George Orwell said that telling the truth in a time of deceit is a revolutionary act. Of course this quote speaks for itself to us in the Dissident Right and any deviant deplorable with a working knowledge of actual history, but there’s much more to Orwell’s statement then meets our keen eye. In fact, it’s quite pertinent to our “current year”.
Yes, eating a ham sandwich or foodstuff whether modified like a Frankenfood burger from the villainous Monsanto to the vegan activist barista brewing a cup of supposedly ethically sourced coffee beans picked by child slaves in the war torn Congo.
It really doesn’t take much these days, especially when you can spam social media with the food you just gorged on at Chic Fil A or one of Ben & Jerry’s social conscious ice cream flavors for 8$ meant to impress people on your Facebook feed you think are your friends.
Author’s Note: This article will be updated, edited consistently, and possibly republished as I focus my thoughts and ideas as time goes on. I’m not an intellectual nor an amazing writer. I’m just some guy trying to flush out what plagues our modern existence. Thoughtful genuine critique is welcome. This long post is divided into two parts with the second focusing on ideas to forge a new mythos and identity.
Something is wrong with modern society. We can feel it in our bones. It chills us like a sinister X- Files conspiracy in which our souls and spirit have been stolen away. We can smell the rot abounding and growing in their absence and we know its more than just the curse of a bizarre post-modernism that’s permeated our modern lives.
The post-Cold War framework we evaluated, measured, and determined our identities no longer holds weight. Useless is the “left vs right” and “liberal vs conservative” paradigms that culture, politics, and even daily life were seen through. It’s been rendered obsolete by our new digital age and a “new” set of problems festering for decades behind the scenes that have finally surfaced.
Almost everyone regardless of their political affiliations can see that the world around is falling apart. We are reaping the seeds we’ve sown in the past all the way from the French Enlightenment to the Post-Christian West as our substituted gods have started to crumble.
For those of you who don’t know, Davis Aurini does a regular Sunday livestream which used to have Luke Ford at the background for video and the occasional Bechtloff jumping on to chat – I think John Steele was on this chat too. A month or two back they had a fallout over a stream dealing with protestant vs catholic issues and criticism of the Catholic church.
If you glance back in time Aurini from 5 years ago, you’ll notice a libertarian Atheist with some early Neo-Reactionary Monarchist ideas. Fast forward to the current year and he’s changed quite a bit both in the types of videos he’s put out as well as his life’s direction. (Hell, he’s a Catholic now.) Instead of triggering the libs, he’s become far more interested in remaining under the radar.
Branding. Easy, understandable, and no-explanation needed labels, terms, and phrases with all the right kinds of connotations regardless of who hears them; a 711 worker, Chase teller, Facebook drone, Amazon warehouse workhorse, lobbyist, journalist, brand influencer, or dog groomer.
One group of people in particular have perfected it’s use: Activist Progressives. Those of us versed in the “culture war” and wrongthink have an inkling as to what this label means. Most “normies” however won’t. It could mean anything. Not good. Sad.
That right there is our number one problem. Yea, I’m serious. It’s worse than the deplatforming, twitter lynch mobs targeting us, Big Tech monopoly/censorship, and AntiFa beatings endowed upon us. In fact it’s whats enabled our current beatings and martydom in the internet arena suffered at the hands of the progressive mobs that don’t seem to stoke widespread and obvious condemnation by the masses.
Editor’s note: Post was republished with further thoughts and an expansion upon of commentary upon the impact of history and culture on a people.
“Appalachia’s idea of a moderate drinker was the mountain man who limited himself to a single quart [of whiskey] at a sitting, explaining that more ‘might fly to my head’. Other beverages were regarded with contempt.”
Bold title huh? To some extent the answer is, yes. Governments ARE us. Blame can be thrown out for some issues, but it can’t alleviate our responsibility completely in how our nations, provinces, regions, etc form and operate.
