web analytics

Category: Michael O’Meara

Categories
Michael O'Meara Racial right

Oasis

Concerned about the events of this month, I began my work this morning by visiting the main sites of white nationalism. I felt completely dehydrated when I ran into the usual: these guys are bourgeois to the core! Not even with this transitional government that will hand over all power to an anti-white mulatta after the senile man doesn’t run for a second term, do they speak like Aryans.

Desperate, in a search engine I typed the words ‘revolution’ and the name of the retired revolutionary writer ‘Michael O´Meara’. I came across an oasis in the desert! I am referring to the article I posted today, ‘Against white reformists’, although I had already quoted some of those passages almost seven years ago. The first sentence of the article was the water that brought me back to life after wandering in the wasteland of white nationalism: ‘Almost as depressing as the thought of our people’s extinction is that of the white opposition to it’. He added:

Our people face extinction, it follows, because the entire structure of Western life—culture, civilisation, economy, whatever you want to call it—betrays the defining essence of their being.

A huge flaw in American white nationalism, and this is one of O’Meara’s greatest insights, is that it isn’t enough to expose Jewry but rather the enablers of Jewry: the whites themselves. In my opinion that happened from the bishops of the Constantine House to date.

The development of alternative media, consciousness raising, various local activities to defend white existence must, to start, give no credence to the reformist snare that the system can be made receptive to white interests. This illusion is the greatest treason.

This reminds me of what Greg Johnson said on his most recent podcast: that the only thing we can do is keep talking in the hope that someone in power will support us sooner or later: a feminine stance unworthy of a true Aryan. But Johnson is not alone. All the sites that were ‘dehydrating’ me in the morning say virtually the same thing. As O’Meara predicted, ‘Only a social crisis set off by some cataclysm that makes their normal way of life impossible will cause them to look for alternatives’, to which he adds:

The white race will be reborn, then, not by electing Congressmen, hiring lobbyists, and participating in a system that seeks its destruction, but by returning to its original self—and to the challenge of creating a new elite, a revolutionary vanguard morally and organisationally armed to stand against the Jewish age—so that when the foul system supporting it collapses in decay, there will be someone around to fight for our fair share of the spoils. It’s in this way that the nobles of blood and spirit are born and come to rule.

Yes: this is not the time to write the obituary of the white race as the dollar crisis that we have been talking about is getting closer and closer. And Biden or his current VP when she reaches the presidency will likely be the fallen guy when the American currency collapses. By the way, when in 2014 I had already quoted some passages from O’Meara’s article a commenter said: ‘O’Meara pretty well nailed the White apathy problem here. Whites are unlikely to act, except as a response to dire economic, social and political crises. They really have to realise that they are threatened, dispossessed and hungry, before they will act’.

Very true. And speaking of those who dehydrated me recently, Richard Spencer confessed that he is interested in political stability (!) in his country with the excuse that he has a family, etc. Wanting stability for the establishment is the greatest treason, as O’Meara would say.

Compare such bourgeois way of thinking with what I wrote, and quoted from a Game of Thrones fan, in November 2019 about Baelish’s words, Chaos is a ladder: The character 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 doesn’t exist in the racialist world. Watch here Littlefinger describing his philosophy of manipulation at a time when he was allied to the evil King Joffrey. A fan wrote:

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 (he wasn’t a noble), 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 wonder who among so-called nationalists wants System stability, and who craves for utter chaos so that those who fight shall share the spoils after the dollar crashes?

____________

(*) ‘The Climb’ was the sixth episode of the third season of the HBO medieval fantasy television series Game of Thrones.

Categories
Conservatism Democracy Michael O'Meara Racial right

Against white reformists

Editor’s note: The following text by Michael O’Meara originally appeared on Vanguard News Network, September 24, 2007 and Greg Johnson later republished it on Counter-Currents, July 17, 2012. It also appears in O’Meara’s book Toward the White Republic.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

‘Je crois à la Révolution dans la mesure où je ne crois ni à la durée ni à la valeur de la Société qui m’entoure’. —Pierre Drieu La Rochelle (pic left)

Almost as depressing as the thought of our people’s extinction is that of the white opposition to it.

