California
Trevor Lynch is called out for “Hating on Hollywood”:
“Speaking of fantasy, “Trevor Lynch” is not precisely a real person himself. Rather, he is the alter-ego of a tiresome and self-important fellow named Greg Johnson who runs a vastly pretentious website called Counter-Currents.com, on which many of the essays that comprise his Guide originally appeared.”
Speaking of terrible Hollywood movies, the new Will Smith movie, “After Earth,” is supposed to be coming out today. It is being called one of the worst movies of all time by critics and “one of the world’s most expensive bar mitzvahs.”
Jack’s comment is still odd.
Chechar,
Is that all Tacitus said? He seems to discussing Germanic execution methods for men who didn’t cut it on the battlefield for whatever reason not that Germanic policy was to execute homos in all cases.
Lew, just curious, have you read this Himmler article?:
http://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/ns-on-homosexuality/
“Personally i’d be fine with some form of b) under those conditions but it’s not a high priority.”
No.
To witness men kissing is disturbing, under any circumstance, and gives normal actors a pangs of discomfort, if not outright revulsion. The homos themselves understand, on a primal level, that their homo behavior is odd and unnatural, which is why they refer to their lovers as “partners”.
Faggotry should be kept a private vice, not a public virtue.
Mighty
Yes, when i say publically tolerated i don’t mean tolerated in public if you see what i mean. I think modesty in public is for the best in all cases.
So you’re not promoting pederasty, but then you use the Classical world as a model for what our attitude towards sexuality should be?
Please state clearly what type of homosexuality is acceptable and why, and what historical European society accepted that type of behavior.
Homosexuality should be illegal, just as it was in the past. We’re not talking ancient history here; well into the 20th century homosexual acts were illegal.
Lew, I’m a fan.
Truth is you’ve dug your own grave in this thread.
At this point you need to admit you’re not a traditionalist, neither are you a rightist.
There’s nothing wrong with that.
You’re a socialist, secular-humanist liberal that doesn’t think Niggers and Jews play nice and therefore want to exclude them from society.
If you want to discuss ancient knowledge, start with the basics.
Know Thyself.
Lol, is that what I am? You’re a funny guy. I haven’t dug shit yet. I just haven’t had time to respond. I’ll get around to it.
“Homosexuality should be illegal, just as it was in the past. We’re not talking ancient history here; well into the 20th century homosexual acts were illegal.”
Illegality isn’t enough. The homosexual demi-monde that resulted from illegality was the first beachhead in the culture war – think of the film “Caberet” for what i mean by demi-monde. It will be the same now in places like China and Japan – Jewish pro-immigration and cultural warfare groups will have a very disproportionate number of native homosexuals.
Exclusion or (some degree of) tolerance.
If White Nationals are pro-Homo it is best they share their views on their own blogs and in the manner Greg Johnson saw most appropriate:
“Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.”
http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/10/homosexuality-and-white-nationalism/
When Greg Johnson and Old MacDonald close comments, not a good sign….
Lew,
I ask you again:
You justify your position by making reference to Greek homosexuality, but then you claim that you do not support pederasty. If not pederasty, what type of homosexual relationships do you support?
“When you align with an anti-homosexuality, you align with the Jewish tradition.”
This is not a rebuttal to anything. We don’t work backwards from, “If the Jews do this, we must do the opposite.” That would be idiotic. “Jews use the Gregorian calendar, therefore we must use the Julian calendar,” or “Jews protect Israel’s borders, therefore we must have open borders.” Lunacy.
We fight Jewish influence when it’s a cancer, not when they adopt basic, common-sense measures that any sane society would adopt.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, as the saying goes. Any Jewish tradition that was against homosexuality got one thing right, likely despite itself.
I’m going to get back to the theme of the post.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
These creatures are genetically predisposed to detroying human.
Clement,
Pederasty was not the only form of sex that was tolerated. I said I don’t support it.
Do you support allowing 11 – 12 year old girls to marry adult men? It was traditional at one time in Euro Christian societies.
They are stabby.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2326039/David-Collins-Somali-teenager-stabbed-British-soldier-heart-brawl-Cyprus-nightclub-jailed-years.html
And finally, refugees control the street drug trade…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334488/Inside-dark-world-Woolwich-Boys-The-300-strong-gang-Somalis-linked-Rigby-murder-suspect-targeted-terror-groups-looking-jihadists-future.html
Victims my arse.
“They are stabby”
Obviously-wigger get hurt in the process. been there. done that. thank my lucky star.
