Yesterday I watched a popular video with Ben Shapiro sitting beside a trans-man who claims he’s a woman. Samantha Schacher, host of Pop Trigger, said that we should expand our inclusiveness and compassion to these machos that pose as women.
This morning I had to pick up a bill from a hospital. Since the parking lot is expensive I parked the car a few blocks away from the hospital and the walking gave me the opportunity for a little soliloquy about the video in which, by the way, the muscular tranny threatened skinny Shapiro with violence as the latter said that transgenderism is a mental disorder.
But what made me think was Samantha’s impassioned speech that we should start mainstreaming transgenderism.
This is the conclusion of my peripatetic self-conversation: Women are, biologically, sexual objects. Just look at the fairest specimens of Homo sapiens and it’s all-too clear that Nature wants that we impregnate them all. Their brain is hard-wired not only to have lots of babies, but to nurture and raise them with empathy.
Once we tell women that they are not objects but ‘souls’ in the Christian and Neo-Christian sense of the term, free-will entities that just happen to inhabit a woman’s body, little women will forfeit Mother Nature by not having babies.
The psychological toll of forfeiting motherhood is apocalyptic. Feminism becomes a weapon of mass destruction not only for the fair race, but for the fair sex as well. For the liberated woman, her hard-wired sense of compassion starts to be transferred onto apparently unprotected humans that are not her own babies. That’s how the Negro and the Homo and the Tranny became like the new babies for the childless woman or even those who, like Samantha, only have one child.
I call the process pathological transference of compassion and presently it is affecting almost all western women, including those feminised males and manly females in white nationalism that are scared of the humorous ‘white sharia’ meme.
The cure for the disease is simple. Forget the white sharia meme for the moment. Use a Western meme instead. Just wait until the convergence of catastrophes makes the holy racial wars possible and the founders of a New Rome will abduct and rape the fairest Sabines as described in David Lane’s novel KD Rebel. (By the way, wouldn’t it be nice if I start publishing Lane’s novel in this site?)
And believe it or not: the pretty Sabines will be the lucky ones. Those who are not fair, e.g. fat women well after their teens and early twenties like Heather Heyer will face justice in the Day of the Rope. To quote Pierce’s novel, ‘There are many thousands of hanging female corpses like that in this city tonight, all wearing identical placards around their necks. They are the White women who were married to or living with Blacks, with Jews, or with other non-White males’.
And thus the feminist problem is solved.
Category: Real men
It has become clear to me that us white males must kill our enemies or our race will go extinct. By our enemies I mean primarily the Jews, and before someone imagines these Jews are invincible and untouchable, just think how many synagogues there are around your country? THE ENEMY that is genociding us is sitting comfortably in our own countries unmolested by the people he is exterminating. That says a lot about us. Unlike our ancestors, white males of today don’t kill our enemies. We send memes to them. We talk about them. Anything but actually killing them. But unless we resume the ways of our ancestors in dealing with their enemies we are not going to survive. If we are too cowardly to kill our enemies then our extinction will be richly deserved.
If there were no police, white men would be more likely to kill their enemies for the danger of life in prison would be put aside. The idea of a ‘collapse’ holds appeal to many because it’s assumed that in the chaos of the collapse, the police will somehow be dispersed and Whites can start killing their enemies without the threat of prison. But we should not rely on a collapse to take place, we must prepare for the worst—that things continue to remain the same. In that case we must simply kill our enemies. What is holding us back is ourselves. There are enough White Nationalist men worldwide to do serious damage to the Jews.
A thousand Breiviks attacking synagogues and the earth would tremble. It is white males who are to blame for lacking the initiative to carry out attacks on their enemies, white males who are to blame for their failure to secure our race’s existence. Real Men would have done something about all this decades ago. In fact real men would never have allowed this situation to come to pass. At some point during the end of WWII the White Man made the unconscious decision that he couldn’t be bothered to contend with the Jews and just chose extinction instead. It is this unconscious death-wish that has made it so easy for the Jews to genocide us.