It’s not just that this opposition is minuscule in number, confined to the internet, has a negative rather than a positive understanding of what needs to be done, lacks consensus as to its common aim, and attracts a great many asocial, dysfunctional types incapable of sustaining any sort of nationalist resistance.

Worse, it seems at times not even to know the enemy. Whether racial conservatives endeavouring to stem the rising tide of colour and get back to the high ground of pre-1965 America or white nationalists ‘who are not revolutionaries, but paleoconservatives who don’t want to change the system, but to make it work for them’, the white opposition fixates on media (i.e., the internet), on consciousness raising, and on political policies aimed at reforming a system that is inherently anti-white.

Worse still, its Sisyphean activities are engaged in the belief that the old white America, dedicated to money-making and happiness, can be won back and is worth winning, that this can be done through ideas, in the form of media-conveyed information, exposés, and arguments, and through existing institutional channels, like the courts and the electoral system.

If only it were that simple.

Our people face extinction not because the Jews or the liberals monopolise the media, force feed us anti-white ideas, control the leading institutions, and wield all the power and influence. This is a big part of it, to be sure, but to see things solely—or principally—in these terms is to overlook the last two or three centuries of Western history.

The threat to white existence is profound, rooted in the civilisational, ontological, and spiritual disorders undergirding the Judaification presently pervading our daily lives.

When Yuri Slezkine boasts that the modern age is the Jewish age, he gets to the heart of this in a way few white nationalists ever do. Based on the Levantine behaviour of ‘rule breakers, border crossers, and go-betweens’, the entire course of the modern Jewish age works, in effect, toward our collective de-Aryanization.

Since its advent, with the liberal-democratic revolutions of the late 18th century, the Modern West, unlike its Medieval and Ancient counterparts, has shed all sense of tradition, transcendence, and fidelity; it violates the natural order of things; it pursues a purely practical, economic course geared to the lowest order of existence; it can’t see the higher points of reference; and it replaces the rights of blood and heritage with false creeds and material acquisitions.

Whether the modernisation spurred by the liberal-democratic revolutions was inherently Judaifying or not (the anti-Semitic tradition is divided on the question) is irrelevant to the fact that Judaification and modernisation—what Kevin MacDonald calls ‘the rise of Jewish power and the disestablishment of the specifically European nature of the US’—happened in tandem, being obverse expressions of the same historical phenomenon.

With the advent of modernity’s Judaification, the Aryan spirit that gave form to our race at the dawn of history and accompanied it through every subsequent stage of its Greco-Roman, Celtic, Germanic, Slavic, and European growth was exiled from the world.

Our people face extinction, it follows, because the entire structure of Western life—culture, civilisation, economy, whatever you want to call it—betrays the defining essence of their being.

What is to be done?

The development of alternative media, consciousness raising, various local activities to defend white existence must, to start, give no credence to the reformist snare that the system can be made receptive to white interests. This illusion is the greatest treason. For it is the system itself, communicating vessel of the Jews’ lunar spirit, that de-Aryanizes us, contaminates our blood, and seeks our destruction. It is the enemy. It cannot be reformed, only abandoned—if we are to live. All talk of working through it is but Utopian chatter, better left to sheenies, darkies, and schoolteachers.

The notion that racialists follow the left’s Gramscian ‘march through the institutions’ is equally unserious. Covington’s Northwest Volunteer Army is a hundred times more realistic than the thought of re-establishing the integrity of white life through elections or an expanded media.

Of necessity, our course must be Aryan, not American. The old America may have been racially conscious, but in a typically liberal way, privileging the lower functions of production and reproduction—which fated it to become ‘capitalist, cosmopolitan, and anti-national’. Its racialism was thus not the blood consciousness native to the warriors who sired our race, just as its upper world of wheeling-dealing money men, bought politicians, and leading families is but the respectable verso of its criminal underworld—alien to traditional Aryan standards of hierarchy, form, virility, transcendence, authority, and sovereignty.

As for the white masses—whose vegetative existence is lived unconscious of the higher forces governing them and oriented to the materialist and family concerns of the lower orders—they’ll never be moved by ideas and principles openly challenging the existing order. Only a social crisis set off by some cataclysm that makes their normal way of life impossible will cause them to look for alternatives. And at that point, what matters most will not be ideas and principles, but men and organisations whose exemplary stature instils in them the confidence for decisive action.

What need, then, have we for more education, more programs, more market strategies, more media, more time in the Gay Old Party to make the existing anti-white system work for us? Any self-respecting white man who wants to know what’s going on or what to do doesn’t have far to search. All the answers are already there, waiting for the taking.

In any case, the increasingly totalitarian character of contemporary liberalism, not to mention the plantation of a hundred million muds on our soil, makes the entertainment of such reform an exercise in folly.

The white race will be reborn, then, not by electing Congressmen, hiring lobbyists, and participating in a system that seeks its destruction, but by returning to its original self—and to the challenge of creating a new elite, a revolutionary vanguard morally and organisationally armed to stand against the Jewish age—so that when the foul system supporting it collapses in decay, there will be someone around to fight for our fair share of the spoils.

It’s in this way that the nobles of blood and spirit are born and come to rule.

All the ancient Aryan civilisations arose, in fact, from ‘a race of conquerors who overcame lands and peoples on the basis of a higher calling and qualification’—a higher calling and qualification modelled on the Aryan Doctrine of Battle and Victory. Hierarchy, order, courage, and a solar universality came, as a result, to inform white life.

If our people are to restore European America (in the Pacific Northwest or elsewhere), it will be in the Aryan way, through a return to the ancient practices that formed us in the beginning and made us who we are. It will not come about through a process dependent on all that is the root of our present humiliation.

Categories
Abraham Lincoln Hermann (Arminius) Leonidas Michael O'Meara Racial right

White nationalism

I’m not done with what I said on Friday.

What is known in the United States as white nationalism is not white nationalism. If it were, the Americans who promote it would say that Leonidas, Hermann and Hitler are the heroes who would replace the faces carved at Mount Rushmore. This American provincialism is the great failure not only of ordinary white nationalists but of one of their best minds, the retired Michael O’Meara, who in one of his articles that I have been mentioning wrote:

If you want, then, to engage in discussions about race and racial differences, you bring in the geneticists and Darwinists. But if you want to build a nationalist movement to ensure the continuity of white America, you appeal to Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson, to the Battle of the Alamo and Kearney’s Workingmen, to the Stars and Bars and the sustaining voices of those quintessential representatives of America’s white culture, the Carter family.

Stars and Bars? Really? As Robert Morgan explained to us, the carved personalities at Mount Rushmore, including the Jefferson that O’Meara wanted to put on us as an inspiring figure, represent ideals that would eventually lead to white decline. Let’s compare what O’Meara wrote with what Mauricio recently told us responding to an objection about carving out the images of Leonidas and Hermann (‘We are unsure as to how they looked’):

We don’t need photos of them. The Christians didn’t need photos for Jesus, neither do we for our demigods’ iconography.

Leonidas looks like a veteran of a hundred battles. He is the wise old man of sixty years, husband, father, king. Long grizzled hair tied in braids. Cleft chin, scars across his cheeks and brow. His deep, sullen blue eyes observe the horizon fiercely, as the subhuman hordes approach. He grips his spear with his right hand and his Corinthian helmet under his left. Long red cape, shining bronze armour. Behind him, a wall of shields with the Lambda symbol. He is hopelessly outnumbered, and yet he knows no fear.

Hermann is a virile young man full of wit and brash confidence. Golden-blonde, bright blue eyes, very tall. He is the clever two-faced warrior. In one face, he is a gallant Roman commander, with steel armour, silvery helmet and blue cape, on horseback leading his cohort across the Rhine. He is the Eagle. In the other face, he is a muscular, bare-chested German warrior, with blue war-paint markings, leading a ferocious charge against the Roman shield-wall, roaring from top of his lungs: ‘TYR!’ He is the Wolf.

There is no image we cannot carve.

In short, what people on the internet call white nationalism, O’Meara included, is actually American nationalism. That should be obvious: as a legitimate white nationalism would imply a story that inspires all white Nordic types, not just those from a single country.

