Counter-Currents
Keep Families Together on the Other Side of the Border
1,450 words
There’s no surer sign of a scam than an appeal to conscience by a politician – unless it’s one by a journalist.
The “humanitarian crisis” on the Southern border is instructive because the usual suspects aren’t bothering with the standard propaganda. No one is pretending that that the Children’s Crusade will “be good for the economy” or “help America compete in a globalized world.” Instead, we are simply told that in order to be good people, we are obligated to accept a seemingly unlimited number of Hispanic immigrants on the grounds that they “need” it.
Indeed, this is even framed as a punishment – Central America is poor because of American foreign policy, with reporters getting to drag out references to Ronald Reagan, Oscar Romero, and even John Foster Dulles. Having to deal with an influx of helpless Hispanics is just our “chickens coming home to roost.” One would think Central Americans would be insulted. But they know their place.
It would be unimaginable for a white migrants, however poor, to brag about using their existence as a tool to drag down a host country, or exploiting their own children as a moral weapon precisely because of their helplessness. This must be more of those “family values” south of the Rio Grande that George W. Bush loved so much. Yet it’s not just liberal reporters or Reconquista ideologues pushing this. Even a “senior representative” of the Honduran President vowed, “As long as [U.S.] immigration reform is not approved, the exodus of children to the United States will continue.”
It is a strange kind of patriotism they practice in Central America, where pride is expressed by fleeing the country and enemies are punished by sending them your own people. And how giving more people legal status would somehow halt the influx was left unclear.
Of course, hypocrisy is a major part of this. Nancy Pelosi pried herself away from Botox long enough to announce, “We are all Americans–North and South in this hemisphere,” a major step forward in the forthcoming linguistic campaign for force citizens of the United States to relinquish the name “Americans.” She also added that she wished she could “take them all home,” though needless to say there will be no anchor babiespopulating her estates any more than there are union workers in her vineyards. Nor does the billionaires’ consortium of Adelson, Bloomberg, or Gates seem likely to trouble themselves about the fate of the “children.”
But that doesn’t mean that the problem is simply limited to limousine liberals. The first stage of the “children” were welcomed by hysterical white liberal women, always eager to moral preen with their beloved non-white pets. There are inquiries from around the country from people who want to adopt the “children.” Although the conservative media has revealed that this surge was largely planned, most conservative leaders have accepted the frame that this is a “humanitarian crisis” and that Obama is wrong precisely because he is endangering the precious “children.” Even when there are timid mutterings that Obama should enforce the law, they are prefaced by a monologue about how important it is to take care of the poor dears.
Needless to say, many of the children are teenagers or much older. Some are well over 30 – and trying to be let into American high schools. MS-13 is already using the processing center as a recruitment and coordination hub. Instead of “fleeing” gang violence, the planned influx of refugees is spreading it. Even those who are minors are absorbing resources and spreading diseases, one of which has already incapacitated a Border Patrol agent, who will suffer the effects for the rest of his life.
Oddly enough, we aren’t seeing much in the way of cute pictures of bambinos y bambinas clutching teddy bears and American flags. This is probably because the truth is far less photogenic than the propaganda. After all, even Congressmen trying to see what is going on are being turned away. The American towns who are being forced to deal with the illegals are not even receiving the courtesy of a notification. The “Intolerable Acts” that prompted colonial Bostonians to start the American Revolution have nothing on the President’s actions — but Sam Adams didn’t have to compete with Xbox One.
What President Obama, Eric Holder, and all the rest of the ruling clique are doing is simply pushing on an open door. To speak of “law” when the President casually ignores the ones he doesn’t like is to proves oneself irrelevant.
The critical issue is moral. Americans lack the vocabulary to say why it is morally permissible to limit the people who are let into the United States of America for any reason whatsoever. The fact that it is mostly (but not solely) white people leading protests against the influx is taken as prima facie evidence that the invasion is good.
White advocates fondly hope that there will be some catalyst that will force whites en masse to “wake up” and confront the truth of their own dispossession. The truth is that many whites know they are being dispossessed, support it, and will fight against those who wish to save them. White victims of crime are eager to “forgive” their indifferent perpetrators. The parents of those murdered often seem angrier at white advocates promoting a story than nonwhites who butchered family members. The Amy Biehl Foundation exists, and will continue to exist for some time to come.
