Print this post Print this post

The Old Order vs. the New Right

Alan Beiler, Black Amish Fugitive920 words

By a quirk of fate, a Black toddler ended up being raised in an Amish community in Lancaster County. A couple decades later, he’s a fugitive leading the cops on high-speed chases, a thorn of deviance in the side of the Amish community’s pathetic Amish Mafia underbelly.  While this stereotypical outcome is even surprising for my White Nationalist self, there’s nothing surprising in the aggregate about the transformation that a community experiences when its innate essence is undermined by integration.

There’s nothing surprising to somebody who’s worldly, anyway. If you’ve diligently purged yourself of Modernity, so diligently that you’ve refused to educate yourself past middle school, refused to exploit technological innovations, and refused to learn about the world beyond your rural farm community, a lot of stuff will come as a surprise to you. As much respect as I have for the Amish folks I grew up around, and as much respect as I have for a hardy tribe of White people in America’s heartland making tremendous sacrifices on behalf of their community and faith . . . they’re doomed.

You can run from Modernity, but you can’t hide. You’ll buy yourself some time, you’ll make yourself a less obvious or appealing target, and you’ll feel like you’re winning for a while. But sooner or later, decadence must be directly confronted. The only way out of Modernity is through it. The difference between retreating from liberalism and defeating it is the cardinal difference between Old Right and New Right.

It’s the difference between an innocent church lady who’s scandalized by and blindly opposed to gays (the decadent identity group du jour) and a person who understands homosexuality in its complete biological, epidemiological, and sociological context, arriving at a response to it which is both principled and successful in its defense of traditional lifestyles, common decency, and public health.

The Amish and most traditionalist ideologues are in the habit of imagining a dichotomy between worldly knowledge and traditional wisdom. This abstract error’s consequences include an outright denial of scientific facts in the form of young earth Creationism, a refusal to leverage technology in defense of traditional lifestyles, antiquarianism, and naive Orientalism. Most insidious, and perhaps most common, is the notion that Tradition belongs in the past rather than the present or the future.

Who typify this misconception more than the Amish? They’re truly backward–historically, politically, socially, and intellectually backward. Their only way forward is into the abyss. One generation’s Amish, the next is Mennonite, and then the next generation are globalists marrying African men or lesbian feminists. They’re utterly defenseless, because to cling to traditional wisdom and discipline without employing knowledge and worldliness in your defense is hopeless. The Amish strategy of evading Modernity is the strategy of the dodo, and it will share the same fate.

Mammy: The First Paleoconservative

Mammy: The First Paleoconservative

The Old Right can only stammer “It ain’t fittin’! It just ain’t fittin!” when confronted with the Left’s latest step in the spiraling descent, because they’ve forgotten the metaphysical foundations of their worldview. These paleoconservatives, religious fundamentalists, antiquarians, and Amish who comprise the last dying enclaves of American conservatism may be closer to the bygone avatars of Tradition, but we’re closer to the next avatar of Tradition.

With each passing election cycle, decade, and generation, America’s paleocons, religious fundamentalists, and antiquarians become less numerous and less relevant. The Amish remain demographically ascendant, but for how long? A handful of mild legal persecutions, demands for more transparency in the wake of trumped up or fabricated allegations of abuse, and efforts at “outreach” will bring the community to its knees at the exact moment the oligarchs decide to harass them rather than humor them.

We can expect America’s last surviving traditional communities to play an even more prominent role in the future as the vanguard of decadence and Modernity. They’ll do so because the final stages of decadence result in a necrosis of the will, selfishness, and lack of discipline which renders one useless for any project. The craven contemporary hipster may embrace diversity in principle, but he’s no match for the Christian fundamentalist whose faith has been transformed into a hideous caricature of its former self. The hipster can only mumble some cliches about human equality and social justice while hypocritically avoiding it at every turn, but the fundamentalist patriarchs and Mormon housewives of the world are applying the fumes of tradition in the service of our murderous Christian Zionist foreign policy, grabbing up AIDS orphans from the darkest corners of the Earth, and suffering through the grave sacrifices and hardships necessary to make alienated global humanism look like it’s working.

We contemporary White Americans who are discovering Radical Traditionalism are in many ways every bit as alienated from Tradition and devoid of authentic spirituality as the indulgent hipsters who surround us. But if we can fully internalize these principles, they’ll strengthen us, sustain us, and propel us to victory. Our worldliness, our familiarity with the modern world, and our technology aren’t vices to purge ourselves of, they’re the very weapons we need to defeat the enemy. If we leverage them to their full potential, we’ll achieve a future so idyllic that future generations could have the opportunity to grow up in an Amish-style Garden of Eden innocent of the knowledge of good and evil.