Tomorrow will mark three years of the event in Charlottesville. Just compare how the American government reacted to that big event with its reaction to BLM. The reversal of classical values to Christian values that Nietzsche so feared (‘last shall be first’, etc.) is now complete. The government of the United States is really Sauron. That non-revolutionary, law-abiding civilian white nationalists fail to propose the destruction of at least all of Lincoln’s symbols is so delusional that there is no point trying to argue with them.

America’s near future will disabuse them.

Categories
Civil war George Lincoln Rockwell Hate Michael O'Meara Racial right Who We Are (book) William Pierce

Charlottesville without stars or stripes

Or what does the word transvaluation mean in my mouth

There is something that I must add to what I said yesterday in the context of the current approach among race realists, which can be summed up in the already quoted words of Michael O’Meara, ‘The historical course offered by myth, in contrast to the inherently passive determinism of scientific rationalism, is a choice for heroes, not bookworms or computer hobbyists’.

But first of all I must say that the great failure of O’Meara was not seeing in Hitler the hero who created the new myth, the story that supplants the Christian one. Michael was simply unable to see the greatness of the Third Reich. Among Americans only George Lincoln Rockwell, after he finished reading Mein Kampf, saw that Hitlerism was a new religion. William Pierce got off to a good start, calling Hitler ‘our leader’ in National Socialist World in 1968. But then he got carried away by the American way and, instead of using the swastika for the new religion he wanted to create after Rockwell’s assassination, he devised another symbol (which nobody uses anymore).

The tremendous mistake I see here is that the American population cannot make contact with a higher archetype, as the Germans of the last century did. Americans are not the chosen people to create the new religion because their materialistic culture is completely uprooted from the history of their race, so well described by Pierce himself in Who We Are.

Yesterday I said that what is called history must be rewritten since, if it came from the pen of Christians or neochristians, the only value that history books can provide is raw material that must be relocated in the numinous context of the fourteen words.

To give just one example. Recall what I have made of the work of Karlheinz Deschner, his criminal history of Christianity. Although the late Deschner was antichristian, his scale of values was clearly liberal, that is, neochristian: a pseudo-apostate to use my neologism. Deschner’s encyclopaedic knowledge had to be appropriated to turn his legacy around our point of view: the POV of the transvalued man. And the same must be done with the rest of the other historians.

Yesterday I also said that what galvanised men in National Socialism were its marches and events in the streets. From this angle, the only thing that imitated them well, other than Rockwell when I was a kid, was the Charlottesville event three years ago. However, regardless of whether the government ambushed those who demonstrated, the demonstration was schizophrenic because of the American flags they carried. It is as if the Nazis of yore had carried the symbols of the degenerate Weimar Republic on their marches instead of coming up with a new flag.

That the racialist movement that raises the American flag is schizophrenic is seen in its inability to realise that, with its three anti-white wars—the 1860s, the 1940s, and today’s cold war that is already turning hot—the United States has become Mordor, and that using its symbols is mind splitting.

As far as I know, the only contemporary racialist who has understood that you have to hate the US to save the Anglo-German DNA is the Canadian Sebastian Ernst Ronin. Even at that Rockwell failed when trying to mix the swastika with the stars and stripes flag. Don’t be fooled, white nationalists: Since the United States was founded as a worshiping nation of Mammon and the god of the Jews, it is unreformable. The United States can only be repudiated and put an entirely different political animal in its place.

If the American racialist movement were not charlatanic, its proponents would not only begin to rewrite history from Who We Are, but reject both materialistic comfort and Yahweh. They would also begin to learn Germanic languages and would even try to change their American accent to how it sounded in England in Jane Austen’s time. Furthermore, after the Revolution bonfires would burn the books of accepted wisdom, including Bibles, degenerate music and Hollywood movies; in addition to the destruction of churches and the public lynching of those who oppose it.

Mount Rushmore will be nuked and another American mountain will boast colossal granite sculptures representing Leonidas, Hermann, Hitler and that of the new American messiah who led the racial revolution (a man whose name we still ignore).

