The Ferdinand Bardamu article I was mentioning yesterday, published on The Occidental Observer, reflects a sane approach to what the coronavirus represents. But a considerable percentage of the dissident-right folk are, literally, insane.
Unlike one of my old friends with whom I spoke about the trauma model of mental disorders in the previous decade, among my racialist readers no one has thoroughly considered what I say in Day of Wrath where I use terms like ‘psychogenesis’, ‘psychoclasses’ and ‘paleologic thought’. If the Day of Wrath content were popular among racialists, the conceptual bases for understanding cognitive distortions in humans in general, including the dissident right, would be better understood.
Today, for example, Hunter Wallace complains about the insults he received from a recalcitrant coronavirus sceptic:
There are people who are “dissidents” in the sense that they believe things like the earth is flat, the moon landing was a hoax, the victims of mass shootings are “crisis actors,” viruses are not real, microchips are being implanted in our brains to create “a worldwide slave grid,” SARS is the flu, women are the enemy of men, Harvey Weinstein is a hero, and so on. It makes no sense to continue to use a term that lumps together people who have such radically different values, perspectives and temperaments. Many of these people tend to overlap with the fringes of conservatism and libertarianism.
I just shake my head in disbelief…
In a recent Occidental Dissent discussion thread, another irrational coronavirus sceptic challenged Wallace to tell him if he believed in ‘the official story’ about the 9/11 attacks. To avoid another shitstorm, Wallace avoided a frank and direct response, but he may very well have included 9/11 in his list above.
For believing in the ‘official story’ abut the coronavirus, Wallace was told yesterday: ‘I bet niggers fuck your wife and you probably jack off while watching’. Worse things have been said to me. For not believing the 9/11 conspiracy theory, in a Majority Rights article—not in the trolling comments section—an author of that webzine called me ‘jew’.
Since then I’ve decided not to discuss with them again for the reasons stated in ‘On paleologic nationalism’, nor will I discuss with them below in the comments section (I won’t even approve their comments). Wallace is more patient with these types of people than I am.
10 replies on “Dissident right insanity”
In the comments section of another Occidental Dissent article today, a couple of commenters hit the nail about these Flu truthers:
Mostly correct. I read – or used to read – Democratie Participative, which is essentially the French equivalent of the Daily Stormer. They, unlike the Stormer, are successfully funding themselves via crypto (or at least appear to be) in spite of being harassed and censored nearly as much. However they are jumping fully on board the “just the flu” train, as badly as Americans.
It’s very disappionting, they had very good and perceptive analysis of the racial situation, and even somewhat on the religious front (they’re neutral toward Christianity, which is a politically necessary alignment, France being such a reflexively Catholic country). But here they’ve just gone knee-jerk opposite of whatever the crowd is doing, for no rational reason, repeating the most easily debunked crap.
For the liberty/constitutionalist/far-right segments of the American political scene to be publicly perceived as aligning themselves with the virus and against public health is the craziest and most self-destructive thing they could possibly do. And yet they’re dead set on doing exactly that, and trying to talk to them about it gets people precisely nowhere.
Makes me think that a return to political sanity will only be achieved by counter-revolution from within the Left, ala Stalin or Napoleon.
(Also: I spent about a month, years back, looking into all the 9/11 hoax theories. The deeper I dug the more apparent it became that the hoax theories were nonsense and the official story did indeed fit all the facts.)
I am an old dog. In my time one avoided religious or political discussions on the table. Now, one has to avoid talking about the new conspiracy theories: believers get very upset.
For me the litmus test that something is wrong is a guy’s inability to tolerate the slightest bit of cognitive dissonance. The level of abhorrence and immediate breakdown of a civil discussion that I see among those who have embraced the theories of 9/11 is similar to what I’ve seen among Scientologists, who openly say: ‘Never argue Scientology with a wog (i.e., a not Scientologist): just discuss the wog’s crimes’.
That was the attitude of the early church that I have been complaining about when translating some chapters of Karlheinz Deschner’s work; a church that burned down entire libraries of the classical world for intolerance.
I am glad that this irrationalism in the dissident right has come to the surface, as the commenters quoted above say: it was something that had to be openly discussed.
My criticism of the Jew Ron Unz on the other conspiracy theory that many racialists accept, the JFK assassination, shows that even high IQ folk are as prone to intolerance to the slightest dissonance as Scientologists: Thou shalt not read a single article of a critic.
It takes time to realize that you’re a genius CT.
The main obstacle is the fact that you’re Hispanic. It’s not easy to racialists to psychologically overcome this reality.
It’s difficult to Aryans to recognize that someone with a non-Aryan background, born in a overcrowded non-Aryan place can be so superior intellectually.
Not a genius. I am merely repeating what greater intellects say. And since you have insulted me so frequently in the past, very probably you are being sarcastic here.
Reblogged this on My Journey.
I’m seeing a lot of Ad Hominem, proof by assertion and above all, attempts to psychoanalyze those you disagree with, based on what appears to be on an a priori assumption that skepticism of official information is fundamentally irrational. Can you please stipulate clearly which points of the official narrative you agree with, and why you disagree with the counterarguments?
No, I can’t: unlike Hunter Wallace I have no time to discuss the issues with those who believe in conspiracy theories (CTs). I would recommend reading Wallace’s daily articles rebutting covid-19 CTs and trying to rebut Wallace’s points there.
There are a number of very eminent scientists and doctors who disagree with the official narrative. Sucharit Bhakdi for example is one of the most cited research scientists in German history. As explained in Sam Vaknins’ presentation (Who is not a conspiracy theorist and has expertise in epidemiology and other fields). So pray, are they, the scientists I’m referring to under the influence of paleologic thinking? For being independent and disagreeing with the government-employed scientists? See for example an article entitled:
“12 Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic”
There is a Youtube channel called “The Highwire With Del Bigtree” Del Bigtree is not a conspiracy theorist but a professional journalist with a team of medical researchers working for him. Is his skeptical coverage of Covid-19 conspiracy-theorist in nature? He has a 90-minute presentation entitled “DATA OR DECEIT? : THE COVID-19 PEAK”, and there is not one single allusion to any conspiracy theory through the entirety of the presentation, as is the case with all of his other videos. I want to know if that is in fact exactly what you’re saying? Again, Hunter Wallace is not a scientist and I prefer to defer to the scientists on this issue. I don’t know why you’re less interested in scientists opinions than those of White Nationalist personalities.
Many scientists are not trained to debunk such things (cf. what James Randi says about how easy Uri Geller bamboozled some physicists in the 1970s).
Again, at OD (Occidental Dissent) your case will be heard.