I said I wasn’t going to hear anything from TFM but I couldn’t resist the temptation to listen to a podcast of the previous year. I stopped listening at the time he talked about his tender ‘relationship’ with his sex doll, in which he even gave details of his ‘affective’ relationship with ‘her’.
Something similar I can say about what Andrew Anglin recommends today in ‘Manly [sic!] Advice: Do Not Spend the Holidays Trying to Redpill Your Family! Don’t Even Mention Politics!’
The attitude of Anglin and TFM is inconceivably feminine. A true Aryan man with principles would never do something as humiliating as getting a sex doll. And if someone says an aberration in a family reunion, we must correct her in front of everyone. In my case, not long ago, I promised myself not to sit at the table when my sisters are present, or a first cousin female, as they do not want me to speak about the JQ, politics or race. Instead of following Anglin’s ultra-feminised advice I will do the opposite: I won’t even sit with them at the Christmas table next month.
Not long ago one of my sisters simply got up and left, telling her teenage son to leave with her, when I wanted to correct her about a System lie about Richard Wagner and the lachrymose narrative of the Jewish question. My white first cousin got up a few years ago when I talked about the IQ of blacks and brown Mexicans. And my other sister complained behind my back that she doesn’t want me to touch the sexist/racial issue again as I did when talking about an Alfonso Cuarón movie in front of a Catholic priest, who was having dinner with us.
When the Wagner scene occurred I made things clear: my pseudo-family has the right to get up so as not to hear me, but I have the right not to sit at their table again. (They’ll never change their attitude with me; they’ll never listen to my reasons.)
Anglin and TFM although they sound like men, are, in fact, tremendously feminised. A true man does not allow any woman to monopolise a family’s narrative or masturbate with a doll. If family members don’t want to listen, one simply has to stop seeing them and prepare for the revolution. And this can also be said about racist pessimists, as it is always possible to do something, even as a disinherited individual.
In Game of Thrones the character Lord Petyr Baelish, popularly called Littlefinger, is not my favourite. But his biography arc shows a kind of ruthless man to achieve his goals that currently does not exist in the racialist world. Below, Littlefinger describing his philosophy of manipulation at a time when he was allied to the evil King Joffrey:
As a GoT fan said in one of my recent links, the ‘climb’ is a metaphor for achieving power, and the ladder—chaos—is how Littlefinger climbs. When things are in disarray it allows him to manipulate so that he is ahead. Chaos means the great houses overlook his birth, because they need him. It means they are weakened, so they are brought more to his level. Chaos provides opportunities for him to advance, because there are problems to be solved.
I am quoting this because, instead of the pessimism from some racialist quarters, this is the attitude we must have if we take into account that the convergence of catastrophes could open a window of opportunity to climb the ladder away from our PC family. (Remember, Littlefinger had no family either.)
10 replies on “Chaos is a ladder”
To be honest, Littlefinger sounds like a Jew.
From discussions with my own family members, I’ve noticed that “waking people up” is a rather pointless endeavour. Not just because whatever I said went in one ear and out the other, but because I’d first have to educate them on all the literature I’ve read and they’re unwilling to read on their own. It was particularly irritating when they still insisted on talking about topics they know nothing about.
I even tried to summarise the Jewish Question as simply as possible. “Either there is something about Jews or everybody else on Earth, aside from Jews, are psychopathic — particularly towards Jews”. Which seems more likely considering over a thousand expulsions from cities and countries from all across the world? Why is it that even extremely successful individuals have talked about Jewish influence? Alas, it didn’t get through. My nephew said he lost major respect for Henry Ford when I told him he was a so-called “anti-semite” as well.
I once even had a funny conversation with my father. I quoted you, who was quoting someone else. To paraphrase: “Jews are overrepresented in institutions that are against white interests and underrepresented in institutions that are for white interests”.
He said: “Yeah. Jews aren’t white.” And there was not a single spark in his head that maybe this is why Jews shouldn’t be in white nations.
