web analytics

Category: Judeo-reductionism

Categories
Judeo-reductionism

On commenter Armor

Hadding Scott has just replied to Armor, a monocausalist on VNN forum:

It doesn’t seem to occur to you to ask what ideas might have been in White people’s heads that allowed a tiny minority like the Jews to exert so much influence. Somewhere along the way there were White people who for some reason were nodding yes to what the Jews wanted, or else they supported a political system that allowed this to happen.

Armor, who has a French passport, responded with the fallacy: “White people didn’t allow the Jews to take power”. Incredible that this guy ignores that Frenchmen and other Europeans empowered the Jews after Napoleon. (Armor is right however that if Jews suddenly disappeared whites could regain control of their lands much easier than with them still existing.)

Categories
Judeo-reductionism

Greg Johnson vs. Tanstaafl

Or:

On doctors and quack docs

quacks

“If whites have no responsibility
for their own actions then you’ve
reduced their moral agency
to zero.” —Jack Frost

A monocausal white nationalist has iteratively accused me of “making excuses for the jews” and still worse: he has raised questions that I could probably “be a crypto-jew.”

The charge is so crazy that I would like to respond by means of a personal vignette.

A few months ago I caught an extremely nasty flu. So nasty in fact that my doctor mandated some X-ray photographs checking up for sinusitis (never in my life I had been asked to do radiographs for the symptoms of a flu).

The diagnosis of my doctor was a common viral flu complicated by a secondary infection of streptococcus, a bacteria. While my body’s immune system took charge of the viruses after a week or so, the doc’s treatment focused in killing off the bacteria through fair doses of a pretty strong antibiotic. That is to say: although the primary etiology of my disease was viral, what was knocking me out was a secondary, bacterial infection; and the whole purpose of the antibiotic treatment was to kill every single bacterial pathogen that was irritating my throat so intensely.

Now imagine that another physician, a “monocausal” quack that disbelieves the existence of viruses as the primary etiology of complicated flus, declared that my doctor is “making excuses for the bacteria” even though his treatment meant a “final solution” to the streptococcus problem. Still worse: imagine that the quack doctor imagines that my family’s physician may be a bug himself because that’s the only way the quack can conceive that our physician is unwilling to blame the bacteria as the single cause for the disease!

Silly and crazy as it may seem, that’s exactly how this monocausal nationalist reasons about me. The fact that I postulate the existence of a primary, viral infection of white decline is enough to consider me a bacterial bug! It doesn’t matter the least bit that I promote final solutions to the bacteria or kike problem (see: here) as the way to regain our health. The sole postulating the existence of flu viruses as the primary etiology is enough for this man to see the physician that mandates killing the bacteria as a bacteria himself!

Isn’t it incredible how silly single-causers can be?
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Update of September 2014

Good grief! The “quack doc” (Tanstaafl or simply Tan) is now calling me “parasite-apologist Chechar”. I don’t even want to link here where he wrote that to avoid further paranoia from him. Suffice it to say that it is on a comment thread at his blogsite, Age of Treason, on the 3rd of this month.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Update of February 2015

Tan is now saying: “You’re [Franklin Ryckaert] pushing Chechar’s psychoanalytic ‘monocausalism’ meme, basically another name for “anti-semitism”. Fuck off.

Just for the record, it’s the second time this guy insults Ryckaert for not subscribing the quack hypothesis (elsewhere he called him “piece of shit”).

______ 卐 ______

 
Update of May 2015:

Today, a fan of Tan’s blog stated: “The Occidental Observer blog is just another blog that promotes the jewish strategy that whites are to blame for their own extinction,” and also mentioned my name (source: comments section on the article “Fear and Loathing and Treason – Part 2”).

Greg Johnson joins the discussion at Tan’s blog:

I would like to offer a counter-accusation: simple-mindedness or monomania or oversimplification. I think it is more important for Tan to simply “accuse the Jews” in this little corner of the internet than to actually fix the Jewish problem, which requires, first of all, that we fully understand it.

Johnson also said:

The “you just want to blame everything on the Jews” meme comes from observing people like Tan and Helvena. It names a perverse and irrational mindset — based on the arguments given on this site — that seeks to reduce the causes of white decline to (1) Jewish aggression and (2) white treason, and labels attempts to explain white susceptibility to Jewish subversion as intellectually dishonest, chiefly as an attempt to exculpate Jews and blame whites. There are two main false premises here:

1. The idea that either Jews or whites but not both are the cause of our problems

2. The idea that explaining psychological mechanisms for behavior is the same as the blame/exculpation game

This sort of monomania is irrational because it is based on faulty reasoning and probably some psychological naivete. It is perverse because it actually weakens our team and strengthens the enemy.

Later Johnson also said:

The inconsistency you spot is in Tan’s position, since he in the same thread will argue as if “It is either whites or Jews but not both” and then grant that some whites do work against our ethnic interests, but then claims they are merely traitors working for the Jews. The real position he wants to argue, but does not state clearly, is that: “There are no whites who are in good faith — i.e., because they think it is the right thing to do — working against the genetic interests of our people.” That proposition is false.

And later:

What is missing or wrong here is that I see reason to believe that the white predicament can be explained fully by: (1) Jews, (2) white traitors working for the Jews, and now (3) sincere whites who believe in a Jew-defined, Jew-centric morality. All roads lead to the Jews with you.

But don’t you wonder what is it about whites that make us susceptible to this? Your answer to that question, in one form or another, is simply to repeat: Jewish subversion. But the question remains, what makes us susceptible?

And later:

Tan, I have chosen to overlook your insults and increasingly emotive and obnoxious tone, because I think there is a real issue here worth discussing, and I think we are actually making progress.

And later:

Then there is your breath-taking assertion that my position is the same as Jared Taylor’s and that it amounts to the view that whites are genetically programmed for self-destruction. One form of lying is to present hunches or hypotheses as facts. You do that all the time (while being hair triggered with charges of intellectual dishonesty). In fact, I do not believe that whites are genetically programmed for self-destruction. I daresay you have not inquired about my views on these matters at all, so you are in no position to summarize them or equate them with Taylor’s views. So why do you say things that you cannot know to be true as if you have knowledge? Why can’t you just deal with the issues?

As far as I have seen, you have never squarely taken on the question of white vulnerability. You just evade it, attack straw men, and resort to insults. That is a sign of intellectual weakness, not strength.

I guess it is some consolation to me that I end in good company: along with Kevin MacDonald and Wilmot Robertson, I have been weighed and found wanting in intellectual honesty and rigor by the Great Tanstaafl.

And later:

Tan, you have spent far too much time trolling the internet. You are good at it, and therein lies the problem. Because trolling and grandstanding before imagined audiences of adoring dullards is too low a bar. You don’t have the logical tools or patience or ethical commitment needed to get to the truth. You just have simplistic talking/trolling points, which you defend with sophistries. It isn’t good enough.

And finally:

Why do I argue with you, Tan? Because ideas have consequences, and bad ideas have bad consequences. Beyond that, it is important for me to understand the many perverse and self-defeating mindsets that handicap our side, and you and your amen corner here are an interesting study.

(Of Tan’s responses I’ll include only his phrase: “You should go now. You’ve got a war on White catladies to fight.” Greg’s last, sardonic comment was: “OK Tan, I quit. For what it is worth, you are the smartest guy in this room.” See also my article “On Carolyn and Tan.”)

______ 卐 ______

 
Update of December 2015

At The Right Stuff Johnson commented:

My point is that Tanstaafl is quite open about harming his own ethnic genetic interests [he places the ethnostate above his children and half-Jew wife] because of his commitment to the ideology of White Nationalism, but he is dismissive of the idea that other white people might have any innate propensity to this kind of behavior, i.e., sacrificing their children on the altar of ideology. He seems to want to hold that Jews are either forcing such behavior upon us, or bribing our leaders to force it upon us. But he thinks the idea that ordinary white people might have a pre-existing propensity to this sort of behavior is just a plot to blame whitey and excuse the Jews.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Update of 2016

Greg has replied to a comment by Andrew Anglin thus:

Kevin MacDonald published his four path-breaking volumes on the Jewish question and started The Occidental Observer. During that same period, The Occidental Quarterly was founded, which has published MacDonald for years and is now under his editorship. Thus whatever occult power of suppressing discussion of the JQ that you suppose he wields, it clearly was not operative then. So what has changed? Has MacDonald stopped writing about the Jews? A quick look at TOO shows this is not the case. The only thing that has changed is that MacDonald’s theoretical work now focuses on whites. What has made us so susceptible to Jewish manipulation and takeover? Good questions that you think we would want to answer, in order to inoculate ourselves against Jewish subversion.

Unfortunately, a couple of paranoid cranks, Tanstaafl of Age of Treason, and Raven Gatto, who is primarily a Facebook presence, have been promoting the truly nutty idea that MacDonald has now stopped blaming the Jews and is now blaming whites (as if both parties cannot play a role in the current mess), and that MacDonald’s shift in emphasis is due to the evil influences of people like Paul Gottfried, Colin Liddell, and little old me. These paranoid notions are carried into your discussion forum by memetic plague rats such as Cledun (a guy who bats 1000 in picking literally insane mentors), and I think your own thinking has been infected as well.
 

______ 卐 ______

 

Update of 30 July 2017:

The Great Tanstaafl said today: “Chechar is in essence a psychoanalyst. My guess is it’s because he’s a crypto” in the comments section of his today’s post “The White Race and its Discontents” (which I won’t link here).

Just imagine my dear readers: I have published two thick autobiographical books in Spanish, that I started in 1988. Anybody that knows my family in Mexico City knows that my ancestry is 100% Catholic for generations on both sides.

For the record I have written a whole book in Spanish debunking psychiatry and psychoanalysis. But Tan labels me once more “in essence a psychoanalyst.”
 

Final thoughts

Tan and the commenters at Age of Treason are trapped in a monological belief system: a system in which white decline is only caused by Jews no matter what information they get. This group commits “the fundamental attribution error”: a tendency to assign a mono-cause to a problem rather than focusing on the context—situational causes that are harder to grasp. (Conspiracy theorists do exactly the same with their minds.)

Their methodology also exemplifies “conformation bias”. Tan and his amen crowd simply ignore evidence contrary to their pet theory. They are so overwhelmed by their POV that sometimes these guys even interpret an attack on their research model as an attack on themselves.

With such a quack mentality civil discussion with real doctors who want to solve the JP is impossible.

Categories
Catholic Church Judeo-reductionism Miscegenation Portugal

Massive Iberian screw-up

As a postscript to my recent post about why the single-cause hypothesis in White Nationalism is untenable—that is, that “Whites can do no wrong and are the eternal victims of Jewish deceit and aggression”—, let me clarify something I said about the Iberian side of the conquest of America and New Spain in particular.

mestizo kid

(A Mestizo kiddie: the symbol of the Iberian blunder.)

The main culprit of the extremely thorough mestization that took place in the American continent at the south of Río Grande, all the way to the lands of the Incas in South America, was the Iberians’ lust for gold and silver.

That was the main culprit that in this blog I have called, inspired in Wagner and Tolkien, as falling prey of the One Ring or “economics over race” policies. That’s also why, at the very top of this blog, I include an image of the real god of spoiled whites, Mammon.

The second culprit was the Catholic Church that allowed the bachelor Spaniards in the continent to marry Amerindian women with a Pope bull only ten years after the conquest of the Aztec Empire. Christianity in general is blind to racial matters and the Church did not give a damn about the havoc that such bull would cause. (The Catholic Church was so powerful in New Spain that by the end of the 17th century it owned more than half of its territories.)

Those are, in my view, the two main factors that explain how the Iberians massively screwed up the continent.

As I said in my previous post, this case proves that whites are capable of committing ethno-suicide by themselves, without the help of the subversive tribe, the Jews, who were persecuted and dispatched when detected in the three-hundred year period that lasted the Colonial times. (Hernán Cortés was the first to burn at the stake a couple of kikes in 1528, even before the Inquisition was formally established in New Spain.) Yes, it is true that even with such controls some cryptos might have entered spheres of influence. According to one biographer, Bartolomé de Las Casas was of converso heritage, although others refer to Las Casas family as old Christians who migrated from France.

But the larger point is that even if Las Casas (and presumably other cryptos who escaped detection) was of Jewish ancestry, it would be ridiculous to claim that they “caused” the thoroughgoing mestization that, with time, ruined the genetic pool of the conquerors.

Bernal_Diaz_del_Castillo

If you want to breathe the zeitgeist of New Spain I would highly recommend reading the primary sources, starting with the stupendous chronicle of Bernal Díaz del Castillo (d. 1585), The Truthful History of the Conquest of New Spain, i.e., the conquest of Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Bernal was a foot soldier and fought with Hernán Cortés during the conquest of the capital of the Aztec Empire.

You will breath in The Truthful History, right from the beginning of the history of post-Columbian Mexico, how gold and religion provided the zeitgeist or axis around which the Iberian dominion over the Americas would move. Whatever happened in this large part of the American continent it had nothing to do with Jewish subversion. It was the Spanish and the Portuguese doing it to themselves. But judge it by yourself if you are interested in history. Read the primary sources that have been translated to English.

Categories
Aristotle French Revolution Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald

On Carolyn and Tan

Or:

Blaming the Morlocks, sparing the Eloi

For those who don’t believe Whites are capable of imposing this madness on themselves, I will point to France during the French Revolution which abolished slavery in the name of the “Rights of Man” and made every Negro a citizen of the French Republic.

—Hunter Wallace



I have listened to the recent show on The White Network hosted by Carolyn Yeager and my ol’ friend Tanstaafl (Tan). The show was a reaction to Kevin MacDonald’s article on The Occidental Observer: a summary of a collection of papers of the journal The Occidental Quarterly or TOQ about white pathology.

I have to say something about the show. In the first place, I see that after the debacle of the last year Tan—and I must steal a sentence from Franklyn Ryckaert—is still incapable of seeing the difference between guilt tripping by Jews and honest self-criticism by Whites. Tan still seems to think that self-criticism by Whites is nothing but interiorized guilt tripping and he proceeds then to proclaim the total innocence of Whites. Jews are the only ones who are guilty of white decline, and anyone who suggests that Whites have a responsibility of their own is deluded. He calls that “delusion” the “suicide meme.”

Judge it by yourself, visitors. Listen the show and tell me if Tan continues to identify honest criticism with guilt tripping.

