This was the week that this happened to the Guardian: ‘Alt-right’ online poison nearly turned me into a racist. It’s still up. Godfrey Elfwick has, quite plausibly, claimed credit. Jim’s Law of Poster Children proves predictive yet again. All “rape culture” stories are fabricated. All racist cop shootings prove to be bogus. Now, all repentant Alt-Rightists turn out to be lulzy trolls. What’s next? Should be exciting…
Let’s see… what else was going on?
Neocolonial’s challenge to forge a paradise in Tasmania rests on the very fact That no men are created equal. It’s what made California great… once. Can it hold in Tasmania?
William Scott has reflections on Advent 2016: day 1. And some pics to ponder… including a fresh Folkways Meme.
Mark Citadel has a couple of bones to pick with this WCR piece (which I had linked with a terse, “harsh, but fair”, comment) in Mark Citadel—Struggling Tone Policeman/Self-Help Guru. Tempest in a teapot I think. Mark, of course, is one of the best analysists of right wing phenomenon out there, and has been remarkably temperate in his estimation of what benefit the Alt-Right may be.
Citadel also has a new video up (and commentary) on Corneliu Zelea Codreanu—The Beginnings of Legionary Life.
Filed under Whimsical-But-Pretty-Serious, Sarah Perry has a scholarly article: A Pseudoethnography of Egregores. Well… about as scholarly as the subjects permitted.
The Dutch are amazing at pretending to get along with each other but they do it in different fashion than the Americans, whom we accuse of faking friendliness. Americans on the other hand criticise the Dutch for being so direct with one another but they do not realise that that is a prerequisite for not going crazy. Americans have space, the Dutch don’t. The funniest way this manifests is the way in which people discuss politics in Dutch media: everyone’s opinion is ostensibly taken seriously. Naturally leftist opinions are taken serious above all else and the more leftist your opinion the more often it will be broadcasted, but there in general is a strange absence of serious disagreement in Dutch culture. We all play to get along.
LOL. And also this was quite good: Leftism destroys families. Not that we didn’t know that, but Alf pulls back the curtain on the how.
Natural law follows natural hierarchies—the hierarchies of families. The father relative to the son, the husband relative to the wife, the elder brother relative to the younger brother, the grandfather relative to the grandchild… All these relations have a natural feel to them, a genetic behavioural code imprinted in our DNA that tells us the significance of these relations and our role in them. Leftism subverts this hierarchy for the purpose of attaining power over family members. The leftist sees his father and says to himself: silly old man, your morals are hopelessly backwards. Clearly I am more pious and deserving of respect. Of course by acting in such manner he sets a precedent for his own sons who see their father and think to themselves: Father you tried your best but clearly you were but a product of your time. We are the new generation and our morality is clearly superior and more deserving of respect.
Never trust ancestor myths of recent vintage.
Nick Land spots an unexpected bit of good news on the Treasury front. Not sure if Allison is an actual candidate or a bargaining position for Trump. But yuge if the selection sticks. Land also takes note of an actually honest Leftist. Amanpour continues…
[S]ections of the left still won’t engage it nor even bother itself with trying to win the debate. It simply plods on refusing to acknowledge uncomfortable truths. It doesn’t practice and hone its arguments nor learn to persuade those who are being sold simplistic and brutal solutions to addressing those truths. So high-minded. So contemptuous.
The alt-right on the other hand has done nothing else but try to persuade. It’s strategy has been to monopolise the often small and politically-inconvenient truths avoided by much of the left. Wearing those truths like the cloak of a prophet it has won credibility and trust with a large and increasing section of the public. And with that credibility, it is now in a position to make simplistic and probably dangerous ‘solutions’ become our reality.
I’m not sure we’re exactly winning yet, but admissions such as these do give one pause…
August Rush at Dissident Right finds a whole lotta Pas d’ennemi à gauche in Public Relations for Political Radicals.
Slumlord has further reflections on what it means to be included in Right Club.