Despite Mongolian domination and destruction for 300+ years, China is not a shithole while parts of Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Iraq, etc. are.
Well a people’s culture are actually VERY significant as are the traditions, heritage, language, and attitudes that shape them, their history, and set foundations for their future. Let’s get down to brass tax.
Editors Note: I use quotes and italics for “white” and various suffixes of it because it’s hard to know who is “white” and how that’s determined anymore. (Mixed? Italians? White Hispanics who have too much conquistador in them? Arabs? North Africa? What?)
Unbearable “Whiteness” overtook these divers as they rescued Thai children who had been stuck in a cave. Pay no attention to the fact that these kids are safe, but rather to their rescuers who were clearly not burdened enough by their… “whiteness”. What deplorables! In fact we should encourage this behavior, but more on that later.
It must be quite the burden. “Whiteness” here. “Whiteness” there. “Whiteness” everywhere! What can be done to deal with horrid state of institutional systematic “whiteness” dear advocates of love, harmony, justice? Sometimes I fear that the burden may be too much to overcome.
The term itself isn’t just speaking truth to power. Lucrative it has become. Over the last few years more and more woke people – often “white” themselves – drop it as an odd badge of honor. It’s now permeated out of the backwater holes and into the mainstream.
Forney with Aurini had a recent stream on Candice Owens and her rise to prominence via “grifting” in Conservative circles. I will say that I don’t hold quite the antipathy toward Owens as others do and I specifically appreciate her role in helping to confirm what many of us already knew about Zoey Quinn – that she was harassing herself and making a virtue signaling false flag racket with it.
It however brings up an overall trend that’s been happening in the last few years and what I’m going to label as “Dissident Appropriation”. We saw it with the anti-feminists on YouTube, the Skeptic “community”, various members of the Red Pill communities, and in the Dissident Right in general.
What did we see?
Even in the Dissident Right as well as other associated spheres, you’ll notice there’s a crop of people – often anonymous or semi anonymous – trying to create a name for themselves. It happened with the manosphere and now it’s happening throughout the Dissident Right at large.
People coming in to make a quick buck and trying to create a product – not a bad thing necessarily – but with little actual ORIGINAL thoughts and ideas. They just rehashed what had been circling in the various spheres from the abstract and intellectual writings of reactionaries to the Red Pill shock jock larger-than-life style bloggers.
Recently me and my wife – who both really enjoy horror films went to see the Quiet Place. I won’t spoil much of it, but the premise of the movie was essentially that silence would guarantee the survival of a family on a rural farmstead amid a kind of post-apocalyptic world inhabited by creatures with no known weakness. This film makes the ultimate use of every sound.
We had heard some of the reviews and many of them were justified in celebrating how good this movie actually was. Leaving the theater and feeling like the cost of our tickets had been justified, we briefly chatted about what we enjoyed about it. In fact, I highly recommend seeing it.
One thing this movie is about is the concept of sacrifice in a world where much has to be sacrifice must be made. It drives home the questions of how far you would go as a parent for your family to survive.
Surprisingly, this film was given reasonably positive reviews by the critics and for good reason; it takes a concept we’ve seen before a bit and explores it in a way that make’s you lean in a bit closer, look at the non verbal language coming from their faces and bodies, and jump.
Foremost, this film made you think instead of just mindlessly vegetate waiting for action sequences or the usual jump-scares and cliches. It presented a world where there were no easy quick solutions, just the harsh reality of trying to survive.
Now of course, there is the usual brouhaha about how something in the movie was “regressive” by the New Yorkers standards – I’m still not exactly sure how, despite being well versed in grievance and identity politics.
