we ought to be as self/communally sufficient as possible, but still somewhat connected to the general system (at least enough to change and subvert it from within).
I laid this out in a post a while back, building pro-White ‘colonies’ and communities all around the USA, though without all of the strange religious ideas, archaic dress, and so on – http://whitesurvival.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/future-opportunities-for-on-the-groundreal-life-pro-white-community-formation/
Polygenic polygamy is the default of humankind. Monogamy has one important societal benefit: it decreases violence by minimizing intra-species conflict. In a polygenic society, some men are going to be left out mateless and they won’t be satisfied by it.
In reference to my previous post, I recommend building a White ‘warrior-politician caste’ first, small community units of White men who make sure to provide for the security of the pro-White colonies first and foremost.
Everything else ought to be built around that nucleus of pro-White martial-political elites, and they will be the main/ruling patriarchy of the White communities who will also provide the pool for the main leaders and community politicians. All of the greedy/fickle White businesspeople plus the everyday lower-level White workers must always remain subordinate to the ruling White martial-political caste.