Sydney Trads have up another @WrathOfGnon classic: G. K. Chesterton on the Nation of “Tolerably Contented Peasants”… which mildly inflames my love-hate with Chesterton. And: H. L. Mencken on the Architecture of the Cathedral. Mencken is more a hate-love relationship for me.
Also there a Black Pigeon Video and some nifty graphs: How Chinese Colonization will Crash the World Economy.
Neovictorian changes the name of his blog to reflect a slight alteration in direction. He is still very much one of us.
I think the bedrock precepts of and concepts of NRx are very sane, but it’s the sanity I’m most intrigued with. The term “sanity” doesn’t seem to be so much used today as it once was; now it’s almost always “mental health.” I don’t believe that the two are identical, and I don’t believe that the fact that “mental health” coincided with the rise of Progressivism and “Therapy Culture” is a coincidence.
And sanity is getting harder and harder to find.
Michael Rothblatt has quick but effective note: Communitarianism doesn’t imply Communalism. Property doesn’t cause conflicts so much as prevent them.
[I]f there is but one car in my community, and it is owned by everyone, but two people want to use it at the same time, conflict about the use of car necessarily ensues. One could, of course, resolve the conflict by having a third party decide who’s going to use the car, and given the definition of ownership, he would then be de facto owner of the car. But if we do that, then we are in contradiction, given that we assumed ownership by everyone. So, the property is, contra Rousseau, a convention necessary exactly in order to avoid conflict, and promote peace.
Also from Michael: Rise In Productivity And The Underclass. The idea being that they are positively correlated. If so, this could place the beginning of Western dysgenic fertility patterns.
[T]he Holmes conjecture is that if leisure is not always a good, and work is not always a bad, then it is no longer obvious that the optimal level of tariffs is zero.
Sometimes, you might prefer to have some restrictions on trade in order to keep jobs in America.
But you have to be honest about why you’re doing this.
Holmes earns an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for this one.
Free Northerner tackles the Power vs. Culture debate: Legitimacy, Power, and Culture—legitimacy being the operative word. I’ve long suspected feedbacks between the two. Northerner has zeroed-in on what was missing from the relationship.
[P]ower creates culture only insofar at it has authority. Culture is organic and of men. If men do not obey, there is no power and culture can not created, destroyed, or changed. Culture is only changed insofar as men allow it to be changed.
Men only allow culture to be changed, in so far as they think the change and the power causing the change are legitimate.
A very valuable contribution to this on-going field of study and an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.
Seth Long takes note of the problem of Old World Shit.
I do begrudge Hamid’s and the Taiwanese girl’s desire to hijack their new country’s systems to address their old countries’ problems. For them, America is a tool, and they don’t seem particularly interested in what’s good for America or Americans in their decision to wield that tool for their own tribal ends. Staking a position in the Chinese/Taiwanese fight is certainly not in America’s interest. Nor is meddling in the Sunni/Shia vortex, but of course, that ship has already sailed.
Bad Billy Pratt has been away too long. He makes up for it with: The Human Animal and “Of Mice and Men” (1937). It is, of course, another of his patented contemporary social theory-classic movie mashups.
There is nothing inherently attractive about the civilized good-boy who sips his tea, speaks politely, and has an adorable little career with amassed resources. Any drug-addled bartender will tell you that, straight up- no graduate degree required.
When a woman scans her surroundings for the highest-quality male, the civilized man with the admirable career isn’t on her list of priorities. Whether she’s aware of it or not, her criteria is set to finding the highest-quality human animal.
And for an ovulating high-school teacher, that might just be some 14 year-old kid.
Women are sheltered from nature, and thus will inherently misunderstand it. Historically, this was a privilege. Nature is cruel and dangerous; uncompromising, nature is the ultimate fascist. The responsibility of dealing with nature falls to the hands of men, who exist on the front lines of risk when shit goes down and man must protect his tribe. Man, as hunter, understands the unpredictable nature of the wild animal; woman as caretaker will only understand the cute and cuddly, cartoonish domesticated animal.
In modern terms, even if hunting isn’t our primary method of sustainment, men are still tasked with the responsibility of understanding reality while women favor a socially acceptable, cute and cuddly, cartoonish worldview; of course, this is problematic in an egalitarian democracy.
But when women decide to venture out into nature and poke a few bears, blind to the reality that nature is not something within their sphere of control, things can get ugly.
As happened in Of Mice and Men. Fantastic piece, worthy of the coveted ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀.
Atavisionary talks about Choosing sides in the culture war.
Finally, this week in CWNY: They Are Legion. “They” being the enemies of Christ and European Civilization.
This Week in Jim Donald
And speaking of Jim… he kicks off the week with a pep talk on the importance of creating and maintaining Frame.
In their history of the world Rhodesia, the Belgian Congo, segregation and slavery were hurtful evil crimes against blacks committed because whites hate blacks. They read and believe a press in which covers in hostile and mendacious detail every incident where a white kills a black, while piously ignoring an enormous number of incidents where blacks attack whites out of hatred inculcated into them in school, in university, and in the mass media.
In fact, blacks were immensely better off under white rule in Rhodesia and the Belgian Congo than before and after, slavery was necessary because of black disinclination to work for a living, and ever since slavery whites have been carrying blacks upon their backs. Segregation was an early form of affirmative action for blacks, artificially creating a black middle class by protecting them from white competition.
Next a bit of good news: Support for democracy is falling. Which makes perfect sense once you realize that democracy is leftist, and the left has been taking it on the chin the last year or so. How is democracy intrinsically leftist? Jim recounts the ways.
His first 100 days have not even begun, and Jim finds Trump already setting things right.
The entire world has been living under the threat that if you do not install prog government that keeps up with the latest in progressivism, your country will be destroyed, like Libya or the Ukraine. Trump has removed this threat. If the Philippines is safe from the murderous, sadistic, and indiscriminately destructive wrath of the state department, so is Poland and Hungary. Expect a cascade of fashy governments around the world.
Conquest’s First Law of Politics is that everyone is conservative in what he knows best. And what Jim knows best is Women.
Similarly, if you see a woman alone in a twenty four hour laundromat, late at night when there is no one around, she is a single woman, because if she was married her husband would not permit it. Or if he is too weak to stop her, she will not be married very much longer.
Female sexuality and reproductive capability needs to be kept under male control and male supervision. If women have control of their own bodies, they are apt to behave badly.
This Week in Social Matter
Ryan Landry is quick out of the blocks with The Progressive Need For Nurture. I.e., they need for nurture hypotheses of achievement to be correct, in order to justify their spending. Unfortunately they’re not correct, but the ensuing bid up for “nurture” (like “good schools”) just makes everything more expensive.
Landry is back on Wednesday, with the Left’s recent push for Delegitimized Elections… that they don’t approve of.
Hadley Bishop, Editor in Chief, played this one close to the chest: a very surprising memoir from Loretta (The Prole) Malakie: Cornell, J’accuse…! Quite far from Social Matter’s usual fare. Failures abound in this story… of course, and Loretta isn’t looking for cheap grace… but just in case you think academia doesn’t need to be nuked from orbit: Read this.
Arthur Gordian returns with a very fine piece: Rethroning Gnon In The Social Sciences. Nothing less than a “fundamental reorientation of society” is sufficient to our task. (And nothing more, I think, is necessary.)
What, then can we use as a source of the laws of Gnon in our Restorationist study of human and social sciences? History is not useless, but needs to be sifted against the Whig revisionism which perverts its lessons. A purer form of ancient knowledge could perhaps be Indo-European comparative mythology. Mythology is not a pure fantasy but a means by which to transfer hard-won truths about nature through a narrative built on distinct principles of epistemology. A story is true, not if it literally happened in history, but if the lesson imparted by the story is true; this is the appropriate mindset to approach all forms of mytho-religious texts. “Did it really happen” is the meaningless question of a stunted, reductionist mind limited to materialist epistemologies. “What reality does this convey” is the thoughtful approach.