Part of this is pathological altruism, a bona fide mental disorder in its own right. And part of it is Christianity – though it is revealing that Christianity apparently a valid moral consideration when it comes to immigration, but not with abortion, sex, or gender roles. The greater problem behind all of it is a universal moral imperative which holds that someone’s suffering, anywhere in the world, constitutes a claim on us. This now has a racial element as whites – all whites—are held to be in a privileged position and responsible for both the suffering and the salvation of the nonwhite world.
There are easy rebuttals to this. The only thing we can do with the “suffering” of the “children” is share it by admitting them. Their own corrupt leaders (either in the state or in gangs) are simply exporting their problems in order to seek domestic advantage. And Obama’s talk about ceasing deportations is what’s leading to the deaths of children, not white American protesters.
But ultimately, morality isn’t about them. It’s about us. And what is happening throughout the Western world is one giant piece of performance art constituting a reductio ad absurdum that our moral code is a scam. Luis Gutierrez and Nancy Pelosi are making no sacrifices. It’s only the useful idiots of Christian America who are being condemned by their own sense of decency, what Ayn Rand called the “Sanction of the Victim.”
They will receive no gratitude for their charity – only more fury, as shown by the likes of Gutierrez, José Antonio Vargas, or the innumerable others who spend their lives taking revenge on a society that permitted them to enter. From the banlieues of Paris to the barrios of the American Southwest, the nonwhite masses seethe at the Europeans and their descendants who have built a world with wonders they could never achieve over millennia. And yet whites will continue to blame themselves, even though we are hated not for what we do, but for what we are.
Let us be clear, as the President would say. We owe these people nothing. The American government has a duty to its own citizens and no one else. And if the government has decided to abandon that duty, then the European-Americans who created, built, and sustain this country only owe concern and allegiance to our own people. Those who wish to abandon us in the name of universal moralism and egalitarianism are free to do so, but they may find their new pets rather angry at their decades of patronizing.
Yet the fundamental challenge is still before us. Whatever reasoning people can develop from the Bible, philosophy, or just common sense, most people would concede that moral idealism is on the other side and what we offer is practicality. It remains to develop a systematic moral philosophy that can speak to issues like this and be both emotionally compelling and logically defensible. Otherwise, we will continue to be held hostage by moral blackmail. If a moral code demands we must destroy ourselves, then it is that that code which needs to be destroyed – not us.
8 comments
Great article.
Like William Pierce said, the supreme morality is survival.
The more I realize how utterly hypocritical and dysfunctional Christian/Western morality is the more I actually believe that morality is indeed a social construct.
The problem is that it’s a Jewish social construct, as opposed to an Aryan social construct.
Morality is like a muscle, it’s something that must be constantly trained and developed. It’s not something we want Jews to dictate to us. This lazy mentality we have that morality is something spontaneous and set in stone makes us morally obese, to the point that we can’t even use morality to ensure our own survival.
We’d rather die like cowards that fashion our own moral code.
Inverting Western/Christian morality would be a good starting point for us.
I don’t think it’s necessary or desirable to use the inversion of Western/Christian morality as the starting point for a revaluation of values. That would make us willing accomplices to the straw man argument forwarded by Christians and mainstream conservatives that pagan Europe as such was irredeemably cruel and licentious etc. This is an easy trap to fall into (and it is indeed a trap.) To define our values as the inversion of Western/Christian morality is to subscribe to the same dualistic/manichaean worldview that divides all actions into “good” vs “evil” (or “strong” vs. “weak” or whatever other binary concepts might be employed in the inversion of Western/Christian morality.)
