web analytics
Emigration / immigration William Shakespeare

A response to Armor

By John Martínez

What you say doesn’t invalidate my remark that people who are cowering in front of the anti-White dictatorship often misinterpret their own behavior as foolish sentimentality.

Immigrants are pouring into Western countries at the invitation of Western governments, and at the consternation of most White people. If White people had their say, for example, in a referendum, immigration would stop. So, if you would like to blame White people, you have to blame their lack of courage, not their foolish sentimentality.

Anti-White dictatorship?! I beg you pardon. Last time I checked every single Western European and Northern American government had been elected by popular, democratic vote. Who voted these governments into office and where do these politicians come from? From what you’re saying, one might get the impression that these politicians are aliens from outer space who came to Earth in order to abet the niggerization / arabization / mestization of these countries, or that it is extraterrestrials who are voting for these folks, instead of adult nationals who have had ample opportunity to see (and live with) the consequences of their stupid political choices for several decades now.

Look, I have all sympathy for the people of North Korea, for example. They certainly haven’t had any say in their government ever since the mid 50’s. Their country was kidnapped by a gang of sociopaths with the aid of a million-strong army. They are real victims. There is a real case to be made that they are not responsible for what is happening to them. But for you to refer to contemporary North American and Western Europeans as poor, oppressed folks, terrorized into cowardice by autocratic, unaccountable governments (as you take it for granted that that is the case) is disingenuous, with all due respect.

I said something to this effect on another thread and a reader, Roger, apparently an English European himself, agreed 100% with me.

Trying to argue that their stupidity and their cowardice is in fact just cowardice is beside the point. The point is that Western Whites are ultimately fully responsible for what is befalling them. And trying to exonerate them from their sin against both their ancestors and their future generations is to assure that nothing will be done about it.


Whites have let the kikes in and have let them take control of their governments, finances, academia and press. Whites have allowed the inferior non White scum to colonize their societies. To blame “the elites” or “the political class” is a lame excuse because these segments of society are part and parcel of the said societies. Besides, the political class depends on votes to stay in power and what’s more, “the elites” can perfectly well be boycotted into poverty, since we are not talking about Ancient Regime aristocracy here. If stupid liberal Whites can boycott a restaurant chain because its owner said something that displeased gays (link) the reason why the treacherous elite stays where it is, is because Whites want it to be there.

To quote John Derbyshire (discussing the Jewish Question) in a context that twists the meaning of what he said (I despise his philosemitism with all my heart):

97 percent of the U.S. population [and the European one, for that matter] ended up dancing to the tune of the other three percent. If that is true, the only thing to say is the one Shakespeare’s Bianca would have said: “The more fool they.”*

If Whites can mobilize for idiotic causes like homosexual “marriage”, “human rights”, “wymyn’s rights”, “global warming” and at the same time they don’t organize to tackle real issues like Third World immigration it is because they don’t want to. They are not interested. If they are not aware of the JQ, it is because they are not interested. And if they keep voting for treacherous politicians who have [messed] their asses it is because they don’t mind it. So let them live with the consequences. At the end of the day, you have to sleep on the bed you made, right?


* In Act 5, Scene 2 of The Taming of the Shrew by William Shakespeare there’s a line, “The more fool you for betting on my loyalty.”

41 replies on “A response to Armor”

John Martinez: “Anti-White dictatorship?! I beg you pardon. Last time I checked every single Western European and Northern American government had been elected by popular, democratic vote.”

So, what you say is that White people want to be race replaced. And very logically, they vote for politicians who will democratically enforce our race replacement. Chechar seemingly agrees with you, which is why he used your comment as a new blog post.

I thought that Chechar’s fight against “monocausalism” wasn’t really helpful to the anti-replacist cause, but it is getting worse!

In the real world, White people don’t want to be replaced by third-worlders. The problem comes from Western governments who simply ignore popular opinion. If you need arguments supporting that view, just google “antiwhite regime”. This blog doesn’t belong to the White Nationalist movement if it takes the view that Western countries are working democracies.

“if they keep voting for treacherous politicians” / “let them live with the consequences.”

That isn’t a White Nationalist view either!

The Derb:

That their agitation was the main determinant of postwar U.S. immigration policy seems to me more doubtful. And if it is true, we must believe that 97 percent of the U.S. population ended up dancing to the tune of the other three percent. If that is true, the only thing to say is the one Shakespeare’s Bianca would have said: “The more fool they.”

What he says is that if the Jews are responsible for the race replacement policy, the Whites are stupid for letting them get away with it, and they deserve their fate. That’s the usual nonsensical argument: let’s not blame the Jews if the real problem is White people afraid to take action against the Jews. Derbyshire is certainly playing White people for fools.

If the Jews are most responsible for the race replacement crisis, the correct reaction is to spread the word, so as to get them out of government and the media. The correct reaction is not to denounce “antisemitism” and say that White people are really stupid and deserve their fate. In any case, nothing can justify Derbyshire’s view that the Jews should keep their domination on the media, should be allowed to keep lobbying in Washington, and so on.

Chechar seemingly agrees with you, which is why he used your comment as a new blog post

I do agree with John but don’t overstate your case: I’ve not said that whites consciously want to be racially replaced. What I say is that today’s whites are like the Eloi; that the white elites and the jews are like the Morlocks, and that the blond Eloi just don’t care (as in the film: one of my favorite films by the way).

This suicidal apathy when the Eloi are en route to be cannibalized is the primary factor. What the Morlocks do is completely secondary. There is a scene in the film that is one of my favorites: when Rod Taylor tries to impede the walking blond zombies to continue walking in the path of their assisted suicide, and he’s completely ignored by the Eloi.

For me, who was two years old when the movie was filmed, and who saw it as a kid, it’s like a sense of déjà vu because that’s exactly how whites are behaving these days.

I think we tend to over-analyze the Jew thing. Ted Bundy wasn’t “to blame” for “crime” in general, he wasn’t even the cause of most crime, that doesn’t mean you let him walk.

“Blame” isn’t divisible, a burglar doesn’t get 1/4 the sentence for having 3 helpers.

Most modern whites are spiritual n*ggers with a high IQ. They live to play golf, eat chocolate cake, fornicate, watch Hollywood movies, go on vacation, and count the pennies in their bank account. Do not waste your time rationalizing the political activities or lack their of most white people. 1945 symbolized the triumph of narcissism over nobility; what you see walking around in the streets are mostly greedy, infantile whites who have never had a day of struggle in their lifetime.

Merely think of the necessity of a new regime, run by warriors and wise men, the true aristocracy or blood and spirit.

Just an off-topic question for all visitors of this site: Is the Botticelli image of the Venus face visible at the top of the sidebar in your PCs and Macs?

The image with the golden locks seemingly blowing in the wind? Yes, visible on my PC laptop using Mozilla Firefox browser.

And this is an opportunity to say I appreciate your work.

James Laffrey

Thanks for letting me know. Since my Mac broke down I’ve been using my old laptop and I cannot know how the blog looks in newer machines. And incidentally welcome to WDH.

Yes the image is visible using google chrome.
From the guy you are tired of interacting with, but who still likes your blog. 🙂


While I agree with your assessment of Whites and most of your commentary in this response to Armor, I have to disagree with the following quotation:

If Whites can mobilize for idiotic causes like homosexual “marriage”, “human rights”, “wymyn’s rights”, “global warming” and at the same time they don’t organize to tackle real issues like Third World immigration it is because they don’t want to.

In the cases you mention above, the mobilization is being orchestrated by Jews and involves topics ( homosexual marriage, women’s rights and so forth) that are dear to Jews and the Oligarchy that actually runs the USA and Western Europe. In these instances Whites are “allowed” to participate, are funded and even guided to success in their efforts. You will note that the TEA party (“Taxed Enough Already”) did not meet with such success after the initial splash that they made in the media, and for obvious reasons.

“In the cases you mention above, the mobilization is being orchestrated by Jews”

If you were comparing Jews to Niggers you would have a point. But you’re comparing them to Whites, WHITES.

What do you think Shakespeare, Dante, Bach, Newton would say about this whole mess? I’m sure that if totalitarian powers were given to this quartet, they would solve all of our problems in a matter of weeks.

“Is the Botticelli image of the Venus face visible at the top of the sidebar in your PCs and Macs?”

I use both Safari and Firefox on a Mac, and Safari on an iPad, and that Botticelli image is always visible and always looks good.

“If you were comparing Jews to Niggers you would have a point. But you’re comparing them to Whites, WHITES.”

I was not “comparing Jews to Whites”. I was stating that Jews set the agenda, decide which ideas get air time, and which “issues” will be addressed by government, and that Whites willing to advance those issues will be allowed to do so by those in control. Whites trying to advance their own interests are thwarted at every turn. Elections are rigged, and nothing less than armed insurrection would change that. If I WERE comparing Jews to Whites, Whites would fall far short of a favorable comparison with Jews in a number of categories: 1) No racial cohesiveness , 2) Less concern for the future of their children than for their creature comforts and entertainment, 3) inability to cooperate with one another for the benefit of the racial group as a whole 4) moral degeneracy, 5) lower IQ …. I could go on and on.

“If I WERE comparing Jews to Whites, Whites would fall far short of a favorable comparison with Jews in a number of categories”

Too bad for them then.

As I have said several times on this blog, you can’t run away from Darwin. The weak Whites will be culled out and the fittest of them will survive as it has been Nature’s general rule of thumb since the beginning of life on the planet.

Tough and sad, but true.

What does Darwinian notions of ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ have to do with the current situation?

I know plenty of ‘strong’ (physically and mentally) whites who have no issue with massive immigration or race-mixing.

I cannot speak for John but I believe he had in mind that those “strong” you mention are Pod people: the weakest breed of whites in all history; Pods that will be exterminated during and after the coming convergence of catastrophes. (Have you read “Liberals—about to be mugged by reality” at the sidebar?)

Right, I have read that and agree. My only point is that in a decadent age, ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ are very misleading in the current climate.

Mr. Deutsch says:

“What does Darwinian notions of ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ have to do with the current situation?”

Deutsch, I proposed the notions of weak and FIT, both of them adjectives taken in an evolutionary sense, caracterizing an organism which is apt to survive and pass on its genes — and, in the case of humans, sustaining the fundamental cores of its mores, culture, civilization, etc.

Off topic

First of all, I’m no prude. I’m not a “conservative” neither in the paleo-conservative nor in the neoconservative sense.

I have shared rooms with homos, worked with homos, studied with homos and befriended homos.

Although I personally think it is not a normal nor a healthy behavior, and that it should not be encouraged, I can interact with them in a respectful and civilized way.

But THIS (link) is ridiculous. When I first saw it I did a double take and thought that I was in the wrong page.

I cannot judge the character of the guy, and I don’t want to be mean, but honestly…

Guénon and that Hindu woman (whatever is her name) on the one hand and this guy on the other?

Isn’t it self-evident?

Do I have to say anything else?


Any time.

The white Hinduist woman you mention is Savitri Devi.

The link you added above is this image in James O’Meara’s “About Me” blog page.

I used to be an ultra-liberal too. Once, when I was doing anti-psychiatric activism, I even said on TV that gays used to be stigmatized by psychiatry but that since the zeitgeist changed psychiatry changed accordingly (trying to say that that is no science at all). The context of that TV appearance was so liberal from my mouth that, embarrassingly, a Catholic friend who saw the program asked me if I was homo…

That was less than a decade ago. Presently I would not “defend” homos the way I did, let alone a transvestite who is featured in one of the most sophisticated WN sites (as if he was a genuine WNst).

I think most of us who visit this site know by now that the majority of whites are useless at the present point in time. We should concentrate our attention on the racially-aware White minority that wants to survive.

The question is:

Does the racially-aware White minority have the ability to survive (which ultimately means: to kill and to reproduce) left in them?

If not, then
“when a people is not able to fight for its existence — Providence in its eternal justice has decreed that people’s end.”-Adolf Hitler

The Titanic is sinking, but the band is still playing and wine is being served.

Since I’ve read neuropolitics, I started thinking seriously that the white liberals (and their replicas among the non-white races) are simply so. I mean, there is absolutely nothing we can do for them. But we can do for us.
Having children in an environment ideologically conservative, it is possible. The European and American cities have already been taken, now we must return our territories by force demographic. It’s the demographics that wins wars.
The U.S. has huge spaces that can be taken by conservative white demographically, which I know are many.
Jews and white liberals are like, this is their behavior, ideology is also genetic. They evolved that way, the difference is that the Jews are adapted to this environment.

Don’t trust the author of that article. He recently wrote an evil piece about Hitler and precisely at AltRight. I discussed the real causes of white self-hatred in an article about a body-snatched Spaniard that no one took seriously because it’s aqua incognita for most whites.

But is it even *self* – hatred? The article suggests that our elites don’t see themselves as part of our tribe. Ironically, Colin slanders the very Man who sought to end intra-White class war in Germany. Von Stauffenberg the “moral” Christian aristocrat planted the bomb…much like wealthy nominal Whites sabotage the poorer “less moral” Whites battling colored hordes.

Nobody has a monopoly on truth. Even flaccid conservatives like Colin can occasionally make an important discovery or provide a challenging new theory.

What Stubbs said below. And I’d add that trying to decipher self-hatred from the brain’s left hemisphere is misplaced; you got to see what’s happening in the right hemisphere (again, cf. my essay on that deranged Spaniard woman).

The same Colin Liddell has an article at The Occidental Observer about the Stockholm Syndrome, a psychological mechanism whereby people show sympathy for their captors and oppressors:

Every day it becomes clearer that White South Africans are living under an increasingly abusive system that aims ultimately at their extinction as a unique people and organic community. So, how are they reacting? Are they organizing? Are they developing solidarity? Are they fighting back?

On the available evidence, and with a few small exceptions, the answers are no, no, and no.

What makes this more remarkable is that we are talking here not about a historically slavish demographic, but about some of the toughest White people on the planet. There is no doubt that if South African Whites had the will they could seize control of the country tomorrow. So, what has happened to the proud Boers and even to the Anglophone Whites, who were always lukewarm supporters of Apartheid but who clearly don’t want to suffer the indignities that the Marxist-racist state has in store for them?

The only explanation is that Whites in South Africa are undergoing a collective Stockholm Syndrome, identifying with their abusers, sympathizing with their oppressors, in an attempt to make an unbearable situation slightly more bearable.

At least, Liddell doesn’t say, as John Martinez might say, that South Africa is a democracy, and that White South-Africans are simply suicidal…

In every case of the Stockholm syndrome, there are the captors on the one hand, and the captives on the other hand. Here, Liddell seems to say that the Stockholm syndrome is between White South Africans and their Black abusers. I think it is more likely that the syndrome is between White South Africans and the White traitors who are still in government, working with the Blacks.

Meh, I don’t see much sense in his assertions.

How do we know greater psychological variance doesn’t decrease the need for formalized hierarchies, on account of the necessary specialization coming about through organic inclinations? (A biological quasi-caste system that individuals naturally cluster around?)

Why do we assume that a strong hierarchical system would be based on mutual loathing between classes? Wouldn’t classes ranging more widely in ability have to work more closely with one another?

How do we jump from a loathing of other classes within our race (which still perform necessary tasks for us) to a loathing of our own race as a whole? Why wouldn’t it jump to the dark races that form a pseudo-class themselves and are more generally disagreeable?


If whites are not body-snatched stupid suicidals, please explain this recent poll:

However the YouGov poll provides evidence that Britain does remain a tolerant country and that the far-right support remains at the margins of society. Nearly two-thirds (63%) believe the vast majority of Muslims are good British citizens, up by 1% from last November.

There has also been an increase from 24% to 33% in the proportion who believe Muslims are compatible with the ‘British way of life’. Around two-thirds (65%) said on the whole most people tend to get along well with each other.

One in five respondents said they felt positively about demonstrations being held against last week’s terror attacks, and half felt negatively.

However, two-thirds said they felt negatively about such protests led by the BNP or English Defence League (EDL). Asked if they would join the EDL, 84% said they would never do so, although there has been a 9% increase in the proportion of respondents who had heard of the far-right organisation.

Dr Matthew Goodwin of Nottingham university, who commissioned the poll, said: “Compared to last year, when we ran the exact same survey, today people are either just as likely, or more likely, to endorse a series of more positive statements: that Muslims are compatible with the national way of life; are good citizens; make important contributions to society; and share British culture and values.

“In fact, while far right groups were pointing to the murder as evidence that Islam poses a fundamental threat to modern Britain, the percentage of respondents who view Muslims as compatible actually jumped by almost ten points, to 33%.

“Clearly, the numbers remain low, and point to wider challenges facing government, and our local communities. But in the aftermath of events that could well have triggered a more serious backlash, the direction of travel remains positive, and suggests there has not been a sharp spike in prejudice.”

The underlining tolerance appears to back up the prime minister’s statement last week in which he said the murder of Rigby on a Woolwich street was “not just an attack on Britain, and on the British way of life, it was also a betrayal of Islam and of the Muslim communities who give so much to this country.”

On Saturday a demonstration by the EDL in Newcastle was met by a anti-fascist protest, chanting: “Nazi scum, off our streets.”

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said groups such as the EDL were fuelling division and helping those behind terror attacks. She said: “Anyone who seeks to divide our communities is doing the work of the extremists they say they oppose.

“The clear message from the overwhelming majority of British people is ‘not in my name’. We stand together against violent extremism, intolerance and hatred – whether it comes from Islamist extremists, the EDL, the BNP, or extremists of any kind.”

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/25/woolwich-attack-islam

I wouldn’t take anything those guys say at face value. Among other things, I’m sure the poll asked the Muslims themselves and other invaders what they thought.

Still, I agree that no amount of mere “crime” and dysfunction is going to turn liberals into revolutionaries. Only absolute ideological zeal can do something like that. A formal worldview that puts race at the forefront regardless of current events.

Baaltanit commented on the conflict between the English and the Irish for an example of how dark violence alone won’t change anything: link

It’s fairly believable, but I have two reservations about it.

Number one, I’m skeptical about a single short-period “crash” leaving large urban centers without food. The EBT system will never go down for as long as there is a government at all. They’ll create new dollars to finance it. If for some reason dollars are useless they’ll create “food credits” specifically for the poor to buy food with. They’ll give out free bread and sugary drinks through some sort of “humanitarian aid” program. If people die sooner eating cheap quasi-poison so be it.

Some sort of equilibrium will be reached, even if the outcome is basically a third-world slum. They will always have corn syrup and soylent green and bad TV shows available. Eventually the rioters will get tired or killed by the police state. The government will start issuing “police credits” to pay their police with, if the dollar is unreliable. The communists didn’t make Party members wait in breadlines.

Number two, I’m skeptical about the White resistance. It wouldn’t be implausible in terms of our ability, but look at South Africa. How much can it get? But the South Africans don’t DO anything, and at this point they don’t have much to lose. Besides their lives and their most basic comforts, which people actually tend to be very fearful of losing.

Unless there’s a change in the way people THINK, a complete rejection of what “society” was supposed to be for the last 70 years, they won’t fight back beyond their individual immediate circumstances, even if they would have had their ability. It’s like Solzhenitsyn said about the Bolsheviks; the Russian people could have stopped them united, but instead each one hid in his basement hoping that the secret police wouldn’t stop by that night.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying there won’t be opportunities, for us and for others. We’ve got a lot of disruption coming down the pipe. Oil shortages, increasing food costs, bad weather, water shortages, horrible overpopulation, mutating bacteria, all sorts of stuff.

China could do a lot with the global food supply, Russia or Iran could do a lot with oil. Some hardcore Marxists might still think a collapse would help them, some of the crazy Capitalists might bite off their nose to spite their face. Hell, maybe the Zionists will go “Samson” after they realize they’re pretty much fucked.

In the end though, an opportunity is only what we make of it. And ONLY a new and coherent way of thinking is going to allow for group action. It will never be in an individual comfort-seeker’s interest to be part of a vanguard, and a bunch of incoherent Tea Party stuff about “restoring our republic” isn’t going to sustain a revolution either.

To create a new worldview is a tricky thing; Covington’s trying it in the Northwest, Pierce tried it through Cosmotheism, Yockey tried it through the Imperium, Klassen tried it through Creativity, Hitler tried it (and succeeded) through National Socialism. Without a pro-race worldview you wind up like the Boers. It may be easier to put something together in a time of crisis, when people are more open to radical thinking, but it’s never going to hurt to have stuff established prior.

Generally, the best way to plan is probably to stockpile resources and skills like the world might end tomorrow and set up culture and families like you’ll be resisting for a century. If nothing else I think the “waiting for the balloon to go up” mindset is really bad for you, it turns you into a spectator at best, and doesn’t even leave you with much legitimate confidence if everything DOES crash. The Mindweapon, NAR, and PLE movements can all be credited with taking a proactive stance here.

I don’t know, but just stockpiling stuff in a bunker with five other guys isn’t a good long-term plan. If people solely live in a mindset of “when the rapture comes” the amount of stress that would suddenly be placed on them if an opportunity does arise would make them convince themselves that it wasn’t “The Collapse” they were waiting for, and they’d continue to hide in the bunker (unless the government got sick of them and set it on fire).

There will never be a single event so momentous that the President won’t be able to go on TV and assure the nation that everything’s under control, and that another shipment of Pepsi will be by shortly. Congress will never come out of the Capitol and just say “well, fuck it, America is gone just do whatever”. So the collapse will be what people THINK of as the collapse, just as a war is won when the other side gives up and stops fighting (which is why we’re losing in Afghanistan so badly).

The only way people will THINK that the government has collapsed is if they feel they have a shot at the title, so to speak. I think that’s part of what The Brigade was trying to say. (Of course in the real world economic and psychological independence is the 90% of the revolutionary iceberg that you don’t see.)

Comments are closed.