If it becomes clear to me (and others) near the end of my lifetime that the White race is not going to survive, I will not pity us. For our extinction is justified by Natural Law. Nature’s Law of Survival of the Fittest ensures justice, and we will have been weighed in the balance by that law and judged unfit to survive. Extinction is the logical outcome for a species too cowardly and stupid to preserve itself, and although it is my own race that is perishing, from a detached, impartial perspective there is no need to pity it. It simply got what it deserved.
Categories
Siege, 12
Real revolution versus phony revolution
The old-timers from the Forties and Fifties predicted the “Coming Red Dictatorship”. Those of us around and active in the Sixties were taught to dread the “Black Revolution” and that of the “New Left”, the Yuppies, etc. —none of which ever took place. Or did they? I’ll just put it this way: all of their vile and sick demands either already have been implemented or are well on their way.
The kind of sick filth that prevails today and much of which has long since been coded in law books is the sort of stuff that is so insidious and destructive that Joseph Stalin himself—that “Arch Red”, right?—would have, and very often did go all out to root up and get rid of before the whole structure of society was devoured by it. While we’ve been on guard against threatening menaces, things far worse have overtaken us.
Things so foul and deep-rooted that it’s even hard to put a finger on them. One thing for certain however, taken together, it all adds up to a national death sleep. Rockwell called the situation in the Sixties that very thing, except he believed enough White Men knew the score, hated it, and were ready to fight if only given the proper leadership. Things have gone far beyond that today: most people don’t know the score; they don’t give a damn; and they wouldn’t fight under any circumstances.
They are ready and willing to lay down and just die! So to HELL with them!!
Are we—are you—as unworthy of the White genes in your blood as that? That’s one reason to join the fight. Another reason is that the situation which prevails on planet earth is a damned insult and disgrace to a Creator or to Creation itself. This crazy and rotten mess cries out to be ruthlessly corrected and the only way to prove that you are not part of the problem is to become part of the solution. One final motivation is this: those of us having been around and “in the know” had better get on with the big job of the dirty work while we’re still young. The System provides no retirement benefits for failed revolutionaries.
As far as any real revolution is concerned, one can only come from us.
What’s the difference between all other interests vying for a piece of the pie today? They all love Blacks and their greatest ideal is high profits. What’s the difference when the U.S. First Lady is pictured with two great, outstanding democrats: John Wayne Gacy and Jim Jones? What’s the difference when Jesse Jackson, in his syndicated newspaper column, refers to the five dead identified Communists in Greensboro as “civil rights leaders”? Could things be worse? Do we need fear a Communist or Black revolution? Hardly.
To bring off a revolution means literally to turn the tables upside-down. It does not mean quibbling inches and degrees; turning back the hands of time; arguing two sides of the same coin. It doesn’t mean patching up a rotten, sagging framework either. It means DEATH to the old order and the BIRTH of the New Order! Anything other than this is no more than a variation on a single theme: Jewish-controlled State Capitalism.
So forget about someone else’s revolution. There’s not going to be one unless WE make it!
Vol. IX, #4 – August, 1980
Order a copy of Siege (here)
Categories
Siege, 11
Our reasons for being NSLF
One incontrovertible fact is that the NSLF remains to date the only new development within the Movement in America since Rockwell began it in 1958. It was Joseph Tommasi’s work of the most incredible genius, the POLITICAL TERROR leaflet, that he designed in 1974 and which reached my hands at that time, that provided for those true revolutionaries in the NS Movement what we had been groping towards for years. It was original and unique and Tommasi had DONE IT!
NSLF is not an order of monks sequestered away studying religious tracts and further separating ourselves from reality. We do not wish to get the tiniest handful thinking differently nor do we imagine we can do the same with the masses. We do wish to give the answers to the people that are as plain as the noses on their faces. We preach revolution while the rest preach reaction. We do not wish to rock the boat, we intend to SINK IT!
If anyone can claim to be the “legitimate successor” to George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party it is NSLF and no other! NSLF is the true, logical extension of everything Rockwell believed in and fought for. Petty legalisms and political chicanery aside, were Rockwell alive today, he would not be retrogressing holed up with sterile bureaucrats. He would be found FIGHTING IN THE STREET! His call would still be TO ACTION and not inaction on the part of eccentrics and fakers who studiously claim to have the “right way”.