I think the problem with western/Christian morality is twofold:
1.) The division of all actions into good vs. evil doesn’t reflect the nuance and complexity of worldly human life. While a binary division between order and chaos at the level of metaphysics is logically valid, theoretically useful, and quite possibly true and real, to say nothing of its longstanding existence as a fundamental Indo-European concept, it has become patently obvious that the rigid application of good vs. evil to human affairs has great potential for abuse especially when entire groups of people are collectively identified as “good” or “evil”. As Mr Hood pointed out at the end of the day these terms are nothing more than weapons used to dehumanize one’s enemies and the present immigration crisis is one among many reductiones ad absurdum of this good vs. evil dichotomy. It is closely analogous to the defense mechanisms of “projection” and “splitting” used by those suffering from narcissistic personality disorder to absolve themselves of guilt and shame and remove the burden of empathy for one’s adversaries (be they family members with whom one disagrees or mortal enemies).
The solution here is not to strive to be the opposite of “good” as defined by the system but to reject this faulty construct entirely and act from the standpoint of “virtus” and “honos” and other “Aryan” values.
2.) The ten commandments have effectively shifted the focus of awareness away from the quality of one’s inner state and placed it on the most exterior aspects of one’s being. The legalistic quality of biblical morality allows great leeway to those who are adept at deceiving themselves and others by going through the motions and keeping up appearances while neglecting introspection and honesty with oneself. Hence the seemingly exponential increase in sanctimonius hypocrisy, moral bullying, and overabundance of passive aggressive manipulative behavior showed by our fellow white Gutmenschen.
Again the solution to this moral bankruptcy is not to create a moral code that commands opposite behaviors but to act from a mindset that transcends this pitiful list of “no no”s that amounts to nothing but a system to be gamed by devious manipulators in order to hamstring their opponents. An Aryan fights for truth and order with honor and integrity. It’s that simple. Nothing more is needed. No commandments, only self-respect and good will.
The average white man sees race in terms of moral philosophy. Since facts enter his one ear and exits the other there is need for a counter-argument. For most whites integrity and honor are about faithful adherence to the code. There is nothing “idealistic” about this code, however. Ignoring reality and redefining the stranger in one’s home as kin, elevating him above one’s family, and inviting more strangers to enter under the guise of altruism is betrayal.
“For most whites integrity and honor are about faithful adherence to the code.” Correct me if I’m wrong but I take this to mean that for most whites integrity and honor are about faithful adherence to the moral code promoted by our current rulers; i.e. cultural Marxism/ secularized Christianity or whatever you wish to call it. If so I think that although it is imperative to promote traditional Aryan virtues and a love for one’s folk and European civilization as a whole by whatever means we have at our disposal, we have to resign ourselves to the fact that a great many of our fellow whites, perhaps the majority will never “get it” no matter how hard we try to get them to see the light. It never ceases to amaze me how many people are truly indifferent to what is happening or who find some way to convince themselves that it is morally indefensible or hopeless. I think this is due in large part to the fact that white men now look down upon any particularism (other than perhaps the nebulous idea of the “nation” as it is currently forumulated) as atavistic and any sense of warrior spirit (outside of confines of the military industrial complex) as childish. Such men are incapable of being woken up and we shouldn’t waste our time with them.
I apologize for my lack of clarity. I should have stated “faithful adherence to one of two moral rules, and ALL that may be derived from them” (including racial Marxism):
1. “Do to him as you would have him do to you (unless you are undeserving or want to harm yourself).”
2. “Do to him as he would do for himself (unless he is undeserving or wants to harm himself).”
The first rule is seemingly about simple reciprocity between equals (individuals or groups).
1. “Live and let live.”
2. “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
3. “Forgive so that you are forgiven.”
4. “Don’t judge so that you are not judged.”
The second rule is seemingly about elevating others above oneself.
1. “Die so that he might live.”
2. “Love your neighbor more than yourself.”
3. “Forgive, but do not ask for forgiveness.”
4. “Judge not but be judged.”
Note that the second rule is amenable to what some call, “competitive altruism.”
By “seemingly” I mean as the rules appear to the average person in a superficial sense – that is, without thought. The reality is both rules (and their derivatives) are manipulated by assholes (god wannabes) seeking dominance over others. Both appeal to pure reason which is (for reasons I don’t quite understand) elevated above the practical reason derived from sensory experience.
I think r/K selection theory is amenable to moral philosophy, but I clearly haven’t the time, skill, or aptitude for it.
I see. Thanks for the clarification.
