Whiteness, BlurringAndrew Hamilton
Spanish translation here
Represented in the randomly-selected photographs on this page are whites (persons whose ancestors presumably originated within Europe’s continental boundaries), non-whites (persons whose ancestors originated outside of Europe), and part-white hybrids—but no Jews.
It is apparent that standardization of attire (a cultural cue) kicks away one of the major identificatory props we unconsciously employ to recognize race or ethnicity. Likewise, in still photographs speech becomes an inaccessible cue. I believe all of the individuals shown here speak (or spoke) English—some with, but others definitely without an accent.
Race denial is the official ideology of state and society. This dogma maintains that races are “social constructs” and that biological races do not exist.
I won’t waste time on this here. Race deniers as well as so-called “anti-racists” are in fact obsessed with race and, in particular, nurture a deep hatred for whites. They do not really believe races don’t exist in the biological sense. No one does. This claim is essentially an ideological screen, a party line, useful in promoting anti-white hatred, discrimination, and genocide.
Until recently, whites numbered among the major races of mankind. Presently they are being driven to extinction. As this process unfolds, the line between white and non-white is fading rapidly.
Importance of the Physical Stratum of Race
The purely physical stratum of race can be identified anthropologically, forensically, and genetically.
Here’s an example that should drive this point home.
Several years ago Louisiana police were searching for a serial killer. Due to incorrect witness reports or prejudice (e.g., racial profiling), or both, they were interrogating only white suspects. During the initial course of the investigation police impugned the integrity of numerous innocent men, causing great mortification and shame in the process.
Finally the authorities turned to a Florida testing lab, now defunct, whose work could specify with a high degree of accuracy the race of an individual based upon a single DNA sample. The police submitted such a sample, and the company informed them that the killer was almost certainly a Negro with a small amount of Amerindian ancestry.
Based upon this new information, the authorities altered their search techniques and apprehended a suspect. Using a different method, DNA fingerprinting (matching two separate DNA samples, one from a crime scene and the other from the suspect in custody), the killer was positively identified. As predicted, he was black with some Amerindian admixture.
Clearly, there is a physical basis to race.
The importance of the physical stratum from a racialist perspective has been neatly summarized by Jared Taylor. Until the 1960s, he noted:
White Americans believed race was a fundamental aspect of individual and group identity. They believed people of different races differed in temperament, ability, and the kind of societies they built. [Emphasis added.] They wanted America to be peopled by Europeans, and thought only people of European stock could maintain the civilization they valued. They therefore considered immigration of non-whites a threat to whites and to their civilization. It was common to regard the presence of non-whites as a burden, and to argue that if they could not be removed from the country they should be separated from whites socially and politically. Whites were strongly opposed to miscegenation, which they called “amalgamation.”
In other words, different races (or “populations”) give rise to different behavioral, psychological, aesthetic, and normative traits. These traits, in turn, produce different cultures and civilizations. Indiscriminate mixing (“miscegenation”) will eradicate a race, and with it the cultural and physical attributes unique to it.
White by Inertia
Whites today exist because of historical inertia. They are products of the exclusionary rules and consciously evolved barriers to race-mixing their predecessors evolved in the past.
Whites are still around today because of men who were formerly prejudiced and actively discriminated, who, for example, periodically expelled Jewish populations (or, rather, parts of them) from European soil between 1290 and 1945 and the Moors and Moriscos from Spain and Portugal, established the Pale of Settlement in 1791, repatriated blacks to Liberia (1820–47), passed the Indian Removal Act (US, 1830), established Indian reservations (in Canada, Indian Reserves), formulated the Blood Quantum standard, stopped Chinese immigration to the US (1882) and Canada (1923), wrote America’s Jim Crow (segregation) and anti-miscegenation statutes, Germany’s Nuremberg Laws, South Africa’s Apartheid and Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949), the Immigration Act of 1924 (effective 1924–1965), and repatriated Mexicans (1930–35; Operation Wetback, 1954).
But now, virtually all such natural barriers to interracial panmixia for whites have been systematically eradicated. At the same time, racial consciousness, in conjunction with anti-white racism and discrimination, is promoted for all other groups.
Therefore, whites are threatened with extinction. Even if all blacks, Mestizos, Muslims, and Asians now living in formerly white countries or being imported into them were racially mixed with whites, their core global populations would remain robust. Ours would not.
The Clear Case
Like Jared Taylor, William Pierce, Wilmot Robertson, and George Lincoln Rockwell, I believe that “white” is the appropriate identity to cultivate at this stage in history.
And, like the last three, I am convinced that Jews must be excluded from the “white” category. For the genocidal assault upon our race is primarily the consequence of post-WWII Jewish fanaticism, racism, ideology, and social power.
In many cases we have no difficulty determining who is white.
For example, although race deniers assert that humans and chimpanzees are genetically 98.9% the same, and different human races 99.9% the same (anthropologist Peter Frost calls this ploy the “small percentage fallacy”), imagine “a random assortment of fifty humans and fifty chimpanzees. No one . . . would have any difficulty in reconstituting the original fifty-member sets by simple inspection . . .” Likewise, applied to 150 humans selected 1/3 each from Japan, Malawi [Africa], and Norway, “[a]gain, by simple inspection, we would achieve the same 100 percent sorting accuracy.” (Vincent Sarich and Frank Miele, Race: The Reality of Human Differences, 2004, p. 208)
Famed population geneticist Sewall Wright made the same point: “It does not require a trained anthropologist to classify an array of Englishmen, West Africans, and Chinese with 100% accuracy by features, skin color, and type of hair in spite of so much variability within each of these groups that every individual can easily be distinguished from every other.” (Chapter 10, “Racial Differentiation in Mankind” in Evolution and the Genetics of Populations Vol. 4: Variability Within and Among Natural Populations, 1984, p. 439)
These sorting exercises, or though experiments, are implicitly designed, I think, to “flatten” cultural differences, including signals such as language and attire, in order to focus solely upon differences in racial morphology and demonstrate anthropologically the same fact shown genetically in the Louisiana case described above. Wright is clearest on this point, specifying “features, skin color, and type of hair.”
But in their examples the authors use northern Europeans to represent the core white population. Moreover, they implicitly employ historical populations (“Norway” and “Englishmen”) as their benchmark. But, if you randomly selected actual residents from those countries, you would end up with representatives of virtually every non-white population on the planet, not to mention hybrids of every imaginable variety.
Because the idea of whiteness historically originated within primarily black-white social settings, terminological and conceptual confusion can result. For example, aren’t Jews “white”? They obviously aren’t black. The same could be said of several other non-black races.
Compounding the problem is the difficulty of morphologically distinguishing many brown or near-white-skinned races from our own, especially after obvious cultural cues have been “flattened” or eliminated by cultural homogenization, assimilation, or deception. We rely heavily upon cultural markers (language, proper names, apparel, religion, etc.) to differentiate non-Europeans. Once such pointers have been removed, physiological race presents more of a dilemma.
The confusion is greatly exacerbated by widespread, indiscriminate white hybridization with non-whites.
While it would be nice to know for sure whether a person was white or not simply by looking at or interacting with them—and often, of course, one does know—I’m certain whites can’t consistently discriminate accurately on this basis alone, especially as the racial situation continues to deteriorate. Walking down the street, strolling through a store, or watching movies or television, I often can’t tell the difference.
Following are excerpts of impressions of Washington, D.C. written as long ago as 1978 by a racially conscious, perceptive, discerning man who was very knowledgeable about race. They serve to illustrate my point. Of course, things are much worse everywhere today, and race mixture far more advanced. Yet the author was clearly perplexed by the provenance of many of the individuals he saw around him even then, including whether or not they were European.
A hundred faces in each block, and perhaps thirty of them kindred to mine. The rest ugly and alien, swart and frizzy, with flat noses and muddy eyes. Ugliest of all, the almost-Whites, these mongrel spawn of East and South and North outnumber the rest. What a transformation has been wrought in a few decades! Where have these swarming masses been breeding, to spew forth their dark millions upon our streets?
Behind the streaked, dirty window [of a restaurant] are dark faces: not Black faces, nor White either, but the faces one sees nowadays in every restaurant, faces from the Mediterranean, from the Far East, from Persia, from God knows where.
If only it were a simple problem of Black and White, of my kinsmen against theirs! But the filth of the city spreads over all in it, pulls all into a common tangle, blurs distinctions. Some Blacks learn to act like whites; some Whites begin acting like Blacks. And everywhere the almost-Whites, the not-really-Blacks, the raceless ones! And yet I can remember when the mongrels were seen as seldom as the Blacks, when the Whites all acted like Whites and owned the sidewalks.
