“Read Evola on the metaphysics of sex. When sex becomes an end unto itself, rather than a means to an end, the Collapse phase of a Culture is well underway.”
—Fourmyle of Ceres, addressing homophiles at a WN webzine
Categories
“Read Evola on the metaphysics of sex. When sex becomes an end unto itself, rather than a means to an end, the Collapse phase of a Culture is well underway.”
—Fourmyle of Ceres, addressing homophiles at a WN webzine
11 replies on “Degenerate sex”
I’m utterly disgusted by my perusal of the commentary. These idiots believe that the Jews have brainwashed Nordics into loathing homosexuals. What a crock of crap. The Bible has nothing to do with my disgust at homosexuality and sodomy as sexual perversions.
This O’Meara character is a freak who lusts after his own kind and fellates other men. The punishment for that is DEATH. He’s not a good stylist either. He writes in a faux-intellectual fashion full of faggy “pizazz”. Half the crap that he and Johnson discuss is degenerate. They are children of rock’n’roll, crap literature, deviated spiritualism, and espousers of an idiotically amalgamated, skewed philosophy.
These grotesque turds are the doyens of “WN”?! We really are in the Kali Yuga!
My God am I happy that I have purposefully abstained from visiting that rock’n’roll loving site! The hell with these people.
IFA
http://www.iranianforaryans.com
What is crystal-clear to me is the following:
When Fjordman and others said at Gates of Vienna that only Jews or half Jews could criticize Jews objectively (which aprioristically invalidates MacDonald, you and me), with the “Baron” seeming to agree, I purchased a copy of an academic treatise by a Jewish erudite on the history of anti-Semitism and took the trouble to quote at length most chapters of his book. Then I linked the quotations in GoV.
No avail! The GoV-ers simply ignored my efforts and shunned me, giving the lie to their previous claim that they would be willing to discuss with a Jew (albeit in form of my typed long quotations) who criticizes his tribe.
Something analogous happened at Counter-Currents (CC). Johnson had many opportunities to discuss the subject of homosexuality with a civil like me. After all, in 2010 and 2011 I had expressed dismay of the way Linder, Giles and Wallace spoke about Johnson’s apparent preferences. And this year I wrote that long Gitone essay trying to rebut the basic tenets of the homophilia at CC (my most unusual essay should have been published and discussed there; I had sent a link to Johnson by mail). Finally, I got upset because of the interminable flow of articles Johnson publishes authored by two overt homos, and tried to say something about one of them that didn’t pass thru Johnson’s filter.
The truth is that CC and GoV have traits of the quintessence of Liberalism: protecting a chosen minority (homos and Jews respectively). Those subjects are not controversial for the “Baron” and Johnson. They’re utter taboo. They simply suppress all dissident discussion in their respective blogs even if those who want to discuss the issues show nothing but good faith.
I don’t even read CC any longer. The whole site has become a grotesquery: welcome to WNism!
Well, but let’s not forget that according to Evola that this end isn’t procreation at all.
You’re correct. It’s an attempt to remake the monad and transcend. I fail to see how sodomy does that. Indeed, it just leaves the offenders, like Donovan, O’Meara and now perhaps Johnson, with feces on their members.
That’s both disgusting and abnormal.
“Sodomy” isn’t necessarily part of homosexuality, let alone homophilia. The history of Greece can teach you that. Also, “sodomy” isn’t exactly that uncommon among “heterosexuals” as well, and that has been around for ages.
Good points, but whom are we kidding? The Greeks were deviant in this regard, sodomy or intercrural sex or no contact, notwithstanding. Even if it were platonic, which it wasn’t, this was disgusting.
At least men who sodomize women are sodomizing women, not other men or livestock. The man’s attention is on woman not boys or mares.
I’m getting sick of these movement intellectuals trying to infuse their petty philosophical pet fancies into the tenets of White Nationalism. Whether that be “Jews can be White too!” in the Gates of Vienna realm, or, “we should embrace White Nationalist homosexuals!” in places like Counter-Currents.
Honestly, if one is SECRETLY a sodomite homosexual but is willing to die and fight in the name of a White Nation, I wouldn’t turn them away.
If they wanted to clandestinely find their same-sex partner on the internet and in the streets of a White Nation, I wouldn’t waste resources funding some Saudi-Arabian style ministry of virtue to hunt them down.
Is homosexuality a sign of a society in decline? Absolutely, and I would hang the first man in the White Nation who would declare homosexuals as those in need of recognition, celebration, or protection. But we have bigger fish to fry then to try and repeat the same moral battles the West has already fought and lost long ago. Their is nothing salvageable in this land of the multikult accept for the physical genetic stock of the occidental man and women. Our goal is to completely separate, to build from something strong and foundational, something that cannot be easily mutated by the nihilism and relativism of the Jewish intellectual.
Democracy can be easily corrupted by Jewish influence. As can capitalism, or communism, or banking, or Christianity.
The spiritual sense blood and kin of one’s ancestors, however, cannot be undone and bastardized so easily. It is so simple, so fundamental, that it cannot be used against us like the European intellectual creations of old.
That being said, within the movement it is clear our intellectuals habitually devolve solid movements into esoteric standstills.
The building blocks of White Nationalism are simple: White men willing to fight our enemies, to breed with white women and only white women, and to orient their lives and their beliefs, with the best of their ability, in the name of the 14 words.
They need not be Christian, they need not be Pagan, they need not be gay or bisexual or steeped in the words of Nietzsche.
They need only be White men of the 14 words.
Why most our movement be so intellectually complicated when our goal is so fundamentally clear?
But there’s the rub. I got upset at CC when I didn’t find explicit that either Jack D. or James O. were willing to sacrifice their lives for the 14 words. Jack’s priority seems to be men who like things manly, and James is mainly interested in his “wild boys”. Or am I missing something in their writing?
Because radical, embryonic movements are always founded by weirdos, it’s only when it gains a reasonable amount of mass that people of sounder mind incorporate.
I don’t read CC that much, and when I do its mostly for entertainment reasons since its interesting to see a hipster/liberated leaning towards White Nationalist views.
If they said, however, that they would not die for something like the 14 words, than clearly they’re mere intellectuals enjoying a White Nationalist past time and should be ignored all together.
That is, sadly, a precise way to put it.
Is the Northwest Front really the way? I’ve been considering it, but there’s always that nagging thought in the back of my mind that Harold has merely built a very convincing and elaborate charade to attract foolish people and their money. The insipid personal attacks against him seem petty and I smell bullshit, but how can I really disprove them? I was not there, nor do I have the time or ability to dig deeply in through the web of lies. The NF is simply too controversial within the movement, and such controversy is literal kryptonite for real White advocacy due to our cyberspace entanglement. To break free from the virtual WN squawk-box, one must believe they can merely walk outside, meet people like Covington, and be convinced they’re men and organizations to rally around.
If Harold is right though, and he does construct these racially conscious white communities (which I hope to join) then there will finally be a beacon in this sea of multikult darkness.
Off-topic: this is the first time in the recent memory that I’ve seen Jared Taylor mention specifically Jews in a derisive manner, even if its a mere quick judgement. (link)
Maybe there are more who pass the ultimate litmus test in the racialist movement than we’d like to believe, but for reasons unknown keep the truth to themselves?
I am also relatively new to the movement—arrived long after these debilitating affairs took place. Re Covington, if you want to follow the white rabbit, click on the word “Trainspotter” in that entry. I don’t criticize Covington on the Internet because it’s the only available plan to fight back (Mark’s alternative is a little awful for my mind: see my reply to Mark after his comment). The best way to make one’s own mind about the Northwest Front is to pay a visit to Covington: precisely the scouting trip that he very much recommends.
One thing is clear to me: I feel uncomfortable with reactionaries (AltRight, OD, MR, CC, the commenters at TOO, etc) and comfortable with revolutionaries (the late Pierce, Sebastian Ernst Ronin, Covington and perhaps Severus Niflson too).