For the transvaluation of all Christian values to Greco-Roman values to be complete, public opinion won’t give a damn if, instead of nymphs, one or two generals of the ethnostate have had ephebes as cute as Björn Andrésen or Max Born when he was a teenager. (On the other hand, having sex between same-sex adults will be frowned upon as it was frowned upon in Greece and Rome.)

Since that’s impossible given the level of the inflated ego in today’s American nationalist, only a convergence of catastrophes that kills vast numbers of whites around the world will straighten the ways of survivors.

Now that I saw the title of the latest article of The Occidental Observer I couldn’t contain the feeling of what O’Meara said about bookworms and computer hobbyists compared to the heroes we need, including the new messiah whose name we ignore. Without soldiers and transvalued heroes the academy is useless. In other words, the first rightful steps were made in Charlottesville, not in the pieces that Kevin MacDonald publishes. Now we would have to do the same but without the enemy flag, devising a swastika flag for American consumption.

But demonstrating in the streets will be impossible as long as Uncle Sam lives. If the US government didn’t exist, whites would easily win a war against BLM and (((those who finance it))). But killing Sam will be impossible as long as Christians and neochristians dominate both conservatism and white nationalism itself. Without infinite hatred there is no revolution. And with the psychic toll that Christianity bequeathed to us, there will be no place for infinite hatred.

Curiously, American racialists have already heard about the keys to save the race in both Who We Are (transvalued academy as opposed to KMD’s neochristian academy) and The Turner Diaries (bloodthirsty soldiers). But they follow a different path because they insist on being slaves of parental and societal introjects, including the enemy flag.

Although white advocates acknowledge that Jews hate, they are unable to link the info between two elemental neurons and imitate them. Being children of the Christian and liberal ethos they really believe, even many secularised racists, that we should solve our problems without violating the command to love our neighbour. Otherwise they would have already amalgamated their selves with the spirit of the Diaries.

Mine is constructive criticism of white nationalism insofar, unlike destructive criticism, I point out the way that could potentially save them.

Categories
Michael O'Meara Racial right Sword

The edge of the broken sword

After William Pierce’s death, the only intellectual who knew that sooner or later the sword had to be wielded was Michael O’Meara, whose essays were published by Greg Johnson when the latter was editor of TOQ Online and later continued to publish essays by Michael at Counter-Currents. But Michael became disillusioned with the racialist bourgeois movement and has abandoned his practice of writing. Yesterday I reread two of his old essays, ‘The Sword’ and ‘The Edge of the Sword’, and came across these phrases:

‘The historical course offered by myth, in contrast to the inherently passive determinism of scientific rationalism, is a choice for heroes, not bookworms or computer hobbyists’.

‘If I want to build a nationalist movement, I know it’s going to take something more than the virtues of Frank Salter to convince whites to abandon their individualistic and materialistic lives (which, incidentally, are usually led under the sign of self-interest)—it will take something bigger and grander that touches them at the core of their being’.

Yesterday also Apollokult, a European commenter of this site, told me the following:

Yes, the world is stuck in a welter of insurmountable contradictions, and the (natural?) course of events goes to a gloomy denouement… So, like in Greek tragedies, sooner or later, a Deus ex machina has to cut the knot of human hubris, excessive pride and sin against proper cosmic order. And his hypostasis will be definitely wrathful, not pacificatory. A Tolkien’s term, eucatastrophe [from Greek ευ- ‘good’ and καταστροφή ‘destruction’], is very worth meditating about its hidden non-lying-on-the-surface meanings.

There is an inspiring thought: none of these sickly advocates of schizophrenic outlooks will become a foundation of any better world, because they are just gutters for muddy waters of the modern pseudo-intellectualism. Some fastidiousness speaks inside me: you, Ceasar, overspend your time and energy on them. Leave them in their delusions alone.

In any way, some will cross the Rubicon, and some will be swallowed up by Lethe. Let’s look forward, not looking back at the always past beings. The time for a wohlmeinend or gutgesinnt [well-meaning or well-disposed] re-education attempt has gone by in 1945. And you know it very well, too well…

What Apollokult tells me motivates me once again to consider what I had uselessly promised me not long ago: to stop visiting the sites of white nationalism as long as they don’t want to take up the sword. I don’t mean to go out and fight immediately, as that would be crazy and premature. Michael O’Meara never did anything crazy or premature, but his thinking was clearly revolutionary.

While normies are like children living in Normieland, white nationalists, I said yesterday, are like drunken teenagers in the middle of the psychological Rubicon who don’t want to take more steps. Since it has already become a bad habit for me to be yelling at the latter to come with me to the other side of the river, why not, as Apollokult advises me, dedicate myself to speak only to those who are already on firm ground on this side?

That would mean starting to get a little more familiar with National Socialism. There are many things to do in this area, even being so close to the convergence of catastrophes that will change the world.

Incidentally, Michael’s book is out of print at Counter-Currents. I have a hard copy of it with some kind words from the author’s pen.

Categories
Blacks Civil war Destruction of Greco-Roman world Michael O'Meara Racial right Real men

Apollo and the cross

‘My suggested approach [regarding the anti-white system] is generally fairly mild, nonviolent, and legal’. —a phrase from the feminized piece that has just been published, today, as a featured article on The Occidental Observer.

Generally I would only recommend the Counter-Currents (CC) webzine to a little normie who wants to take his first baby steps when crossing the psychological Rubicon. Like The Occidental Observer and American Renaissance, CC is an online publication for racially conscious American conservatives, not for Nietzschean revolutionaries. They don’t deserve to be called ‘white nationalists’, the term some of them use, since creating a White Nation would obviously require revolutionary violence. God forbid!

I would go as far as claim that almost all the racialist sites that use the term White Nationalism lie, as they are not promoting revolutionary ideals to reclaim their nations. What they are actually doing is complaining, as women have complained throughout history. If the alt-right sites were run by women I would not criticise them at all. But they are administered by males, which makes these men intellectually cowards, at least compared to the author of Toward the White Republic.

Although Michael O’Meara’s last chapter is a ‘Call to Arms’, in the sense that he was not advocating mere armchair speculation or complaining, this is not the time to start a revolution as the zeitgeist is at the exact opposite pole. However, an ideology must be created that takes antichristianism to its ultimate consequences—see for example what I said this morning to a commenter—always keeping in mind that the final goal is the fulfilment of the fourteen words.

This said, and independently of the baby steps, sometimes Counter-Currents contributors say interesting things. Yesterday for example CC published a piece by Spencer Quinn, ‘Black Lives Matter is Black Supremacy’, which is worth reading. But I was more interested in what a couple of commenters said in the comments section. The first wrote:

As others have said, these riots were about black honour and power. A white policeman kills a black criminal. But blacks see only ‘white man kills black man’ and respond through vengeance upon white society.

Another one commented:

What is cited regarding people getting fired over mildly criticizing BLM doesn’t really have much to do with the organization per se so much as the extravagant social currency connected to BLM; companies are firing people because we live in a capitalist economy; criticizing BLM is equated with criticizing blacks; criticizing blacks is taboo; and a company that associates with people who commit a taboo will lose social credibility and thus money. It is really capitalism that has given the abundance of soft power to BLM— BLM just happens to be the “moral truth” at this moment in time. In the past, I’m sure in certain places you could lose your job and social capital for supporting blacks. Same system, different truth.

This second comment is important, as it was difficult to understand why companies are taking sides with vandals, rioters, and those who pull down once-respected statues in the US. But what both Quinn and his commenters omit is that the moral grammar that Christianity engendered is behind today’s taboo of criticising blacks, or other minorities, throughout the West.

The gospel commands us to love the weak, and even more so those groups who are at the bottom in society. The Enlightenment, the American Revolution and the French Revolution only started the process to secularise these axiological standards, but the background always was Christian standards of morality. As I tried to explain in my post yesterday, pulling down from the pedestal the handsome sculptures of classical culture was nothing more than degrading ancient civilisation in Rome after a cult of Semitic origin took over the empire. And what is at issue today is replacing white supremacism with ‘black supremacism’, to use Quinn’s expression. The first step to achieve this is degrading modern white civilisation through its very symbols.

It is up to the men who are now deceptively calling themselves white nationalists to leave their femininity behind and start thinking like real men. The first step in that direction would be a return to pre-Christian values, for example, beginning to love once again the handsome statues that the Semites destroyed so many centuries ago. The rest follows from there.

Down with the cross, up with Apollo!

Umwertung aller Werte!

Categories
Degenerate art Michael O'Meara Music Racial right

Who to read?

Today Krist Krusher said:

Jewish prolefeed cannot be stopped by simply banning media made after 1969. It requires banning films in general. Sound films are particularly worthy of scrutiny as the first talkie was about glorifying the degeneracy that was jazz with a Jewish protagonist (Jakie Rabinowitz / Jack Robin), a Jewish actor (Al Jonson), and Jewish producers (the Wonsal brothers a.k.a The Warner Brothers). Triumph of the Will notwithstanding.

Music is the second target. Destroying rock‘n roll records is only the first step to regeneration of the soul. Only after taking the progenitors of the these horrid genres around the corner can Europa regain her sensibilities. The culprits being old Bluegrass and Appalachian folk music that was played in 1800s America. Despite their Scottish origins, they are completely degenerate; therefore they must all be eliminated.

This was posted after my article ‘On prolefeed for Alt-righters’, and what I am about to say must be understood within that context and also my other article today.

When out of curiosity I enter the podcast of a white nationalist and find that they play degenerate music, I immediately disconnect and do not hear the spoken word after such music.

This may seem like an overreaction, but if there is something in which alt-right folks are schizophrenic it is in denouncing the prolefeed of the Jews and at the same time consume it with pleasure! I have talked about degenerate music on this site but the same I say now about Hollywood. There are exceptions of course: but the norm is to use degenerate music in the alt-right podcasts and unabashedly comment on Hollywood movies as if it was a legit form of the Seventh Art.

It is precisely because of that all too obvious schizophrenia—in the vernacular sense of the term—that I no longer recommend the alt-right sites to the normies. I recommend them my collection of twenty authors in The Fair Race. One could say, again, that I am overstating my case as someone like Kevin MacDonald does not promote degenerate music or Hollywood in his webzine. But even respected professors like MacDonald have other shortcomings (also discussed in The Fair Race).

The right way is to read those who grew up before cultural degeneration reached superlative extremes: Yockey, Rockwell, Oliver and Pierce. Some of the old American spirit can still be breathed in the texts of a retired American intellectual, Michael O’Meara, who unlike the schizophrenics knew that revolution is unavoidable.

Categories
Civil war Michael O'Meara Racial right Real men

WN is a club for women

– Edited in September 2020 –

We live in the darkest hour for the white race since prehistory.

This means that almost one hundred percent of whites are degenerate, including those who should be the protectors of white women and children, Aryan men.

As David Lane said in his open letter to a dead race, if there are not 30,000 warriors hiding for some reason, the white race is lost. That means that our attitude must be Revolutionary, not reactionary. White nationalism and the Alt-Right are reactionary. It is a movement basically of women, not of men, in the sense of feminized western males, and therefore inefficient. If all WN forums we see today were actually run by women for women’s readership, I would not complain, but only males can actually defend them and their children.

That does not mean that, as men we are, we have to throw ourselves recklessly for the Revolution.

It just means that we should think like Revolutionaries.

If there were those 30,000 of whom Lane spoke, The Turner Diaries would have already replaced the Bible for these 30,000 men (similar to the 300 Spartans in real history).

But since the 30,000 are missing, the 3 warriors that want to take The Turner Diaries to the real world have to do some metapolitics to convince the other 29,997 to join the Revolution. And the best way to do that is to attack the Alt-Right as I’ve been doing in my latest articles, ‘Fuck white nationalism!’ and ‘On picketing WN meetings’.

Didn’t Norman Spear say that a Revolution needs only 3 percent of Aryan males convinced of the cause? So the job is to convince them by making fun of the Club for Women.

Johnson’s mistake is the mistake of all the degenerate bourgeois of the Alt-Right who believe that it is possible to save the race without endangering their lives.

But the trick is to tell the potential Revolutionaries that it is not yet time for fighting in the real world, as Revolutionaries are far from reaching 3 percent of Aryans.

The work of these cultured thugs that still can’t get out of the trenches is to channel our hatred for the ethnocidal System in unmasking these feminized bourgeois so that the young may join ranks with the Revolutionary cause, far from the forums for women.

It may seem unlikely what I am going to say, but if I had a way to contact these would-be Revolutionaries, I would say the same thing that William Pierce told Bob Mathews: that his plans for immediate action are premature.

We have to wait for the dollar to tank. These experts recognise that we live in an economic bubble that will soon ‘pop’, as can be heard from their lips at the end of the video.

Even after the American dollar tanks we have to wait a while until we reach 3% of Aryan males who are willing to fight.

Meanwhile, as I said, the task is to convince young people that white nationalism is a Club for Women, as it is impossible to seize power without a fight in a West that doesn’t even allow us to speak in public. Only the United States has the First Amendment, but even that country has an extralegal system of penalties to silence the dissident, as seen in Silicon Valley, ADL, SPLC and let’s not talk about what happened on my birthday in Charlottesville.

Yes, ‘Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable’ (John F. Kennedy) but today’s warriors must hold their fire because of what happened to Mathews. But the spirit of Mathews, not Johnson’s, is the one that will eventually save the race.

It is curious that the best author of original texts that Johnson has published, Michael O’Meara, finishes his book—the first book that Counter-Currents has published—with a call to arms.

Although O’Meara has not rushed like Mathews, in a discussion forum before retiring from white nationalism he said he would prepare for Revolutionary action.

That is the correct attitude.

It is time to troll the Club for Women called white nationalism in order to recruit the real men from its ranks.

Remember: the goal is three percent among the Aryan males of a nation. Some would say that one percent is enough, insofar the other two percent are blind followers of hardcore leaders.

Categories
Americanism Judeo-reductionism Michael O'Meara

Kindergarten WN

Michael_O'Meara

by Michael O’Meara

 
For white nationalists—whose cyber-based “movement” is still in its infancy—simple explanations tend to be the rule.

The reductionist “anti-Semitism” that dominates WN ranks and serves as a catch-all explanation for the predicament white people find themselves in today, to cite the most prominent example, is wont to attribute every assault on white life to Jewish perfidy.

There is, certainly, no disputing the existence of this “perfidy,” for no other group—not the browns or blacks, not the former powers of international Communism, not anyone or anything—is or has been so disposed to breaching the color line, undermining America’s traditional racial hierarchy, or propelling the processes responsible for the present dispossession of the country’s white majority.

To think, however, that Organized Jewry has been the alpha and omega of this dispossession is not just simple-minded, it’s dishonorable.

It’s simple-minded because it understands complex historical processes in Kindergarten terms. It ignores other, no less culpable factors.

More fundamentally, it ignores or conflates the differences between structural imperatives and conspiratorial designs, between concrete objective forces and the subjective influences of interest and conscience.

History, as such, offers few cases where monocausal explanations suffice, for the confluence of fortune, structure, and subject (fortuna, necessita, virtu) undergirding the historical process means that significant historical changes are almost always the consequence of a combination of forces unique to their specific time and place.

By the same reasoning, monocausal explanations focusing exclusively on a demonized “other” are dishonorable because they spare whites all responsibility for their misfortunes, refuse to acknowledge the dysgenic and self-destructive forces indigenous to modern society, and ignore the numerous, inherently Jewish facets of the American project.

In criticizing this, I do so not to absolve the Jews, but to preface the subject of this essay—the anti-white consequences of the Cold War—which offers a somewhat broader explanation of white dispossession (though there are at least a couple of others that can also be made).
 
_________

Editor’s note: You can read the rest of the reprinted, 2011 article on Counter-Currents (here). But I much prefer the original 2010 article at The Occidental Quarterly divided in four pieces. Reason: in three threads of the comments section O’Meara responds to his monocausal critics (here, here and here).

Categories
Judeo-reductionism Michael O'Meara

Monocausalists

“To focus exclusively or mainly on the Jews (no matter how nefarious their distortions) is an exercise either in reductionism, ignorance, or dishonesty.”

—Michael O’Meara