He goes on to make several practical suggestions in the field of education. This struck me as a very Henry Dampierian sort of article, which we haven’t had around here for a while. Gordian takes home an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.
Anthony DeMarco goes on his second “Solo Climb”, explaining The Trichotomy. I reiterate, he and I are not feuding. Our schedules just aren’t overlapping as much as might be desired.
Saturday’s Prose & Poetry went inexplicably missing this week. I’m informed by the top brass, it will be back next week.
This Week in 28 Sherman
Over on the home blog, Landry finds an area of the swamp to drain that hasn’t receive the attention it should: Fracture the Central Intelligence Agency. Given the CIA’s tepid popularity, this shouldn’t be too hard, he reasons. The X-Files was right: FBI are the good guys, CIA is the bad guys. Historically…
CIA is an independent entity but often aligns with the Blue Empire goals of State. Syria is a perfect illustration of this where CIA-State work hand in hand with rebels. If you read its history, MI6 and the Brits foreign office did everything in their power as World War Two raged to help guide the creation of CIA in a mold that mirrored MI6. It was elitist and mocked Hoover’s prolish FBI. Hoover was constantly attacking CIA in turf wars both from a fiefdom angle and a responsibilities angle. Hoover fed McCarthy, Dies and Nixon all information to push communists out and to smear CIA enough that it might be wiped away. There was a legitimate threat to CIA that it would be wound down and portions rolled into Hoover’s FBI.
But alas! that was not to be. The CIA persists, like cockroaches… or bad fish.
The goal now should be splintering CIA to pieces under the guise of reform. Why are there field agents when we can roll that into the Army’s intelligence department? Let DoD select, train and run those men. The DIA runs through similar training and should handle all personnel. Let them have zero control over anyone in the field. Obama had even shifted control of drones from CIA to the Pentagon. Let analysis of data be handled in Langley? Why? Roll that element into the NSA. How different is synthesizing the intelligence from multiple sources? Merge and fire the redundancies always from CIA.
Next up: Hotep Is A Masculine Reaction. For those (like me) who were only dimly aware of it…
[T]he hotep movement is a reaction to the matrilocal and matrilineal society that black men live under right now. LBJ’s Great Society accelerated trends within the black community that were moving to a matriarchy. I wrote once on an Indianapolis small community that was a snapshot for the black community where out of 371 people in the apartment complex only 17 were adult men. The idea that men raised in a matriarchal society would react to their brothers being used and discarded at the whim of women with the FULL BACKING of the government should be considered perfectly normal. Black men become a revenue stream for black women if they knock them up, and thanks to the government, she can exclude him from his children’s life. Why wouldn’t men react?
Hotep is basically a black version of NRx. Modernity is an acid that eats up everything. As with any ecological disaster, minorities are always hit hardest. Landry concludes with a challenge to our cultural masters…
What journalists should be asking and what they never will ask is why oh why is every group within the Western system seeking some form of traditionalism or structural way to repudiate the matriarchal globalist system? People want a way out. Human nature will seek old ways or new ways but will create order to express themselves and reject that which they feel is unnatural, arbitrary and artificial.
Landry nabs an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for his excellent and informative research here.
This Week in WW1 Pics, it’s Flares At Night.
Finally in this week in SoBL: NY Times Goes NRx—well not exactly that, but democracy is becoming “problematic” for the Grey Lady. Secession is still in the air. For how long no one knows.
This Week in Kakistocracy
Why are we not surprised, liberals becoming suddenly fond (Another) Two-State Solution? Porter barely has the heart to tell ’em, “Hey, sure sounds good to us racists!” But he finds a way.
Next, timely commentary, with an historical perspective, on the latest NAMALT outrage: Mogadishu on Campus. Buying the loyalty of barbarous, backward peoples be an efficient solution for any given empire from time to time. But bringing them into the capital as anything more than circus curiosities is not going to end well.
Porter pulls out a chair for veteran commentator D.N. Poolside whose contribution is a Frostian And That Has Made All the Difference. It’s a sweeping piece focussing on the singular political fissure of our time: Who vs. Whom. He sees potential in the examples of Chile… or South Africa.