Lew,
There is no reason that girls shouldn’t be married young as long as consummation occurs after she blossoms. This ensures purity. There is absolutely no reason why a menstruating woman should not be married until an arbitrary age unless she lives in a society that would rather see her work in some capacity during her childbearing years, without much hope of retaining purity for marriage. The younger a woman marries the better a husband she will win and her father doesn’t have to worry any longer about preserving her honor. Modern men don’t understand this, they literally let high school boys (as I was once) sleep over in their daughters bedrooms (as i was once did) and then they ate breakfast with me in the morning. That is the worst humiliation because the man is not even aware of the transgression he is allowing me to commit against his family.
At this point you need to admit you’re not a traditionalist, neither are you a rightist. – No-Man
I’m sympathetic with many traditionalist perspectives, believe tradition ought to be used as a guide to action where appropriate, and generally strongly support the traditionalists.
But I have never claimed to be any form of traditionalist myself. There is a rigid, sclerotic, reactionary in the wrong sense, backwards-looking impulse in traditionalist thought that can lead to conversations like this.
The only anti-homos I see strictly applying traditional ideas on homosexuality are the Ugandans.
It’s not liberation for a sexually functional western woman to be working or “studying” without a husband into her twenties. The equality of work has long been enjoyed by slave women, asian women, untouchable women, negresses. It demeans women and the demand for female “empowerment” was a largescale shit-test that we failed miserably.
Lew,
What other homosexual relationships were allowed in antiquity? You’ve mentioned Roman men using male slaves and prostitutes. Is this what you would like to see? Classical artistic depictions of homosexuality, homosexual love poetry, etc., all of this focuses on the grown man’s love for the youth.
I’ll ask you again: what type of homosexual relationships are you promoting? what historical precedent exists for these relationships?
In answer to your question, there is nothing wrong with a girl being married when she reaches child-bearing age. It was common practice for girls in most of pagan Greece to be married around age 14. However, there were some European societies (such as Sparta) where girls got married closer to age 20, so there could be an argument from a traditionalist perspective that adolescent girls should wait a few years before marrying. But the type of relationships that you seem to promote don’t have any historical precedent in traditional Europe.
No-Man,
Some very good points, although I don’t think Lew values female chastity very much.
This is something that all supposed traditionalists need to understand: even among pagans where men were allowed prostitutes and concubines, all traditional societies recognized that chaste women are necessary for creating new families and producing legitimate offspring. Sex outside of marriage for everyone in society was never the norm in Europe.
Re: “this kind of implied evil of everything that could in the smallest way be considered “judaic” (…) Enjoy your day but we shouldn’t discuss Jews, ever.”
Rather spend time discussing how BLACKS run Amerika, and how useful they were as slaves.
Mosin. BRA means run for Blacks. Please stop.
Clement,
I’m not a traditionalist. When an idea arises for debate, my standard for assessment is — What is the good for whites? — not is this idea consistent with tradition? Quite frankly, I don’t care as long as there is utility for survival in the idea. In which case the reason for following the idea is it’s utility for survival not that it’s traditional.
I see tradition as a non-binding GUIDE that is very often but not always relevant to today’s problems. Blindly following tradition for its own sake is as problematic as completely ignoring it because things change.
I don’t promote any homosexual relationships. I recognize they’re going to happen anyway. It seems that for as long as there have been people there has been homosexuality. Many homosexuals are fine people, hard workers, kind, honest. As long as they’re NOT promoting the present-day gay agenda, I don’t care what they do. Dwelling on homosexual sex is Jewish. Read Leviticus.
No-Man, my sentiment is that we can go back to traditional sex roles and still make it illegal to marry 12 year olds. That’s a child.
No-Man, my sentiment is that we can go back to traditional sex roles and still make it illegal to marry 12 year olds. That’s a child.
In BRA 11 year-olds can buy plan-B. But they’re just children, too young to marry under any circumstances. Do not mistake the pile of skulls left behind by the French and American revolutions as moral highground.
Clement,
I missed your answer:
Chechar,
I’m reading it now.
Lew,
Many different vices are bound to happen, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be punished. I’ve known many non-whites who are also “fine people, hard workers, kind, honest”, but they should still be excluded from our movement.
When homosexuality was illegal throughout Europe, how was this bad for whites? What advantage have we gained by making homosexuality legal?
Instead of asking what type of homosexuality you promote, I ask you what type of homosexuality would you permit, and why permitting it would be better for whites than outlawing it. Also, if you don’t think any of the ancient Greek homosexual relationships should be permitted, you should probably stop using the Classical world as part of your argument in favor of homosexuality.