The fact that the golden rule and its derivatives such as pathological altruism trump all considerations of loyalty to kin I’m afraid doesn’t bode well for the prospect of Euro-Americans taking their own side (unless perhaps they are faced with violent persecution, which is, as we all know, why it’s a soft genocide thus far anyway.). Europeans especially northern Europeans suffer from the same spiritual affliction, but among them it is still counterbalanced to a far greater extent by a more intact culture, customs, and the palpable, undeniable reality of identity evidenced by the general environment of centuries old architecture etc. They won’t require as much propagandizing as Americans because it’s self evident to most of them who’s a Frenchman or a Hollander and who’s not. I hate to be the pessimist so often but I hope all of us consider this deeply.
There’s a public relations concept called the “Bandwagon Effect.” The idea is that if you present an issue as inevitable, and as something that everyone is supporting, most people will line up to get behind it. This is so no matter how absurd the issue might be. People want to be on the side of the winner. This holds true in advertising, in elections, and certainly in information warfare. Look at how a Paris Hilton can become a cultural icon simply for being a cultural icon.
Consider the mass migration issue. Consider how much of the left has jumped on this bandwagon. 15 years ago, the left was organizing against globalization. Yet the left today is organizing in favor of a globalized work force. Leftists may dress this up in ideological folderol about an “international working class” or whatever, but the reality seems to be that by getting behind mass migration, they can believe they are on the winning side (even as transnational corporations consolidate their power and first world middle classes sink).
Mainstream conservatives can gush about “compassion” or third worlders wanting to “become Americans,” ghee whiz. Liberals, as usual, get to grovel before even more “people of color.” Hear the drumbeat, feel the cadence, march behind the bandwagon!
It strikes me that mass migration is no more inevitable than any other issue these decadent days. The current US system has no problem enforcing the law against large number of Americans when it suits the powers-that-be.
Look at the War on Drugs. The full power of the state has been used to arrest literally millions of people over the past several decades, to drug test entire workforces, to seize assets under forfeiture laws, to shut down medical cannabis clinics, to order SWAT teams to kick in doors in the small hours of the nights, and to march small armies into the Andes. We can also see the massive anti-drug infowar campaign put into place via D.A.R.E., Partnership for a Drug Free America, et alia.
Now imagine that same effort against illegal immigration. Heck, a fraction of the effort used in enforcing drug laws would secure the borders in 48 hours!
Similarly, look at the repressive measures which various European governments have employed against dissent on the far right: the censorship, the arrests, the media blitzs, and, etc. Why can’t all that effort be used to enforce immigration law? Well, we know why. It’s a post graduate course in Anrcho-Tyranny 501. Crack down on citizens; ignore criminal activity from the outgroups. When the show is over, hostile elites have enhanced their power.
All this points out a tactic. There may be just too much pessimism on the side of the alternative right. But look at the reality. The other side (hostile elites, multicult, whatever we care to call the system) is so corrupt, so based on falsehood, so contrary to any kind of sane civilizational order, that it can not last. It’s a facade. Just look at how the EU has been flummoxed by Putin over the Crimea, or the Obama administration can’t even deal with a few thousand rebels in Iraq. Come to think of it, neither the EU nor the US government can deal with the growing third world enclaves in their own inner cities as the growth of gangbanging and car burning shows. It’s like some period in the Roman Empire where dissolute emperors have let everything go hang–and all it took was one good general, a Septimus Severus, to march into Rome to set things straight.
WN (and the rest of the alternative right) must show the triumph of the cause to be inevitable. Go on the offensive with infowar. Hit home the message, and hit it hard. It’s what all the cool kids will be doing!
more cheap labor for the Republicrats to sweat, more welfare/crime/drug class for the Demicans to hook on gubmint and vote collectivist, and more brown orcs for the Jews to aim at the Whites. As the Race War intensifies – already on in the urban jungles, where spics and ‘groids have at each other on a daily basis – sufficient Whites will eventually pitch in against both…as well as against the FSA’s Jew officers. Most Whites – the cosmic kind referenced in this excellent piece – will also not survive the coming Disturbance. But there will be a saving remnant.
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.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment