In Mala Fide recently changed from a single-author blog to more of a webzine with many contributors, with topics spanning the anti-establishment gamut from men's rights to game to alt right to white racial consciousness. It seems that the one topic more outrageous than any other, one which the tough truth-seeking guys and gals who read In Mala Fide found so distasteful that they complained about it is the latter - which I'm not going to call "white nationalism", as that's an easy, pejorative term that its opponents use. Basically, it's just any expression that whites have legitimate political interests as whites and that TPTB are deliberately cheating them out of the country which they founded and in which they've been the majority from day one.
Ferdinand followed through with Whites Are Their Own Worst Enemies, a post not without plenty of truth but which also serves to distance In Mala Fide from white racial consciousness and to mollify all those who complained. It's Ferd's site of course and he can run it any way he wants, but the interesting thing here is that he found it necessary to throw whites under the bus so quickly, the reason being that white racial consciousness is so controversial that even a site replete with obscenities, graphic descriptions of sex, anti-feminism, game, and general anti-establishment ranting can't handle it.
That "whites are their own worst enemies" is true could hardly find better confirmation than Ferd's feeling that he needed to satisfy everyone that complained - which no doubt included plenty of white folks - even though he himself invited those very writers who wrote on the topic in the first place. That this is perhaps the most "controversial" topic in existence, i.e. the one that more people want to shut up and shout down, ditto. "Who, whom" is obviously at work here, rather than any real sense that the topic is morally repugnant, since every other racial/ethnic group in the country (or the world) can unabashedly promote and be proud of their racial/ethnic identities without fear and without controversy.
I don't think this point can be emphasized enough: if you're white and show any sign of being motivated by it or proud of it, a lot of people will hate you and want you silenced.
eh, i think it's a style issue, mostly. the mindweapon crowd are pompous blowhards. imf is a fun place.
ReplyDeletetake udolpho or maybe coldequations, these are wnish writers who are also fun to read.
I don't see how it's possible to be both pro-White and a Gamer.
ReplyDeleteTheir goals are diametrically opposed.
Gamers teach (White) young men how to seduce, for a quickie hookup, pathetic, promiscuous club-girls who are giving it away for free, which causes said young men to become bitterly cynical about all young (White) women. The whole premise just furthers the likelihood said young men won't get married and make babies.
Game is anti-White.
The proprietor of the aforementioned blog writes:
ReplyDelete2) Most rank-and-file white nationalists are jerks more concerned with hating non-whites and fantasizing about a Day of the Rope that will never come than actually loving their people and trying to help them.
With 'friends' like that...
And exactly how is this much different, in form, than any other PC hack who tries to 'shame' (see first comment) those bad white nationalists'?
There's no difference; it's the same sneering contempt, content-less, logic-less.
His whole comment/justification is total bullshit, from beginning to end.
Just someone else trying to seem cool by dissing those neanderthal 'white nationalists'. Cretin.
My take is that Ferd fancies himself another roissy and doesn't want to miss out on banging blogger groupie sluts with too much unsexy "WN" on his site.
ReplyDelete@ JSM
Of course game leads to cynicism but without at least an understanding of game principles, they're probably not going to be ABLE to get married and have white babies so... take your pick. Hypergamy exists.
In my forays around the web lately, I've seen a growing trend of self-identified Jews, Arabs, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians posting at HBD and/or White nationalist sites, expecting kudos for their purported high IQ (the Jews and Asians) or their proclaimed "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" stance (Arabs and Hindus posting at Amren or Occidental Observer). In the meantime, In Mala Fide finds Whites their own worst enemy, and hurriedly reassures the offended "nonracial" posters that ethnonationalism is stupid and destined to fail. Just another day through the looking glass, I guess. FWIW, Dennis, the host of Stuff Black People Don't Like is offering a genuine scholarship competition open only to those at least 90% White by DNA testing, and any contributions made for the next few weeks will go towards this (I've already donated). May I encourage those of your readers who are interested to contribute? If suggesting this on your blog is unacceptable, my pardon and ignore my comment.
ReplyDeleteBardimu is basically just anti-everybody, which is fine to a certain extent. Even an enfant terrible can't afford to look pro-white though.
ReplyDeleteYou can add another thing to your list about In Mala Fide: anti-capitalist. It joins half sigma as being liberal blogs who espouse HBD.
ReplyDeleteGamers teach (White) young men how to seduce, for a quickie hookup, pathetic, promiscuous club-girls who are giving it away for free,
ReplyDeleteGame is supposed to describe how women think and what men can do to make themselves more attractive to women. It's not prescriptive, and it doesn't mandate that men be promiscuous.
Take a look at Vox Day's game blog, where most of the commenters are Christian men trying to find a wife or improve their marriage. Along those lines, the most successful "gamer" I know in real life is happily married and has a two-year old daughter. He didn't meet his wife looking for a quickie hookup.
which causes said young men to become bitterly cynical about all young (White) women.
No, they're already cynical because they have to deal with the harsh, hypergamous reality of modern dating. The stereotypical guy who embraces game has never had a girlfriend, rarely or never lands dates, or has just been dumped. Chances are he's already bitter toward women. If game helps him improve his social skills and interaction with women, it will make him less bitter.
And needless to say, men with this profile aren't likely candidates for seducing lots of "pathetic, promiscuous club girls." It would seem your anger toward game is based more on alarmism than reality.
I've always been surprised by Ferdinand's popularity among the reactionary set, because he's essentially a poor man's Roissy. And while Roissy has the reactionary principles to go with his rhetoric, Ferd seems to offend only for its own sake.
ReplyDeletePut more crudely, he's all cock and no balls.
And while Roissy has the reactionary principles to go with his rhetoric, Ferd seems to offend only for its own sake.
ReplyDeleteHmm. Are you sure Roissy is as principled as you think he is? I for one doubt that he is all that different from Ferd.
Perhaps he is similar to Obama, in that he speaks rarely of his principles and allows others to project what they want to believe onto him. Now that's some good Game!
I've written before that Ferd primarily deals in reaction.
ReplyDeleteAs for why so many people complained, well I'm pretty sure the Manosphere is full of East Indians, blacks, and Hispanics who, for obvious reasons, aren't too happy with race talk. They basically just hate white women and want to focus all their energy on blaming them for society's ills (see a guy like The Fifth Horsemen or Advocatus Diaboli).
(Why don't you have a non-moderated comment section? Just delete the "bad" comments when you see them. Real-time comment sections are much more interactive.)
Perhaps he is similar to Obama, in that he speaks rarely of his principles and allows others to project what they want to believe onto him.
ReplyDeleteMany of his posts are explicitly political- see "Number Of White California Residents Plummets As Majority Status Slips Away" for a recent example.
He's written a lot of rants against 3rd-world immigration and has said (more than once) that women should lose the right to vote. That doesn't leave much room for projection.
He's written a lot of rants against 3rd-world immigration
ReplyDeleteWho hasn't?
You're right, though. But those political posts still tend to be "lost" among the masses of game-related posts. And then there was that Jew post that he deleted...
Ferd is more eclectic, and thus makes himself more of a target.
Bardamu's blog isn't half bad. At least he brings up issues that the video-gamer/internet-porn subculture wouldn't otherwise get as much exposure to.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how it's possible to be both pro-White and a Gamer.
ReplyDeleteIt's about living a little while you're at it. Not everyone's got the goods to hide out in the mountains to escape the clutches of ZOG.
But I wouldn't worry about it. You have to figure if these "gamers" were capable of the feats they never tire of relating they'd be out there doing it, not babbling about it on the internet.
The broad definition of genocide according to the originator
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
"General Assembly for consideration. In 1943, Lemkin wrote:
Generally speaking, genocide...a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves..."
"The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."
This definition is more or less identical to the openly stated aims of cultural marxists and their new disguise as Transnational Progressives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism
(The corporate elite element on the right go along with it also because it suits their bottom line in the short term.)
White people have a hard time wrapping their heads around this because most find it hard to conceive of a betrayal on such a vast scale. Invasion and conquest we can understand because it is so common in history but an entire civilization being stabbed in the back like this on such a vast scale is different.
It's not surprising then when someone first grasps that it's true their first reaction is to back away from the sheer scale of evil it represents.
Ferd lacks the courage of his demi-convictions. He clearly has hard-HBD/soft-WN tendencies but when the postings got critical he baled: disappointing, yet not surprising.
ReplyDeleteIt's just an act anyway. Roissy is the real thing, and he has seldom shrunk (except on the Jew issue; whoops) from hard truths. Ferd is a poseur.
As for Game being anti-White - dude, stop the white (literally) knighting. Game is race-neutral. Our women are mostly horrible, wake up. Becoming a genuine alpha by applying Game - that's how it starts - will lead quality women to you and they will want to take your seed bigtime (trust me) ... how is THAT bad for the race?
There's no difference; it's the same sneering contempt, content-less, logic-less.
ReplyDeleteHis whole comment/justification is total bullshit, from beginning to end.
Just someone else trying to seem cool by dissing those neanderthal 'white nationalists'. Cretin.
Yep. Smug and stupid.
White Nationalism is a stupid term. It denotes loser neo-Nazis, and Klan guys. About 99.9999% of Whites don't want to rule other people.
ReplyDeleteThey just want to be separate from them.
White Zionism is probably a better term. Already you see folks like Palin (in White Zionist Alaska, which is why there are about 50 reality shows set there) grasp that. Her Israeli flag on her desk as Governor was not to get the big Jewish vote in Alaska (I think there might be as many as 12 Jews there). Rather, it was a statement of identity. And spoils slicing.
White Zionism argues for "good fences make good neighbors" and spending inside each community as determined by each group. The Black majority city of Detroit's spending and political decisions are something I could care less about. Its their business to order their affairs as they see fit. I merely want the same for my group.
To tell the truth, I never really gave Ferdinand a chance. Every time I read his blog I read impolite talk about various body parts. In the article Dennis is talking about, he basically just says "white whine too much".
ReplyDeleteLeast original way to criticize someone: say they "whine". Use of that word implies that the writer would be lost without it.
So, I guess I'm not going to start giving Ferdinand a chance now. I can't even get to everyone on my own blogroll, and they're all ten times better writers than Mr. "Whine!" at In Mala Fide.
"Of course game leads to cynicism but without at least an understanding of game principles, they're probably not going to be ABLE to get married and have white babies so... take your pick. Hypergamy exists."
ReplyDeleteI've heard it said that Game can be used to get a wife. I'd like to believe it. Women DO want to be romanced; that's true. She wants to think she's getting a prince.
But if you read Roissy, et al., virtually the entire focus for Gamers is how to get the nouveaux saloon girls into bed for quickies(without the bother of having to pay them for services rendered) that are better looking than they could otherwise.
Really, the only women so hypergamous as to be out of reach of White nerds under normal circumstances, are some 7s and the 8s 9s and 10s who know they can land the whole package, good looks, charm AND money.
Honest "beta-provider" guys who want a good girl to marry need to look at 4s, 5s and 6s and some 7s, us women who are their natural mates, for potential wives. But you won't find girls like that in the hookup-scene.
"Gamer" is just the antonym of "feminist". Feminism has increased the number of girls who've been brainwashed to spend their fertile years slutting about, and Gamers have evolved to exploit a newly-opened niche for uncommitted sex.
"The stereotypical guy who embraces game has never had a girlfriend, rarely or never lands dates, or has just been dumped. Chances are he's already bitter toward women.If game helps him improve his social skills and interaction with women, it will make him less bitter."
But I'm arguing, successful Game WON'T improve his social skills, at least the kinds required to make a marriage work, and it will make him MORE bitter, believing ALL women are either perfidious bitches like the one that dumped him, or cheating wh****s.
You say men with this profile aren't likely candidates for seducing lots of "pathetic, promiscuous club girls."
Headscratch.
Is it not true that the target audience of Roissy, et al., is the nerds, and the tactics he teaches are to be played out on the girls they meet in the clubs?
Because I certainly don't see him suggesting that lonely young men go to church.
As far as my "alarmism," Roissy himself has admitted how shocked and disgusted he is at the girls that Game works to get him lots of free lay, and he's admitted he's convinced ALL women are this way.
If the Numero Uno gamer is cynical, it's a sure bet all his followers will become so, too.
"anti-capitalist" does not equate with "liberal."
ReplyDeleteindustrial capitalism good.
finance capitalism not.
WHOOSH
ReplyDeleteI totally missed an interesting irony.
Why does Ferdinand think whites are lame? Their hatefulness to other whites.
In what tone does Ferdinand talk about other whites? A hateful tone.
I am leaning towards the viewpoint that Ferd is having us on. I even checked the post date to see if it might be April 1. (It's actually April 4.) Point is, there is something funny about a guy who writes, basically, 'I hate whites because they hate other whites.' He might as well have written, 'I hate whites because too many of them have blogs about who girls are yucky. Also, I hate hypocrisy.'
Speaking of unintentional humor, did someone just call JSM a dude? Even I know the difference between a white knight and a white lady, and I wasn't even homeschooled.
This is my favorite thread in a long time.
Once again, the comparison between Roissy and Ferdinand Bardamu is an unfair one.
ReplyDeleteRoissy posts mainly game posts and once in a blue moon, a hard right political post. He also doesn't interact with his audience nearly as much as Ferdinand does. Ferdinand puts himself out there, engages people, links to and reads dozens (hundreds?) of blogs, and posts about a variety of topics. It's inevitable that he'll antagonize more people than Roissy while doing this.
With this disparity, I just don't understand how people think they can draw the conclusion that Roissy is "for real" while FB is "fake".
Roissy is gaming you.
just don't understand how people think they can draw the conclusion that Roissy is "for real" while FB is "fake".
ReplyDeleteRoissy is gaming you.
Yeah, but Roissy is much better at it, and we (like women) want to be gamed by a suave, experienced gamer even if we're aware he's doing it.
Like jmperry said, Ferd is the poor man's Roissy. The gaming is there but it's awkward and stilted so it turns us off.
Wandrin said re genocide and how it applies to White people (not Jews btw, White people) that:
ReplyDeleteWhite people have a hard time wrapping their heads around this because most find it hard to conceive of a betrayal on such a vast scale.
The problem is that the majority of White people do not identify as White. Even though all their legislative and government bodies have identified them in the negative as Whites, that is Whites are those people who cannot claim any status for positive discrimination, Whites in the main prefer to see themselves as autonomous individuals unencumbered with a group identity.
White nationalism will appeal mostly to White men, not women, since White women are positively discriminated whereas White men are negatively discriminated.
But the major disabler of White identity, even though it is implicitly and explicitly identified by our legislatures, is that to face the reality that we are discriminated against is to acknowledge that we are "losers". And that for the Game types who have a mythological image of themselves as Alphas bestriding harems is a fate worse than death. "Who me, a loser? Not a chance!"
The Roissy and Ferd types would much prefer to pretend that they are asserting some sort of Alphadom than to ever acknowledge a shared identity with Beta "losers". That is essentially how it appears to me as to why Ferds threw WNs under the bus. To accept a group identity, even though that identity is real and legislated for is to accept commonality with "loser" Whites. Roissy and Ferds and their followers are individuals first and foremost. Renegades against all that you've got. A massed group of "lone eagles" and "lone wolves" collectively huddled and hunting in packs, all lone individuals mind you, and propping each other up with their non-conformist conformity.
If they were to accept the reality that they have been identified as part of a group, then it would be the same as the cool kid at school suddenly realising that he's got a lot in common with the derided doofus who gets his shoes thrown onto the school roof daily: "I'm with him? No way! Watch me punch him in the head."
That's the overall impression I got from Ferd's post on the subject. To accept the reality of a White identity is to also identify himself as a "loser". And "loser" is the worst thing a man can be tarred as. Most of Ferd's posts identify all the problems that face White men, he rails against them, he is generally supportive of White men but, ultimately won't accept being identified with and thus responsible to, White men.
But, as he says, much of what he writes is entertaining hyperbole and his blog is one of the broadest tents you'll get on the internet. Getting identified with one particular group is simply a bridge too far. It would make him responsible.
"for Game being anti-White - dude, stop the white (literally) knighting. Game is race-neutral. Our women are mostly horrible, wake up. Becoming a genuine alpha by applying Game - that's how it starts - will lead quality women to you and they will want to take your seed bigtime (trust me) ... how is THAT bad for the race?"
ReplyDeleteNot a dude. -- Thanks, Olave, for reading my posts enough that you know this. --
Quality *women* (emphasis on the plural) taking your seed is bad for the race because White people are extreme K -strategists.
White kids need a Dad who's around to love them, not a sperm donor for their single mother.
White kids need their own bioparents to be married to each other, and faithful to each other, so they stay together, so the kids can grow up mentally healthy and form their own fertile, happy marriages.
Divorce, hookups, single-motherhood, everything that follows from *women* taking your seed (as opposed to ONE woman -- your wife) is exactly what leads to White young women riding the, uh, carousel, (with its concomitant barrenness) which is killing The Race.
The fact that you celebrate *women* (plural) taking a man's seed is, in a nutshell, EVERYTHING I'm talking about about how Game is anti-White.
Whiskey, you are truly an idjit.
ReplyDeletePalin's flag is NOT about getting elected Governor of Alaska. It's about getting elected President of the United States.
She's pandering to the Christian Zionists in the rest of the U.S. and the Ashkenazis at AIPAC.
*facepalm*
JSM you've badly misread roissy and everyone else in the gameosphere, all i can say
ReplyDeleteThere is truth in Ferd’s essay, but the deeper problem with it that undercuts the true parts is, if you will excuse the too obvious pun, that it was presented in bad faith. In critiques of White nationalism / advocacy / rights, it is relatively easy to tell whether the author has grappled honestly with white nationalism’s best arguments. This is usually apparent from the degree of rancor in the critique. If I write an article about why sprinting is better for health than jogging, and do it with dispassion, technical details, evidence and logic, it is a useful exercise. If my argument consists of callers joggers a bunch of hippie-dippie, SWPL losers, the truth of the underlying claim will be irrelevant and buried under the rancor.
ReplyDeleteAmong those who have made serious and constructive critiques of white nationalism, I would include Mencius Moldbug (“Why I am Not a White Nationalist”), Steve Sailer (“citizenism”), Derb (his debate with Jared Taylor), Hunter Wallace, etc. Ferd’s article, in a vacuum, would actually fit that mold. I think his understanding of and explanation of the shortcomings of WN are, in essence, not far from Moldbug’s position (although the writing styles and presentations are obviously different….).
BUT, my beefs with Ferd’s essay concern not so much its content as what prompted it and who he is targeting. His essay was prompted by the complaints of a bunch of commentators who _do not know the first thing about WN_. Most people who have never thought about WN can be assumed to have been brainwashed against it. By immediately acquiescing to the complaints of ignoramuses, Ferd essentially validates their prejudice that there is not an ounce of difference, philosophical or practical, between say Jared Taylor and Harold Covington, or between Steve Sailer and William Pierce (as if they had heard of any of these people). Ferd KNOWS this is not the case, yet his article in essence denies it and conflates his “WN” contributors, who are mostly HBD nerds of the OneSTDV type, with another phenomenon altogether.*
Ferd’s essay represents a big missed opportunity. Ferd could have used the outcry in the IMF comment section against so-called White nationalism as an opportunity to educate them on the very wide range of views and positions in the HBD-o-sphere, and even to nudge this group – who are potentially HBD-sympathetic, in the direction of race realism. Instead, he took the easy way out and simply validated the misconceptions of a group of know-nothings. As Dennis notes, the new IMF is supposed to be about pushing boundaries and challenging conventional wisdom. Ferd’s action was a cop out.
* While I obviously have my own views on whether Jared Taylor or Harold Covington is the more admirable figure and better representative, that is not the point I am making here. The point is that their views and philosophies are different, and to imply otherwise or characterize the entire HBD / WN movement in a way that confuses people on this point is a disservice.
"White nationalism will appeal mostly to White men, not women, since White women are positively discriminated whereas White men are negatively discriminated."
ReplyDeleteWhite nationalism most definitely would appeal to women if it were marketed right. And that right approach is? Through her concern for the well-being of her kids.
While many (White) women today do the requisite verbal genuflecting to PC-MC, all the while displaying her latent WNism as she enrolls them in a private, i.e, White school, if she were made to understands her GRANDKIDS aren't going to be able to flee the benefits of diversity, she'd likely howl louder than any WN man that the imminvaders be made to GO.
The only group that won't be amenable to this argument are the single, barren, bitter, carousel-riders that Roissy, et al., are so pleased with themselves about depositing their seed into.
@JSM
ReplyDelete""Gamer" is just the antonym of "feminist". Feminism has increased the number of girls who've been brainwashed to spend their fertile years slutting about, and Gamers have evolved to exploit a newly-opened niche for uncommitted sex."
Similar to my take. Feminism has decreased male interest in marriage (and brainwashed girls into thinking a sex in the city lifestyle is cool) so some of the girls are putting themselves out there more and being taken advantage of by men who are good at taking advantage.
So nerds who aren't married (and don't want to be) but aren't getting casual sex either (and do want to be) are trying to emulate the men who are good at taking advantage while the girls they should be having kids with are sat at home reading books.
@Pat Hanagan
Interesting and plausible explanation. One of the common strands in the radical individualist ideologies that have started to appear in the last ten years or so (just as White people badly need to be collective) is the lameness of anything collective.
"Gamer" is just the antonym of "feminist". Feminism has increased the number of girls who've been brainwashed to spend their fertile years slutting about, and Gamers have evolved to exploit a newly-opened niche for uncommitted sex.
ReplyDeleteExcellent summation. A Gamer is to males what Feminists are to women. Differences: Game is a reaction whereas Feminism is an assertion. Feminism requires legislation and cannot be naturally sustained. Game is somewhat rooted in nature and requires legislating against. Game is the natural response to Feminism. The end scenario is the collapse of our civilisation as we've known it.
Back to my point about Gamers being averse to "loser" status see Whiskey's White Nationalism is a stupid term. It denotes loser neo-Nazis, and Klan guys. Losers, losers, losers.
Call a man a loser and watch him come to heel. Call a woman a slut and watch her come to heel.
WNism on the contrary is more akin to "Alphaness", that is a dominating and assertive nature, since it is unperturbed by "loser" status, but rebels against the effects of being a loser.
Game is a perverted form of Camus' "The Rebel":
"In every act of rebellion, the man concerned experiences not only a feeling of revulsion at the infringement of his rights but also a complete and spontaneous loyalty to certain aspects of himself. Thus he implicitly brings into play a standard of values so far from being false that he is willing to preserve them at all costs."
The Gamer rebels against his loser status only. And his method affirms that status quo that designated him as a "loser". The Gamer confirms his "individuality" and renounces his group attachment thus identifying himself as a member of the social order imposed upon him, and assigned him as a "loser". The Gamer rejects his loser status by affirming others as losers.
The WN on the other hand is the true rebel:
"He affirms that there are limits and also that he suspects - and wishes to preserve - the existence of certain things beyond those limits. He stubbornly insists that there are certain things in him which 'are worth while...' and which must be taken into consideration."
...
"What was, originally, an obstinate resistance on the part of the rebel, becomes the rebel personified. He proceeds to put self-respect above everything else and proclaims that it is preferable to life itself...Having previously been willing to compromise, the slave suddenly adopts an attitude of All or Nothing. Knowledge is born and conscience awakened."
"JSM you've badly misread roissy and everyone else in the gameosphere, all i can say"
ReplyDeleteOk.
Well, I've read lots of defense of "Game" all over the web.
But the proof of the pudding being in the eating, and all that --
-- is there *anybody* here who will tell me honestly that you, yourself, used it successfully to get a nice wife and have children, and NOT to get uncommitted sex?
Note how Jews applaud Ferd's post. And their main objection to WNism is, as Rollory states: “White nationalism”, as such, presumes something that doesn’t exist: that there is a nation defined entirely and only by whiteness.
ReplyDeleteWNism never existed therefore it cannot ever exist. And this from Darwinian evolutionists! In any case, if Rollory's logic were correct then why even bother addressing the point? WNism is doomed to failure yet, the Jews fear it so.
Is it because something is awakening long repressed? A group consciousness of their own slavery? Could a single cell organism rise up and form new legs? "Kill it at the birth we deny"!
@JSM
ReplyDeleteYou are failing to take into account female hypergamy. A male 7 never seems acceptable to a female 7, unless society puts some restraints in her way or socializes her a certain way.
As to game not being profamily, I suggest you visit:
http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/
The site isn't proWhite and you won't see him acknowledge it but he owes a great amount to Roissy and other gamers.
Also you are underestimating Roissy's poisitve effect on young White men.
Only after I had internalized and tested game did I realize everything else I've ever been tought by the media and school has been skewed by an agenda. Feminism and modern faux conservatives promoting yesterday's liberalism didn't cut it anymore for me after that. I used the game I learned from Roissy to get a wife, a smart 20ish 7 with blue eyed, who told her ex she didn't want any children, told me she wanted 2 kids when we got together and changed her mind to 6 after we got married (we're working on that). I call that a win for the White race. And no I couldn't have gotten her in Church because she's atheist (like me).
Don't you find it remarkable that Roissy desipe early protests about Hard right positions basically managed to out himself as a HBDer and even implicitly strongly proWhite while not loosing nearly any of his base? Can you imagine another blog not about WN making such a transition?
Game is a powerful PC solvent.
"A Gamer is to males what Feminists are to women. Differences: Game is a reaction whereas Feminism is an assertion. Feminism requires legislation and cannot be naturally sustained. Game is somewhat rooted in nature and requires legislating against. Game is the natural response to Feminism. The end scenario is the collapse of our civilisation as we've known it."
ReplyDeleteSpengler's Universal Law of Gender Parity in action.
In essence, the Gamer as typified by Roissy and Ferd's post says:
ReplyDelete"Don't call me a slave and I'll accept my slavery."
The White Nationalist says:
"Call us whatever you want but we will never accept slavery."
The Gamer screams and points, "Slaves! Slaves! Look at them, Slaves! Now look at me, look at me!"
TPTB says: "Good boy, sit. I've got a new name for you boy - Alpha! Do you like it?" Gamer wags his tail.
"Ahh, I knew you would. Here, fetch! A series of night club sluts to keep you company and occupied while we get rid of all the Men...er, Slaves."
Pat, I am glad you are writing on this thread.
ReplyDeleteDo you know what's really crazy? Czech nationalism! After all, it defines itself by something that cannot exist, because it has never existed - a Czech republic! Those silly Slavs.
Austria-Hungary? Now THAT is what I call a state that will never die, that can never die. Why? Because it is so natural! A group of people, all with the same Emperor, and the same army (plus those other two armies), a single currency, and the very same postal system. And if a hereditary leader, some more-or-less centrally organized military units, and a bureaucracy doesn't make a viable, unified people, I don't know what does!
Ooops, I just fell out of the 1911 Encyclopedia. (Speaking of which, it's the centennial of Herr Browning's 11.43mm Selbstlade pistole.)
Anyway, I pray with all my heart that it doesn't take a repeat of '14-'18 to prove that the United States can't hold together. I'd prefer something in velvet.
It has been mentioned that Roissy once did a post about Jews, but subsequently removed it. Does anyone have a link or cut-and-paste of that post? Never saw it and would be curious to see what he said.
ReplyDelete@pat hannagan - "The Roissy and Ferd types would much prefer to pretend that they are asserting some sort of Alphadom than to ever acknowledge a shared identity with Beta 'losers'."
ReplyDeleteyes. i would think that roissy- and ferd-types are actually narcissists and|or psychopaths, and i do mean clinically. behaviorally they will not (because they can not) identify with or go along with the group. it's just not in their nature.
one way psychopaths can be persuaded to do something, tho, is if they risk losing whatever their ultimate goal|desire is. not sure how that, if at all, can be used persuade such men to start thinking about society as a whole.
no idea how to work narcissists. presumably ignore them. (~_^)
Sorry Dregs but there are just some things that rebels just won't rebel against.
ReplyDeleteThis post by Matt Parrott contains some excerpts.
A line for the Classics:
A group may advocate bad policies, but you can choose not to listen to them. Or are you accepting your powerlessness?
Looks like Roissy accepted his. But as Ferd's says:
last I checked, the Jooooooos didn’t forcibly send armies to capture our cities, destroy our governments and enslave us. No, we're just too scared to even write anonymous posts about them. T'is to laff.
Also got a good laugh at this one: First off, the only people who claim Jews aren’t white are you folks,... And Mike Wallace it seems.
Morgan Freeman: "Which month is White history month?
Mike Wallace: "Gasp, well..."
Freeman: "Now, c'mon, c'mon, tell me..."
Wallace: "Well, der, er...[waves hands, eyes wide, like a Roo in the spotlights]...I'm Jewish!"
Freeman: [exasperated, thinking this was a ruse to avoid the question rather than a declaration of the truth: Jews aren't White.] Ok! Which one is Jewish History Month?! [shaking his uncomprehending head]"
Wallace: [pitying the stupidity before him, and relieved he just got off the hook] There isn't one."
This pair of nincompoops are gonna "solve racism" like it's a puzzle in the newspaper. Racism is the equivalent of a Rubik's Cube. Ahhh, ya gotta laugh, otherwise you end up crying.
@JSM
ReplyDeleteReally, the only women so hypergamous as to be out of reach of White nerds under normal circumstances, are some 7s and the 8s 9s and 10s...
Honest "beta-provider" guys who want a good girl to marry need to look at 4s, 5s and 6s and some 7s... But you won't find girls like that in the hookup-scene.
If you think that only models and actresses are hypergamous, or that average-looking women are absent from the hookup scene, you're being willfully ignorant. If anything, the average girls tend to be sluttier because they have have to barter sex for male attention, whereas the most beautiful women can get male attention with no effort. Certainly that was my experience in college, where the biggest sluts all had middling looks.
Apart from that, you're shaming average men for being hypergamous while denying that average women are hypergamous. Hypocrisy, anyone?
Is it not true that the target audience of Roissy, et al., is the nerds, and the tactics he teaches are to be played out on the girls they meet in the clubs?
No, it's not true. Roissy talks about nightclubs because lots of women go there. He talks just as much about meeting women at house parties, bookstores, art classes, etc. In any case, one doesn't see many nerds going to nightclubs, no matter how much Roissy they read.
Roissy makes both prescriptive and descriptive statements, and you seem to be unwilling to differentiate between the two. I mean, Roissy has said he's personally against marriage, but he's also said that one can use game to land a wife or strengthen one's marriage if so inclined. I've learned a lot from Roissy without buying into his rhetoric - which is meant as entertainment as much as anything else - as I'm sure others have.
-- is there *anybody* here who will tell me honestly that you, yourself, used it successfully to get a nice wife and have children, and NOT to get uncommitted sex?
I mentioned Vox Day and his readership. Another commenter mentioned Athol Kay of Married Man Sex Life. There's also Hawaiian Libertarian, who used game to resuscitate his failing marriage. So there you have three examples.
I'm not sure why you need someone specifically from this blog, where many of the commenters are in their early-mid 20s. Unless you're looking for a reason to ignore other bloggers who contradict your view of game.
@JSM, part deux
ReplyDeleteWhite nationalism most definitely would appeal to women if it were marketed right. And that right approach is? Through her concern for the well-being of her kids.
I don't know. Many women seem to be obsessed with social approval. These women wouldn't dare support WN as long as Polite Society condemns it.
Most white women may be "practical WNs" in the sense they don't want their children growing up around dangerous blacks and Mexicans. But in something as complex as politics, it's easy for them to vote for bad (but trendy) liberal policies and then disassociate their support for these policies with the policies' ultimate results.
Besides, it's tough to be concerned for their children's well-being when so many women aren't having children.
Off topic but damn.......suck it Lindsey Graham!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qeyrp-V3Jvc&feature=player_embedded
Note how Jews applaud Ferd's post
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about me? I haven't "applauded" anything. I thought the sudden influx of preachy WN bloggers was changing IMF's character to something unrecognizable - you know, the same way immigrants change a country's character - but that's been rectified, I believe.
I am always rather aghast when I see my compatriots on that eternally-untouchable 'question' renounce all tenets of "game" as some anti-white Mr. Toad roller coaster... as if once we've identified the causations that made Toad's indulgence so pleasurable, we would again be free to resume civility.
ReplyDeleteThe genie is out of the bottle, the cat is out of the bag. Your daughters, no matter how wholly Christian you raise them, will not escape the influence of blank-slate sexual amorality. It's better that some beta provider learns to smack your bratty daughter once in awhile than resigning her to the dowry-less pairings of shrinking white suburbs, who now (Atlanta, at this onset) are being aggressively opposed anyway.
The first few handfuls of comments on this thread were all that demanded presentation: they were succinct and convincing.
"White Nationalism is a stupid term. It denotes loser neo-Nazis, and Klan guys. About 99.9999% of Whites don't want to rule other people...White Zionism is probably a better term."
ReplyDeleteYou either have a very powerful imagination or are engaging in deception. It's been said that the best deceivers are self deceivers, so you are probably not even aware of it.
To hell with "Ferd's" stance on WNism. I take more offense to his stance on the "Jooooos".
ReplyDeleteObviously "Ferdinand Bardamu" hasn't read much by his creator Louis-Ferdinand Celine.
Anybody who still thinks there's hope for white lands, read the English translation of "Bagatelles pour un massacre" here:
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres6/CELINEtrif.pdf
This was written over 70 years ago.
@ JSM: So you have tits -- good for you. Your efforts at shaming are annoying. Yes, I run Game on women (note plural). Because I can. Because the vast majority of white women in the USA are unworthy of an LTR, much less marriage. Hypergamy leads to PnD territory; women control access to the cooch, blame thyself. If you have read Roissy and the manosphere at all, you will be aware that about 90% of divorces are initiated, one way or the other, by the wife. No thanks.
ReplyDeleteAlso, there are very few genuine WN chicks and the ones I've met are frankly insane.
@JSM
ReplyDelete"Game is anti-White."
though it is useful, this is ultimately true about game. we learn to treat each other like toys.
I'll add that his arguments are stupid to the point of being intentionally misleading.
ReplyDeleteFor example, he claims that we don't want starvation in Africa because that would cause an unprecedented, unstoppable migration from south to north. Nonsense. That is, the "unstoppable" part.
All the EU has to do is sink a hundred boats brimming with 'fugees and the migration would quickly stop and Africans would be forced to solve (or at least try to solve) their own problems back home.
As it stands, Africans don't give a damn about their problems because they're all planning on jumping ship and heading for white lands. And they're planning this because the option is there and it's very viable, thanks to ZOG.
Then "Ferd" writes that Whites would never agree to blowing helpless 'fugees out of the water.
More nonsense.
The masses will swallow anything sanctioned by the elite and promoted by some agitprop in the mainstream media.
The MSM would merely have to do some honest reporting on the huge numbers of assaults, gang rapes and murders committed by these "refugees", along with how the lot of them are parasites on social assistance, and the pliable populace of Europe would support any action against these useless, violent hordes.
We've so far murdered about one million civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan and where's the public outcry? It's non-existent, because the MSM spin, spin and spin some more, and the goyim lap it out like the malleable fools that they are.
If "Ferd" can't see just how pliable the masses are and just how powerful the MSM is, then he's either a shill or a moron.
One could pick apart Ferd's post on various matters, but one item in particular bothered me:
ReplyDelete’m a loud and proud proponent of human biological diversity research,** but the hard determinist line pushed by many hereditarians doesn’t explain why Italy, the heir of the Roman Empire and its technological and cultural legacy, has been a backwards basketcase since the year 476.
Um, hasn't he heard of the Renaissance?
...has been a backwards basketcase since the year 476.
ReplyDeleteHas he ever been to Italy? Driven a Ferrari?
IHTG asks "Are you talking about me?" No, not specifically. I actually linked and quoted Rollory. I didn't do my Jew diligence as to ascertain your ethnic status so, no I didn't know you were a Jew.
ReplyDeleteBut now that you mention it, you have added further validation to my point. Thank you for your confirmation.
Your earlier comment at IMF that the British aren't White now makes sense. I bet you are also categorical that the Jews are White though, aren't you? Tut tut, you really ought to get a less see through negligee before you venture out in public.
"Um, hasn't he heard of the Renaissance?"
ReplyDeleteItaly's achievements in art and architecture are unparalleled.
"Ferd" doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand the level of civilizational development needed to rear a Bernini or a Michelangelo.
@JSM
ReplyDeleteMost guys that get into Game, get a girlfriend (or wife) and then drop out of the scene relatively quickly. The turnover rate is probably greater than 90%.
These are mostly guys who were either dissatisfied with their love lives, or didn't have one at all. PUAs are very rare, and are mostly older men that have been through a divorce, some of which already have kids and have given up the ghost on monogamy.
I'll also disagree about women caring about their children's wellbeing, especially in multigenerational terms. Their daughters will simply mudshark their way to success, and if their sons can't handle the harsh landscape then they are simply weaklings undeserving of life.
Living in an urban area, I know a lot of single mothers. Let's just say that I don't believe very many women will willingly sacrifice very much for their children.
But now that you mention it, you have added further validation to my point. Thank you for your confirmation.
ReplyDeleteAwww, does that mean we can't be friends anymore? :(
"I'm not sure why you need someone specifically from this blog, where many of the commenters are in their early-mid 20s. Unless you're looking for a reason to ignore other bloggers who contradict your view of game."
ReplyDeleteIt's not that I need someone from this blog, specifically. Just someone from somewhere. I need enough examples from guys that used Game to marry to believe that it really leads to marriage.
Sure, Roissy *says* you can use Game to marry, if, you know, you really want to, (with the undercurrent tone of "but who DOES?" when there's such a target-rich environment) and then in the next breath he's waxing lyrical how you can be banging 4 at once if you've got really tight game.
(Yuck. Imagine that chlamydia getting passed around in THAT scenario.)
He may be just writing for entertainment, but the guys reading him are True Believers, at least according to the comments.
I'm using shaming language on guys for being hypergamous? Nuh-uh. I want you guys to get a nice, pretty wife. The shaming language is for the promiscuity.
And I was all ready to submit my In Mala Fide guest post 'The Glorious Third Reich'. Sigh. I just can't read the public mood.
ReplyDelete"Yes, I run Game on women (note plural). Because I can. Because the vast majority of white women in the USA are unworthy of an LTR, much less marriage."
ReplyDeleteHere's an example of what I'm talking about: the cynicism, the bitterness at pretty much all women that gaming causes in young men.
"Hypergamy leads to PnD territory; women control access to the cooch, blame thyself."
I do. I spend plenty of time telling the young women I know that the best birth control is a penny. You hold it between your legs. (Prevents the Mjollnirs from gaming you right into single-motherhood.)
"If you have read Roissy and the manosphere at all, you will be aware that about 90% of divorces are initiated, one way or the other, by the wife. No thanks."
The 90% is among college-educated. I suspect those women filing are women who rode the carousel (which Gamers looooooove being the horse for.) Women who've had too many partners make for poor wives. (Unable to bond.)
If you're gaming a woman to make her your wife and she's been gamed by your philosophical compatriots previously, yeah, you're gonna get filed on.
This is why Game is inherently anti-marriage, and by extension, anti-White. Mjollnir shows us, Game IS about getting uncommitted sex. And Gameable women (if Game success is defined as getting her into bed without a commitment) are going to flit away when a better gamer comes along.
Of course we can remain friends IHTG. Our friendship shall remain open and honest, you're a Jew and I'm a White. So long as we never conflate the two then we'll get along famously.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of Kosher wine though I must warn you, so if you're prepared to share a glass or several of Samuel Smith's Taddy Porter instead then that will seal the deal.
Which reminds me, I only realised the other day that Vegemite has the Kosher "K" as well as the Halal symbol. What's with that? Kraft Peanut Butter is neither Kosher nor Halal and there surely is a far greater market for the leftover's of beer production for that than Vegemite so I don't understand it even on economic grounds. Before I smashed the jar in disgust I put it to household vote whether we do or don't eat Vegemite anymore and was unanimously outvoted (though the boy came around under sustained pressure). So, till an unspecified future I have to eat Kosher and Halal Vegemite so the least you can do is share a Kosher pork pie with me. Deal?
May as well start to pick apart Ferdinand's post even given that it is so flawed.
ReplyDeletePeople who love to wax dramatic about tribalism seem to forget that the strongest tribal hatreds are between peoples in geographic proximity – meaning that different tribes of whites, blacks, browns and yellows hate each other FAR more than they hate the “others.”
If this were true then the Greco-Persian Wars would never have eventuated.
Nor would the Prussians have saved the day and English pride at Waterloo.
The USA would never have resolved WWI to the detriment of the West. Nor would Japan have sided with the Nazis in WWII.
Nor would have all the Roman states combined to defeat Hannibal.
I think that's enough examples in rebuttal.
Actually, that's not a start but completion.
ReplyDeleteAll Ferdinand's other points were demolished by everyone else above. I didn't realise that beneath all the verbiage there was such a paucity of points let alone knowledgeable substantiation.
"Here's an example of what I'm talking about: the cynicism, the bitterness at pretty much all women that gaming causes in young men."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw
@Dregs
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, Roissy's post said hardly anything at all.
"Anti-Semitism: the belief that Jews can be criticized in the same manner as everybody else."
Or something to that effect. It was the comment section that caused a stir.
"Excellent summation. A Gamer is to males what Feminists are to women. Differences: Game is a reaction whereas Feminism is an assertion. Feminism requires legislation and cannot be naturally sustained. Game is somewhat rooted in nature and requires legislating against. Game is the natural response to Feminism. The end scenario is the collapse of our civilisation as we've known it."
ReplyDeleteThis tired arguement again. I have a question for Hanagan: What alternatives are you and your fellow white nationalists providing?(*) If game is feminist and anti-white and white fertility is paramount what are you doing to promote white fertility? It seems like if WN's were really serious about this problem they'd go about and construct an alternative system. Indians have successfully instituted a system of arranged marriages that seems to work well so why couldn't WN's do the same? This would ensure that young whites are married off at a young age and would probably increase the white fertility rate. You may not like Roissy but he actually provides real solutions. What do you provide? If your not prepared to provide a real alternative to the free market meat market young men aren't going to take you seriously. Right now the advice seems to be to find a "nice girl" out in the free market, but don't use game to do it.
@JSM
Please stop. You really have no idea what your talking about. Try to at least gain some background knowledge about the subject before forming opinions about it.
(*)-I'm definitely pro-white, but am on the fence about whether or not I'd call myself a WN.
If indeed Roissy's followers have a statistically interesting effect upon American life, then one must wonder if that entire effect is primarily the rock-bottom 30% of WHITE America.Charles Murray's new empirical study of America's top 20% versus its bottom 30% over the period from 1960 to 2010 shows clearly that the top 20% demonstrate tremendous marital stability, religiosity, honesty, and industriousness. They deteriorated from 88% to 83% over that important era, while the bottom group went from 83% to 48%!!! Murray declares that dysfunction is the norm among the bottom 30% of WHITES. These are non-Latino WHITES.Our people are failing at the bottom because single parents make BAD parents.Crime is epidemic among whites today even if much less than rampant blacks whose freedom opened the floodgates of amorality in a tolerant society.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that Murray has again discovered our deepest pathologies and GAME is nothing but another nostrum of an amoral nature.I deem it a frill and not a major factor, however. The very fact that black styles and fads should greatly impress young whites today leaves me with the feeling that dysfunction in Hollywood-Gaga, Sheen, etc. together with black inanity and violence, must affect the less educated whites far more profoundly. Dumb gets dumber every day. Murray must explain to me why rich, effective whites are able to disdain Roissy and maintain their great power in a culture full of self-destruction. Murray at least grasps the danger. The honeymoon of isolated elites cannot proceed forever down the Goldilocks path with wolves in the waiting.
"Please stop. You really have no idea what your talking about. Try to at least gain some background knowledge about the subject before forming opinions about it."
ReplyDeleteI know this much: Any of your Gamers come within 10 miles of my lovely, well-reared daughter, her dad will neuter you with a rusty pocketknife.
I know this much: Any of your Gamers come within 10 miles of my lovely, well-reared daughter, her dad will neuter you with a rusty pocketknife.
ReplyDeleteLol. Don't worry, I'm sure she'll pick some nice, young, authentic narcissistic sociopath instead of some guy that's just faking it to land a girlfriend instead.
That'll at least save your husband from negro-induced anal fissures.
@Cornelius Troost
ReplyDelete"top 20% demonstrate tremendous marital stability, religiosity, honesty, and industriousness. They deteriorated from 88% to 83% over that important era, while the bottom group went from 83% to 48%!!!"
Cultural marxism works like an IQ bomb. The lower the IQ the more damage is done. Intelligent people will (on average) choose benign behaviours for themselves. In the past (relatively) benign elites made the same choices for the less intelligent by creating conservative social structures that nudged them in a benign direction.
The cultural permanent revolution that has been ongoing since the 60s aimed to dissolve those structures for everyone but they effected lower IQ groups first (thereby magnifying the effect of those IQ differences). With higher IQ groups it took longer to have an impact and when it did it hit the left side of the bell curve first.
Any of your Gamers come within 10 miles of my lovely, well-reared daughter, her dad will neuter you with a rusty pocketknife.
ReplyDeleteAs long as these individuals have low IQs, I suppose I can't object!
May I suggest that JSM is a little overprotective?
ReplyDelete"(Yuck. Imagine that chlamydia getting passed around in THAT scenario.)"
ReplyDeleteOff-topic but someone mentioned a lower than expected black birth rate. Is it an infertiliy issue?
.
"Here's an example of what I'm talking about: the cynicism, the bitterness at pretty much all women that gaming causes in young men."
I think it feeds off something that was there before. Feminism originally was a simple conflict over percieved unfairness. As usual that conflict was hijacked by people who made it much more bitter and extreme and who, in the eyes of a lot of men, swung the balance too much the other way.
So i don't think game causes the bitterness. I think Game feeds off it (but i do get the impression it also makes the bitterness worse in the same way radical feminists made the male/female conflict worse than it needed to be).
JSM wrote:
ReplyDeleteI know this much: Any of your Gamers come within 10 miles of my lovely, well-reared daughter, her dad will neuter you with a rusty pocketknife.
JSM, I firmly believe your lovely, well-reared daughter should have every opportunity to grow old alone and unloved.
Matt, all your questions and concerns I find legitimate and deserving of a response. Ryu put up a post on it at IMF Defeating Feminism but Losing Your Country.
ReplyDeleteAs you can see WNs are not ignoring today's dilemnas, nor dismissing your concerns but are directly addressing them. If you are interested I commented several times in that thread with regard my position and what I believe i the WN position.
Here is my reply to a similar question to yours:
"Squared asks: But others have raised one particularly good point that I don’t think has been properly addressed. Namely, why should I give a shit?
Because we offer you hope. Look at your solution: "In Mala Fide, motherfuckers. Learn it. Breath it. Live it. … I feel many here haven’t captured its true essence. TL/DR: care less.TL/DR: care less." The esssence is -> hope-less-ness. Do you really want to continue living a life with no life force behind it, no pride in achievement nor respect and admiration from others?
WNism says that you’ve been sold a turd, as you yourself point out, by those who should have had your prosperity foremost in their minds. Because they failed you doesn’t mean you or we should fail our kin around us now, or who are coming into being. The opposite of course. Our parent’s generational failure points us to the way in which we shall advance.
WNism primarily says, you are valuable to us, and we want you to succeed. We will support you spiritually, economically, socially and through all possible avenues. Read your history, not the history of White shame you’ve been subjected to throughout schooling. Know your past, take pride in it and from it gain strength. Our success will be incremental, at first. Take the long view. Forget sex and start hoarding wealth and education. Get a trade or degree and build a social network with other Whites.
If you want sex then Game will get it done but really, that’s easy and will offer nothing long term. Game works within the current decadent social order. The order that atomises you, treats you as a discrete individual with no past, and no future, just an endless ferris wheel of revolving gratification that needs be fed daily. It works within the Monopoly game we’ve been born into. WNism proposes to kick over the whole board and smash every piece to smithereens. To create again our game.
WNism offers you hope in long lasting happiness within a community of your own kind. That’s the true IMF: to reject the nationless hopelessness that is given as your own shitty reward for the luck of not being aborted. WNism rejects all that and gives you hope."
Matt G, I'll address your points.
ReplyDeleteRight now the advice seems to be to find a "nice girl" out in the free market, but don't use game to do it. That isn't my advice. Use Game by all means if that is what is required.
Indians have successfully instituted a system of arranged marriages that seems to work well so why couldn't WN's do the same? Arranged marriages of that type are not a Western tradition. Our tradition is that of the Troubadour Love must be a component and forcing people into marriage is not our way. But certainly WNs would prefer to rear their children in a community that valued things like love rather than the squalid sex obsessed Judeo-America of today.
It seems like if WN's were really serious about this problem they'd go about and construct an alternative system.
Yes, some want an ethnostate to hive themselves off from the decadence of today. I have mixed feelings about that. I am more in favour of revolution - which I probably cannot go into here - but, something like the goal of Tyler Durden in Fightclub. My preferred WNism is to smash the order that prevails which includes Gamers. In my preferred outcome many would be, hmmmm, re-educated as to how they should behave.
Game to me is not a method for taking on the prevailing order, it is acquiescence to the prevailing order. I find it hard to believe that getting sex is such a problem today. It seems to me there is abundant opportunity for that. What is not offered nor affirmed is love in the full meaning of the word "faith hope charity" perseverance, loyalty etc. The prevailing order has imposed a sordid loveless world upon our people and Game is merely a method within that milieu to garner as much sex within that milieu. Game is not a solution. WNism is all about a "solution".
"People who love to wax dramatic about tribalism seem to forget that the strongest tribal hatreds are between peoples in geographic proximity – meaning that different tribes of whites, blacks, browns and yellows hate each other FAR more than they hate the “others.""
ReplyDeleteYes, geographic proximity is neccessary hence why Diversity Kills everywhere while homogeneity only kills at the borders.
Kyle
ReplyDelete"That'll at least save your husband from negro-induced anal fissures."
It's comments like that which show how de-masculinized you gamers actually are - although i guess it's not really your fault.
"JSM, I firmly believe your lovely, well-reared daughter should have every opportunity to grow old alone and unloved.'
ReplyDeleteAs I said, Gamers are anti-White.
"It's comments like that which show how de-masculinized you gamers actually are"
ReplyDeleteYes, clearly. Let me respond in a more masculine fashion.
"No, it is I who shall cut his balls off with a rusty utensil!" /chestthump
Is that better? More in line with the tone of the threatened castration by a hysterical woman, out of touch with reality?
Perhaps it's the snark? Don't be absurd. Women are almost universally incapable of pulling off humor. It's as masculine a trait as their is.
Kyle, what exactly did your comment That'll at least save your husband from negro-induced anal fissures. mean?
ReplyDeleteI took it as a variant on the Sandra Bernhard hope that Sarah Palin would be gang raped Blacks.
"a hysterical woman, out of touch with reality"
ReplyDeleteOh, so you're saying game DOESN'T work.
Ok, then.
K(yle) said...
ReplyDelete"Lol. Don't worry, I'm sure she'll pick some nice, young, authentic narcissistic sociopath instead of some guy that's just faking it to land a girlfriend instead.
That'll at least save your husband from negro-induced anal fissures."
LOL. Right on point except for the fact that she lives in Wyoming, so there probably isn't a negro within 500 miles.
Also LOL at Yan Shen managing to work IQ into the thread. If that isn't cognitive elitism I don't know what is.
@Pat Hannagan
Thanks for your responses Pat, I haven't had time to look over everything you posted but I'll read over it tomorrow. Your a feisty bastard who writes under his own identity so I respect that. I'm a partial coward myself.
Palin had that Israeli flag on her desk long before McCain even considered her as a VP candidate. Prior to McCain's dark horse pick, no one had ever heard of Palin. She wasn't anywhere. And she knows she has been so thoroughly defined that she could not get elected dog catcher. Now.
ReplyDeleteWN is a stupid term. It basically shouts loser, like a tattooed Nazi idiot, to most people. It denotes low-class thuggery they see on Law and Order, etc.
White Zionism is a winning term. Most Americans heartily approve of Zionism. If you like and admire Zionism, you're automatically not a Klan guy burning a cross. You just want to live in a nice safe neighborhood and have as little to do as possible with people who hate you.
The beating of the White Giants fan at Dodger Stadium (coma, brain damage, likely care for his entire life if he survives, which is dicey) by two Latino Gang Members drives home White Zionism.
You can't change your White skin. You are never going to be Mexican, if you are Jewish, or Catholic, or Protestant, or Agnostic, or Atheist. And WHITE. You are a victim and target whenever there is opportunity. "Vibrancy" merely means anti-White violence. That message, direct and simple, is easily grasped.
The guy, at Dodger Stadium, Stowe, was a Paramedic. His buddies were there, and tried to save him. Likely the first blow so grievously injured him (delivered from behind) there was no chance for him.
White Zionism merely echoes New England Poet Robert Frost on "Good Fences Make Good Neighbors." It is the key to getting women on board.
As far as Murray's elites go, they held onto their behavior because of MONEY. MONEY! That much money, even hypergamous women can keep marriages together to summer in the Hamptons instead of say, the Jersey Shore with the Snooki crowd.
Random thought.
ReplyDeleteWhen i was younger you'd try and get a girlfriend you liked being with. There was no conscious intention to marry them but there was no conscious intention *not* to marry them either so having a girlfriend you liked being with made sense.
I wonder if "game" is partially a consequence of young men specifically *not* wanting to get married and therefore not actually wanting a girl they liked being with.
"Arranged marriages of that type are not a Western tradition. Our tradition is that of the Troubadour Love must be a component and forcing people into marriage is not our way."
ReplyDeleteIf I´m not mistaken, the troubadour tradition was that of young man seducing older noble women who were married to even older man who they didn´t love (becaues their marriages were yes, arranged). The Catholic church did discourage forced marriage all over Europe, so its mostly a christian tradition. Alas Christianity its pretty much dead. When liberalism (christianism´s successor) goes bust, I wonder what will be the rationale behind romantic love, which in its extreme form of today, is causing more evil than good.
"Negro anal fissures"
ReplyDeleteMy take was, he was implying, should my husband take revenge on one of you cads for breaking our daughter's heart and leaving us with a b******* to provide for, his prison sentence would include sodomy by the diversity in da joint.
JSM - I think you're underestimating young men in your fears about "game", as if they're all such sorry specimens that they're going to be permanently brainwashed into sexual nihilism after stumbling across Roissy's and related sites. (Well, the dumb ones, maybe, but whatcha gonna do?) What they like and what they're excited about is 1)getting actually useful information on women and how to attract them, instead of the PC bullshit they've been fed all their lives, and 2)finding a venue where they can vent spleen and unload a lot of pent-up, perfectly justified rage about the utterly f******-up society their feckless elders have left them.
ReplyDeleteThen they'll move on, because what they want is to be men, which means earning the respect of worthy men more than it means getting chicks. (But don't underestimate the importance of the latter.) They're angry about anti-male PC society, but they're even more fundamentally disgusted, even if unconsciously, with its pervasive effeminacy. And whatever his usefulness as a catalyst or cathartic entertainment to confused young men, Roissy is a weak reed, whose own character cracked on contact with the reality he pretends to be such a badass for exposing.
Look at it this way, JSM: a while back I sent my then-16-year-old daughter to peruse his site, because I wanted to have a serious talk with her about these things. I had not previously expressed any opinion to her on the subject whatsoever. Afterwards, I asked her what she thought about it. You know what the first comment out of her mouth was? I quote: "That's a girly-man writer. And the comments are like being around a bunch of really catty high school girls."
Which cracked me up. I've noticed that (though I didn't phrase it quite that way), and I'm certainly not the only one to have made that observation, but damned if I expected a teenage girly-girl to pick up on that, and certainly not as her first and over-riding reaction. So if a girly-girl sees that right off the bat, do you really think normal young men won't? After the thrill of having their eyes opened about certain home truths of human nature, they'll see that, too. One truth always leads to another, no matter where that truth is picked up. Give 'em some credit, JSM.
Chinese woman tries to get out of jury duty by pretending to be racist.
ReplyDeleteHowever, she was probably not pretending. Many FOBs from China do have such attitudes.
""That's a girly-man writer. And the comments are like being around a bunch of really catty high school girls.""
ReplyDeleteThe fallacy being the assumption that if two trains end up at the same station they came from the same lines, and will leave on same lines.
Roissy Maxim #19: The alpha male thinks and acts more like a woman than a man in matters of seduction. He understands his adversary’s psychology, and uses it to shatter her defenses.
http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/roissy%E2%80%99s-maxims/
Game is feminine-minded, because women are feminine-minded, more so now than ever before; when all restrictions on them have been removed, they behave in their natural way.
"The sexes deceive themselves about each other: the reason is that in reality they honour and love only themselves (or their own ideal, to express it more agreeably). Thus man wishes woman to be peaceable: but in fact woman is ESSENTIALLY unpeaceable, like the cat, however well she may have assumed the peaceable demeanour."
And the simple observation that for women, lust and love aren't separate from each other.
The alpha male is amoral because woman is amoral. His behavior is like that of a woman, but has authority over hers.
"Then they'll move on, because what they want is to be men, which means earning the respect of worthy men more than it means getting chicks. "
If you continue down that line, it'll end up at Kay Hymowitz's station. And it's the same line because you too have internalised the mores of this feminised society.
Worthy men?
"We don't have the faintest idea what it means to be men anymore. Our male models are reconstituted women. They are the men women like, not the men God likes."
http://menletter.org/articles/What%20Men%20Know%20That%20Women%20Don't.htm
I love how everything Whiskey promotes is aimed at implicitly justifying or supporting Israel and Jewish interests.
ReplyDeleteHey Whiskey, I like your "White Zionism" idea. Let's do it just like they do it. Ethnonationalism at home - diversity everywhere else, including Israel.
I'm so sorry, JSM.
ReplyDeleteLet me apologize with a video:
Dear Woman
JSM: "'Negro anal fissures'
ReplyDeleteMy take was, he was implying, should my husband take revenge on one of you cads for breaking our daughter's heart and leaving us with a b******* to provide for, his prison sentence would include sodomy by the diversity in da joint."
Of course. It's all part of the new civility.
I can't imagine why anyone cares what a Ferdinand Bardamu or Roissy thinks. Most of what he says in the linked post is correct; but he is generally such a vile individual that I see no reason to worry overmuch about who he is excluding. I'll take it as a compliment if he wants nothing to do with me, although I'm not a white nationalist anyway. If these people are the best the right can come up with, then we deserve to lose.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with white nationalists is the same problem with all ideologues; they're monomaniacs who believe everything comes down to their one big idea. If only we could get rid of all the blacks and browns and maybe the Jews we'd be fine. Their greatest sin is not being wrong but boring. I'm really just riffing off of Thomas Fleming from Chronicles here. As he says, if 10% of so-called conservatives took their principles seriously, it would be a greater revolution than we've yet seen.
sometimes it seems like the right is nothing but a patchwork of ideologues running after their obsession of the week. Racialism, 'game', men's rights, anti-semitism, IQ, neo-paganism...will we ever be serious?
Matt W
Pat Hannagan:
ReplyDelete"Actually, that's not a start but completion.
All Ferdinand's other points were demolished by everyone else above. I didn't realise that beneath all the verbiage there was such a paucity of points let alone knowledgeable substantiation."
We missed a point, Pat, and it's a point you often make yourself. Tansaafl is all over it in an excellent post.
Ferdinand Bardamu mocks the notion that Jews are not White, while he blames all White problems on Whites, not Jews.
This, he seems to think, cuts off all discussion of a Jewish agency in the downfall of the Whites.
But to do that, he has to play the Jewish game of claiming that Jews are White whenever that's convenient for Jews, and Jews are not White whenever that's convenient for Jews.
This is not a natural position for a White, except one who's a sell-out. (In this case, that would be for for $1,018.49.)
One natural position for a White would be: Jews haven't been considered as White, historically and socially. They're a special case, a distinct group. So they might or might not be an external cause of the problems Whites face. It's not logically contradictory to say that they are.
Another natural position for Whites would be: sure Jews are White. They look White to me. So I guess if we Whites are destroying ourselves, that means Jews are also agents in this destruction. I am angry at them too, just like I'm angry at the rest of us.
To play a pea and thimble game where Jews can't be an external problem for Whites (because now they are White) and they also can't be an internal problem for Whites (because now they are not White) argues bad faith.
"Hey Whiskey, I like your "White Zionism" idea. Let's do it just like they do it. Ethnonationalism at home - diversity everywhere else, including Israel."
ReplyDeleteI understand (and share) the sentiments behind your comment, but I'm pretty sure that most "White Zionists" are non-parasitic and want to give value for value, to be left alone and to leave others alone.
I am more in favour of revolution - which I probably cannot go into here - but, something like the goal of Tyler Durden in Fightclub.
ReplyDeleteYou are pointing up something: the lack of alternatives. OK, there are some good discussions and excellent websites about WN, HBD, game, MRA, whatever, on the Internet. And these are important for establishing an ideological foundation, as well as getting the word out. Certainly, the Internet is a great agitprop front for "insurgent" movements opposed to the current multicult order.
But we need to get things to the next stage. There needs to be organization in the real world. Think in terms of our version of the ACLU or $PLC or MALDEF, fronts which can bring legal and political action in the support of various insurgent causes. Bear in mind that small numbers of MRAs have been able to get some legislation passed, and have fought the worst excesses of feminazism. There's no reason that similar movements could not fight against affirmative action, or launch lawsuits against PC universities, or defend the frontiers against illegal immigration.
The "Fight Club" issue is part of this, providing a means of solidarity as well as reclaiming civilization. And no, I do not mean men literally bashing each other in basements at midnight. Rather, there needs to be a rejection of the passive consumer conformist lifestyle which is promoted in the media and universities, and its replacement with the rise of unique fighters who can take on the system.
Just some random thoughts from Paper Street.
"Give 'em some credit, JSM."
ReplyDeleteThank you, Rohan. I'll mull over what you said some more.
Conscious men:
ReplyDeleteCan't watch your video. I'm mad at google, therefore I'm not going to link up any accounts for them in order to watch something on youtube.
My take was, he was implying, should my husband take revenge on one of you cads for breaking our daughter's heart and leaving us with a b******* to provide for, his prison sentence would include sodomy by the diversity in da joint
ReplyDeleteCorrect.
The problem with white nationalists is the same problem with all ideologues; they're monomaniacs who believe everything comes down to their one big idea.
This is probably the best criticism I've ever read of WNs all contained in a single sentence.
A lot of WNs also seem to be antisocial, and logic chomper types that either can't understand nuance, subtext, et cetera, or have no interest in doing so. This could probably qualify as criticism of a lot of rightwing hobby horse cliques (do we have any Libertarians in the house?).
It's hard to add anything of value to their worldview via discussion, even when the topic is specifically their hobby horse.
For Wandrin, Matt W., and Pat H.:
ReplyDeleteWandrin correctly reinforces my interpretation of Murray's new formulation of WHITE decline and disorder at the lowest levels of society.It is a profond observation that elites of conservative times in America encased the potentially disruptive low IQ segments in conservative laws and mores that constrained them despite the irritants of poverty and the range of problems seen in the novels of Steinbeck and Sinclair. I consider Christianity and the Protestant ethic to be the most powerful forces in this relatively benign time. Wandrin is still correct in seeing the left part of the IQ normal curve as extremely vulnerable once movements like liberalism advance a meme that connects with the white sentiment related to slavery and its constant media reminders. The Sixties took Vietnam , Civil Rights, and diversity to challenge all major themes of white America.
Matt W. nails the obsessive nature of cultist sub-populations of whites like the WN group. While our concern over white survival is real and necessary, some degree of repitition is unavoidable as bloggers chatter among themselves.Still, this communication is often rich enough to permit new insights and I, for one, greatly appreciate those little gems from Dennis, ONESTDV, Half-Sigma, Auster,etc. The good comes with the bad in such open blogs so I am glad that some filtering of various crazies is carried out on occasion. WN is a special case because some have interesting ideas but at bottom they are obsessive and dangerous.
Pat H., while obsessive in his usual way, at least acknowledges that Jews "might" be white. How impressive! Of course, Jews would then become an internal enemy while as non-whites they can, as Bartamu points out, be treated as outsiders whose innocence is more easily rationalized. I happen to agree with Pat that Tansaafl nails the issue of Jewish subversion quite well. Where I disagree with both is the FACT that jews helped build the America that we were once very proud of.Perhaps they were rare patriots, but their brilliant work in high IQ fields made us what we were! Get used to reality.
Liberalism won for many complex reasons. While Jews played a significant role they were but one part of the gradual sweep of the socialist meme. Marxism was also popular anmong black intellectuals. At UCLA I heard Angela Davis ranting about the demise of America in 1965!!! America's enemies come in a variety of colors, odors, and political views.Summerhill, The Greening of America,and all the works of Herbert Marcuse. The radical left emerged from the diverse left of the Sixties and grew into the police-state PC multiculturalists.In the Dictatorship of Virtue, the NY times writer Richard Bernstein, a flaming liberal, finds these fanatics of the Left to be dangerous demogogues with a post-modern tendency to create their own "truth."They have captured our once free universities and constructed an American gulag in which young Americans are brainwashed with systematic fury. PC police are a major factor in college life as "social justice" reigns as the supreme idea to govern young lives. Repression makes captives of innocent but poorly-read young whites with few intellectual and moral defenses.
The eminent philosopher John Searle, in the book cxalled "Debating PC," pointed out the hysteria of the left in demanding that the humanities cleanse all curricula of anything that hints of "hegemony," "patriarchy," and " exclusionary." They wish to oppose any aspect of Americana that is "elitist."They vigorously oppose the idea of excellence because it promotes elitism!! The left is indeed an enemy of all we hold dear. WN has no real solution but the rest of us must keep up the fight on various fronts to restore sanity to public discourse and free ourselves from the bonds of repressive liberalism. Hopefully there is still time.
FWIW there appear to be a number of guys who apply game principles for good, Athol Kay and Dalrock for example.
ReplyDeleteI hope Dennis won't ban my comment, as Steve Sailer usually does when I respond to the Jewish Nationalist troll Whiskey. This guy is always spamming Steve's blog with ultra Jewish Nationalist propaganda, and when I usually respond back to him by reversing his own words: Jewish with White and Zionism with Nationalism, Steve deletes my comments. Even though my comments are simply a mirror image of Whiskey's comments, but from a White Christian perspective instead.
ReplyDeleteAt any rate, since Whiskey is trolling these blogs, it's only fair that we adopt or implement some rules of engagement to level the playing field. It's not fair to have him spam every conservative blog with Jewish Nationalist propaganda and get a way it, while we are censored the moment we respond back adopting his own language.
Why would my comments be considered anti-Semitic and get deleted (mostly from Sailer's blog), while he gets a free pass? Why aren't his comments considered anti-Christian and banned from conservative blogs?
Kyle says: A lot of WNs also seem to be antisocial, and logic chomper types that either can't understand nuance, subtext, et cetera, or have no interest in doing so. This could probably qualify as criticism of a lot of rightwing hobby horse cliques (do we have any Libertarians in the house?).
ReplyDeleteThe so called "problem with white nationalists" is much like the great majority of MSM and blog argument: a one sided diet of examples. Take Ferdinand's post for example: reel out every stereotypical image of a WN and then attempt to demolish them thus demonstrating the superiority of one's own position. It's a variant of the strawman argument with the difference being that such stereotypes do exist. By ignoring any example that runs counter to your position you are able to pretend that these examples, these absurd stereotypes are the definitive example of whatever you are arguing against. As Daybreaker says, it is to argue in bad faith. But then we are dealing with someone who's raison d'être is to act in bad faith.
All well and good if we understand that the prime motivation is bad faith but we also assumed that to act in bad faith was to do so for a higher cause. That was the indication that Ferdinand had given. As we now learn, to act in bad faith is the cause, completely, in and of itself. It's a bizarre position to say the least. It is entirely self defeating. Once we learn that there is no cause in being "in mala fide" other than to be "in mala fide" then we can dismiss it is a productive venture and one worth pursuing. That is if we seek to be productive, if we have some goal in mind.
One thing that all White Nationalists do have in common, regardless of the diversity of expression and types within the movement is the one goal of asserting a group consciousness and the expression of that people within law, culture and society. The WN is the rebel who has "revulsion at the infringement of his rights but also a complete and spontaneous loyalty to certain aspects of himself." To be in mala fide, as the cause in and of itself, is to absolutely nullify any loyalty to even oneself. There is no cause but defeat and capitulation. Like a child who opposes her parents in every aspect simply because the parent has an authority that the child cannot bear, or difficult to live up to. Rather than seek to define themself in their own way the child takes the parent's position on everything as absolute and defining of himself, and rebels against that only to the point of self harm if need be. A more self destructive philosophy I find it hard to imagine.
If there is "one big idea" that a White Nationalist has it is that we matter. We are a people. We do count. And we will assert ourselves.
You, on the other hand Kyle, want to rebel against the system that suborns you through complete submission and acceptance to that very system. So much so that you wish a man who asserts himself for a value be serially sodomised in state sanctioned prison. It is a very good example of what you and your type stand for. The system is dead long, live the system.
"The problem with white nationalists is the same problem with all ideologues; they're monomaniacs who believe everything comes down to their one big idea.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably the best criticism I've ever read of WNs all contained in a single sentence."
Actually it's two ideas: "Who are we?" and "What's good for us?" These ideas are at the core of all nationalism.
The "problem" with your criticism of "ideologues" and "monomaniacs" is that it is selectively aimed at Whites.
white racial consciousness is so controversial that even a site replete with obscenities, graphic descriptions of sex, anti-feminism, game, and general anti-establishment ranting can't handle it.
ReplyDeleteWhite racial consciousness isn't controversial, it's taboo. Abortion is controversial. Thinking Obama's a dick is controversial. White racial consciousness is forbidden.
And "white racial consciousness" isn't particularly apt, either. Whites are supposed to be racially conscious - conscious of their racial duty to submit.
But you do make a good point, diction aside. What is taboo any more? Buggery, perversion, boorishness, drug abuse, decadence, sloth... pick your sin, odds are it's nothing anyone's going to get upset about. Unless you're white and not an Uncle Tom. Then you must be punished.
Suggest, ask for, or demand for (while wearing white skin) what Jews have for themselves in Israel and you must be punished.
It's amusing to me when Uncle Toms bring up the "white on white" oppression thing. As if racism is okay, as long as it's white-on-white. As if they'd never heard of the term, "Uncle Tom." These guys all have the "southpaw" weakness. They're such timid souls they've avoided the discussion altogether and consequently have no idea WTF they're even talking about, having never been exposed to what it is they're opposing.
Ah yes, Mr Troost obsessively misconstrues my position. If Jews are White as you obsessively claim, then what did Mike Wallace mean by declaring "I'm Jewish"? It's not a rhetorical question. The answer is that Mike Wallace doesn't have a "White History Month" because he is Jewish. He's a Jew. Not White. btw, when he says that there is no Jewish History Month that is patently incorrect. Every month is Jewish History Month. Why, my daughter has just finished "The Diary of Anne Crank" recently as part of the strict school curriculum in "Jewish Victimology and White people are all Nazis" mandatory subject.
ReplyDeleteWe'll be moving on to "The Holocaust" soon where we learn that the Jews, and only the Jews, have ever been holocausted. They don't cover the Holodomor for some reason nor the Sandakan Death Marches. But if Jews are White then I simply do not understand this singular focus on what happened and is always happening, only to the Jews, the eternal victim. The one constant theme is that we Whites are the eternal oppressor. Ever read any history on the Jews being oppressors Mr Troost? Know about Jewish involvement in the Slave Trade? Of course you don't. Cause that's what Whites did, as Spielberg demonstrated in "Amistad". But then he's White and the Whites run Hollywood too, according to you. So it's our fault not but once again.
The point of identifying that Jews aren't White (some are European extraction as I have stated all along but you obsessively miss) is to a) acknowledge exactly what the Jews say of themselves and b) respect Jews, they have their own interests, and we have ours. You see in this identification some anti-semitic idea that by stating that Jews aren't White I must want to "burn them all! kill them all! Every man woman child and beast of the field!" Your position is as absurd and insane as the very Old Testament authors who held to exactly that take on "us" and "them", and what "we" should do to "them".
I'm a Catholic Mr Troost. Do you think that I don't have Catholic interests at heart? Do you think that my Catholic interests are always conversant with yours? You're a fool if you do. It is right good and proper that you identify that Catholics have Catholic interests and many of them are negative to your interests. Catholics, as manifested by the last somewhat apostate, and delusional, Pope do act against your interests. Are Catholics White? Why did Kennedy act to dismantle the racial heritage of the USA? Did he have ethnic or religious motivations?
Jews aren't White. They are Jews.
I have thought of a new term: uppity white. It is intended to be broad and inclusive, encompassing WNs and all the people who agree with them on substance, yet won't identify with them for fear of catching cooties. Or leprosy, or whatever it is.
ReplyDeleteI'm not convinced that WNs really are excessively focussed (or you can use the Freudian term if you really want to hurt their feelings). WNs are less obsessed with race than Austrian-school economists are with hard vs. fiat money - my observation only. I've known plenty of people who vote exclusively on abortion. Compared with American Idol and televised ball sports, race seems downright significant, or even *gasp* important.
Don't identify as WN if you don't want to, but if your main reasons to avoid them are something to do with their alleged loserdom, consider that the rest of the world considers you a loser based on skin color, not on whom you identify with.
Cornelius Troost said: "Pat H., while obsessive in his usual way, at least acknowledges that Jews 'might' be white."
ReplyDeleteThe "are [Ashkenazi] Jews White?" question is very, very simple to answer. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with how they "identify" themselves.
Ashkenazi Jews are part White (meaning European) and part non-White (meaning a good portion of their ancestors originated in the Middle East). (They are fully Caucasian in that that category includes Middle Easterners.) The question is just how White are they, i.e. how much European admixture do they have?
Do a little reading on Ashkenazi Jewish genetics. It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp, actually. (And it's also pretty obviously from what we know of their history.)
It's just like asking and answering the question "is Obama Black or White?" The man is half Black and half White.
See? Not so hard!
Come on! Eileen taroo ay ay! (sorry, couldn't resist). You have completely missed that Jews are religious as well as racial.
ReplyDeleteCatholics on the other hand are religious only. See, this is the thing as I must reiterate (not an obsession when you're in the valley of the willfully blind): Judaism is a unique combination of race, religion and culture.
Not a definition I made up. One that Jews hold. And I accept.
When being classified as White suits Jewish purposes, then they accept the definition. When being classified as Jews suits their purposes then they call themselves Jews. As you say "See? Not so hard!"
Once again, I refer you to the clip above of Mike (I'm Jewish!) Wallace above.
ReplyDeleteIt's just like asking and answering the question "is Obama Black or White?" The man is half Black and half White.
Actually, he is a little more than half white and a little less than half black, given that his mother was white.
That is only if his father was from Kenya. I have seen speculation that his father was a well-known communist African-American, which if true makes him even less black and more white.
In any case, I'm waiting for any of you "Jews are White" proponents to explain what Mike Wallace meant in that clip. It is quite clear that Wallace is declaring that he is first and foremost, for all definitional purposes Jewish, not White. The question was "Which month is White History Month?" and Wallace answered "I'm Jewish!".
ReplyDeleteNow of course we can see that Wallace has European blood, he looks White, got a White name BUT...he doesn't identify as White! He's farken Jewish you idiots. Listen to the man. Show him some respect. He knows what he is.
I am supposed to be the anti-semite not you people. Yet I am one of the few here who give the Jews the dignity and respect owing to any man to have their own identity. I accept what Jews say of themselves. They have interests.
But you have a problem with that don't you. You can't handle the truth. That if they have interests, as Jews, then what does that make you? You can't face defining yourself can you? What are you left with when a white man says "I'm not White, I'm Jewish"? The fact that you've been duped into thinking everything a Jew does was always in your interests?
I think you Mr Troost, you Eileen, and all other like people need now admit this one thing: Pat Hannagan is 100% correct. Jews aren't White, they are Jews.
And a funny thing won't happen. You won't suddenly feel the urge to kill a Jew. You will continue as you have before yet with this one difference: you will have to think about your own racial interests as seperate and unique to that of Jewish interests. And I think that's your problem. You think at base you have a genocidalist's heart just waiting for bloodlust revenge against the "other".
I promise you that that won't happen. You will experience a liberation of thought and identity. You will know a) who you are and b) who you belong to. That is: White.
Has "Ferdinand Bardamu" even read Celine? Seriously, what a stupid guy:
ReplyDelete"“But but but it was the Joooooooos! The Jews are the ones who’ve destroyed the white race, and everyone knows the Jews aren’t white! Durrrrrr…”
Is that the best caricature these jokers can come up with these days? They want so badly to believe they're arguing against simpletons who want all Jews gassed so all Europeans can finally hold hands in harmony. I ask these posturing gasbags, how can you learn about the genesis of something like the Federal Reserve and not grow immediately skeptical of JoOoZ in power? Face it, a clan whose characteristic loyalty to each other (and indifference/hostility to us) must never be spoken about (unless it's praised) has inordinate power over so many aspects of our lives. If they're often motivated by tribal interests and/or by disdain for gentiles, is that something one can ignore with a clean conscience? Economic policy, finance, law, politics (what noble physiognomies -- men fit to rule, all); journalism (liberal and conservative), foreign policy, immigration policy, pre-K through university education, entertainment, advertising (you name it), all directed by a tribe whose members understand that the best thing that ever happened to them was the growth of the global anti-white multicultural idiocracy. See any problem there?
(True, there are exceptions. For example, there are some perceptive formerly-radical' ethnic activists who came to realize that it might not be such a bad idea to keep the goose that lays the golden eggs alive after all. There might be useful counter-jihadis in their ranks!)
Pat H., while obsessive in his usual way, at least acknowledges that Jews "might" be white. How impressive! Of course, Jews would then become an internal enemy while as non-whites they can, as Bartamu points out, be treated as outsiders whose innocence is more easily rationalized. I happen to agree with Pat that Tansaafl nails the issue of Jewish subversion quite well. Where I disagree with both is the FACT that jews helped build the America that we were once very proud of.Perhaps they were rare patriots, but their brilliant work in high IQ fields made us what we were! Get used to reality.
ReplyDeleteCornelius, your arguments are weak. By necessity, but weak nonetheless.
The issue is Ashkenazi-American presence amongst White folks. You argue that AAs have built better mousetraps, as though that requires or argues for your position on the issue, but it manifestly does not. The Chinese have the same mouse traps, sans AAs. See, it all started with the letter. Then we got the telegraph. Fast forward to today, and we have instantaneous global communication. Your argument seems to be based on the notion of AAs as totems or talismans, requiring close proximity (to be rubbed?) to work their mojo.
In short, we can negotiate at arm's length for these benefits.
But perhaps you're making the argument that AAs have done us a good turn, so we are obligated to invite them in, wherever we live? But not the reverse, of course - they get to have their own ethnic clubhouse in the Levant. That goes without saying, right? Because we've never done shit for AAs, so they owe us nothing.
But you can't be saying that. That would be wrong on several levels. First, it's wrong on a factual level; Whites have done far more (by your own metric, mind you) for AAs than AAs could ever hope to do for Whites. The balance is so asymmetrical it doesn't even bear mentioning, except in response to absurd arguments like yours. So if anything, AAs owe us on this score, big time, not the other way 'round.
Second, it's wrong on an ethical level; Whites are no more obliged to allow AAs among them, wherever they go, than AAs are willing to allow Whites into Israel. Despite having done FAR MORE for AAs than AAs have ever done for us, they refuse to allow us among them in Israel the way we allow them into our lands.
No, you can't be saying any of that nonsense. So maybe you should clarify your meaning.
The only "contributions" AAs make to our society that are truly unique, exceptional, and irreplaceable, are bad ones.
Have you read Kevin MacDonald's work? If so, please show me a few Jewish movements that do good on the planes MacDonald illustrates? I.e., positive collective Jewish efforts to balance out the bad ones? I've been asking for this for years and never gotten a response. As far as I know, there are none. None. Better mousetraps do not count. In this context, better mousetraps are "neutral"; they help AAs as much as anyone else. They do not specifically help Whites. But AAs do many bad things that specifically harm whites.
And you imply balance? If that's your idea of balance, you're a fool. But I don't think you're a fool. I think you're simply afraid to face the truth. You have plenty of company, there's no doubt about that.
But don't preach to braver men. Do not lecture them about their supposed pathologies. Move on to subjects that don't arouse your fear, instead.
Let's pretend for a second that AAs are White in every sense of the word (they manifestly are not White in the sense the word is used in "White Nationalism," as any fool can plainly see).
ReplyDeleteSo what? They have their ethnic interests met, and they deny them to every other White subgroup. That alone is enough for me to kick them out of consideration for inclusion. It would be the same for the Irish if they had an Irish Zion and worked against any other White Zions, or the English, Italians, Germans, Czechs, or anybody else.
Genetic concerns mean NOTHING in this context, even if the analysis returned the way you folks want them to, which they don't. This is political.
The "problem" with your criticism of "ideologues" and "monomaniacs" is that it is selectively aimed at Whites.
ReplyDeleteBeing that the conversation is about whites, and that I'm white, and don't really give a shit about other groups enough to criticize them; yes it is selective.
One thing that all White Nationalists do have in common, regardless of the diversity of expression and types within the movement is the one goal of asserting a group consciousness and the expression of that people within law, culture and society.
Unless someone goes off message slightly then that person is a secret Jew, FBI agent or some other kind of agent provacatuer. Or is in some way so mentally defective as to be useless to the coming ethnostate because they can't agree if there were 79 or 80 episodes in the original Star Trek, or whatever irrelevant plank in current WN doctrine is being violated.
Your own comments demonstrate the derranged antisocial personalities exhibited by far too many white nationalists, including Day of the Rope fantasies, replete with reeducation camps for white people, and describing castration by rusty knife as "a man who asserts himself for a value".
What value is being expressed in a maiming? Would the victim's relatives be expressing values in retaliating with rape, murder and pillage over the ruination of their kin? What would you do if a man asserts himself for a value and determines that your son is maybe just a little to well spoken and must certainly have "Game". Just let bygones be bygones right? Of course in your simplistic worldview you and yours will always be on the perpetrating end, so there is no issue.
I'll be sure to jump on that White Nationalist bandwagon at some point when White Nationalists like you aren't drooling over the opportunity to forcibly send masses of white people to camps to be taught a lesson over some imagined evil.
For the record I don't wish anyone to be prison raped. I only expressed the reality of what's going to happen to anyone who maims someone over his own daughter's poor choices, or really for any reason at all. Yeah, I would like to live in a society where random maimings don't take place over percieved slights.
Basically I currently enjoy not living in Africa, with it's network of tribal loyalties, familial vendettas, oppressive governments, forced migrations and internments. I'm for 'The System' to the extent that I don't want any of these things featured as pillars of society in places where white people live, which is apparently something that puts me in opposition to White Nationalism.
Your comments are starting to resemble Thordaddy's batshit insane Anti-Supremacy rants that are only intelligible to himself.
Just to keep score, one of us is an advocate of cutting off young white men's balls and one of us isn't. Which one of us is more pro-white?
Actually it's two ideas: "Who are we?" and "What's good for us?"
Yeah, who is "we" and "us"? Those are good questions. Based on the comments on this thread I can certainly see that it's not white people.
"Perhaps they were rare patriots, but their brilliant work in high IQ fields made us what we were! Get used to reality."
ReplyDeleteGood God man, get off your knees.
Pat Hannagan said: "You have completely missed that Jews are religious as well as racial."
ReplyDeleteNo, I haven't. It's just that what their religion is is completely irrelevant. All that matters is the genetics.
When Jews play their little switching game -- "we're just a religious group, oh no we're an ethnic group" -- that's irritating, I agree. But it doesn't change the fact that what makes them different from most White populations -- Germans, English, Irish, Italians, Polish, etc. -- is that none of those groups have large parts of their genomes that are non-European in origin (unless, of course, you go back to the Neolithic, etc., etc. -- or, of course, unless you start looking too closely at some of the southern Italians or Spaniards and maybe some of the Balkan peoples). Ashkenazi Jews, on the other hand, are fundamentally a Middle Eastern group with some European genes added in. They migrated to Europe from the Middle East and some of them married some local girls.
Pat Hannagan said: "Come on! Eileen taroo ay ay! (sorry, couldn't resist)."
Oh, great. Now I'm gonna have that song in my head all day! :-p
Anonymous said: "Actually, he is a little more than half white and a little less than half black, given that his mother was white."
ReplyDeleteTrue.
My point was just that some people are a mix of, whatever -- races, ethnicities, etc., etc. And Ashkenazi Jews are one of those mixes.
Pat Hannagan said: "I think you Mr Troost, you Eileen, and all other like people need now admit this one thing: Pat Hannagan is 100% correct. Jews aren't White, they are Jews."
ReplyDeleteThere's no need to argue against me, Pat. I agree that Jews have their own ethnic genetic interests that are separate from Whites. That is clear.
In fact, it must be the case given what they are genetically. They are not fully White, therefore they do not have the same ethnic genetic interests as fully White people.
Just because they are partially White does not mean that they would have the same ethnic genetic interests as fully (or more fully) Whites populations. Just the opposite!
I just get irritated at the "yes, they're White" vs. the "no, they're not White" arguments because neither is based on the facts. One needs to acknowledge honestly and with a level-head what their (Ashkenazi Jews) genetic ancestry is -- mostly Middle Eastern with a good percentage of European White thrown in. This makes them a unique group of their own and, therefore, they will necessarily have divergent interests from Europeans.
Svigor,
ReplyDeleteIsrael doesn't exclude non-Jewish whites from living there, if they want to. A non-trivial number (including devout Christians) do. Non-Jews are also able to become Israeli citizens. It is easier for a Jew or someone with Jewish ancestry to become an Israeli, but that's also true of someone with German or Italian ancestry who wants to become a citizen of Germany or Italy. In fact, until quite recently, Germany's ancestral/ethnic citizenship requirements were stricter than Israel's. And of course America has far more citizens of German ancestry than Jewish ancestry, but I don't recall anyone making similar complaints from WNs about German citizenship requirements before they were loosened.
Of course you don't. Cause that's what Whites did, as Spielberg demonstrated in "Amistad".
ReplyDeleteThat film depicted a single incident, not the institution of slavery in general, so if you're claiming that Spielberg wrongly erased Jews from the story, can you give me the names of the Jews who were actually involved in the affair?