Next, an ode of sorts to Professionalism, and how almost everything is more important than that these days…
While the existence of professionalism tends to be its own camouflage, its absence often stands out in stark relief. Of course professionalism by our standards is far more exception than rule in the places from which we source our replacements. But even in the West there are thriving pockets of third-World indolence and corruption. I think none more obvious than those employed within the media disinformation complex. It is not their uniform liberalism that necessarily earns this occupation such broad public contempt. But rather their pristine absence of professionalism.
Your experiences may differ, but I do not know the politics of my mechanic, attorney, accountant, or Russian handler. I do not know this because we have pleasant but strictly business relationships, and their role is to competently discharge the duties for which they are being paid, not to advise me of how intensely they care about climate change. I remain their client because they remain professional. This is a key commercial concept, and forms the basis for how people with vastly disparate opinions can peacefully transact without lunging for each other’s throat.
But the media is significantly more egregious than a mere fry-cook offering his gender perspectives over a chicken patty. At least he can theoretically still deliver an honest product. They actually conspire not to. Their business is to report, but what they deliver is narrative.
Journalists, like clergymen, are picked mainly for their piety. Too much professionalism might seem rather a deficit. The Committee obliged this with an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.
Finally from Porter, Opportunity’s Fleeting Offer which he hopes isn’t wasted by a Trump Administration on politically evergreen fiscal extend and pretend policies.
This Week in Evolutionist X
Evolutionist X kicks off the week with another in this invaluable series: Cathedral Round-Up #16: Infiltration of the Church?—a series of spectacular vignette’s of how various sects of Christianity have been infiltrated to drain it of its potency.
Next a bit of haplogroup geekery: Locations of the African Ethnic Groups in Haak et al’s dataset, in which sub-Saharan Africans are shown to be, indeed, quite diverse. Here are the European haplogroups. And here are India, Pakistan, Asia, and Australia’s.
Evolutionist X’s Open Thread contrasts the psycho-social realism of Angry Birds vs. Zootopia. Among other things.
And… Anthropology Friday returns (on Friday)! Excerpts from The Life and Adventures of William Buckley: 32 years a wanderer amongst the Aborigines of the then unexplored Country Bound Port Phillip, the province of Victoria. Buckley (No relation to WFB, AFAIK) requites himself pretty well for a soldier and a thief. But back in the 1800s, excessive credentialing was not required to contribute to the wealth of human knowledge. Included is a detour to Napoleon Chagnon, Steven Pinker, and the Yanomamö.
This Week Around The Orthosphere
Matt Briggs issues a Reader Challenge: Find College WITHOUT Diversity Program. A truer test of non-poz there ain’t. There seem to be a few—shining—examples. He’s down by The Stream with Bioethicists Want To Purge Christian Doctors. Also there: Pope Francis and President-Elect Trump Disagree on Global Warming Threat. I bet you didn’t know it, but See of Peter has a little known special charism, directly from the Holy Spirit, in climate modeling.
Also there, a preview of the criminally underappreciated Anthony Esolen’s forthcoming guidebook, Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture.
And Briggs against hosts the congenitally idiosyncratic Ianto Watt: Do I Exist? (Does Russia?) Part I.
Testis Gratus has a Reflection on the Immaculate Conception, and a reminder that this Thursday is a Holy Day of Obligation (should it fail to rise to the level of a joy).
At The Orthosphere proper, J. M. Smith is seeking Not a Snowflake, but a Hero.
The hazard of becoming merely reactionary is especially great when some fatuous Leftist opinion has become an object of special scorn among reactionaries. For instance, the excesses of feminist ideology drive some men into the mere reaction of affirming forms of rigorist patriarchy totally outside the Western tradition. Another example is mere reaction against the excesses of the individualist ideology that reactionaries mock with the epithet of “special snowflake,” and that too often drives reactionaries into conformist ideologies. The choices in this world are not limited to “snowflakes” and myrmidons, to flower children and men in grey flannel suits.