The NYT had a more objective review regarding it, but of the several comments that were negative about the film because of muh 1950s culture and because the father apparently is bumbling, fumbling moron who can’t cope with the world like usual. That said, one comment struck me in particular by “Arthur” via April 8, 2018
“Am I the only one who wants this family to get eaten by the monsters? Why – because it’s anti-urban, they’re essentially a metaphor for upper middle class white suburbia’s desire to be free of the constraints of an urban multi-cultural society and all the inherent complications of seeing other people as equal and worthy of participating in their world. In this fantasy the ideal is presented without shame, the white cold war nuclear suburban family, quirkily upgraded, but with their paranoia made rational because MONSTERS, read drugs, sex, gender, the poor, foreigners, socialists, all the things they are irrationally afraid of can be forgotten and their irrationality celebrated here in an entertainment product. I’m not asking all sci-fi dystopias to have more inclusive values among the survivalists, but it would be nice to think that simply keeping your family safe in free standing home on a two acre wooded lot in suburbia isn’t the only option which will be left us when the real monsters get here.”
At first I thought it was a troll, but he does appear to be serious. Notice just how much was read into the movie. This guy is so entrenched in his progressive dogma, he can’t simply enjoy a movie for what it is. Instead it’s been interpreted as not reflecting a desired social commentary that adheres to a certain progressive worldview. Sad.
Most of us horrible bigots over here in the Dissident Right have been able to enjoy quite a few movies that depict people even remotely similar to us as ever kind of “ist”, “ism”, and “phobe” to be loathed and laughed at.
Despite the hopeless hapless doofus father that is enduring in just about every prominent sitcom, crime drama, TV series, and movie, I can still enjoy that media for what it is rather than what I want or think it should be. This isn’t a novel concept.
We don’t want to be like that commentator mentioned earlier – something that’s far easier then we realize. Life is short, and if you don’t enjoy it, you likely won’t have many friends and people to spend it with if everything and anything is seen through the lens of cultural critical analysis.
Sure, we don’t have to come out and pay for some of the “white christian cis straight males are terrible people” crap Hollywood keeps droning about, but letting loose with laughter with a movie like The Hangover without looking for how it fits with one’s worldview is good for the soul – especially in an age where even humor is under attack by newly arrived leftist combatants.
I can’t believe I’m saying this to our very numerous hedonistic narcissists that dominate our society, but live a little dammit. If you are going to pull a Conan on the front lines in the culture war, you’ll likely need to be able to take a break and disengage regardless of your creed.
Remember to relax and enjoy this film with an inquisitive mind.
Color me confused that in today’s modern world of global communication, we appear to still be in those fraught times where the Chinese don’t want you getting too cushy with any members of the Mongol horde and contact might get you viewed as spy and saboteur. Don’t even go near their horses.
What alarmed me in particular this time was that to some gun control advocates, anyone who didn’t denounce the NRA as a terrorist organization or opposed gun control was personally responsible for the shooting and was of course a vile, despicable, human being who supports kids being murdered.
That’s a pretty easy strawman to beat in public for an applauding mob. But wait, are’t these the same people who are interested in diversity? Not when it comes to worldview and politics apparently. In fact dissenters need to be isolated, dehumanized, and possibly targeted. If you can cost them friends and family as well as various public shamings, all the better right?
Welcome to conversation in the 21st century on the internet which is now spilling over into people’s actual real lives. Rid yourself of dialogue and arm yourself with a cell phone and your targets contact information and workplace details that can be submitted to a two minute hate twitter mob.
Have the wrong opinions and be at the wrong rallies and you can be beaten by AntiFa to the applause of self-professed very tolerant people. They aren’t humans after all, they are apparently fascists and violence against them is justified. (You don’t want to end up like AntiFa.)
Perhaps we are much more divided in terms of worldview and culture in America then we ever have been, but since when did dissenting views equal incompatibility with even spending time or associating with someone? When did it start to approach being okay with violence toward them?
Recently I was having a conversation with a family member – one that I very much respect -who was surprised at how I could become “friends” with someone in the Dissident Right who my family member considered to have rather reprehensible views. (Granted, most of my family members would consider him to have said reprehensible views.)