And it will be our obligation to deprive them of that opportunity for as long as possible, delaying the time when this whole miserable cycle must by necessity play itself out all over again.


This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. Posted December 28, 2012 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    Anamnesis means remembrance or reminiscence, the collection and recollection of what has been lost, forgotten, or effaced. It is therefore a matter of the very old, of what has made us who we are. But anamnesis is also a work that transforms its subject, always producing something new.

    To recollect the old, to produce the new: that is the task of anamnesis.

  2. Jaego
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    You believe this in the Cycles then? How do you reconcile that with Orthodox Christianity? Or do you even try? Martin Lings said that Humanity seemed to have been given narrower and narrower revelations as time went by. How does a man who knows more live with a clear conscience with fellow believers who know so much less? Schuon said Christ knew that we were living in Kali Yuga and that a man need not feel guilt for knowing more. But then the question of hiding comes up. After all, the Priests and the orthodox Orthodox aren’t going to accept any such doctrines or those who hold them.

    Yes, it was an interesting show. All Cultures need warriors – even pacifists. Amazing at the level of parasitism now extant: Chinese making fake Amish goods? So specific. They can’t even let something so small live in peace. Their lands are very rich, will they be allowed to keep them? Alternately, if the Collapse was quick, they’d become Serfs of the Black Gangs of Phillidelphia. The Hutterites live on the High Plains in remote areas – this might save them for a long time or permanently if Collapse comes quickly.

    Technology can be a good tool but much of it is addictive and thus degenerative. Children have to be protected against so much of it. And this would be true even if all the shows were run by us and there was no porn on the net. The very mediums themselves can stunt the brain if used too early or often.

    • Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:44 am | Permalink


      You believe this in the Cycles then? How do you reconcile that with Orthodox Christianity? Or do you even try?

      I was describing a specific cyclical historical phenomenon, not implying an endorsement of any particular Traditionalist school which may or may not be compatible with Orthodoxy. If you could be a bit more specific in your implication that I’m contradicting myself, I’ll do what I can to resolve it.

      Technology can be a good tool but much of it is addictive and thus degenerative. Children have to be protected against so much of it.

      It’s my opinion that conservatives in America do way too much to protect their children. Is it any surprise that so many fundamentalist parents lose their children when all of the arguments for and temptations of the modern world are laid on them all at once in young adulthood? It all comes back to the flight instinct, the bunker mentality, at the heart of the Old Right.

      Raise them to be capable of focusing, prioritizing, and succeeding in the heart of this whirlwind of temptations and distractions. Children are remarkably resilient, adaptive, and open to parental instruction…but we never give them the chance. We hide them from what they’re supposed to be learning about while we have control, and aren’t there to contextualize and critique it when we can no longer hide them from the modern world and no longer have control.

      The Hutterites live on the High Plains in remote areas – this might save them for a long time or permanently if Collapse comes quickly.

      If The Collapse is timed just right, evasion may indeed work out. As for me, I’m going to continue trying to accelerate, exacerbate, and hopefully even help instigate it.

      • Jaego
        Posted December 29, 2012 at 2:08 am | Permalink

        Oh I wasn’t trying to offend or catch you in a contradiction. I though you might be in the same boat as me and was wondering how you dealt with it. I believe in the Perennial Tradition as put forth by Guenon and Schuon, but the living Traditions as they are now mostly emphasize bhakti or devotion as opposed to Wisdom or Knowledge. I feel the Truth of Orthodoxy, but do they really know ALL of Christ? The One who said to be as wise as serpents? So I stay away rather than be with people who would find me alien if they knew my mind.

        Lord Northbourne suggested that for most men, the answer is to be found in their own culture. But Orthodoxy seems a bridge too far to me. I better stay with the Catholicism of my birth – utterly corrupted as it is. The Eucharest is still imbued with the Real Presence and the Prophecies predict a miraculous revival. No one wants to know what I think or feel so there is no problem. Orthodoxy, because it alive and real, is. Besides the real Spiritual Community, some have suggested (like Huntington) that Orthodoxy is a separate culture from the West, one far more group oriented. Not possible to hide my mind without alot of evasion and subsequent guilt – all of which is alien to the ethos and wouldn’t work anyway with the best people.

      • Daniel
        Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

        It’s my opinion that conservatives in America do way too much to protect their children. Is it any surprise that so many fundamentalist parents lose their children when all of the arguments for and temptations of the modern world are laid on them all at once in young adulthood? It all comes back to the flight instinct, the bunker mentality, at the heart of the Old Right.