Of all those who have come along since the death of Rockwell with pretensions of being an NS leader, all but one have been totally lost within themselves and their fantasy world of “Fuhrer-dom” and many have shown themselves to be downright crooked and incapable of dealing as men and as National Socialists. One has turned out to be a racial alien and a sexual pervert and currently is serving a prison term for the latter [Mason here is referring to Frank Collin, the Chicago Nazi leader in the 1970’s who is mainly infamous for his plan to demonstrate in Skokie, IL].
It remains today that the measure of a group is the measure of the man who founded or who leads that group. Joseph Tommasi, as founder of the NSLF, was the first of a new breed. A hero and a martyr to the Cause. What he wanted most was to provide the Movement with its much overdue HIT TEAM and not to set himself up as some sort of cheap, tin horn demigod like the rest. Tommasi personified the kind of man we MUST have: those desiring to serve the Movement with great facility, and not pose around in gaudy uniforms as “Hollywood Nazis”.
NSLF is not taken lightly by the Reds, the Blacks, or the System. We are not laughed at. We have taken the already-formidable reputation of the ANP—built up by Rockwell at monumental human cost—and ENHANCED IT by removing all pretenses of conservatism and legalism while the rest have made laughing stocks of themselves and their sphere of the Movement. A White Man can take pride in being part of the NSLF. It is the ONLY place for a White Revolutionary to be found!
In terms of longevity and resiliency, we have more than pulled even with the closest runner-up to the old Party, which had been the NSPA [National Socialist Party of America, headquartered in Chicago]. The death of our founder and the most severe tribulations still see us today in the best shape we have ever been.
Finally, we are NSLF because we want no part of cut- and-dried, hard-and-fast, locked-in bureaucracy like the others. We see the need for absolute flexibility as we struggle towards revolution in America. We recognize the need for a certain formality of concept and effort but until we have the pool of human resources large enough to draw selectively from, we REJECT any “rules and regulations” that would keep us from that pool.
The rest will tell you that they are “It”; we tell you that we are the only ones with the potential—with your help—of BECOMING “It”. We are not among the “Great Pretenders”. We are not part of the System or the Establishment in any way, shape, or form, as most of the others are with their charters, corporations, legalisms, etc.
We are REVOLUTIONARY!
Vol. XI, #5 – May, 1982
Order a copy of Siege (here)
Categories
Siege, 8
When right wing becomes revolution
You’ve all read of the arrests in New Orleans made in connection with the projected plan involving the island of Dominica in the Caribbean Sea. I must comment at the start of this that a D-Day on the part of the Ku Klux Klan is a long way from burning crosses in cow pastures. That is encouraging enough right there. But because it was a first, infant step, it failed. It failed however for reasons easily corrected. It was a good idea and it was not bound to fail. Loose lips sink ships, always did and always will. I’m not trying to pick apart a mission that failed for reasons either inside or outside but I am wondering about something that could have still happened but did not.
It was reported that the KKK members were arrested with automatic weapons, about to embark by boat from New Orleans. Why did this happen? Why should ten men with automatic weapons about to leave the United States by boat be arrested? How could they be arrested unless they themselves decided in their own minds to let themselves be arrested? Instead of the end of a Right Wing mission, it could have and should have been the beginning of a revolutionary one. It could have begun right there on the pier.
They might be dead or out to sea right now but they’d be free and the System would most definitely have bled and the White Man would have scored a solid hit against the forces of Big Brother. Instead, these men are in a limbo and facing many years in prison while no real action was ever taken. Think of the tragic waste! They still maintained the old Right Wing notion of “getting away” with something; they felt individual life too sweet to take the dare and RESIST!
One set of equations that Joe Tommasi never got around to mentioning regarding the levels of the struggle is this: in the past the Right Wing pulled stupid stunts against Blacks and other useless expendables and then ran away hoping not to be caught later by Big Brother but usually were caught, and then offered no RESISTANCE. (Trying to defend yourself in Big Brother’s courtrooms is not resistance.) Lately some of the Movement have been choosing better, higher targets but still put themselves in a runaway kind of position where they are either caught right on the spot or after a manhunt. Again, little or no resistance (except in the heroic case of Fred Cowan who would not be taken).
The two levels which the Movement is steadily evolving toward are these: first, if they must put themselves in a hit-and-run position then they will have made up their minds at the start to not surrender by the rules of the System’s game. The final level is when they have begun to hit and keep on hitting, never considering detection much less capture because they are completely involved with the ongoing attack. This final level of struggle shall be when the so-called “capture parties” sent by Big Brother go out but don’t come back.
Any bets as to whether it’s coming to that or just how soon?
Vol. X, #6 – June, 1981
Order a copy of Siege (here)
Categories
Siege, 7
Something that will work
This would almost call for a “mass” movement but here again we must carefully watch our definitions and understanding. By “masses” we need at most only a few hundred thousand more-or-less hardcore people committed to revolution and, to get and keep this discussion down-to-earth, we have been on the verge of going after these few hundred thousand twice before in the history of the Movement in the United States. Not only in theory but in actuality as newspaper headlines and membership rosters showed. First in 1966 and again in 1973.
As strange as it may sound, the opportunities of 1966 were lost well before Commander Rockwell was assassinated. And certainly there was no such single incident in 1973 [comparable to assassination of the leader] that could be easily blamed for the downward trend that next set in. In both instances the revolutionary political groundwork had not been tended to in advance of the laborious and painstaking street work which was eventually—and all too fleetingly—crowned with the reward of some significant numerical clout.
I’m sure also that had the pitfalls of having no solid chain-of-command reinforced and ready for the sudden challenge of hard success somehow been accidentally avoided, then still the moment would have been lost due to a lack of greater direction—a revolutionary plan—when suddenly called for.
And such a thing can rarely be supplied by accident. Getting into the rut of rolling with the blows is dangerous because it gets habit-forming and it numbs the senses and imagination. We have to know exactly what we’d do with a real political machine if we had one right now, for if we were handed one—or the means of getting one and did not know precisely what to do with it, we’d quickly blow it.
In 1966 Commander Rockwell was unable to EXPLOIT the God-given opportunity that presented itself in Chicago that summer and fall. He always considered and referred to himself as being the spearhead of the Right Wing and when the historic moment arrived during the time of the Black riots in major cities, when Commander Rockwell was doing his best spearheading activities, he was LET DOWN AND BETRAYED by his own side.
They failed to act in support even when, as the Commander himself pointed out, they stood to gain more from his efforts than he did because in the main, those people recruited by an intensive, unified Right Wing drive would naturally gravitate toward the “softer”, “easier” names and approaches like the NSRP [National States’ Rights Party] and various Mans. The Commander said all along that he only wanted and would only get what any true spearhead outfit must have: FIGHTING MEN! The apex moment of the 1960’s was thus lost.
In 1973, through constant activity nationwide and through some admirable policies of professionalism, the Movement stood ready to break into what Commander Rockwell would have called “Phase Three”, or the phase of mass action. We then had more leaders than had been on the scene in 1966. Rather than wait for a moment to come, we made our own. Not only that but we also chose the place: Cleveland. Over one hundred uniformed, helmeted Troopers marched down the middle of Euclid Avenue that Labor Day and formed-up in a public square for a rally.
And though the opposition was there—from the System and from the Reds—we were too strong. Had that sort of show of strength and discipline been maintained and repeated in various other cities it most likely would have, first, broken the “spell” of thousands who were hovering on the brink of committing openly and, second, prompted panic reactions on the part of every aspect of our racial Enemy thus providing obvious and inescapable openings for further and greater EXPLOTATION.
What set in next, both in 1966 and 1973, is what we must now learn to recognize and make our new effort far less vulnerable—if not altogether immune—to. There seemed to be no absolute commitment to REVOLUTION. No one seemed to know what the goal really was. The prevailing leadership at both times used the term “White Revolution” copiously in their propaganda but they thought only in terms of a revolutionary ideal or of a revolutionary social change far down the road somewhere.
They did not fully subscribe to TOTAL REVOLUTION NOW! And not only the men at the very top. The one-man show has proved it can’t get to first base. To be legitimate, a revolutionary political movement must have at least about a dozen or more leading, prominent figures. No one among the cadres being built at those times (with the single outstanding exception of Joseph Tommasi) was thinking purely revolutionary.
Everyone had their own ideas, and were bent on doing their own trip. When the “fun” stopped, when the “thrill” wore off, when the self-gratification halted, they split. Also because they had their own conceptions, most of the rules of good common sense got walked all over—primarily during and after 1973—resulting in petty bureaucracy followed closely by alienation and the effective destruction of the one party.
Had everyone concerned been completely committed to REVOLUTION OVER THE SYSTEM then it would have been a much easier task to sublimate the personal feelings and weaknesses which destroyed their efforts ultimately. The most incompatible of personalities can work together effectively for revolution but hardly for a damned thing else.
The most limited and klutzy individual can understand the common sacred drive to SMASH THE SYSTEM. Everyone can find his or her proper place in the WAR AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT. The Communists have proven this in a dozen historic cases, all of them recent. Once we get our fallible and undependable selves sublimated to REVOLUTION then the rest should come easy when compared to the endless, nowhere drag of past years.
Once accomplished, then all the “right” and the high ideals will have some meaning and can be put to some use. Instead of the current hindrance, they will have become the “end” that justifies whatever “means” may be necessary.
Vol. XI #1 – January, 1982
Order a copy of Siege (here)
Categories
Slippery slope
“It is far too easy to abandon our principles and values arguing pressure of circumstance. It takes strength of character, fortitude and resilience to resist the corrosive ideas of our enemies who bid us take the easy way… We have only to compromise once and we are on the slippery slope that leads to betrayal.”
—Derek Holland (The Political Soldier)
My paternal grandmother was born in the 19th century, specifically in 1888, and I lived alone with her in the late 1970s and early 80s, when she was in her nineties.
When I was a small child the institution of marriage was pretty solid. How well I remember in my sixth year that a boy of my age talked about a case of divorce: an unheard of phenomenon in my family! Nobody talked about homosexuality and no degenerate music was heard even in shopping stores (this was before the malls). No degeneracy was shown in those elegant, old-time theatres like opera halls where I used to watch films. As a boomer I am a witness that all of these catastrophic changes happened within my lifespan.
Below, my abridgement of “Just what are traditional gender roles?,” a piece published last month on The Daily Stormer:
“I’m in a traditional marriage”
“I’m all for traditional gender roles”
“I want gender norms to be like the old days”
These are refrains I’ve heard endlessly repeated as the discussion over White sharia has advanced. They are coming from women and a few weak men counter-signaling the White sharia meme.
Because of the critical importance of this discussion for the survival of the white race and its European civilizations, I wanted to take a minute to explain to all the men and women claiming to be so-called traditionalists all the concepts and social boundaries that defined traditional relationships. This is the most important education that I can possibly give the community at this moment, and I ask that you ask yourself if you are really embracing traditionalism like you claim to be.
Coverture
Coverture was the reality for all of European history up until the mid and late 19th century, when feminist agitators, the media, and academic establishment triumphed with their agitations through its abolition. The basic principle of coverture is that the rights of the woman are completely subsumed into that of her husband’s. A married woman could not own property, sign legal documents or enter into a contract, obtain an education against her husband’s wishes, or keep a salary for herself. William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume I:
The very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband: under whose wing, protection, and cover, she performs every thing; and is therefore called in our law-French a feme-covert; is said to be covert-baron, or under the protection and influence of her husband, her baron, or lord; and her condition during her marriage is called her coverture.
UCLA gender studies professor Ellen Carol DuBois (whose career is chronicled in the Jewish Women’s Archive, of course) highlighted in her histories of women’s rights “the initial target of women’s rights protest was the legal doctrine of coverture,” and that 19th century feminist icon Lucy Stone despised the common law of marriage “because it gives the custody of the wife’s person to her husband, so that he has a right to her even against herself.”
If a woman decided to leave her marriage she was a penniless non-entity no matter what her previous position was in life (truly, there is no better position for an errant whore to be rendered into). Any restoration of traditional gender roles starts by restoring coverture, thus removing financial incentives for worthless scheming whores to destroy the sanctity of marriage by abandoning it over whims and lusts. Marriage, up until the abolition of coverture, meant that the woman was permanent property of one man; it allowed continued existence and any degree of freedom only in accordance with his desires.
Bride price
The dower grew out of the Germanic practice of bride price (Old English weotuma), which was given over to a bride’s family well in advance for arranging the marriage.
Before a woman was her husband’s property, she was her father’s. This is why the father gives away the bride at the marriage ceremony. Traditional marriage was a transfer of property, with the priest serving the role as the trusted third party to do the background research and make sure the transaction was honest. It was essentially like getting the sale of your apartment validated by a notary. The daughter was sold off by her father, and it was the father’s sole judgment of who was eligible to lawfully purchase his property.
The status of women as property was nearly universal in European cultures, with the exception of Jewry and some groups of gypsies, where access to tithes and trust followed a matrilineal line. This was why the Jews were so keen to attack these ideas, because the patrilineal passing of property was innately offensive to their culture. Europe only has this absurd notion of women as independent entities because of organized subversion by agents of Judaism.
Domestic discipline and “marital rape”
Coverture and bride price were abolished to ridiculously assert women were independent entities with “rights” so that they could lobby for suffrage. The implementation of suffrage culminated in legal penalties for domestic discipline and the concept of marital rape so that women could abandon their most basic household duties, thus destroying their homes and their husbands’ lives.
The thing about these changes is that they are really fresh and new. While the 19th century might seem like a long time ago for many of our young readers (it isn’t, on the civilizational timescale it is just last month and on the evolutionary timescale it is mere seconds) these new changes began in the lifetimes of our parents and finished in many of ours, and civilization was immediately and measurably the worse for wear. According to Wikipedia:
The reluctance to criminalize and prosecute marital rape has been attributed to traditional views of marriage, interpretations of religious doctrines, ideas about male and female sexuality, and to cultural expectations of subordination of a wife to her husband—views which continue to be common in many parts of the world.
These views of marriage and sexuality started to be challenged in most Western countries from the 1960s and 70s especially by second-wave feminism, leading to an acknowledgment of the woman’s right to self-determination (i.e., control) of all matters relating to her body, and the withdrawal of the exemption or defense of marital rape… The criminalization of marital rape in the United States started in the mid-1970s and by 1993 marital rape was a crime in all 50 states, under at least one section of the sexual offense codes.
Rape is a property crime and nothing more. First a crime against the property of the father, and then a crime against the property of the husband. This change only finished in the US and UK in the nineties, when I was eight years old. Women existing in a state of slavery to the sexual whims of their husbands is not some barbarism of prehistory. This was universal common sense for whites up until a couple decades ago.
Likewise, hitting a woman out of her head was seen as benevolent and a universal necessity in every marriage until the sixties, and even portrayed positively in movies and film. Regular slapping and the occasional vicious beating of a woman was a necessity in every household. Women need to be regularly disciplined to keep their heads about them. They can be intellectually mature and clever to the point of deviousness, but they will always have the emotional state of a very young child and we all know what happens when you spare those the rod.
On this subject I hear two narratives from low-T men in the alt-right. The first is that all these transformations in the rights and status of women happened in reaction to family abandonment and general hardships upon women. Even those I respect fall for this sniveling lie from the mouths of manipulative whores. To these I have said: let us examine the data. [Editor’s note: the graph is not included in this abridged post.]
Broken families happened as a result of these changes in the status of women, not as the cause of them. The reality is that extramarital sex and birth was at an all time historical low because of Victorian standards of morality. The only spikes on that chart before 1950 were a result of world wars, because a man that died in some kike’s war could not marry his whore. Men held up their end of everything. They married women, they provided for them, they gave them newfound comforts and innovations like laundry machines that reduced their domestic workload to nil. They gave them full legal independence, and then they even stopped giving them the basic boundaries of discipline.
What did women do with all these new rights and comforts? Well, you see how that graph goes. They whored like never before through the sixties and seventies, and Western civilization has been rotting ever since.
They did this because white men had a fool’s compassion in their hearts and lost the good sense to shove their faces into a countertop and give them a swift kick to the gut as hard as they can when these skanks had it coming to them.
Men counter-signaling White sharia
So most of this “I’m totally traditionalist but White sharia is terrible” nonsense is coming from women, but sometimes it is coming from small-souled bugmen as well. Some of these men are being bullied by their wives. Some of them just have no will to power. Beardson just used this line, and as far as I’m concerned he’s not only no longer the leader of the thot patrol, but no longer eligible to even be on it. We’ll be bullying whores without him from now on.
Here’s the reality of European tradition: women were a category of property that had a single instance of sale. They were complete slaves to the will of fathers then husbands, both having free reign to beat them and the latter having the lawful right to fuck them, where and when they pleased.
This was the reality for thousands of years of European history and the change in this status only finished in our and our parents’ lifetimes. There’s nothing Islamic about this. It is just the default position of any civilization that is not being destroyed by decadence.
Man up, put women under your heel, throw away their birth control and make them bear you children and take care of your house. If they resist, discipline them.
If you are uncomfortable with the White sharia meme because it contains the word sharia, I can understand that, but “muh feels” is not an argument against the efficacy of the meme. This meme is effective because it has an immediate effect of being shocking and lurid to the senses of women and weak men and forces people to talk about the status of women in our civilization.
All we are pushing for is a return to the status of women we had in the early 19th century before Jews and their feminism ruined our civilization. This should not be controversial. If you are opposing White sharia because you disagree with women being reduced to the status of property to be beaten and fucked at the whims of her husband, you are a faggot and a cuckold and have no place in any right-wing site, and instead belong at the bottom of festering bogs like Reddit and Voat.
Categories
In defense of white sharia
by Sacco Vandal
Donald Thoresen recently wrote a criticism of the White Sharia meme, wherein he alleged that the proponents of the meme may perhaps be suffering from “self-hatred… and the internalization of white subservience.” As one of the genuine originators of the meme—which was first promulgated on my podcast, The War Room, in late 2016—I assure you: this is simply not the case.
In his piece, Thoresen wonders why anyone on the Alt Right would be “attracted to the brutality of the Islamic world” and advises those who enjoy the White Sharia meme to “decolonize themselves.” Unfortunately, it is Thoresen who needs to decolonize himself. He seems to have internalized the attempts of the darker races to meme our men into pacifistic, overly-civilized weaklings. Our enemies have facilitated this lie precisely in order to disarm us before moving in for the kill. But, in reality, barbarity is not foreign to us whites.
We should never forget that Faustian man was once, not so long ago, the most vicious and barbaric player on the world stage. Oswald Spengler referred to early Western man as “the red-haired barbarian” of “Frankistan.” Whites did not conquer the entire Earth by being nice or civilized; Whites conquered the world by sailing into foreign lands and taking those lands by force. Vikings, Crusaders, and Conquistadores alike were all practitioners of rape, pillage, and plunder.
But, alas, we have lost that barbarity. Our enemies have successfully memed us into cowardly weaklings.
____________
Read it all: here
Categories
White Sharia
Unlike most white nationalists, Andrew Anglin has been telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about women. He’s even better than the MGTOW complainers because MGTOWers are not racists. Below, a few excerpts from Anglin’s article today on the Stormer:
What I am “claiming”—which is in fact simply explaining an objective reality, based on accepted science—is that women have no concept of “race,” as it is too abstract for their simple brains. What they have a concept of is getting impregnated by the dominant male.
Believing in “racially aware women” is a furry-tier sexual perversion. A woman is hardwired to breed with whoever she perceives as dominant in the society, as she wishes to give birth to dominant children. That is simple, mainstream, accepted evolutionary biology—not to mention painfully fucking obvious.
In a natural society, all women wanted to fuck the dominant warlord tribal chief. Because that would produce for them dominant, warlord children, who would protect them, feed them, house them and clothe them when they were too old and unattractive to have a male protect them for sexual reasons. This is the biological instinct of women to produce the most dominant male offspring—that instinct does not recognize race.
And we now have a society that has elevated the brown man to the status of dominant male. So the increasing female desire is to fuck the brown man. This is not complicated and it is not controversial.
The female sex drive is primitive and obsolete. Having been sexually liberated, they are leading our race to oblivion…
Primitive, obsolete female sex drive needs to be controlled with brutality.
I wish there was another way.
But there isn’t.