But through these discussions I noticed that whites have a very creepy attitude towards Jews. They get peculiarly and inexplicably defensive if one dares to bring up Jews as Jews. They have no such attitude towards any other race. I found it interesting.
All the best with your books.
The JQ is probably the hardest pill for normies to swallow. I don’t usually bring the topic but if someone says something false about Wagner and the 19th-century Jews in Germany I feel obliged to respond.
My rhetoric when people allow me to talk is different than yours. I simply use my own autobiographical odyssey to make a point: How I was a philo-Semite still in 2008 and what happened in my journey on the stepping stones along the Rubicon: philo-Semitic Robert Spencer and Gates of Vienna (2009) and then Jew-wise WN. I say that what made me cross the river was the 60 million Russians murdered, and how Jews were overrepresented in Lenin’s willing executioners. The first time I said that to my father and brother they remained silent: it was the first time in their lives that someone straightforwardly offered them the redpill.
With women it’s different. They simply freak out.
And by the way, what you say explains why Littlefinger is not my favourite character. But the point was that chaos will open the window (in real life, not because a Littlefinger causes it, but because the System already blundered with an economy and demographic bubble that will pop).
Señor Cesar, Solzhenitsyn is a shameless liar. How could the astronomical 60 million be real? It’s not even 20 million. Here’s the population of the USSR 1925–59:
1926 148,656,000
1937 162,500,000
1939 168,524,000
1941 196,716,000
1946 170,548,000
1951 182,321,000
1959 209,035,000
Had the Jew killed so many in Russia, this could have only benefitted Germany, so there’s nothing to complain about. Russia was finished as an historical entity as early as 1918 and the slavic mass would have been reduced to serfdom in a victorius Third Reich as the Führer’s Table Talks suggest.
Had they killed so many, Germany would have won the war. I’m not a christian hypocrite, I wish they did.
I don’t think that Solzhenitsyn was a liar. He used the number available in his time. And remember that you could do no research in the Soviet Union in those times.
Without western revisions, in Gulag Archipelago Solzhenitsyn estimated the numbers of victims to be far higher than now attested. He blamed the Stalinist system for the deaths of at least 60 million people: 20 million during the forced collectivization of agriculture that resulted in severe famine, 20 million during World War II, and 20 million in Soviet labor camps.
@Verdigris
I can perfectly well understand your frustration with trying to make people see the fatal grip the jews have on their outlook onto this world.
Henrik Ibsen said in one of his plays (The wild Goose): “If you take the life lie from the average man, you take away his happiness as well”.
My attempts in this matter seems to work best with what CT insinuates here: Give them one, and only one, big fact on the matter. Then allow them to ponder on it. Repeat it the next time you meet, and it may actually sink in. Then you can give them one more. If you give them too much the first time, they just jump back into their trenches.
Is this the same way you would treat a child? Absolutely. But that’s the mentality we are dealing with here.
@C.T.
Admittedly, this was before I had learned the truth that Soviet Union was a Jewish project.
@sunhunter61
Thank you for the advice. I have asked them on whose morality are we supposed to care about the (alleged) six million Jews the Nazis killed but we don’t care about the tens of millions of white Russians murdered by the Jews in Soviet Union. Unfortunately, that didn’t make a dent either.
(I phrased the question that way deliberately. I don’t want them to just learn that Jews are as bad as every other people. They way I see it, it would just keep them trapped in universalist moralism.)
On the topic of preaching the 14 Words:
It’s obligatory, yet, it’s not for everyone. One should preach the primordial truths to those who can still listen – namely, young white men. Preferably young Aryan men.
Last night I scolded my boomer parents for wanting to watch TV during dinner. They’re more interested in watching some Scandinavian murder mystery series involving dead blonde women and sexually-abused children than having an actual conversation. Well, my patience has it’s limits. “Turn that shit off, NOW.” I said. They riposte with indignation.