        I was raised as a fundamentalist, evangelical Protestant, but was fortunately not sheltered from the world. Getting same small tastes of the world as a youth allows one to see its follies and shallowness, rather than being fulling exposed at some later point and being overtaken by it. Also, reading Aristotle, Plato, and Nietzsche as a youth, even if only gaining a superficial grasp, does immunize one much against modernity in one’s mind and soul.

  3. David
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:55 am | Permalink

    Is that opening tale about a black kid raised by Amish becoming a criminal real? If so, can you share a link, please?

    How heartbreaking, though. The Amish represent – in both fact and ideal – the essence of European Christian kindness, and I agree that watching them get contaminated, oh so slowly, by modernity is inevitable. But no less heartbreaking.

    Jaego made a comment about how technology isn’t the elixir the article suggests, pointing out its addictive qualities. I agree wholeheartedly. Watching some young men I know fry their brains with information overload by TAP-TAP-TAPPING away at their iPhones, unable to even watch a movie for two minutes without the compulsion taking them back to their iPhones, is an example of this. This is called “novelty addiction”. It’s very real, and very harmful to the prefrontal cortex. And Jaego’s referencing of internet porn being the most acute form of novelty addiction is accurate. I heartily encourage EVERYBODY to check out the great TED Talk, ‘The Great Porn Experiment’. 16 minutes. Then send it to every white man you know. (Or, really, any man, period. It’s that disturbing.)

  4. Posted December 29, 2012 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    I came to this same conclusion a long time ago but have never expressed it as well as Matt has with this article.

    In practice, you want to be raising your kids to be modern hipsters who pretends to go along with diversity but makes White life choices, To do this, we should basically imitate the Asian academic and mercantile striving per Amy Chu’a Tiger Mom or this tumblr:

    That is shorthand how to raise healthy white kids in the modern world. As far as a philosophy of life, I like Nietzsche and Machiavellli. The Asian parents tell the kids the world is a hard place and if they don’t come out on top, they’ll be abused slaves. This is a good lesson to teach White kids.

    What white parents have been teaching their kids is “turn the other cheek” and “the meek shall inherit the earth” and “racism is our original sin.” Liberalism was very carefully designed to mimic Christian morality.

    What we have to teach our kids is, “Fight back,” “life is both an individual and group evolutionary struggle,” and “the meek shall inherit the bottom of my boot,” and “original sin is a lie that the weak invented to undermine the strong.”

    I guess you could say that modern White parenting is ideally a combination of Ragnar Redbeard and Amy Chu’a.

    • Robert Pinkerton
      Posted December 29, 2012 at 11:52 am | Permalink

      Kievsky, you said it better than I could do. Do you teach your children to adapt to, and win through, the world as it actually is? Or do you “adapt” them to the world as you would like it to be, other than as it actually is, in the hope that, when they grow up, they will change the world for the “better(?)”? Real? or “ideal”? (“Ideal” by what standard? Good by what standard?)

      • Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

        @Robert Pinkerton,

        I pretty much cribbed the Asian parenting worldview — the world is a tough place, either learn Calculus or work at Burger King. There’s no in between, there’s no comfortable middle, you cannot afford to have too much fun and be an American slacker. You can have some fun, but not as much as these future retail worker kids. The Asians are studying until 2am, you can study until midnight.

        As far as race and such, when my daughter was little I would take her to the black hair care aisle in the drug store and show her how black people want to make themselves look white, and how the black models in the hair care aisle were as white looking as possible, and look at Beyoncé and Jennifer Lopez trying to ape (LOL) Marilyn Monroe’s look.

        So being White and staying White makes life aesthetically better — you don’t have to spend your life trying to look White when you are already White.

        Also, I taught her that the poor deserve to be poor because they are lazy, and in fact they aren’t poor enough, they should not be given any welfare so they actually have to work in order to eat. And people who are not going to do a good job raising children should be sterilized; liberal welfare policies that pay girls to be single moms are child abuse. I don’t need to just tell her that, she sees it with her own eyes.

        We barely need to “teach”her anything — the world teaches her and we just confirm the evidence of her own eyes.

      • David
        Posted December 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, the worldview of advocating sociopathic worldviews is all well and good, until the white kid strutting around the mall with a smirk bumps shoulders into a black kid, challenges him to a fight, and gets the living shit kicked out of him, and his girlfriend gazes at the victorious black dude with awe (undoubtedly thinking, “I want a black baby.”)

        Happened outside of a mall here in my area just a few years ago.

        Telling a young white girl to disdain poor and suffering is unnatural, morally repulsive, and ineffective. I say “ineffective” because, make no mistake: a white girl raised by a phony tough white dude posing as tough (rather than a truly virile and productive man) will eventually be running off with Andre, Tyrone, and Denard to escape your brand of fake tough guy bullcrap.

        We white people have empathy and goodness in our genes. This is why we took to Christianity and have spread it. This empathetic nature in us is something to be managed, not ignored.

        Again: teaching a young white girl to disdain poor people is unnatural sociopathy to the point of child abuse.

      • Sandy
        Posted December 29, 2012 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

        David. Please! So a White kid gets beaten by a black kid at the mall! Big deal. Fighting is like anything else and has to be learned. We are virtually starting from scratch but we will triumph . While the adolescents are learning how to scrap us older guys can build a support system to back them up and as Fourmyle of Ceres would say you can either piss on the kid or send a couple of bucks to Counter-Currents and help get this show on the road.
        There is also a moving sale going on at the moment. Buy a couple of items, make sure they have Counter-Currents address on them and quietly drop them off at a charity shop for resale. Spread the word. Even if us old guys are too old to fight we can support the kids that do. And my apologies if I sound grumpy but I’m not my usual sweet self today.

  5. WG
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

    Excellent piece. What you’re advocating, I think, is a form of the Left Hand Path.

  6. rhondda
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    David, thank you for your comment. There is a place for compassion. I do not mean an agenda of do gooderism to get a place in heaven. There are poor people who have chosen to be poor rather than all out aggressive capitalists exploiting others for their own gain. We all have to make moral choices and we are given those temptations. In past times, even the great artists were dependent upon the generosity of those who saw their talent and chose to support it. You can chose to help raise someone up or you can put the boot to the face.

  7. excalibur
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    Excellent essay.
    While reading the comments I see we often have problem with words. It is so often difficult to find a word which adequately would express ideas.”Modernity” would be such a word.In broader sense modernity means more than prevalent views as propagated by the academia,advertising industry, media,movies etc.
    Modernity means more than technological advancements.Modernity also means science,evolutionary biology,molecular biology etc.Let us take biology as an example. What do we learn, life feeds on life,struggle to survive as individual and as a group.The struggle takes different forms but the end is the same.
    Modernity would also mean to question, to doubt,to open your eyes,to think.

  8. Counter-bitchy
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    So all men and women are capable of equal advancement, if only women would work harder at turning themselves and their children into full blown sociopaths? But then again, who am I to judge such macabre arrogance that makes a mockery of the diversity and sanctity human life.

  9. Posted December 29, 2012 at 9:19 pm | Permalink


    In case you didn’t notice, the sociopaths are the most successful people in society. Not that I am a sociopath. I know what a sociopath is, and I’m not one. However, I don’t coddle lazy losers and scum. I don’t add to the mountain of moral hazard, like the mountain of garbage in Idiocracy.

    According to you, white females should all be suicidal humanitarians, crying over starving African babies and thinking that some punk loser with a bravado act and no real abilities or work ethic is just a hero, a diamond in the rough. LOL. Sometimes — actually quite often, a loser is just a loser.

    There are so many losers who have been enabled by the idea that they are misunderstood or mentally ill and need psych meds (which makes them much less employable) and therefore crazy checks. In the old days they just worked and the world dealt with their mental quirkiness. If they were too bad they went into the insane asylum, but a lot less of them than are collecting crazy checks now, I c an tell you.

    Now the losers are regarded as morally or spiritually superior. Liberalism teaches monstrous lies to children.

    The fact is, the losers deserve to be despised. There is too much coddling of them. Too many girls are raised to regard losers as heroes, and support them in their loser-dumb.Which is why we have Idiocracy 500 years early!

    I raised a White girl to despise losers and cads. You want to invent Hell for me, to tell a story in which I goeth before a Fall. Fat chance, David. LOL.

  10. Posted December 29, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Permalink


    See this:

    People aren’t able to get job skills because of over-regulation of the labor market, minimum wage laws and easy welfare. This is why Mexicans come in and take jobs — because Americans are too coddled and it’s too hard to hire them, and too easy for them to collect welfare.

    Modern Christianity is indistinguishable from liberalism, it glorifies disability, vice and weakness. To the Christian, a retard or a heroin addict in a church pew is superior to an atheist engineer who is managing complexity and contributing to society.

    Peter Schiff may be a Jew, but he’s telling the truth about America’s moral rot. Too many white men are shirking, and letting brownvaders take their place.

    If that’s going to be the case, where we are going to be a highly stratified Latin-American type society, then Whites need to learn master morality. Those who cling to slave morality will be assimilated into the brown morass.