A Smith drops some Carlyle along the way.
Also at The Orthosphere, Kristor has a tight little essay: Knowledge is Sanity:
Reality edits falsehood.
Or can; the preponderantly sane can learn from their errors. Offered a red pill, they take it; and then the scales begin to fall from before their eyes, one by one.
The preponderantly insane tend rather to double down on their commitments to their fantasies. They resist red pills with all their might. When mugged by events, they question reality, rather than their models.
Speaking of professionalism, Mark Richardson says it’s Time to Boycott Kellogg’s. Maybe choose a prepared foods brand that only cares about… oh I dunno… selling a product. Which gets to the root of the matter: Why should Kellogg’s care about prog-values, when it only exists to make money? Answer: Because it only exists to make money.
Bonald proposes An alternative grand bargain on identity: Try for separate but equal really hard. So long as Brown v. Board of Education doesn’t mind. I cannot tell if this bit is facetious or not…
The grand bargain can be stated this way: Whites make enormous short-term material sacrifices for long-term legitimacy. Why would we consider doing such a thing? Because we know that they are ultimately stronger than us. Stronger because of the non-white races’ stronger faith, their absolute confidence in their own righteousness that we could never match. If it comes to a race war, they will win, and then they’ll take everything. Better to offer them a lot now in the hope that they don’t realize their own strength.
But if not… I think it is quite wrong. Wherever whites are oppressed… they are only oppressed by other whites… and a few (((whites))).
This Week at West Coast Reactionaries
Via Adam Wallace at WCR, Giovanni Pennacchietti’s essay: Beholding a New Pale Horse: The Culture Industry & Foucault after Modernity. A long but worthwhile essay, originally posted by the positively enigmatic NOBODY™.
Alexander is upset with Alt-Right/Alt-Lite again this week in Buying Away Our Freedom: Who Cares? In principle, he’s correct about free speech. Reactionaries care not one whit for abstract rights. But that doesn’t mean that holding our enemies feet to their own fire cannot be a strategic undertaking. Those who live by liberalism deserve to die by it.
And Pennacchietti is back on Friday with ancient, but quite relevant, philosophy, The Heart Collector: Love as Akrasia in Augustine & Plato.
Alexander returns Saturday lamenting, quite rightly, The Decline of Working Class Masculinity & Culture.
This Week in Arts & Letters
Heather Mac Donald explains why Democrats, Not Trump, Racialize Our Politics. She’s also on their 10 Blocks Podcast talking BLM, Trump, Law and Order, and Jeff Sessions. (It’s short. They also provide a transcript for the visual learners.)
Also at City Journal, a nice retrospective on Castro and his collaborators: No More Cigars: From Jean-Paul Sartre to Susan Sontag, Fidel Castro courted—and received—the support of useful idiots in the West. Fred Siegel has a French Twist: How Marine Le Pen quietly became the left-wing candidate in the French elections. And Theodore Dalrymple is there with criticism of The Guardian’s obituary: Still Fawning Over Fidel.
Chris Gale has some Orwell poetry… it’s inspiring enough, if even for a very dubious cause. And a bit of verse from Elizabeth I: Red Pill Queen Poem., and some added personal motivation. I had no idea she wrote poetry.
He’s also got more verse from C. S. Lewis: Victory.
Also from Chris… this on The need for negative trials—and especially publishing them.
Over at Imaginative Conservative: Can the Humanities Contribute Anything to the Modern World? Certainly not from their current isolated academic ramparts. But this was only part one. Also there, PJB: Rethinking America’s Global Role in an Age of Nationalism.
Richard Carroll reviews Medieval Monsters. It seems pretty cool, but too small for the coffee table.
This Week… Elsewhere
TUJ is keeping an eye on Deutsche Bank as it Faces its Acid Test: Italia.
Quas Lacrimas takes advantage of an unforced error: Matthew Yglesias, crackhead, and his snowflake theory of identity politics, to compose a very strong exposition of why Ygelsias and the Democratic Party are not going to be able spread pale-face identities as icing on their wonderful diversity cake.