He was particular surprised by me using the word friend. Why would you become friends with someone with views and speech seen as inexcusable or unacceptable? (While I don’t agree with this friend on everything, he is still a friend.)
Well regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, it’s a damn good question.
How I Became a Deplorable With Detestable Views
Picking my friends, associates, or villainous enemies to be denounced on twitter based on what they think or hide in perspective closets has always simply been a matter of how and where I meet people.
Hookah lounges. Bars. Concerts. Churches. Raucous Parties. Parties I will not mention. Internet Forums. Gaming Circles. Gaming Servers. Family functions. Work. My Old Campus.
Years ago before Trump was a thing, I used to play an online browser game called Astro Empires. While I’ve retained a friend from that game, one other “friend” – a rather progressive one – on Facebook told me he couldn’t be friends with me anymore because my views were detestable. We even really enjoyed soccer too! (At that time I was first stumbling across the Manosphere.)
When I reflected upon that moment, the recent conversation I had between me and my family member prompted that EUREKA moment in my puny bigoted backwards brain; plenty of people today view life style, worldview, political, or even cultural differences and disagreements as the whole of a person.
If their views are too far out there or “offensive”, their friendship is something that’s found to be shocking. I find this notion troubling as to what it implies; you are what you secretly dare to ponder upon in the late night hours when you entertain crimethink thoughts about the nature of man, society, and any other specifically touchy controversial subjects where voicing opinions on what you actually think could get you fired from your job because guilt by association.
Talking to people, associating with them, or even communicating or working with them on mutually agreed ideas – even if you differ with them on everything else is certainly not allowed.
What happened to Quinn Norton, which while it certainly didn’t happen to me reminds me of myself. She got fired hours after being hired by the New York Times for talking with the wrong people. Quinn dared to “associate” with Weev or the greatest deviant villain alive on the internet today, Andrew Aurenheimer founder of the Daily Stormer. Whoops.
Obviously Quinn is the opposite of a Nazi, but the fact that she had communicated with him on just ONE idea they shared the same opinion on and that she felt was important produced some sort of alternate internet depiction of her as a Nazi.
I was called a Nazi because of my friendship with the infamous neo-Nazi known on the internet as weev—his given name is Andrew Auernheimer; he helps run the anti-Semitic website The Daily Stormer. In my pacifism, I can’t reject a friendship, even when a friend has taken such a horrifying path. I am not the judge of who is capable of improving as a person.
This philosophy also requires me to confront him about his terrible beliefs and their terrible consequences. I have been doing this since before his brief time as a cause célèbre in 2012—I believe it’d be hypocritical for me to turn away from this obligation. weev is just one of many terrible people I’ve cared for in my life.
I don’t support what my terrible friend believes or does. But I strongly advocate for people with a good sense of themselves and their values to engage with their terrible friends, coworkers, and relatives, to lovingly confront them for as long as it takes, and it would be wrong to not do so myself. I had what I now see as the advantage of coming from a family of terrible people.
This taught me that not everyone worthy of love is worthy of emulation. It also taught me that being given terrible ideas is not a destiny, and that intervention can change lives.
One article that covered her reaction to her Twitter scalping had this particular gem of a comment posted:
“There’s a big difference between being friends with people in private and changing their minds personally, one-by-one, and being friends with people publicly and normalizing their BS. If friendship with the Nazi is so important to her, let them be friends. But if it’s part of her public persona, that makes it part of NYT’s public persona, that makes a big cultural voice voting for white supremacy – welcome to 2018. Everyone can see everything, everyone can hear everything.”
Right there in this tripe of slime comment is everything that is wrong with social media, the internet, and our outrage culture in general. I’m picking on this comment in particular because this is EXACTLY the kind of attitude I see reflected by so many saintly twitter and social media stake burners when they light their torches.
Being friends with bad people – or those deemed to be by our new cultural overlords – is the same thing as “normalizing” their views. Pious peasants don’t associate with heretic harbingers or they risk becoming them or promoting them.
Even if you are friends with a Troll, Sauron, Nazi or worse -a Communist considering their body count in the 20th century – talking, eating, communicating, gaming, participating in gay orgies, or shooting the shit with them isn’t going to “Normalize” anything.
We aren’t our political or worldview beliefs. We are Jack, Jon, Joan, and June who are living life in the 21st century in the digital age afflicted by social media Popes who think that too many “radical” blog posts or social media rants are the absolute embodiment of what someone is 24/7.
Can’t the friend police ever take a damned break? Don’t they have lives? Is this really what they want to reflect upon gloriously when on their death beds?
I always viewed having various friends and associates like a 9-5 job where after you got done talking about what you thought – no matter how heinous it was deemed to be, you then went on with your life. You kept drinking beer, smoking stogies, and telling stories late into the night with them.
In fact, I would imagine myself as a professor or his neighbor. I could have a daily talk with some uber male feminist ally like Michael Kimmel, have very different conclusions, and go back to grabbing a beer with him later while throwing darts.
The disagreements, while fundamental to our worldview differences and how we choose to life life and spend time would fade while we live our normal lives. One would leave work, go home, unwind, and enjoy time with family and friends. Another would go to the bar, play softball or volleyball, or watch the newest Game Of Thrones episode together.
That right there. Normal life.
Journey Of Self Discovery
When you form your worldview and outlook on life, it happens over time – often in a kind of butterfly and domino effect of situations, events, friends, and where you spend your time. It’s a journey, just maybe not as adventurous and epic as something out of Lord Of The Rings.
I’m far from a modern day Jesus, but I have and do associate with plenty of sinners, reprobates, and people who are today’s version of heretics.
Lately there’s been a wave of miserly curmudgeons who want to dictate who you can and can’t hang with. If you deviate, you are labeled some sort of ist /ism or more frequently a fascist or Nazi lover.
It’s not like I went out trying to make friends with hardcore druggies, dangerous online deviants, violent biker types, or Molotov cocktail wielding AntiFa activists. Rather I simply kept looking for the truth and I was going to wherever it led.
I wanted to find out who I was. Being drawn to controversy, mischievous and dirty humor, abstract in-the-clouds freedom of speech ideals, gaming, history, rebellion, cigars and smoking, etc all played apart in the paths I would choose at the forks in the road.
In fact, it was similar creating a character class with attributes in an RPG. I was forging an identity as there were flaws in my current thinking and approach at the time that left me feeling like I was wasting away in the wind while others clearly were not.
What led me even more into the devious, deviant, and every “ist” and “ism” under the sun circles is the simple fact that they were as hostile as I was to control over freedom of association.
Not once did the mean miserly misogynists sexist racists in the manosphere writhe in constant shouting, shaming, and denunciation of myself for being friends with feminists, social justice advocates, Black Israelites, “liberals”, Trump haters, ect.
Neither did those in the #GamerGate, the Dissident Right, and even in horrible dangerous despicable your-soul-may-perish-for-eternity places like the Roosh V forum.
In fact, not once did some White Nationalist or Supremacists types I talked to flip shit over the fact I talked to Jews, had Jewish friends, and didn’t loathe them. Even in the case of me being mixed race, my family being mixed race of various sorts, and plenty of friends and associates being every kind of ethnicity, race, culture, factions and members of various “groups” did this occur.
After a while, I realized where the real “bigots” were coming from and who was surprisingly far more “tolerant” despite having all sorts of views I didn’t agree with. At the end of the day, I didn’t have to be fully 100% on board with Nazis jackbooting in Harlem with a Hivemind to agree with them that feminism is bad thing.
Look what happens to people like Laci Green who are still ardent feminists and social justice advocates who dared to ask questions and not be completely in lockstep. They of course get all the nasty labels deliberately designed to rid them of their humanity, making them acceptable targets.