This of course reminds me the recent exchange between Tan and Greg Johnson at Counter-Currents, where Johnson said:

If the problem is a coalition of minorities who are “in most cases” but not always Jews, then it really is more accurate to refer to them as minorities than as Jews, isn’t it? Thus your desire to find-and-replace “minorities” with “Jews” betrays a certain monomania and lack of scruple.

Sort of like my Baptist cousin who tries to shoehorn Jesus into every conversation. It is very low-churchy to clamp down on “one thing needful,” insist on discussing it even when it is not appropriate, and then to bitterly accuse people of being evil when they draw back from you, or simply exceed your narrow range of interests.

I don’t like that about you.

Understandably Tan became chagrined about this sharp comment and reacted on his blog Age of Treason saying that Johnson is no longer welcome to republish Tan’s articles.

Back to the Carolyn show but keeping in mind the exchange that resulted in the recent distancing between Johnson and Tan. When Carolyn said something Tan mildly criticized her that she was using “the passive voice.” Tan is a reductionist, like Johnson’s cousin, and wants to use the active voice. That’s why Tan made it very clear in the show that he doesn’t like MacDonald’s term “white pathology,” and it struck me that at the beginning of the podcast Tan always referred to MacDonald as an “expert in psychology,” never as an expert in the Jewish Problem (JP). This is remarkable because MacDonald is the foremost expert on the JP, and Tan only an amateur. (As a professor with tenure MacDonald has been a full-time researcher for a while and people like us, who have to make a living elsewhere, cannot compete with that.)

Carolyn started then to mention, one by one, the authors who contributed to the TOQ issue about “white pathology.” Tan commented that he disliked the phrasing of one of the first authors mentioned by Carolyn, that today’s liberalism “is rooted in equality” because, Tan maintained, the Jew-controlled media bombards us all the time with such message. But that just begs the question. The disturbing fact is that precisely because whites elevated the notion of equality by the end of the 18th century to the level of a civil religion, the Jews were gradually empowered throughout the 19th century.

As far as I know, Tan has not tried to take issue with the many articles by Hunter Wallace on Occidental Dissent. Wallace started the now abandoned blog Antisemitica and in my opinion is fairly aware of the JP. Wallace now believes that the Yankees of the last centuries and the French Jacobins were basically on the same page of the Jews as to white dispossession (what we call “assisted suicide”).

Napos-big-blunderIt seems to me that Tan commits exactly the same fallacy that the blogger Lew commits when challenged about precisely those roots that show how liberalism was originally a white phenomenon. Lew wants to count serious history since 1910, after the Jews were already empowered, something that misleads his readers by giving the impression that the subversive tribe empowered itself.

Like Carolyn, Tan doesn’t say a peep about the role played by Christianity in the development of suicidal universalism or suicidal out-group altruism. In fact, in Carolyn’s show he did exactly the opposite. About the TOQ contribution of the blogger who goes under the penname of Yggdrasil, Tan disliked it too because Yggdrasil wants to go to the roots (that’s well beyond 1910). Tan commented that pondering into the remote historical past “is a form of escapism” because “now it is Jews running the show,” and added in pretty sarcastic tone that it is silly to go back as far as the French Revolution and—the horror—up to the times of Rome so that these intellectuals “can find excuses for the Jews.”

I very much doubt that the motivation of the TOQ contributors is excusing the Jews. As Aristotle said, to have a profound grasp on a subject one must delve deeply into the past. Few sentences by Greg Johnson have been more illuminating to understand what I have recently been calling the Aryan Problem (economics over race) than Johnson’s phrase, “In ancient Rome, as in modern America, the economic system and its imperatives are treated as absolute and fixed, whereas the people are treated as liquid and fungible.”

Click on the pic of Mammon at the top of this blog and then click again on the Kenneth Clark epigraph. Follow the white rabbit to dismiss the single Jewish-cause hypothesis. But Tan labeled all of this historical pondering in TOQ as “lame,” which misses the whole point of bicausalism that in this post I’ll define as you need two to dance tango, the Morlocks and the Eloi.

Like the TOQ contributors, my motivation has absolutely nothing to do with excusing the “Morlocks.” If we use as a metaphor the novel by H.G. Wells, The Time Machine, I would say that my motivation is to try that the Eloi wake up.

Remember the 1960 film that adapted Wells’ novel for the silver screen? When George (Rod Taylor) spots young blond people by a river, a woman, “Weena” is drowning but the other Eloi are indifferent (I would call this “white pathology”). Later in the film George is outraged by the Eloi’s apathy and finds out that they’re mere cattle for the anthropophagus “Morlocks.”

time machine 1

What Tan and many others in the American pro-white movement don’t want to see is that today’s whites are behaving like the Eloi. We are in this mess because the masses of whites are basically animal conformists. See the insightful quotations by Rockwell, Pierce and Hitler in my previous post. They’re absolutely essential to understand the viewpoint of The West’s Darkest Hour.

I must acknowledge that in the show Carolyn sounded more reasonable by blaming, together with the Jews, the liberal Whites. But Tan made it clear in the show that he disagrees with the use of that word, liberal. “It is hard to blame the poor white people,” the Eloi. According to Tan, all blame should be laid on the feet of the Morlocks.

Tan also said that white behavior comes from the current Zeitgeist, and that the white traitors are just opportunists. But the central question in this darkest hour of ours is, again, who empowered the Jews. My educated guess is that Tan and those who think like him will always avoid this question.

“Don’t they deserve some blame?” asked Carolyn. At least Tan acknowledged that a specific acquaintance of Carolyn’s that she mentioned was not forced by the Jews to harbor such traitorous thoughts. Then both talked about Jared Taylor and his concept of “pathological altruism” among whites but the Taylor case is problematic because he tolerates Jews in his conferences. Suffice it to say that at least Tan conceded that white altruism “may have biological roots.”

About the article that MacDonald himself wrote, Tan commented (remember that I don’t know shorthand):

My reaction was negative. Look at these white people who acted like idiots! [sarcasm]… He specifically identifies Christian philanthropists. The point I’d like to make… [is that even as far back as] 1861… to neglect to mention the Jewish influence in that kind of thinking and its influence on Christianity is a mistake.

In other words, Tan leaves Christianity off the hook. Only Jews are to be blamed. He has never replied to my very iterated argument that here in what used to be called New Spain the Inquisition, already familiar with the Jewish tricks at the Iberian Peninsula, persecuted the crypto-Jews; that New Spain was the first Judenfrei state in the continent, and that even sans Jews the Spaniards and the Creoles managed to blunder on a continental scale to the point of destroying their gene pool with Amerinds and the imported Negroes.

Hardly the Jews can be blamed for what happened here or even at the Iberian Peninsula. It was clearly a case of white suicide sans Jews.

If you don’t like to read my posts on New Spain, Spain or Portugal because you might fear that I may have distorted information on a subject that Americans have little interest, go to Occidental Dissent and see the posts by Wallace that prove that, long before the Jews took over the US, a specific form of evangelical Christianity plus the Enlightenment of the founding fathers already contained the roots of suicidal liberalism.

Let my finish this entry with yesterday’s quotations by Spandrell on an interesting exchange at Counter-Currents:

And yes, Jews are evil, but it’s the white elite who brought them in, as it has been since the early Middle Ages. You can hate Jewish chutzpah, but blaming them isn’t going to solve much, because: you can’t remove them, and even if you sent them all to Madagascar, it wouldn’t solve the problem of white leftism.

That’s more or less the idea. The Dark Enlightenment is about studying leftism per se. You might believe leftism is a jewish conspiracy and in their absence whites would suddenly arise as a sane and anti-egalitarian ethnicity. We disagree.

Not that white polities wouldn’t be awesome: personally I’m all for ethnic segregation. But as a European let me tell you that it’s not that easy.

And later on that thread he added:

I apologize if I misrepresented your views on the Jewish Question. I’m aware of Kevin MacDonald’s work and find little to disagree with, but it’s hard to blame the parasite when the host has developed a symbiotic relationship with it. Still I just think focusing on the Jews is a waste of time, people get emotional and discussions are seldom productive.

Which is why this blog focuses on the Eloi.

Categories
Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald Science

Monocausalism – requiescat in pace

Today, in “Recently in The Occidental Quarterly: Special Sections on White Pathology”, Kevin MacDonald wrote:

logo
 
This is an introduction to special sections in the Summer and Fall issues of The Occidental Quarterly focused on White pathology. Whatever blame for our situation that we place on others, the bottom line is that we are allowing the unfolding disaster to happen. It is unprecedented for a civilization to voluntarily cede political and cultural hegemony to others, particularly when so many of these people harbor hatreds and resentments toward our people and our culture.

I am glad that scholarship is now saying what this blog has been saying for a while: that besides Jewish influence there are factors within the White psyche that are causing the West’s darkest hour today.

The authors of the Quarterly point out to a form of puritanical Christianity and biological factors as contributing ingredients of the “brew” that presently has evolved into a poison. The “single Jewish cause” hypothesis of our problems, what I have called “monocausalism,” is thus unsupported by both the humanities (history) and science (evolutionary psychology).

Categories
Judeo-reductionism

More degeneracy at CC

Sex-drugs-and-rock-n-roll-


Today,
at Counter-Currents:



Jef Costello said…

Prudishness about drug use tends to be an “Old Right” thing. Just about everybody I know in the New Right has used drugs [my emphasis!] (except Greg Johnson, who is a bit of narc). Old-time right-wingers tend to associate drugs with hippies, and worry that somehow drug use leads to liberalism (or follows from it). And they are often astonishingly ignorant on the matter. One prominent Old Righter of my acquaintance once referred in my presence to “dopers” “injecting marijuana.”

Sandy said…

I am convinced that the government in its insatiable need for revenue will legalize drugs and I commend Counter-Currents for tackling a difficult subject in such a head on manner. At least somebody might be ready for what could follow such legislation.

Jaego said…

Countless artists have used alcohol to boost their creativity. No one ever questions this despite the horrific side effects and broken lives it often leads to. Why not? It’s their business, their decision, their RIGHT.

Rhondda said…

What drugs have taught me.
Marijuana is better for pain than pharmaceuticals and does less damage to brain.

___________________



Chechar’s comment:

A shame that so many people are sending thousands of dollars to CC instead of sending them to WDH!

I mean: This is why I don’t believe in monocausalism. If Jews are a hundred percent guilty, and Whites a hundred percent innocent, how would you explain that even White nationalists are a vector in what Hajo Liaucius calls “dissipationist forces” in current liberalism? The fact is that Counter-Currents not only has promoted rock music, filthy movies, homosexuality and abortion, now it’s promoting illicit drugs.

Just compare this degeneracy with the self-sacrificing spirit of my recent entries on Sparta. Who do you think will make a difference in the coming civil wars: the hedonist New Rightists or the Military Ascetics (like us)?

Sparta-1“Today we need more than morality. We need hypermorality, the Nietzschean ethics of difficult times. When one defends one’s people, i.e., one’s own children, one defends the essential. Then one follows the rule of Agamemnon and Leonidas but also of Charles Martel: what prevails is the law of the sword, whose bronze or steel reflects the glare of the sun.”

—Guillaume Faye

Categories
Ancient Rome Deranged altruism French Revolution Judeo-reductionism Liberalism

On Megalodons and scorpions

teeth


Megalodon tooth with two great white shark teeth.




I have re-read my year-old post “Blaming the shark, sparing the Megalodon” and it struck me as solid.

Those familiar with my classification (see for example: here) are aware that “bicausalists type B” like me maintain a totally different cognitive process than “bicausalists type A”: those who basically blame the Jews for our woes.

One of the most important questions in the movement that both monocausalists and the type Bs avoid is, What enabled Jewish empowerment in the West? (keeping in mind that they never took over the media in, say, China or the Muslim world). We must never forget that in the aftermaths of the French Revolution, Adrien Duport, a member of the Jacobin Club, ascended the tribune and said:

I believe that freedom of worship does not permit any distinction in the political rights of citizens on account of their creed. The question of the political existence of the Jews has been postponed. Still the Moslems and the men of all sects are admitted to enjoy political rights in France. I demand that the motion for postponement be withdrawn, and a decree passed that the Jews in France enjoy the privileges of full citizens.

Duport’s proposition was accepted amid loud applause, which means that Whites empowered Jews; the members of the tribe did not empower themselves. To my mind, the event reflects white suicidal tendencies, with all the euphoria of a triumphant liberal Revolution, in a nutshell. If the West survives its current condition, historians of the future will surely mark this momentum event as the quintessential not only of French pathology, but of white pathology in general.

I am starting to suspect that my “bicausalism type B” stance is the reason why my metaphor of the witches’ brew, that I picked from Pierce, is not being taken seriously—let alone my initiative to identify each ingredient of the brew (yes: including the transferences resulting from child abuse).

If I could I’d poll readers of the pro-white blogosphere: TOO, CC, MR, OD, AmRen, AOT, AltRight, VNN and NWF to see who’s bicausalist type A and who’s type B; asking them to intuitively assign percentages of blame on Jew vs. White.

In such an hypothetical poll I would say this: Since Jewish power is completely derived from white treason I would assign, tentatively, a bicausal blame to whites approximately in proportion to the size of the Megalodon vis-à-vis a modern white shark (see e.g., this virtual image of these two animals in the sea). If this hypothetical assignation reflects reality, it would mean that white pathology is the main factor of the West’s darkest hour.

Of course, I could be wrong. But I need reasons and facts to change my mind rather than insults, especially because I still believe in final solutions to the J problem. (Even when, mixing metaphors, bacterial pneumonia is a secondary infection to viral AIDS, such bacteria is still killing us; we must get rid of them.)

I cannot emphasize strongly enough that I find it rather comical when either a monocausalist or a type A bicausalist drops Jewish names in discussions with me pointing out that some kikes were involved in the Revolution. The central issue in this debate is, again, that whites empowered them and precisely because of enlightened ideas developed by whites.

Moreover, if my reading of history is accurate, the most important century to understand our current dilemma is the 19th century. After those Jacobins I quoted above, in the next century European nation after European nation subscribed the French emancipatory ethos throughout that century. (The singular case of the U.S. is even more pathological as that nation was founded not only upon Enlightenment hubris in 1776, but even previously by the original founding fathers of puritanical extraction that used the Old Testament as their guiding star.) From this point of view, the 19th century was the traitorous century par excellence: European whites virtually started to hand over their banking, media and cultural institutions to a clearly subversive tribe.

I cannot figure out a best way to close this entry than to quote from the mentioned article “Blaming the shark, sparing the Megalodon,” where an intelligent commenter responded to Greg Johnson, a type A bicausalist, with these words:

Deinking said…

When 2 percent of a population controls 98 percent with impunity, it’s empirical proof that that the 98 percent is inferior. If they weren’t inferior, things would be the opposite. Blaming Jews would be understandable if they were 20-30 percent of our population, but when they’re just a tiny fraction and still rule over us, we have no one to blame but ourselves. If we were just one-tenth as motivated, organized, and pitiless as they are, there would be no possible way for them to dominate us. They would hardly matter at all.

We Whites have always been too naive, too gullible, too kind, and idealistic. That’s our problem. If we were hardened realists then we would have destroyed Judaism and Jewish identity thousands of years ago, when the Romans had total control over Judea. But even the Romans were too softhearted and continually let the Jews have their own society even after they viciously slaughtered Roman citizens in their various rebellions… and this was before Christian morality warped our minds. There’s something seriously wrong with us.

Greg Johnson said…

Are humans inferior to scorpions and spiders because we are vulnerable to their stings? The term “inferior” is misplaced here. We are vulnerable to Jews, just as we are vulnerable to bullets. When a man has been shot, you don’t blame him for not being bullet proof. You blame him, though, if he handed his gun over to a criminal.

Denikin said…

A human getting accidentally stung by a scorpion is one thing. But when millions of humans have been repeatedly stung by scorpions for 2,000 years and have not yet learned to stay away from them, it means there’s something wrong with the humans, not the scorpions.

Thanks Mr. Deinking. I have nothing to add.

Categories
Conspiracy theories Islam Judeo-reductionism Kevin MacDonald Sexual "liberation"

What tipped my apothecary scale?

Or:

Stephen Dalton’s point

Another way to see the difference between bicausalism type-A and type B is through the thought experiment of who would you blame the most, the anthropophagous Morlocks or the suicidal passivity of the blond Eloi in H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine? Those who focus on Jewry blame the Morlocks of course. But there are those who, like John Martínez, can see through the minds of the blond Swedes during the recent burning of Stockholm by Muslims and call a spade a spade: white suicide.

German stamp

I would like now to say something about what I said in my previous post on paradigm shifts. In an Apothecary scale, when a pan of the scale accumulates 51 per cent of either side, the scale will tip on the bottom stop. Following the metaphor of the scale, what accumulated the needed 51 per cent on the pan for the scale’s arm to lean my mind toward type-B bicausalism was the fact that some people in the white nationalist movement promote both sexual deviants and degenerate music. Since these people are perfectly conscious of the Jewish problem, I told to myself during those “mental warfare” soliloquies I spoke of in my previous post, this could not be attributed to Jewish influence. In other words, if even white nationalists—precisely the ones, one would expect, who would pursue healthy music and sexual mores—have fallen into the suicidal hedonistic mores, there must be another factor besides the Jewish one.

Let’s put it this way. In the thread of the article “Bicausalism Type B” at Occidental Dissent, Stephen E. Dalton said:

Too many people who are involved in white nationalism are ignorant, hyper-emotional fools who obsess about the other, claiming it’s all their fault (Jews, Blacks, etc.) while not paying attention to their own faults and weaknesses. Hunter & Jack’s [OD’s admins] message is, be aware of your strengths and weaknesses, and take responsibility for them, and be aware of your enemies strengths, weaknesses, and their subversive tactics, and avoid giving into their tricks. Too many of the commentators at OD tend to believe the enemy is all powerful, that he is everywhere. “It’s the Jooos” or some other group is their battle cry. This is nonsense, and let me tell you why.

Porn used to be a small mom and pop business found in the bad parts of a town, dominated by Jews. Now it’s a multi-billion dollar business that sells its filth over the internet. Why did porn become so big? It went big time because the white majority wanted it, lusted after it, and brought it. Sure, the pornographers, and their paid whores in academia, the law, the mass media, and medicine held the forbidden fruit in front of us, but the white majority of this country took that fruit and ate it. We made this enemy powerful by giving it our time and our money. We are the ones who must take responsibility to weaken and destroy it by refusing to feed the beast.

Of all I have read in the nationalist literature, my favorite quote has been what Andrew Hamilton said in one of his articles at Counter Currents: “What I failed to realize for many years was the depth of the evil and the resistance to individual redemption. Obviously, if people are evil when evil people rule, and good only when good people rule, they are not really good.” I have written about Hamilton’s quote in one of the most disturbing entries here at WDH, but for the moment I prefer to pass the microphone to Dalton:

Blaming the Jews for everything is a cop out. Yes they are responsible for a lot of mischief, but so are other groups. To claim that the Boston Tragedy was a Mossad-Jewish-Israeli false flag op is the height of idiocy. It was a Muslim planned op all the way. Yet some people commenting here on this blog and elsewhere refused to see the evidence right in front of their eyes. Instead, they allowed their feelings and emotions against one group to blind them to the reality of what really happened. It is this kind of blind hatred, motivated by paleologic [thinking] (putting emotions and feelings before facts) that kept me away from what is called the racial right for years.

Perhaps Dalton picked the word “paleologic” from what I told him in another recent thread at Occidental Dissent. This is a complex issue (in my book I explain the fundamentals of the concept of “paleologic thinking” here).

When Dalton wrote his comment he had in mind those silly nationalists that believe that the recent London decapitation incident was a Jewish hoax. But these people don’t only blame the Jews, instead of the Muslims, for that single incident: they blame the Jews for the recent Boston bombings too; the killings of Adam Lanza, the Breivik incident at Norway, 9/11 and some conspiracy theorists have developed crank theories about the 2005 London bombings (in Spain these idiots also believe that the Jihad attack of 2004 at Madrid was also staged). Dalton continues:

I now know, thanks to the work of men like Hunter, Jack, and others that there are people who can think clearly on this topic, and can sift through information on events, people, and ideas, and come up with logical answers that conform to what is actually reality.

Kevin MacDonald’s The Occidental Observer is one of the few sane voices that can discuss the Jewish Question without falling into paranoid delusions.

Categories
Judeo-reductionism

Bicausal corollary

These days my classification of “bicausalism” has stirred a long discussion through several threads at Occidental Dissent (see, e.g., here):

1.- Monocausalists – Most of the commenters at Age of Treason, and people like Dave Duke whom I deeply respect. These people believe that there’s but one cause of our woes: the subversive Jews.

2.- Bicausalists Type A – Those who, like Alex Linder and some commenters at Linder’s VNN Forum, believe that Jews are the primary cause of our woes, though there are other important factors as well. Unlike monocausalists, these bicausalists also blame our parents’ religion.

3.- Bicausalists Type B – Those who, like Tom Sunic, Manu Rodríguez and I believe that there’s something seriously wrong with us, extremely wrong actually. Whites’ mental issues (which include a Calvinist type of Old Testament Christianity that conquered North America) are the primary infection, and the Judaization of the West, a secondary infection (like AIDS / pneumonia, etc).

This is my corollary to the above classification. Note that I have added a #4, which means an antithetical monocausal stance to the one mentioned above. (Keywords: AoT = the blog Age of Treason; GoV = the blog Gates of Vienna):

1. AoT-like monocausalism – blames Jews 100%, Whites 0%

2. Bicausalism Type-A – assigns a blame above 50% to Jews

3. Bicausalism Type-B – assigns a blame above 50% to Whites

4. GoV-like monocausalism – blames Whites 100%, Jews 0%

Of course, in bicausalism you can either blame one or the other in diverse ratios depending on the specific bicausal individual, say, 90 / 10 percent or inversely; or 45 / 55 percent, etc.

Categories
Judeo-reductionism

Personal responsibility

In the context of who is ultimately responsible for our condition, Jews or Whites, at Occidental Dissent the blogger Occigent said:

Personal feuds are about as fruitless an endeavor one can engage in, and this issue appears to be as intractable as the Catholic/Protestant/atheist issue. But this is an important distinction, and I’d like to restate my case in a less defensive way, and not in response to any specific personality.

So this much I will tell you:

Anyone who tells you that the state of the ethnic ship upon which our mind weapons are mounted is not now and has not always been our direct and personal responsibility is a Jew-trained welfare mind white house migger that should be immediately cast overboard. We’ll be lucky enough as it is to get this rusty old scow to safe harbor without that dead weight.

We are the most powerful people in the world. We can change the future tomorrow. Don’t let the victimcrats hobble your vision, your clarity, and most important of all, that lost Jewel of White Civilization, your personal responsibility. To your people, to your culture, and to God. Do not ever let someone get in the way of that responsibility. They are the enemy. And they will drag you further down into the pits of hell.

Repeat. Our ship is not the Muslim’s responsibility, it is not the Jews’ responsibility. It is our responsibility. So wake the fuck up and stop giving other people power over you.

Thank you.

And in another thread:

People: get real. We love what the Jews do for us. We love the entertainment, we love the lasseiz faire attitude, we love the sex, we love the drugs, we love the rock and roll. And we get drunk on it, and they take it too far.

But for God’s sake, open your eyes. Get real with yourselves. History is rife with whites who would sell their soul for lollipop, as is WashingtonDC, and as long as there are such whites, which will be always, there will always be Jews to accommodate them.

Do we wish that Jews would not accommodate us in our sin? Yes. We do. Is it the Jews’ fault that we sin? No. It is not. It is our fault.

Right now, as we speak, there are probably a million Jews engaged in commerce and entertainment to fill the needs of 100 million white sinners. And we do nothing to stop it. And that’s their fault?