Clement,
what is to be done with the men and women who engage in sodomy, oral sex, swinger – Lew
Many different vices are bound to happen, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be punished. – Clement
Punished how? Do you mean through ostracism, shunning and social pressure or criminal prosecution and jail terms for a bj or butt sex? The Ugandans, again, want the death penalty.
I’ve known many non-whites who are also “fine people, hard workers, kind, honest”, but they should still be excluded from our movement.
Not the same thing. To mention one obvious difference, white homosexuals have a stake in white society through their extended families in a way that non-whites don’t and never will. Many homosexuals have fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, nieces, nephews.
Also, if you don’t think any of the ancient Greek homosexual relationships should be permitted, you should probably stop using the Classical world as part of your argument in favor of homosexuality.
Sorry, I don’t think that follows. No, I don’t think pederasty should be permitted, but I don’t think letting men marry 12-year olds should be permitted either. I’m not going to stop making arguments for patriarchy because of this.
The achievements of the classical world speak for themselves. It’s conclusive proof that tolerating certain types of homosexual practice are not inherently damaging to society.
“I think that Peter Jackson, a producer or someone on the film team made a deliberate but subtle concession to the culture in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Do the Orcs and Goblins seem a bit pale when compared to the original LOTR trilogy and Tolkien’s descriptions?”
KMac wrote about that.
I don’t really think it’s that big of a deal. Looking at Tolkien’s descriptions of orcs, they vary in color, they’re not all extremely dark, they typically range from sallow to dark. Remember that he likened them to Mongoloids, not Negroids.
You could very well take the opposite view, the biggest, most intelligent, most masculine orc is white with blue eyes. It’s really just a dramatic way to represent him, he stands out from the common, dark orc. The pale orc astride a white warg.
I am glad to hear it. That was a Himmler speech on homosexuality.
Again curious, have you read my 7,600-word essay on the subject, “Gitone’s magic,” which contains long quotes of The Satyricon, that I wrote precisely in the spirit of what M said way above about Socrates’ sublimating his Eros instead of having actual sex with the epheboys?
It is extremely provocative and when I wrote it and send a link to Greg I harbored the vain hope that he would republish it for CC, but no.
That essay bridges the gap between the two camps in this thread, but it’s as philosophical as the Platonic Symposium to attract the attention of the average nationalist.
If you decide to read it take your time. You will be surprised about what I say for sure…
“Yeah, I saw Will Smith’s movie trailer the other night and had to LOL. Another multi-million many times over failure for their little pet Negro.”
Since The Village it’s been flop after flop for Shyamalan, really unwatchable garbage.
I attempted to watch “The Karate Kid” remake, which has nothing to do with karate anyway, just to see how bad it could be. It’s bad, really bad, no redeeming qualities at all. The whole premise of the black mother going to China for “work” is hilarious. They don’t have AA for blacks in China, bitch. I stopped about a third of the way through.
One of the funnier parts is where the Asians laugh at the little nigger and ask if they can touch his weird hair. Be sure to have some extra-strength hand sanitizer ready.
“45 Liberian Orphans Adopted By One North Carolina Community (VIDEO)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/45-liberian-orphans-adopt_n_3367018.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular“
Absolutely disgusting.
Someone else asked what we should do with sodomites, swingers, and the like. A lot of swingers are race-mixing scumbags, especially the women.
Those stupid bitches in that video are what I would describe as emotional swingers. The woman has a nice family, children of her own, but it’s just not enough. She wants a nigger child. Real smart move, you crazy cunt, raise your White daughters with niggers boys, hugging all over them. Someone should tell the bitch that the South has enough niggers already, we don’t need any more. They need to emigrate, the other direction.
That’s what happens when you let a woman run the family, notice the gelded beta walking behind her. Probably waits on her hand and foot, at her emotional whim, pathetic.
No doubt they’re all bleeding-heart Christians. If they’re so intent on helping third-worlders, move there and don’t come back.
Liberians aren’t a bunch of poor people singing in choirs, watch the Vice Guide to Liberia.
“I don’t promote any homosexual relationships.”
I advocate 100% homosexuality for Jews, niggers, spics and all other non-Whites.
“BRA means run for Blacks. Please stop.”
“BRA” as used by OD has been defined or spelled out by OD as “Black Run America,” NOT as “America Run For Blacks.” “Please stop” indicates the position is unassailable, and therefore needs to be silenced.
Lew,
Adultery should be illegal; some states only recently removed the anti-adultery laws from the books. I’m not really sure what your point is about oral and anal sex. For those opposed to homosexuality, the main objection is the fact that both partners are of the same gender, not just the act of anal sex. Even if someone wanted to, legislating such sex acts between hetero couples would be impossible.
Promiscuity in general is one of the largest problems in our society. Certain legislation could certainly be used to combat the problem, although you really need to reform the entire culture. Ostracism and social shaming are also important in combating vice. We should start by ostracizing homosexuals from the pro-white movement. If you look at European history, you see that making homosexuality illegal can be very effective, and does not harm white interests in the least.
So what if Ugandans are opposed to homosexuality? I bet most Ugandans want traditional gender roles, and want to promote the survival and prosperity of their own race and tribe. Does that make all those things bad?
Once again you mentioned ” certain types of homosexual practice” that are not damaging to society, but then you haven’t explained what those certain types are. If the type of homosexuality you accept has never been accepted in any healthy, European nation in the past, how can you conclude that it isn’t harmful to society?
“45 Liberian Orphans Adopted By One North Carolina Community (VIDEO)”
Sad. Some of those people have murdered their own children and don’t know it yet.
Lets look at another vice which, as Greg Johnson himself once said, continually plagues the white race: Alcoholism. The United States had a constitutional amendment banning alcohol from 1918 to 1933. Did this amendment achieve its goal of reducing alcohol sales and consumption? Nope. Instead it spawned a vast black market that the mafia thrived off of. More pertinently, did it reduce alcoholism among white people? As far as I can tell, no.
I bring this up not to argue that homosexuality shouldn’t be banned, per say, but to shine light on the fact that a deeply rooted cultural problem can’t be solved by passing laws banning the particular symptoms of that problem. The rise of the gay agenda and its gradual acceptance among an increasing number of whites is but a symptom – albeit a rather noteworthy symptom – of the cultural decadence that has its roots in the demented concept that “all men are created equal.” Everything in the gay agenda from FCKH8 to the sodomizing of the boy scouts is all just the latest logical extension of the blasphemous religion of equality. A New York Daily News editorial even likened the continued banning of gays from being boy scout leaders to “Jim Crow.” Countenance is wrong: Equality IS the root cause of the gradual destruction of white people and traditional white societies. Equality is an inherently self-destructive concept that contradicts both reality and the essence of being. Or are we to believe that the white race is inherently suicidal? If there’s no root cause to the problems all white nations are currently experiencing, than we’re left to conclude that whites themselves are the problem. I don’t deny that we whites have an extraordinary talent for self-delusion and for coming up with pie-in-the-sky fantasies. Hell, I’m guilty of all that and than some. But I’d like to think that we’re not prone to extinction simply because we’re white. If Countenance doesn’t think there’s a silver bullet, than I’d like to know what the hell his solution is.
Anyway, that was a massive digression. Back to homosexuality.
Here in the 21st century, I don’t think banning homosexuality would be any more effective than banning alcohol was during Prohibition. In order for laws which ban a particular activity to be effective, there needs to be a critical mass of popular support for those laws. If that critical mass doesn’t exist, than those laws will be ineffective. Worse yet, if the critical mass is in the opposite direction, those laws will be viewed as oppressive and insufferable. Just look at what happened in Maine, Maryland, and Washington this past November. (Maine is 94% non-Hispanic white, BTW).
The same concept applies to other vices such as adultery and promiscuity. Traditional white societies all around the world outlawed those vices because a strong majority of whites WANTED them banned. But now the culture has decayed, just like it did in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. Sure enough, whites embrace homosexuality. You can’t “ban” homosexuality in 2013 anymore than you can “cure” a terminal staged cancer patient.
So here’s the point: Seeing as homosexuality is a symptom and not a cause of the downfall of white people and traditional white societies, I don’t think it does anyone in the pro-white movement any good to devote too much time and resources to fighting it. If its an issue you feel strongly about, than fine. Quite frankly, I think any healthy white society would ban it anyway. But we’re not a healthy white society now are we? Nope. We’re a propositional, civic nationalist abomination that is held together by nothing more than feel-good propaganda and the brute force of the military – oh, and a commitment to “liberty” and the “self-evident truth that all men are created equal.” Yeah, sure, that’s a creed built to last. :/
Anyway, that’s my screed on the gay issue. Bare in mind that I’m coming from the assumption that societies are created from the bottom up, not the top down. I believe laws – or a lackthereof – are a reflection of culture, and that culture is a reflection of the people. If the people decide that equality is the star that guides them, than equality is what they will damn well get.