Ahead, a street vendor and her trays of trinkets. Jewess? Gypsy? At the intersection, a small convertible with three swarthy young men, shirts open to the navel, hairy chests, flashing teeth, tight black ringlets, animated conversation. Teheran? Tel Aviv? Naples? (William L. Pierce, “Street Impressions, Washington, D.C.,” 1978)
Even within American white nationalism, mulattos, Amerindians, and Jews have all been mistaken for, or accepted as, whites. At least two Jews have led such groups.
Ultimately, whites with a sense of racial identity must establish clear tests or specifications as to who’s white and who’s not. Such tests require an explicit, rational, articulable basis. Society—law, culture, even individual or group consciousness—no longer supplies this. They must be created.
Because we lack effective access to genetic tests of the type used (one time only) in Louisiana, we are forced to rely upon inconclusive evidence such as phenotype (does a person “look white”?), self-attestation (“I am white”), cultural cues, and recent self-reported genealogy.
Small groups, organizations, a movement, chronologically precede the establishment of a white polity, whether it be micro-nationalist, mini-nationalist, pan-national, or the result of total reconquest. The question Who belongs?, initially applicable at the small group and movement level, therefore ultimately applies to the envisioned state as well.
Because whites long ago lost their collective social and political voice as whites, and have had their racial identity erased, the creation of the necessary standards can only occur voluntarily at the individual, family, organizational, and movement level. There is no place else for it to happen. Even so, governments and racist organizations stand ready to prosecute such behavior in many instances (housing, employment, private associational activity, etc.).
At the moment, everything depends entirely upon the mandates and policy trajectory of the existing system: individual mating choices, population movements, state policy, and the universal absence of a positive, explicit, deep-rooted white racial identity—all of which, individually and in combination, are deeply opposed to collective survival.
IQ Is a Phenotype
White Fragility & The White Nationalist Manifesto: A Comparative Analysis
Correspondence between Gaston-Armand Amaudruz & Julius Evola
Q&A with Jim Goad on The Redneck Manifesto
Nice White Ladies
Critical Race Theory Translated
Thanksgiving Day as a Harvest Festival
The Worst Week Yet: October 9-15, 2022
Andrew, I think you’re right with these recent articles. In Spanish we call the whole thing limpieza de sangre.
Chechar, I’ve noticed we Meds/Adriatic people are much more open to talk of racial purity, especially expressed by the lightness of skin. One of my favorite stories to tell (especially among liberals) is when I told my grandmother I had met the man of my dreams and was SO in love and he’d just proposed and she answered…”He better be light skinned.”
Another one was when we moved to USA and a black waitress had been rude to her and we were thinking of ways to tell her off discreetly and she said…”You should just tell her…YOURE BLACK!” lol. Always makes me laugh.
Even though my family is not exactly racially conscious the fact that light skin is better and being white is pure, clean and “good” is pretty much a given.
So Mr. Hamilton- which people in your pic do you find to be non white? It really is so blurred…and it is a shame that whiteness now is up to how a person “feels” and not anything more distinctive. What is strange is even though the chick from American Pie is Syrian and Cherokee she looks a lot like my friend who is half Brit and half Spaniard (then again, actors love to appear more exotic). So you’re right…what is white? I suppose that’s what they wanted eh? Running around like Jane fucking Goodall checking off certain phenotypes and dispositions.
If they’re mostly white, and good looking, or contribute to the greater good, then let them in- keep the uggos and the dopes out. Others don’t hate on their own b/c they’re half this or that…as long as they help the race they are welcome.
To be more exclusive we must also be inclusive.
So what are the people in the photos?
I know that Wentworth Miller is mulatto.
I think someone touched on it before and reminded us that the range of being White is quite wide. There is my friend in hospital who is the proverbial whiter shade of pale that reminds me I am actually pinkish and then there are all the Whites from cream coloured to egg shell.
Left alone the herd will revert back to normal and absorb the not quites but if the flood keeps coming in we will simply be swamped – assuming that the current system keeps functioning which is becoming increasingly hard to imagine. I suppose at the end of the day it will be as Rudyard Kipling said:
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began —
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire —
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
The Louisiana serial killer was Derrick Todd Lee. In the early 2000s, he raped and murdered a few White women, all young Southerners. This guy very cunning. He convinced one woman to open the door by playing a recording of a baby crying. The sad part is the idiot FBI profilers helped Lee avoid being captured for longer than necessary. The local police did receive reports of a suspicious Black man near one of the scenes, but they never warned the public or followed up because the FBI told them to concentrate on White men.
Another interesting facet is that the FBI profiler profiled him as a “young, white male, who would be uncomfortable around women”, which considerably delayed the investigation, costing several young women their lives. Derrick Todd Lee targeted both young white and young black women. White serial killers almost always only target white victims, of a particular “type”. Any time you see a serial killer targeting both whites and non-whites, the killer is usually non-white. Their behaviour is a psycho-sexual ritual, much like dating. I know this much just from watching true crime shows on A&E, with no particular training in abnormal psychology!
I think that we can agree that the distinction of various native Europeans are very important to maintain. I for one, will be working on a concrete project to that effect, which facilitates cooperation at among distinct, native European interests while marking the difference against non-Europeans, as even more important and profound, ultimately.
P.S. Hurin, good question.
a typo in previous post
I think that we can agree that the distinction of various native Europeans are very important to maintain. I for one, will be working on a concrete project to that effect, which facilitates cooperation among distinct, native European interests while marking the difference against non-Europeans, as even more important and profound, ultimately.
P.S. Hurin, good question.
Lew: Yes, I was referring to the case of Derrick Todd Lee in Louisiana.
Chechar: limpieza de sangre deserves an article of its own!
Hurin is correct that the third photo is of actor Wentworth Miller III. He is a hybrid—but note the WASP-sounding name, which is genuine! A misleading racial cue in his case.
Likewise, Flavia is correct that the third photo is of American actress Shannon Elizabeth. Elizabeth is also a hybrid. (Miller and Elizabeth are the two hybrids among the people shown.) Interestingly, her agents, publicists or studio handlers dropped her real-life surname to come up with her professional name. She is really Shannon Elizabeth Fadal.
This is an example of name deception, most often practiced by Jews. The simple act of dropping the surname meant that some people who would otherwise have noticed will not pick up on the race issue. I suspect this was not her idea. She does not conceal her identity.
Flavia, I found your observation that Shannon Elizabeth “looks a lot like my friend who is half Brit and half Spaniard” helpful. It illustrates the complicated situation we’re in.
It’s also true that northern Europeans (including Nordics) seem more often offended by such discussions than southern Europeans. There are a few southerners who are extremely touchy about such matters, but in general it’s the northerners who have the problem.
It is not my intention to conceal the identities of the people shown. However, I wanted to demonstrate the nature of the problem as I see it. If readers know the names ahead of time and right away look them up, they are often unaware how much this colors their perceptions.
Again, everything depends upon definition. Like Jared Taylor, I use “white” to signify anyone of overwhelmingly European ancestry, no matter where they live (for example, Canada, the US, Australia, South Africa).
Unlike Taylor (but like Wilmot Robertson, Rockwell, and Pierce) I exclude Jews. (And Gypsies.) They are not “white” by my definition, which refers to ancestry and historical peoplehood. My definition likewise excludes non-white immigrants into formerly white lands, and crosses between whites and non-whites (hybrids).
I mean by “Europe” the lands within “Europe’s Continental Boundaries.” https://counter-currents.com/2011/08/europes-continental-boundaries/
My definition of “white” is far from ideal, and will probably be modified over time, but one must begin somewhere. The point is to make it explicit.
Finally, with the exception of Jews, I am willing to work with members of any race friendly to our project, or who have interests parallel to our own, even if only temporarily. That’s Realpolitik. However, such people would not become “white” because of that.
With that as preface, the only white among the people shown is the man in the third photo. Now who in the hell is that? (Hint: Anyone who read last week’s article, No Country for Old Men, will figure it out.) No doubt some already have (like Eric, who was right on several counts).
The gentleman with the pipe and the fashionable lady at the end would be the toughest to identify.
The man with the pipe is Syrian-born Hollywood movie producer (the Halloween series of films) Moustapha Akkad. He and his daughter were killed in Jordan in 2005 by a suicide bomber. They were not the targets of the killer, but simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The chic lady with the chain necklace at the end is actually the same woman seen with her husband in the first photo. I thought they deserved exposure since they are evidently the next in line to have their country knocked over by the world’s scheming gangsters.
Your tax dollars at work!
Sorry, the man in the fourth photo is the white; the man in the third photo is Wentworth Miller.
The creature in picture # 4 is White? Do expound?
Well, you know, it follows from the definition set forth immediately above.
The caveat would be whether Javier Bardem actually is the product of recent admixture, in the Canaries where he was born, or as a result of non-white immigration into Spain (he’s relatively young).
So, it’s based upon the provisional assumption that he’s a full Spaniard in the historical sense. If not, he wouldn’t be white either.
As I mentioned last week, not knowing anything about him when I saw the movie, I assumed he was non-white.
I see what you mean.
What’s the deal with dark looking Northern Europeans such as Sean Connery and Michael Tsarion (Scottish and Irish respectively)? I’ve seen similarly dark Welsh, English, French and German too (couldn’t think of famous examples though) who don’t have immigrant backgrounds.
This photo of Miller might have served you better.
Shannon Elizabeth demonstrates the absolute necessity of miscegenation laws. Not only is she beautiful, but in interviews at least she’s very charming. And if she didn’t mention it the typical White man would have no idea she wasn’t White.
I am ambivalent about this. If someone sees themselves as white, is beautiful, is charming, and MOST IMPORTANTLY does not work to undermine the cause, why is it that we cannot include this person? Do Jews not proudly boast that Scarlett Johanson is Jewish, even though she is only half? Do Blacks not think of Tiger and Obama as one of “their own” even though they are at most 50%? Why can’t we appropriate the good almost whites too? The ones that want to be in the group and can improve it via their aesthetics and work?
Another issue is that one does want to embitter those that don’t fully belong. Why do that when you can have cooperation? Do we really want to ostracize a large group of people because they’re a too dark shade of Sicilian or Southern Spanish or because great grandpa was a mulatto? And where will those people go? Who’s cause will they fight for?
This does not mean that we cannot fully understand and embrace inter-group differences, and also sub racial preferences. But we also cannot act like a bunch of country club assholes….I don’t see what good that would do.
For fun, here are some more WTF are you types.
Kris Humphries: http://www.bff.tv/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Kris-Humphries.jpg
Rosario Dawson: http://bornpowerful.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/rosario_dawson-success-story.jpg
Kristen Kreuk: http://img3.lln.crunchyroll.com/i/spire2/0d155b296d715b1bf098d13d16b59e0e1236314382_full.jpg
Rachel Bilson: http://img1.lln.crunchyroll.com/i/spire3/06212008/3/8/7/9/38795652a1d8c0_full.jpg
Of course, the results aren’t usually as aesthetically pleasing. …but with the exclusion of maybe one- if any of these people wanted to take arms and fight for a better tomorrow, to preserve what is also (partly) their heritage, I’d say welcome to the team.
There really isn’t any doubt about the men you’ve pointed to as examples of racial ambiguity, hard to discern – they are not White.
The racial category of some of the women is more more difficult to discern.
Here’s my idea of non-White:
Boris Becker, with wife Barbara Feltus.
Heidi Klum with husband Seal.
If Whiteness is nothing but being born with a certain kind of blond, blue-eyed modeling looks, then it is nothing but a trivial accident that one generation plus the opportunity to marry out will end.
If Whiteness includes a strongly and persistently felt identity and a commitment to our shared destiny, for better or worse, then it is important.
But Boris and Heidi, along with many others, proved they don’t have that. So they’re radically defective, from the point of view of the kind of Whiteness that might matter.
If every White man looked as much a rugged cave man as Javier Bardem, and every White woman looked a fit match for him, and we all had a determination to carry along together, come what may, that was as rugged as our looks, our future would be secure. (And much valuable variety and beauty would be lost. But it’s being lost anyway.)
If every White person looked as beautiful (and if female as nymph-like) as Jessica Alba, and had her attitude, we’d be done.
Considering that playing “more White than thou” and “sub-racial one-upmanship” games detracts from a common cause for Whites and is thus inconsistent with commitment to a shared destiny, I think that whoever persistently plays them is showing that they are less White than they ought to be.
Looking at these pictures after having been warned to be on my guard, and knowing one answer in advance (Javier Bardem is White), I was usually wrong.
You’ve made your point.
Maybe we need a site or a column to match Jew or Not Jew and similar sites: White or Not White? With numbers ranging from zero to twenty, say, and interpretive ratings like “barely a White”.
When it comes to Hollywood actors, it’s always prudent to regard all of them as non-whites until you have definite proof to the contrary. So many of them are Jews anyway.
When I decide if somebody is a european I look at language, ancestry, culture/religion, phenotype and identity. All the people in the pictures have a entirely or almost entirely european phenotype. You can see some noneuropean feautures in the guy from prison break and maybe a little in Javier Bardem and the syrian president. This means that they to the greater part have european paleolithic origin. So that would make them more or less white, but that doesn’t necessarily make them europeans. Wenthwort Miller are european deemed by language, almost entirely by phenotype and maybe culture/religion. But he is only half european (or slightly more or less) when it comes o ancestry and probally not when it comes to identity. Bashar El-Assad has a mostly european phenotype but has a noneuropean language(arabic), ancestry (alawite syrian arab), culture/religion and identity.
Maybe the question “who is White” should be two questions: “who is unequivocally White?” and “who is White on the whole?”
Someone of entirely European descent would be unequivocally White.
Someone who on the whole seemed White would be, to that extent, a possible occasion of White pride and identification. For example, a sports star who was successful in a mostly Black sport and who was mostly White but boasted some native American (Indian) blood might be an occasion for White parents to teach their children: you can succeed too! For this kind of identification and encouragement, a predominantly White identity is enough.
The blonde blue eyed Nordic must always remain the ideal model for the White Race. It is not necessary for an individual to be one hundred per cent Nordic to qualify as a White. Some Alpine and/or Mediterranian admixture is fine. In my opinion, if a person is more than one eighth negro, amerind, or jew, he doesn’t qualify.
As a statement of personal taste, this is fine. But no good can come of “whiter than thou” attitudes about other Europeans. The idea that Alpine or Mediterranean DNA is somehow “off white” is absurd and offensive. All the peoples on the margins of Europe seem to have some non-European DNA in their populations, (although not necessarily homogeneously distributed throughout their populations). And that includes the Nordic peoples.
Andrew Hamilton’s articles are very interesting, as they explore the limits and boundaries of the in-group – in our case, the in-group is white people. (“White” is an old term, basically invented by Europeans when they came into contact with alien races. In other words, “white” isn’t an accurate ethnic marker, as much as a generalized term for our in-group. Basically, whites are those we identify as our own.)
Especially this article raises an interesting question – if some who is designated “white” blends in among non-whites and looks nearly the same as them, is he still white? Of course, he may be white in the social sense and part of a white culture (and this idea of “cultural whiteness” deserves a discussion of its own), but it’s first and foremost a question of race. You are biologically white, or you’re not. This is why I’m reluctant to accept certain racially dubious people who are officially designated “white” into my in-group.
And no, I’m not saying that “only pale Nordics count as real whites” – in everyday life, I tend to think of all Germanics, Celtics, and northern Slavs as unambiguously white. It’s at the southern fringes of Europe that it gets more “racially unclear”, and I almost feel a William Pierce-ish frustration. I generally judge on a case-by-case basis if this or that South European is acceptably white for me. (To use an example: it’s ridiculous to claim Italy is a non-white nation, but I would also be dishonest if I said that all Italians are white enough to marry into my family.)
“Do Jews not proudly boast that Scarlett Johanson is Jewish, even though she is only half? Do Blacks not think of Tiger and Obama as one of “their own” even though they are at most 50%? Why can’t we appropriate the good almost whites too?”
Ah, this is a good question. I suppose the answer is that whites are an exclusive race by nature. On the other hand, blacks are inclusive and eagerly accept half-blacks as their own. Almost all mulattos tend to identify as “black”, if they don’t have a separate group, because it’s an evolutionary plus for blacks to have them. On the contrary, more evolved races tend to employ the “one-drop rule” to preserve their own genetic integrity at all costs. Traditionally, Europeans and East Asians cast out those who are slightly impure. “If you’re part black, you’re out”. Of course, I don’t think many of us are literally adhering to this ultra-strict rule, but the purist mindset comes naturally to whites.
Whether this is conductive in our political struggle, where we need to gain as much support as possible, is another question entirely. I suppose it’s not. But then again, all of my post was theoretical in nature. And isn’t most internet discussion in the realm of theory?
Upon further reflection, I have decided to ban all articles and discussions that smack of subracial chauvinism and invidious “whiter than thou” distinctions.
I see why “whiter than thou” discussions aren’t conductive to our real life situation, and I agree that it’s only more divisive. But still, there’s no getting around the fact that some people within the geographical borders of Europe are “whiter” in genotype than others. I never said I’m unwilling to work alongside these people, on the other hand.
That said, I’m completely against the idea of us claiming any half-white celebrity as “white” just to boast about them. Leave this behavior to the blacks.
Eric: “But still, there’s no getting around the fact that some people within the geographical borders of Europe are “whiter” in genotype than others.”
Mass immigration from the third world and especially the Islamic world will do that.
Unless that’s not what you mean?
Eric: “I never said I’m unwilling to work alongside these people, on the other hand.”
It makes a difference though, in cooperating with people, whether we perceive that we have a common interest and a shared fate.
Eric: “That said, I’m completely against the idea of us claiming any half-white celebrity as “white” just to boast about them. Leave this behavior to the blacks.”
And the Jews.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Look! Up in the sky!
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Greg Johnson: “Upon further reflection, I have decided to ban all articles and discussions that smack of subracial chauvinism and invidious “whiter than thou” distinctions.”
I’m not sure if that will ban this comment, but anyway here we go…
Heinrich: “The blonde blue eyed Nordic must always remain the ideal model for the White Race.”
Suppose that (most astonishingly) you met Thor. Yes the Thor, with the hammer. According to your ideas, as a redhead he would not be physically ideal, and it would be incumbent on him always to remember that another physical type is superior to him: more ideal, more Nordic. Would you be willing to press that argument, and if so how? Or would you refrain only out of fear, but know in your heart that you are right and that all non-blondes are less than ideal? Or, on reflection, is there room for different ideal types to co-exist?
Flavia: “I am ambivalent about this. If someone sees themselves as white, is beautiful, is charming, and MOST IMPORTANTLY does not work to undermine the cause, why is it that we cannot include this person? Do Jews not proudly boast that Scarlett Johanson is Jewish, even though she is only half? Do Blacks not think of Tiger and Obama as one of “their own” even though they are at most 50%? Why can’t we appropriate the good almost whites too? The ones that want to be in the group and can improve it via their aesthetics and work?”
Bingo! Identification as White is the key issue that we are ignoring, and the reason we ignore it is that it is so emarrassing and discouraging for pro-Whites to dwell on how few people who are genetically White (whether unequivocally or predominantly) identify as White and are for Whiteness. Especially prominent people.
It would be wise for us to take an attitude parallel to that of the Jews: attitude is part of the package. If you convert to Christianity, you are not Jewish regardless of genetics. And you can convert in, with limited or no Jewish blood.
This is rational from many points of view. One advantage is that it might be a rough test of temperament, which is heritable. Someone with the proper temperament is more likely to want to be part of the collective with other people of the same mental character.
So, what I would like to say is that ratings like “barely a White” only apply to people that don’t identify as White (and that are not “black-balling” themselves by being committed to destruction for Whites), that is people who have no claim to Whiteness but a more or less tangled ancestry. Those who clearly identify as White would all go in the “unequivocally White” box, as though they all had ideal ancestry.
But the embarrassment for this position is how few unequivocally White role models there are in the world now. There would not be nearly as many for White kids to look up to as there are unequivocally Jewish role models for Jewish kids to look up to.
Is Jessica Alba White? To me, physically, in her heritage, she is White. If she looked happy when she was told that she was genetically White, if she owned it, I would say, she is unequivocally White and to hell with anyone who said otherwise.
But she looked crestfallen. She doesn’t want to be White. She prefers to be non-White. She’s striven for a Brown baby and she’s hired a teacher to teach her to be more Hispanic. Apparently Jessica Alba thinks that being White is inferior and not “her”. As I see it, she’s non-White because she doesn’t have a White mind and a White heart.
Here’s a link to all the proof needed that as far as attitude goes, Jessica Alba is not White.
I don’t think it’s too exclusive or snooty or “country club” in attitude to say that people can exclude themselves from Whiteness by their own attitudes, decisions and declarations.
But whiteness doesn’t come with a religion, like Judaism does.
How does a non-white “convert” and become white? He may be treated as white by society because he acts like one, but he’s still very much non-white in my eyes.
Eric: “But whiteness doesn’t come with a religion, like Judaism does.”
So much the worse for the Whites.
But a non-negotiable minimum degree of White racial collectivism is vital – literally vital. There is no future for Whites without that. Survival in the long run is a team game, it’s not an individual game, and we are having that truth proved at our expense every day, as the individualist strategies of individual Whites fail everywhere against the anti-White coalitions organized within a Jewish-American hegemony.
One way or another we must find a will to go on together forever, and the complex of ideas, symbols and customs that supports that collective will must be transcendent. It can’t be the sort of thing that is readily subordinated and set aside as irrelevant by objectively anti-White systems like modern Judeo-Christianity.
Eric: “How does a non-white “convert” and become white? He may be treated as white by society because he acts like one, but he’s still very much non-white in my eyes.”
A lot of Whites are non-White in somebody’s eyes. We are all non-White in the eyes of those who refuse to recognize such a thing as Whiteness in the first place. That’s something we just have to live with.
But you’re right: the topic of “conversion” is potentially an important one.
People do earn recognition as White despite disputable ancestry, and we who believe in the future of Whites will need to pay attention to ways of giving that recognition and making it in some sense authoritative, at least among us.
Alexander Pushkin, son of a Black African page, is my poster child for conversion to Whiteness. He was practically the founder of Russian literature, which is important for the solidarity of the Russian people, he was objectively pro-White in supporting the overthrow of Turkish rule over Greece, he married White and as far as I know subsequent generations washed away his Blackness to an insignificant fraction. He was and is one of us. His destiny, his shared race-soul, to put it mystically, was and is ours.
But not everyone who is White-hearted despite a disputable ancestry can be a Pushkin. That cannot be the standard.
Years ago I used to read a man who called himself ‘Maguire’ at Robert Frenz’s website Faem.com. In one of his articles, the White Nationalist Maguire openly said that he would be open to a society where a limited amount of assimilatable non-whites could be accepted.
I think the idea would be for some Western societies (such as Europe itself) to be totally White and others to be multiracial but fascist and eugenicist. Race purist type white nationalists seem to hate this but I doubt they will get the world they envision of Whites universally hating non-whites and not breeding with them.
A multiracial integralist type society could be closetly White supremacist. Dixie and the Soviet Union where not white ethnostates but in the former case the White Man ran the show and in the latter case a dictatorship did sucessfully Sovietize the non-white populations of Siberia and Central Asia.
Also, a multicultural state, so long as it is not a democracy or a corrupt oligarchy, doesn’t need to be a third world nation. If Mexico’s elite instituted a dictatorship, possessed the means to sterilize the stupid, and then proceeded to give out required “vaccines” such a state could quickly lose its flotsdam and emerge functional.
I am open to a variety of societies. Europe and several other Western countries could be White ethnostates and others could try another approach. This would defineately provide less suffering, less enemies, and would be a better reward for those half-breeds and non-whites who have supported white self-determination and revival then just abandoning them to our enemies.
This comment is late to the equation here, but since I think it is an important consideration to add to this kind of discussion, I do have a problem with treating the mixed White/Black men that Flavia proposed for consideration, as if perhaps we should consider them under the rubric of Whites, because it provides justification for mudsharks – they don’t need anymore pseudo-justications than they already adopt.
Dennis Lawrence comes to mind as a non-white white, so to speak. (He was a mulatto.) A remarkable man, he was.
THEIR GOAL IS GENOCIDE. OURS. WHAT’S YOURS?
Daybreaker has hit upon the issue so many of us fail to address in remotely constructive terms, in spite of the fact that this is the sole website dedicated to the metapolitical project for the Race.
Consider well some of his more substantial comments:
Daybreaker in blockquote:
Group identity and shared destiny; the concept works spectacularly well for all other Races, adn will work no less well for us. It’s the “shared destiny” part – a Destiny well worth the Manifesting, to be sure – that we can not agree upon, and this is of critical importance.
This worked spectacularly well for the handful who followed Brigham Young to the Great Salt Lake Valley, in the pursuit of just this destiny, with just this sense of destiny.
It can work no less well, for us, for the same reasons. Remember, the LDS Church offered an alternative social system – economics, and all – to an economic system that was failing. Alternative social order. It worked for Chosen People of all faiths, providing it was in harmony with their natures, and the transcendent purpose they were fulfilling.
Think what could be done with one thousand Class “A” people, with the formation and development of a Northwest Republic.
“Attitude” is EXACTLY an essential component; let’s cal it Mindset, to keep it one step up from the emotionality some might see implicit in “attitude.”
Focus that Mindset on structured, purposeful Achievement, in the fulfillment of a transcendent purpose. Again, this works for Chosen People, all places, all times.
One way or another we must find a will to go on together forever, and the complex of ideas, symbols and customs that supports that collective will must be transcendent. It can’t be the sort of thing that is readily subordinated and set aside as irrelevant by objectively anti-White systems like modern Judeo-Christianity.
It is that “transcendent complex” – “ideas, symbols, and customs” – that is fundamental to what Yockey referred to as the Vertical Component of Race. Yes, there is Something pulling us forward, and we would do well to pay attention to this, and ask ourselves how we can best live our lives in the service of this.
Harold Covington has mentioned the value of metic citizenship in a White RACIAL Homeland, the Northwest Republic. That is a useful starting point.
What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Edit your comment