“I have the right to watch TV if I want, mr. Dictator.”
“Stop being so sensitive, it’s just a series.”
“I’ve had enough of your racism, let me enjoy my retirement.”
Boomers are traitors. Their morality is mired in shit.
Gen-X and Millenials are wage slaves. Their morality is ‘stay out of trouble’. It’s the Gen-Z that are the destitute, disgruntled mass which form the backbone of revolutions.
Using Plato’s allegory: Boomers, living their whole lives in the dark, have become permanently blind with retinal atrophy. The newer generations have functional retinae, but can’t remove their debt-shackles. It’s the younger Gen-Z that can both remove the shackles and go outside the cave, to look at the bright light of racial truth. Focus on them.
Anyway, on the topic of Chaos is a Ladder:
This summer I’ve been enthralled with WW2 history after a podcast by Myth of the 20th Century on Viktor Suvorov’s ‘Icebreaker’.
link
Before you delve into your translations CT, have you heard of this Russian writer? His body of work debunks the myth of Soviets being victims of German aggression; that Stalin was a Machiavellian chess-player – he fomented German conflict with other european nations to cause European chaos, in order to both weaken the West and create a Casus Belli to ‘liberate’ Europe.
One of the moral barriers in the awakening process of Normies, is that they want to side with the Defensive Good Guys, never with the Invader Bad Guys. With proof that Operation Barbarossa was a necessary pre-emptive strike (nevermind that Eugenic Nordics should rule the Earth), Gen-Z might view the 20th century in a different perspective.
I’ve started reading ‘The Chief Culprit’ by the same author. Fascinating stuff. The Soviet military situation in the 40’s was much stronger than what we’re led to believe. Communists were preparing for a brutal war with the fascists. The fight of the Germans was inevitable and forlorn. Their chances of victory were mininal. That’s another thing the Normies like to side with: the underdog.
I think some of Suvorov’s thesis could be a great addition to this blog, and any future ‘Darkest Hour’ compilation you might wish to do. What do you think?
Yes: I knew about Suvorov’s thesis. Counter-Currents had one or more articles about it years ago. But the real problem are those whites who simply say things like what Hunter Wallace said yesterday: ‘I have always hated and avoided the World War II era’.
I think most white racialists experience this problem with their families and relatives. Certainly it was the case for me. One brother has not spoken with me for fifteen years because he finds my views so ‘offensive’. I think my mother was upset with my views not so much because she thought they were wrong, although I believe she did think so, but because she thought they would get me in trouble, which they have. I think my father was most open and accepting of them. He was a fairly bright man and was leery of the jews even before I became aware of their true nature. Because I have refused to curb my politically incorrect views invitations to family gatherings became scarcer over the years. It’s a preferable situation than having to listen to idiotic and uninformed opinions obtained from the jews media and stated with such assurance. As you state above, only a situation of chaos and pain will bring the white majority to their senses. Then, men will have to lead again and women follow them back to an environment aligned with the laws of nature. Back to a place with no room for the jewish world view.
I first began to read Suvorov’s work in the early 1980s. All of it then was about the Soviet system and many of the author’s experiences as a soldier and intelligence officer. I believe his real name is Vladimir Rezin. He is possibly a jew but his work exposing the Soviet Union’s preparations for an attack on Germany got him in some trouble with the jewish establishment and various court historians. They didn’t like the fact that his work undermined their comfortable fantasy about the treacherous megalomaniac Hitler attacking the innocent and unprepared Soviet Union. He can in no way be considered an admirer of Hitler or National Socialist Germany though. On the contrary, he seems to have a sneaking admiration for Stalin while admitting that he was a monster. The knowledge that Stalin was planning to attack Germany in 1941 but was just beaten to the punch when Hitler was forced to take action has been known since then. The Americans and British certainly knew about it but the information was suppressed or at least ignored. Court historians had little interest in digging up any evidence which might in any way shift the blame from the Germans.