Clement,
You make some good suggestions. We can agree to disagree on homosexuality. I believe the solution is the target the agenda not the people. This would make room in rightists movements for homosexuals who don’t promote the agenda (gay rights, gay marriage, gay adoption, gays in the military and such things). Rohm might be example of this. There is some evidence Alexander the Great had sex with men. It’s the public agenda that does the damage not the private conduct IMO.
“The United States had a constitutional amendment banning alcohol from 1918 to 1933. Did this amendment achieve its goal of reducing alcohol sales and consumption? Nope.”
Christian revival is the only factor that has proven to reduce alcohol use on a societal scale, much more effective than even draconian law enforcement.
You’re a socialist – No-Man
Not sure where you got this. I’m against the corporate-banking oligarchy. Nothing against money per se.
Socialist =/= “against money”
….
Lew: “Tariffs, estate taxes, capital gain taxes, higher tax rates on wealthy individuals, closing loopholes and deductions for wealthy individuals, much higher corporate taxes. A good start.”
Lew: “Free market ecomomies don’t exist, nor should they because they’re undesirable. The most successful ecomomies invariably use a “mixed economy” model. ”
Lew: “Fetishizing the “free market” has no place in any sector of the dissident right or project that purports to be opposed to liberalism, multiculturalism, or BRA. It’s evidence of immaturity, being ill-informed and having the wrong values. Business is among the strongest supporters of those things”
I also seem to recall you supporting Obamacare in the name of “white working class”. I could be mistaken.
Anyway it seems like you want to run with the foxes and the hounds when it comes to things like gays, socialism, etc. i’m not interested in pursuing this further. This is squeamish ‘third-positionist’ online stuff. You can call yourself “Star-Fox” at this point and I’ll go along with it.
Every one of those traces back in some way to rightist thought or principles.
Quite frankly, I have always believed that certain Euro aristocrats got what they deserved whether by the guillotine or just by being shunted aside and into irrelevance. Next time, don’t rule in such a grossly incompetent way, and pay more attention to the public good.
Lew,
I have to ask again, what types of homosexuality are acceptable and why? Have the types of homosexuality you accept every been accepted in European society before? If not, then we cannot conclude that they are harmless.
Sexual morality is a fundamental feature of any society. Whether you take your rules from theology, biology, tradition, or some mixture, the rules need to be carefully thought out. The sex-drive is an undeniably powerful aspect of human existence, and how that drive is handled, directed, and restrained, has enormous consequences for the entire community. The idea that “what happens in private between consenting adults has no effect on the rest of us” is absurd, just like most other libertarian notions. We will never have a true, organic, nationalist community unless we can have some basic agreement on what types of sexual unions are allowed.
just by being shunted aside and into irrelevance. Next time, don’t rule in such a grossly incompetent way, and pay more attention to the public good.
There will be no next time. Regicide is such a horrible crime that the people deserve whatever chaos they conjur up, including what is unpopularly known as “race-replacement”.
Louis XVI was a proto- “white nationalist” which perhaps is synonymous with incompetent.
April 5, 1778: Louis XVI prohibits the introduction of people of color and mixed marriages in the kingdom
Published April 4, 2013 by Aetius
Decision of the Council of State April 5, 1778 recalling the ban on bringing people of color in France and prohibiting marriages between whites and blacks, mulattoes and other people of color:
“The king ….. having represented his statement of August 9, in which his majesty would have defended the future introduction of all blacks, mulattoes and other people of color, of a & the other sex, in his kingdom , and is still reserved would be to explain his intentions on those who are currently in France & majesty being informed that some of the black & one of the other sex, that there trouvoient before the declaration, have proposed marriage with whites, it would be against good order to tolerate…….
And the reward:
“But in France, Louis XVI marched to his death in the middle of 60,000 armed men who did not have a single shot for their king, not a voice was raised for the unfortunate monarch, and the provinces were as silent as the capital. We would expose ourselves, it was said. Frenchmen—if you find this a good reason, talk no more of your courage or admit that you misuse it!. . . .” -DeMaistre
White Nationalism doesn’t solve anything and the white mob are ungrateful fools.
I agree with some of your criticisms of WNism. But in my experience the people who defend the old aristocracy often elide this question. Why didn’t the French mob hang every person who tried to appeal to them by proposing equality, and tell them no thanks? We like it the way it is.
That’s rhetot