  11. David
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 11:40 pm | Permalink


    Your points seemed to boil down to:

    1) Christians are weak and suck
    2) Sociopaths rule
    3) Women should not be sympathetic to “retards” and the poor.

    I disagree with you wholly on all three points. But this is fine.

    Your sociopathic advocacy fails. One need only watch the UFC and see all the great champions dropping to their knees and praising God, bobbing their heads up and down like Muslims, to see the power of faith and how prevalent it is among the toughest men in the world. (A great recording of champion Anderson Silva praying in private after one of the most miraculous fights in the history of combat is one of many examples.)

    Anyway, I suppose the bottom line, really, is effectiveness. It is unnatural for white people – particularly women – to be sociopaths. Any moral system (or, actually, a lack of one) which tells them to be bullies and disregard the down-and-outs is simply not going to sustain, any more than telling them to not be attracted to the opposite sex. It’s unnatural and, in my opinion, it’s morally disgusting.

    Preferring to allocate one’s charity efforts to one’s own family, friends, and race is both practical and in keeping with any sort of white nationalist mindset. We have finite resources, and we obviously cannot give everything to everybody. But you did not say anything like this. By your sociopathic mindset, white women should run off with, say, black UFC champ Jon Jones (which they do, en masse) because he’s richer than you and can kill you with his bear hands in ten seconds. By your mindset, it is proper for white women to do this.

    And, once again, I like watching phony white tough guy poseurs get humiliated when somebody calls them out on their tough guy act. I’ve seen this many times: macho “frat boys” strutting around until their girlfriends can no longer stand their posing and then they flee to a more “real” black or Mexican because the white guy is so pathetically fake in acting macho.

    It might be your way, and you might think you’re cool. But it’s not the way of the white man, and you’re not cool. Or tough.

    It is sad to see white men embarrass our race like this.

    We have finite charity resources, and it’s clear that the Jews are exploiting our empathetic nature (sending our capital and our time on faraway problems in Africa or wherever). But telling white people to not feel empathy when they see somebody cold and/or starving is evil. It is unnatural, and therefore will fail.

    • Posted December 30, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Permalink


      You absurdly misrepresent my worldview and draw ridiculous conclusions. I’ll give everyone here a quick story from my life.

      I do side work for a landlord with HUD apartments. When a tenant moves out, I go in and clean up after them and get the apartment ready for the next losers. My daughter helps me.

      We see how utterly filthy these people are. We scrub their floors, shampoo the rug if possible, trying not to have to replace it, scrub grease off the walls, find all kinds of disgusting garbage they leave behind.

      My daughter learned to despise these people indeed. Terrible isn’t it? The swaggering brown kid who acts so cool, actually lives like an animal.

      And it’s interesting to see how you imagine me to be “fake tough.” Do you live in the Northeastern United States? Would you like to meet in person at a coffee shop in Putnam, Connecticut? If so, go comment at my blog and leave a valid email address. I’ll be happy to meet you in person, David, and you can decide in person if I am in fact “fake tough.”

      The ball is in your court.

      • David
        Posted December 30, 2012 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

        Alright, MindWeapon. You’re a tough guy. We believe you.

    • Posted December 31, 2012 at 3:02 am | Permalink

      You obviously have only met soft handed gym boys who think they are tough, not real White men who work in blue collar jobs and regularly beat the brown and black boys asses. Because if you did you would know that actually browns and blacks are usually not very good fighters, that is why they often use weapons like knives and guns, but even then they usually are not that good a shot.

      Browns and blacks are only actually dangerous when they are in situations of about 3 to 1 in a fight. This goes for female as well as male browns and blacks, they use false reputation and noise to intimidate Whites more than anything.

  12. Snorri Svenson
    Posted December 30, 2012 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    Some reasonable level of compassion for members of the in-group is normal for most European population groups, possibly for most humans. Normally that compassion didn’t rise to the level of cradle to grave welfare.

    But compassion for members of out-groups was historically much, much more limited. It’s not normal for humans to exhibit the level of compassion towards out-groups that is currently on display in European and American societies.

    We’ll certainly need to return to a more normal (much lower) level of compassion towards out-groups if we intend to survive. Eliminating compassion towards the in-group isn’t desirable or feasible. It may be possible to define certain types as out-group members rather than in-group members however.

    Of course, this is complicated by the fact that women are programmed to surrender themselves to a conquering out-group, since they’re likely to be raped and taken as wives, not killed. Meaning that for women, defecting to the out-group is a viable reproductive strategy, when the in-group is weak. See 2012 U.S. election.