No discussion of identity politics, therefore, can be considered complete without a discussion of (a) which groups you are planning on screwing, and (b) whether you expect the groups you are planning on screwing to vote against you (but in smaller numbers than the groups you’re helping) or to ignore their own group interests and vote for you. In fact, no discussion of identity politics can be considered informative without this discussion. The snowflake theory of identity politics, by this standard, is non-informative.
B-b-but, what about muh principles?
If you’re a principled voter… well, most principled people are only willing to act in a principled way so long as they believe they are dealing with other principled people. If no team ever wins without playing dirty, either you learn to play dirty or you find a different sport. If only tribal candidates ever win the election, you stop seeing it as a referendum on how the government should be run and starting seeing it as a referendum on which tribe should be running it. Most people are very strongly motivated by the realm of the possibility, whether in politics or in anything else; once one tribal coalition mobilizes itself with enough success to make the victory of some tribe inevitable, everyone else will end up concluding they want it to be their own tribe, sooner or later. In fact, once tribalization is underway, members of a group start expecting every member of the group will do his part to ensure the group wins, and treating anyone who violates this norm as a traitor and a worm.
Quas takes home an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for this surprising bit of analysis.
Also at Quas Lacrimas: Fashy v. Twiggy in which the worst interpretation of NPI Hail Trump Debacle still manages to fail miserably:
What you saw at NPI was not nascent fascism, it was degenerate twiggism. In all of the back-and-forth about who should or shouldn’t use fascist symbolism, and what symbolism counts as fascist, and defending versus disavowing versus ignoring versus reframing, it appears no one taking part in the discussion has the sincere affinity for fascism to call a nog a nog. The problem with the Roman salutes at the end of Spencer’s NPI speech wasn’t that they “went too far” or that they associate the alt-right with fascism, it’s that they were the very opposite of fascism. They were uncoordinated and awkward. They were spontaneous, yet half-hearted. Someone with a serious commitment to fascism should understand this better than anyone else!
Probably the smartest thing anyone’s said about it thus far. Also a boatload of November Thoughts on the JQ.
I’m not sure if responding to Thordaddy is a good idea or not, but PA was pretty good here: White Liberal, Who Are You? I.e., who are you now? He traces the evolution of liberal evil over the past few decades. That picture of Che shooting someone is destined to be a classic.
Lawrence Murray has a review of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, and checks off all the ways that the Alt-Right has lived up to them. He also has a few Alt-Right Office Management Tips… which do not appear to be entirely tongue-in-cheek.
Finally Murray considers Anomie, Anime, and the Alt-Right. As always, it’s a lot smarter than it sounds. For example:
These all remain issues in some form today, e.g. de-industrialization, bifurcation of the labor market into low-skilled services and high-skilled information sectors, and “surplus deaths” among the older White American population. If our gross domestic product is up, why do we feel like Russians living through the fall of the Soviet Union? Why is the most prosperous society in the world addicted to heroin?
Make no mistake, White flight is caused by state-subsidized diversity, and this process forms the bedrock of suburbia. It is the only form of ethnic cleansing where it is socially acceptable to blame the victims. Whites have two choices. Door number one is becoming a minority—which is widely considered to be a bad thing—in a racially fractured, economically stratified, and crowded urban community with a growing share of vibrants (and vibrant crime). Door number two is moving to a newer but more transitory community of people like oneself, who are also seeking escape. Many opt for the latter. They cut whatever local ties they have left (as others have already moved) and relocate somewhere with even fewer connections. Sometimes more than once. People find themselves with fewer and fewer links to the family and friends they grew up with in “the old neighborhood.” Every generation has to start almost from scratch, in a community where many others are doing exactly the same thing, tucked away from the commercial and public spaces of human activity into a world of unprecedented parallel isolation. This only increases the tendency towards individualism and defining oneself through consumption of goods, because what else is there? You don’t have the multi-generational family businesses, churches, political leaders, etc. that you’d have in a more stable village or neighborhood society. The expansion of suburbia fuels a feedback loop of anomie.
There is much, much more here. I’ll stop there… A broad and penetrating analysis on what ails Amerikaners living under the domination of Weimerica. And an ☀☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Award☀☀ for Lawrence Murray. Maybe that’s weird, but it is what it is. The Committee play no favorites here.
Generative Anthropology Blog (GABlog) deserves to be read a lot more. He’s tied for first in doing the best NRx theory right now, and he’s not even (officially) NRx. This week he discusses Principles: Imagining Sovereignty, Fantasizing Anarchy.
Principles, then, are located at several removes from where the real action is, but they are still not quite merely “superstructural” (if we work with the old Marxist model, which Reactionary Future has revived for absolutist purposes recently)—they are readings and indices of shifts in sovereignty. To believe in a principle—say, “free speech”—is to imagine a mode of sovereignty. The government that grants free speech does so because it assumes that in the unrestrained discourse in which all citizens participate without coercion or intimidation the truth emerges along with a rational consensus for the government to act upon. Along with the imagined sovereignty, then, comes an anarchist fantasy—in this case, of free, rational individuals acting outside of government who choose, collaboratively, to act upon and, indeed, constitute the government.
Absolutist sovereignty works quite differently…
Absolutist sovereign imagination does not constitute, as its inverse, an anarchist fantasy—quite the contrary. Rather, it demolishes anarchist fantasies—this is the central “negative,” “critical” operation of absolutism. In the name of what? The hierarchies, modes of cooperation and reciprocities singular sovereignty relies upon in order to exist. Is there something “principled” in this? No more than a craftsman’s desire for perfection, and his search for the best materials, his work on honing his skills, on cultivating relations with co-workers, assistants and customers, his subordination of baser desires to the time and attention excellence requires, is “principled.”
But there is still a principle underlying the absolutist sovereign. Just not one revolutionary peoples are well-conditioned to accept. The Committee award an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀ to GABlog for his efforts here.
Also at GABlog, an equation: Tradition Conserved is Sovereignty Conserved.
TUJ has praise for the newest Mrs. Secretary of the Treasury.
Lue-Yee has an, I think approving, quotation on Self-Determination through Guilds. Tho’ given his cursory beatdown of distributism last week, one is reticent to be overly confident of that.
Unorthodoxy is keeping track of the latest in Fake News, with some excruciating video. I wonder where that Dateline reporter is now… Also there: a pretty based Greg Johnson on the Nazi Panic. And… more on The Demons of #PizzaGate. It will remain #Fakenews until it’s not. Stay tuned to this page for updates.
Roman Dmowski remembers When America Was Great. We’d quibble on Jim Crow, but perhaps it could have been implemented better.
Heartiste highlights the primordial American conflict City Vs Countryside: Prelude To Collapse. Mostly spot on. But one wonders if guys who know how to change their own oil are so great, why do they keep losing so badly.
Not sure how yer Chrome translator is working by Antinomia Imediata expands on O plano de Peter Thiel para se tornar o CEO da América.
Giovanni Dannato has a prediction to make: 21st Century Nationalism Is Not The Nation-State.
The nationalist vs. globalist struggle we see across the developed world is the clash of established nation-states with 21st century decentralized networks. As soon as we understand this it’s clear why the establishment is on the wrong side of history and why in spite of their overhwelming power they can only flap about in furious teary rage as their world falls apart. There is a Tao of the universe and those who try to fight it, no matter how mighty, only exhaust themselves.
The election of Trump is only the beginning of their woes as his momentum carries over and they find themselves under siege in Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, France, and even Germany.
Afro Fogey has A Ramble on the Failures of the Black Middle Class.
Axel McKibbin has an entertaining rant here: The Horror of a Normie (Journalist) Mind.
Welp… that’s all I had time fer. This may be a record number of words. I guess I just quoted a lot. Read the quotes, not me. Debate publicly, criticize privately. Keep your zippers zipped. Keep on reactin’! Til next week, NBS… over and out!!