After all, if someone isn’t human and their views have no place in “acceptable” society, then there are no rules that limit what you can do to them. The insane exaggerated hyperbole and straw-men they are tarred with is therefore not only “acceptable” but apparently some sort of cosmic justice.
Dissenters must be squashed. For some in uber progressive circles where they spiritually and mentally self-mutilate themselves for not being better allies, they reach a breaking point. The term “Peak Trans” comes to mind. Now they not actually suddenly jump to the right politically, but they end up realizing that they can’t survive in a hive mind which allows for no free thinking.
Social media just exacerbates this problem of free thinking. Express views where you question a popular and accepted narrative? People lose their minds and you become a Nazi, ist, or ism. People will take screenshots of denouncing you and “defriending” you.
One is either a hero or a villain – no in between. If you associate with them in anyway or dare to be friends with them, then via guilt by association, you also become a hero or villain.
Pearce Tefft proclaimed that “Peter Tefft, my son, is not welcome at our family gatherings any longer. I pray my prodigal son will renounce his hateful beliefs and return home. Then and only then will I lay out the feast.”
To quote the guy from 300 who get’s kicked into that bottomless pit, “This is madness.”
I have two sons, and regardless if they became die-hard SJWs who loathed every view I espoused, they’d be welcome in my house. I’m not pouring years of time, smelly diapers, long nights, and the joys of watching them crawl, walk, and start talking down some drain filter because of what they might believe.
In fact the mere thought of it really bothers me. I can see not marrying or dating someone because of it, but your very own flesh and blood?
However, this isn’t a new phenomenon. It’s one of human nature. Plenty of family members, villagers, tribesmen, etc. have disowned each other to the point of the sword because of differences in belief.
However that was then, this is now. Right?
Supposedly the Enlightenment and Age of Reason were supposed to put us past this, but they haven’t. I’m not going to bother to go into the reasons for that, but I will say that social media obviously fuels this polarization and dichotomy of us vs them.
For some people, they aren’t just content to “de-friend” and dehumanize you, they also believe you need to lose your job, be unable to pay your mortgage, and ensure you are out on the streets. Your family who you support financially? They don’t give a shit.
I’ve been an advocate of fighting fire with fire – specifically those people who threaten to or go after people’s jobs. However, with finances being tight for myself and with me being the sole provider for my wife and two sons, it’s hard for me to imagine attempting similar retribution to someone, even if they were the aggressors in trying to get me or people with whom I hold similar views with fired.
At some point, we have to draw the line as to how far one should go in a polite and civilized society – while it still barely remains one.
To all you activists out there, regardless of your stripe and creed, how far are you willing to go?
Seriously, consider that so many ardent screaming activists are often far removed from the situations and people they express outrage about. Do those who scream about gun control the loudest with the biggest platforms live in Baltimore in the ghetto? Often they don’t.
Those same people are then shocked when they exit their bubble and briefly enter another where very different views are held. You’d think they’d embrace that diversity, but often they just point, shriek, and scream “HERETIC!” Often, that’s where the mutual conversation ends and the pitchforks and torches begin.
Is this really how any of us want to live? Where we can’t separate someone from their politics or opinions? I certainly don’t, but I fear far too many do.
Many progressive have obsessed over race to the point its turned them into bitter people who can’t take time off to enjoy life. For others they’ve become self-loathing “allies” too busy worrying about their privilege to realize there’s more lessons to be learned from history than just “oppression.”
So take a hint from the self-inflicted pain these people put them through and DONT DO THE SAME.
One things many of us on the Dissident Right should be aware of is history and how demographics across the world have adapted and changed through conquest, migration, colonization, and various other methods. They all overlap in various circles and variables.
Humans are tribal. We always have been and likely always will. Race, ethnicity, cities, families, regions, tribes, etc all represent various “circles” that overlap.
Think of the Google+ circle overlap of friends, acquaintances, etc. The internet, ease of travel, and technology have changed our “identities. Because you can travel 100 miles with a car in mere hours, you and a host of other people can show up at a metal concert, all look somewhat similar, mosh and partake in an event that builds an identity for all those there.
Yes, “Us vs them” is a natural human instinct and its effect up until the last 300 years can’t be understated when used to distract the populace from their real overseers. It doesn’t however mean everything should be “us”, whoever that might be, vs some other group. Not every aspect of life is not a zero sum game.
Now I’ll admit, I may have a bias. I don’t even know if I’m bi-racial. The Turks burned all of our damned records in the genocide, but considering how many different times Armenia was conquered and how many different Empires and other groups have gone through it, I probably have a whole host of Middle Eastern, Russian, and maybe even Asian blood in me. (I’m going to take an ancestry test). My European half is various mix of ethnicity.
I don’t live in Chicago, but even in the part of Illinois I live, I know ALOT of mixed, bi-racial people, not just including both sides of my family and my wives. It’s not deliberate persay, it just happened – probably because the Lake County area generates ALOT of jobs, just as nearby Kenosha County in Wisconsin is starting too. People move to where the jobs are. (Cook County is dead to me.)
Stop seeing the extremes and loud voices from external groups as the complete representation. Most black people don’t care about Black Lives Matter, social justice, or intersectional nonsense. Sure, they might have some agreement with the overall thrust behind BLM, but they’d much rather just go about living life than obsessing over the white man.
Again you will have the malcontent trust fund types who have too much time on their hands and a luxury of funds to major in African studies, but most black people dont. They aren’t wasting their time studying about “oppression”. They are working, trying to survive like everyone else, and enjoy the time they have.
Most Hispanics don’t care about La Raza. The most disagreeable position they might have with you is immigration, and even then, it’s not uniform. They don’t hate “whites” anymore than any other group. Sure, they have they radicals, but if you aren’t at a college campus in a VERY urban city, they won’t care.
Interracial sex and in some cases marriage is inevitable. Hell, in 50 years, it will be harder to tell who is mixing with who. Just because it’s been weaponized by progressive race obsessed miserable fanatics doesn’t mean it’s somehow wrong, bad, or negative.
What’s inevitable about it? Simply history shows that groups will intermingle given migration, conquest, or in today’s day the ability to simply pack up and move. Sure, there are some rather nasty statistics that have been mentioned ad nauseum already that we shouldn’t overlook. (Particularly that most black men regardless of the race of the women they have children with often don’t just refrain from marrying the mother, but often leave her as well. Granted I have a strong sympathy for black men – not because of racism/opression, but that’s for another time.)
Those of us in the “manosphere” should be very familiar with the numerous reasons why black and white men in particular might choose to date and marry outside of their race and I can’t fault them for it either.
While the DailyStormCucks are obsessing about white purity and how it looks via ghetto trash representatives and the occasional armchair philosphers, they keep overlooking that what it means to be “white” has changed drastically in the last 100 years alone.
Zimmerman was a “White Hispanic”. Italians, Greek, and various Balkanites weren’t white 100 years ago. Just two hundred years ago the Irish were looked at as mongrels. We can’t even tell if people from North Africa are White, Arab, or “African” or some mixture of all or how different they are from each other in the two thousand years of constant warfare between each other, invasions, conquests, and migrations.
Even Hispanics originating from Hispania – that’s Spain and Northwest Africa – are part white and whatever else after mixing with the local natives – another example of “interracial” inevitability. Look at other parts of the world.
How many people from Asia and the Middle East have Mongolian, Seljuk Turk, or Mughal in them? How many people alone are descended from Genghis Khan today? How many people in Western Europe, Russia, etc have Scandinavian Viking in them? Yes, the Japanese and Han Chinese might be their own exceptions.
Racial purity isn’t necessarily good or bad, but it’s unlikely somewhere like the US where you’ve had various waves of immigration. Yes, people do stick to their own groups, but plenty will look for love elsewhere and where it’s most easily available. (Not to exclude opportunity, work, education, etc.)
Acknowledging racial, ethnic, gender, etc differences is important. Ignoring them doesn’t make any of it go away. James Damore was fired for daring to talk about it.
If we don’t, we will never be able to improve our lot, or those around us. Dave Rubin did an interview with Stefan Molyneux on the subject, and while I’m not sure I place the same stake in “IQ” tests that he does, it’s worth watching to see how it affects how we live. (Criticism from a left-leaning source here.)
Acknowledging racial and ethnic differences doesn’t mean we need to sterilize “low IQ” people or thrust some crazy eugenic influence into law like the early social progressives tried to do with their social Darwinism.
It simply means that we need to address what we know. Now there’s plenty of insanity in this category with lots of supposed “pseudo-science” being clung around, but regardless the more we talk about it, the better it can be vetted.
There’s this idea that high IQ people have no flaws and are always ideal to a countries prosperity and success. Sure, they are important, but their penchant to do evil with their brilliance is also a possibility. Low IQ types may resort to crime, but many don’t and won’t.
Africa might have some of the lower IQ averages, but it’s more of an indication of constant and complete population displacement and a lack of exposure and well traveled trade routes that facilitate the exchange of knowledge and eventual academic undertaking.
Give some place like Uganda relative peace, 500 years of generations being exposed to a consistent 8th grade level education, majority of the populace being literate and watch what happens. Europe, the Middle East, or Asia didn’t magically build universities, hospitals, ect in 100 years.
It’s going to take time for the 3rd world to get to a 2nd world level. Unfortunately for Africa, the corruption that is so innate to MANY of the cultures of African countries – and the governments there -will test to see if it’s possible. Perhaps the worldview shift taking place in parts of Africa – the rise of Christianity – will start to have an effect on the corrupt culture.
Don’t forget the kind of effect Christianity had on the culture and peoples of the Germanic tribes, Gauls, Franks, Danes, and even the Vikings. Look at what Sweden became – or virtually all of Europe for that matter. It didn’t happen overnight.
Ideas have consequences, regardless of the culture they are from. If there’s anything history tells us, it’s that certain ideas – often many of those in the Anglosphere, some in Asia, and others in Europe and the Americas can uplift a society.
The Middleast is stuck where it is for a reason, despite dominance up to the mid 17th century. An industrial revolution and the ideas necessary for it never took old. The same can be said for most of Africa.
With the introduction of the internet and incredible easy accessible means to learn, share, and obtain information, that may change. However, it will take at least several generations for those changes to start to take root and have results.
You can’t have a cohesive stable functional identity based on race. You can have one based on commonalities, but race doesn’t quite fit the bill here. Brazilians don’t have much in common with the Venezuelans, the Poles with the English, the Japanese with the Vietnamese, the Nigerians with the Somali, etc.
Even similar ethnicities like the Belgian Walloons and Flemmings don’t have much in common, despite sharing the same country. Old ties die hard.
A “white” ethnostate is not just a stupid idea – considering what alt right whites like Spencer and ultra liberal whites like Michael Moore have in common, but an impractical one. It’s just as dumb as any other racial ethnostate. The modern world and means of travel make it an impossible one.
Also the constant melding of people over time means one wont know who is necessarily white, black, brown, asian ect over time if the Hispanics – who are partially white just from their spanish roots – are already demonstrating. The “mutt” of various European blood which intermixed will soon happen here on an even bi-racial scale here.
Sure, you might be able to form an identity based on who you are comfortable living next to, but spend some time in urban, rural, and everywhere in between and you’ll find out how different the world is.
Yes, we are tribal. I feel loyalty to men in the manosphere, as well as some of those in the dissident right, but my familial obligations and loyalty come first – even more so than I thought.
Right there is where you form your identity. Family isn’t necessarily biological and blood related – it’s the close friends, often in similar circles, you make over your lifetime that become like blood. This is where we must start.