    • Posted December 30, 2012 at 11:14 am | Permalink


      Of course, this is complicated by the fact that women are programmed to surrender themselves to a conquering out-group, since they’re likely to be raped and taken as wives, not killed. Meaning that for women, defecting to the out-group is a viable reproductive strategy, when the in-group is weak.

      The White race in America only retains what little homogeneity in America it has despite the tremendous pressure because of our women, not in spite of them. Women are the ones driving White flight and de facto segregation. Even explicitly racially conscious White males lick their chops at the opportunity to save some money on rent by diving into the most squalid neighborhoods. Our reproduction rates having remained within reach of replacement level and our divorce rates have declined and stabilized are all the result of insidious White female scheming in our favor.

      If you’re expecting them to step out into the lead, or even directly beside us, in the explicit and open struggle for sovereignty and identity, then you don’t get the implied contract. They’re doing their part, and will be there when we need them when our cause reaches a threshold of seriousness and momentum. As long as it continues to have the effect of a hateful hobby with no promise of improving the prospects of safety of themselves and their progeny, then women–with admirable exceptions–will continue being disinterested.

      Suggesting, based on a throwaway evo-psych “just so” story, that our wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters are natural traitors in our midst is scientifically specious, historically baseless, and unchivalrous.

      • David
        Posted December 30, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

        Yes, I agree with Matt’s comment here that white women deserve much credit (and the subsequent dismissal of the claim that voting for Mitt Romney proves one’s racial credibility or whatever. This is true for blacks voting for Obama, it appears, but most whites vote more for economic self-interest than the identity politics that Snorri and blacks are fixated upon.)

        I would also disagree with trendy evolutionary psychology edicts attributing female nurturing to….invading human armies? Huh? If this were the case, then the females wouldn’t be the more nurturing and peaceful sex in virtually all species, as very few other species go to war with each other. More to the point, warfare and battling has had a minimal effect on human evolution until the past several thousand years. In direct contrast to Hollywood movies, early man made his weapon and structured his life around the relentless quest to avoid starvation. Being conquered is, historically, a highly improbable and relatively new occurrence (especially relative to starvation) and the idea that the female half of our species is designed to accept this is just silly in the extreme.

        This pop evolutionary psychology stuff has gotten out of hand in internet discussions. I guess it makes people feel smart or something.

      • Jim Stark
        Posted January 1, 2013 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

        Oh Matt, everyone knows women are born traitors. Hopefully your comment is just a bit of clever propaganda, a la The Declaration of Independence. Women have done more than their fair share in pulling the white man down and participating in the leveling effect. White flight is now an admirable strategy spearheaded by white women? I’ve heard it all.

        I think your point is that, “It could have been a lot worse.” I’ll give white women some credit for that.

        If you keep saying nice and ridiculous things about white women, you’re going to convince me you’re a liberal.

  13. excalibur
    Posted December 30, 2012 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    Who is tough guy ?
    The physically brute, selfish, frivolous who is enjoying cheap crass entertainment, who has no sense of duty and loyalty to his wife, family or his group,race ?
    Or the one who denies self-indulgence,aiming at higher goals ready to endure any harshness , with sense of duty, sense of aesthetic appreciation,sense of justice?
    In tough times who will be ready for sacrifice ?
    I believe that today great efforts have been done to invert the sense of toughness and masculinity.

  14. Snorri Svenson
    Posted December 30, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    Married white women are doing those things you mentioned. And they should be applauded for it.

    But single white women joined with blacks, Hispanics and Asians in 2012, to elect Obama, the provider in chief. Romney took 63% of married white women but only took 44% of single white women.

    Married white women sided with the in-group. But single white women defected, siding with the out-group against the in-group. That’s a fact that needs to be accounted for.

    Feel free to disagree with my interpretation of the reason behind this behaviour. But I don’t think it would be wise to ignore the fact that there is a significant incentive for single white women to defect. For married white women the incentive to defect is significantly lower, since they’re (mostly) already invested in the in-group.

    • Posted December 30, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink


      I have reservations about the implied premise that voting for Mitt Romney is a clean 1:1 proxy for White identity.

      • Sylvanus Carpenter
        Posted December 30, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Permalink

        You’re right, Matt. It’s definitely not a 1:1 proxy. Personally, I know at least one person who, although quite aware of his own White identity and the need to secure European cultural and biological continuity, voted for Obama because Romney was too aligned with corporate capitalism.

      • Posted December 31, 2012 at 3:06 am | Permalink

        BTW I voted for Buckwheat. Why? Because he will cause the most destruction to the US the fastest and I wanted the conservatives who voted for Romney to lose.

      • Lew
        Posted December 31, 2012 at 11:30 am | Permalink

        I voted for Obama myself. I agree it’s not a one-to-one proxy; on the other hand, I don’t think these broad voting patterns are entirely insignificant either. The Republicans are less overtly anti-white. Occasionally, they are a little less anti-white in substance; the Democrats, along with mainstream liberal opinion in general, are aggressively anti-White in both tone and public postures. A vote against Obama and the Democrats for whatever reason is therefore a vote against the more openly anti-white political stream in American politics even if it’s not a vote for white identity. If the typical Republican is a million miles away from WNism, the typical liberal — the kind of person who eats up TPM, HuffPo, DailyKos — is a million light years away. It’s why, I’m sure, Greg Hood sent his memo to Republican men — and by extension the women aligned with them — rather than to white male Obama voters who belong to unions.

        So, I think there is evidence Snorri is right: married and conservative White women are driving whatever few healthy trends exist in the mainstream that women are driving, despite being somewhat superficially aligned with WN on economics, environment, etc. Conservative white women are more likely to be skeptical of feminism, more family oriented and so on. Single white, in contrast, women voted for the more openly anti-white, anti-male path (openly being the key word).

      • Jim Stark
        Posted January 1, 2013 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

        Matt, you called the election. Even though I don’t think these elections are actually fair. In my opinion, George Bush Jr never won an election, and Obama didn’t really win the last one.

        You said that the country will move increasingly towards the Democratic Party in the next 20 years or so. You may be right. That remains to be seen.

        A move away from Republicans is probably a function of White voters figuring out that the Republican Party has been taken over by a bunch of money hungry, psychopathic, religious whack jobs. They seem to be channeling a warped version of puritanism and the Jews fit into that. As a white, you’ll probably get a better deal from a half way normal non-white politician is what most people are probably thinking.

    • Clytemnestra
      Posted January 2, 2013 at 1:50 am | Permalink


      But single white women joined with blacks, Hispanics and Asians in 2012, to elect Obama, the provider in chief. Romney took 63% of married white women but only took 44% of single white women.

      Married white women sided with the in-group. But single white women defected, siding with the out-group against the in-group. That’s a fact that needs to be accounted for.

      What hurt Romney was not that “single women joined with” gays and POC in 2012 to elect Obama but that approximately 14 million eligible White (presumably conservative) voters chose to sit out the election rather than fall for the Republiscam and vote for Romney. Dick Morris will only admit to 7 million abstainers and Rush Limbaugh likes to imply that most of them were disgruntled Ron Paul fanatics.

      But there were reasons why Morris and Karl “the Klown” Rove, the architect of the GOP’s misguided strategy to offer 11 (more like 55) million unregistered Democrats a pathway to citizenship, were so sure that Romney was going to beat Obama. They had counted on disaffected conservatives to hold their nose and vote for “the lesser of two evils.” They never counted on any Whites seeing the White Zionist Plutocrat sock puppet as the greater of the two evils OR 14 million Whites seeing no difference between the two and choosing to sit the elections out.

      Theae Republiscum were clearly counting on these people to fall for their okie-dokie again (translated as campaign to the right during the primary and then break all speed records to go center-left after they win the nomination). Not to the mention the Grand Old Plutocrats were expecting Whites’ traditional racism against POC to cause the White working class to vote against their own interests.

      You DO realize that Romney and Ryan would gut the safety nets set up for the White working class, i.e. unemployment benefits, social security, and Medicare before they would ever consider thinking about pondering the possibility of eliminating all foreign aid (especially to Israel) and wars (especially for Israel) not to mention welfare for all those folks populating the ghettos surrounding Washington DC (Ground Zero if the EBT card stops working)?

      So please stop using the 2012 results as some test of White Nationalism. The best thing that came out of a dismal election that gave us the grim choice of two candidates with only skin-deep differences is that it made most Whites start asking themselves what was good for Whites rather than how they could spite POC. Welcome to WN 2.0.

      • Jaego
        Posted January 2, 2013 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

        Agree. They want to cut Unemployment benefits and food stamps Now – before they economy recovers. And that’s not going to happen until we kick out the illegals and entice some of the Corporations back to America, if that’s even possible. And they want Amnesty before any Wall is built or Everify in place – which will bring even more illegals flooding in.

        You can’t change one big thing without changing everything. Even if by some miracle we got a real conservative in office, it would take years to really make a dent in the damadge that has been done. Decades for a full recovery.

        But none of this is going to happen. As my brother says, we are in the position of the Elves after being defeated by Morgoth in the Simarillion. We can only bide our time and implore the higher powers for strength and wisdom to know when and how to act when the time is right. In the meantime we can study, educate, network, relocate if need be, save money, prep, etc.

  15. Lew
    Posted December 31, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    Blacks who pick fights are cowards. I have never personally witnessed, personally heard about through friends and acquaintances, or read about a fight where the blacks didn’t:

    1) outnumber the person 3 to 1 or more (flash mobs)

    2) pick an older or weaker opponent (Trayvon Martin)

    3) use guns, knives against unarmed people (Knoxville)

    When I was in high school, blacks would gang attack whites all the time. My friend, an overweight guy in glasses who never bothered anyone, was jumped by 5 black athletes sparking a mini-race riot. They knocked his glasses off with the first strike. Afterwards, he told me he couldn’t “see shit but just started swinging at anything black.” Of course, the blacks scattered once the numbers evened up. On another occasion a different friend was jumped by a gang of blacks walking home from school. They gave him a pretty good beating. A few days later, he went back with 3 car loads of friends with baseball bats, found them, and beat the living shit out of them (would probably be charged as a hate crime today). A few years later, after high school, a gang of blacks waylayed two of my friends on the street. They ran off when my friends fought back.

    Of course, this was years ago. Whites weren’t as cowed back then, and we were all from working class or poor backgrounds.

    The most important lesson I learned about blacks was taught to me early on by a black friend (and yes I did have them). He said something to the effect of if you scratch black skin you’ll find a coward every time. It was true then, and I have no doubt it’s true today. This myth of black masculine dominance is just another multi-cult lie.

    • Posted December 31, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

      One thing I really dont get is the basic ability of Whites to touch Blacks let alone have sex with them. I have never been able to touch one, even just to shake their hand, without getting the heeby jeebies. Not sure whether it was because I saw few as a child but being attacked by one in college who tried to rape me unsuccessfully sure didn’t help.

      • Lew
        Posted December 31, 2012 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

        I don’t get it either. Anecdotally, I have observed over the years that white women who get involved with black men invariably fall into these categories: she is the bottom of the barrel genetically, or she is an absolute stunner. The exceptionally attractive white women who couple with black males are obviously making a deliberate, sick statement given they can usually choose from any high status male they want.

  16. rocknrollkiddo
    Posted December 31, 2012 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    If the typical Republican is a million miles away from WNism, the typical liberal — the kind of person who eats up TPM, HuffPo, DailyKos — is a million light years away.

    The kind of people that eat up TPM, DailyKos, etc actually think the Republicans ARE white nationalists.

  17. Counter-bitchy
    Posted December 31, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

    What is this?

    I live in the “Asian Circle,” Asian women do not raise their own children, the Grandparents do. And their children are the most mis-behaved children on the planet.

    • Posted January 2, 2013 at 6:55 am | Permalink


      Well, for whatever reasons, Asians are dominating the graduate schools of science — both Indians and Chinese. The longer the family has been in the US, the worse they do, and recent immigrants do the best. You can see the degenerative effects of life in the Kwa in real time by seeing Asians in different stages of immigration/assimilation/Americanization.

      The Mindweapon WN 2.0 project is to raise White American kids who are not affected by the degenerative effects of American society. We seek secede from the culture and mass media while participating closely in society and it’s power plays in business (both manufacturing and trade), government, and education — education which is both the manufacturing of culture (the arts) and science/technology.

      Our work is cut out for us. Most Americans do not participate in society. 90% of life is just showing up, because most people do not show up. Most people live passively, Americans at least, so it’s very easy to become an achievement outlier, by simply pursuing something diligently.

      Think how diligently people play video games, or follow pro sports. Imagine that kind of time and effort and devotion to Physics, or Business. Even if something you do persistently ends up the wrong thing, you still get the work ethic; you drop it and go on to something else. I dropped violin for mathematics, for example. And it was a very good decision.

      Also, we don’t have to travel to develop International Connections any more. All the communities are here. Live in a major metro area and learn Urdu (Pakistan language) or Hebrew or Russian or Chinese — any of these, and you can use your language skills to get in with these communities and they will likely hook you up with some sort of business, because they can trust some White American not to rip them off. If you speak their language, they treat you like an angel descended to earth. I think part of it is because you speak it with the same accent as the Hollywood actors and actresses.

      Learn a foreign language and infiltrate a foreign community that is doing a lot of business. You’re a one man or one woman spy agency and your mission is whatever you want it to be. But probably making your first million should be your mission. Spycraft does not require million dollar budgets, just a high IQ and a work ethic to study a foreign language.

      Im stuck in a rural area it kind of sucks but I have important work to do here. If I could live in a major metro area I’d learn Spanish, Urdu and Chinese. Those would be my target languages and target cultures.

Post a Comment

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.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace