748 words
My first image is of armed Oathkeepers, acting under the delusion that they are police officers, ejecting an alt-right man from a public park in Houston. The event occurred during a recent protest over supposed leftist threats to a statue of the man who gave the city its name.
The young man had brought signs to express his political opinions, and since the Oathkeepers did not share his political opinions, they felt entitled to prevent him from expressing them. One of the Oathkeepers, an illegal Mexican immigrant, also assaulted the alt-right man, so they added garden-variety thuggery to their other offenses. Coverage of this incident can be found on the Daily Stormer, along with a fine example of Azzmador’s intelligent belligerence.
The leader of this band of Oathkeepers expressed their underlying philosophy: “Racists are not welcome amongst us, because racism is just plain stupid. And if you don’t like that, I don’t give a damn.”
“Amongst us” in his first sentence meant “in this public park.” On the basis of their belief that “racism” is just plain stupid, Oathkeepers have concluded that they are entitled to remove “racists” forcibly from public places, regardless of anything the law might say to the contrary.
Oathkeepers, like all mainstream conservatives, believe that morality requires that racial aggression by non-whites against whites be ignored. A white person becomes a “racist” the moment that he notices and acts upon a pattern of racial aggression directed against him. Oathkeepers accordingly pledge that they will never stand up for their own people, and that they will act physically against any racialist white who does. An assault against a “racist” is therefore appropriate, especially if the Oathkeepers are carrying guns and the “racist” is unarmed.
The preceding is an observation only about Oathkeepers, not about white men in general. One of these armed Oathkeepers was a woman; the rest were men. A smart man was criminally ejected from a public place by a few dozen very dumb men, assisted by a very dumb woman. No one should claim that white men as a class were culpable simply because most Oathkeepers are white men.
My second image is from Weev’s recent article on the Daily Stormer arguing for “white sharia,” a meme which is intended to recall the “extreme patriarchy” once practiced by our Muslim forefathers:
The image carries the following caption: “Skanks having the time of their lives whilst their cities are conquered by foreigners? Never heard of this.”
There are two ideas here: first, the three young women are not wearing enough clothing (thus they are “skanks”), and second, the women are not worried about the non-white invasion of Western nations. They should be thinking serious thoughts about the future of their civilization, but these skanks are having too much fun to bother. They are happy, and we men should resent their happiness.
I don’t feel the tiniest bit of hostility to the three women in the picture. It’s a nice image, in my eyes. Advocates of white sharia evidently see it differently.
We cannot know for certain, but I would guess that Weev (or whoever added the caption) is correct that the women in the picture, like the majority of both white men and white women, don’t think much about the future of Western Civilization. It is also true that women in 2017 often wear fewer clothes than women did in 1917. Whether that is good or bad or irrelevant, these three women didn’t start the trend.
Should we feel hostile to these women? I could easily find an image of three white men who appear not to fret much about the future of their civilization, and I have already provided a screencap of a group of white men who are acting criminally in the cause of their own race-cultural destruction, but are so brain-dead that they don’t know it. Whatever bad apolitical qualities advocates of white sharia want to impute to these three women, they must pale in comparison to the active political stupidity of Oathkeepers.
Modern feminism divides the white race, which is why it is so destructive. It is not too great a simplification to say that second-wave feminism was consciously designed to divide the white race. So it is strange that in the minds of White Nationalists promoting white sharia, a picture of attractive white women is expected to provoke hostility in white men. White Nationalism exists to promote our racial solidarity; foolish talk of “white sharia” clearly does the opposite.
12 comments
Agree completely. The creation of an ethno-state WILL require hard limits to certain freedoms which have come to be seen as rights since the 1960’s.
The movement of people, goods and capital between countries, the tolerance of foreign peoples in our communities and the very concept of who belongs to our nation will all need to be tightened.
But this doesn’t mean we need to wrap our women in niqabs, ban dancing or punish frivolous behaviour with a night in the stocks.
Scantily clad ladies having some vacuous fun may not be exactly furthering our cause, but – as Mr Vinson points out – they’re infinitely preferable to those who seriously wish to silence us. Even if such people are wearing more clothes.
I’d add to this argument that even more dangerous than the brain dead Oathkeepers and similar neo-lib praetorian guard are those who are not brain dead at all, but consciously working to advance the demise of our nations.
.
Well said, Mr. Vinson. The whole “white sharia” meme is getting REALLY old along with some of the other nonsensical jokes floated around trying to trigger people. It’s time to get a bit more serious these days and move beyond a high school mentality that some in the movement have difficulty in doing. Blaming white women constantly is regressive and counter-productive at best and has got these individuals exactly nowhere. In fact, it’s almost what our enemies would want……..
” practiced by our Muslim forefathers:”
Did you really write that?
Yeah, I’m having trouble with that quote too. Does anybody proofread the articles on Counter-Currents, this is not the first disturbing zinger popping up?
He’s mocking these people.
Having followed the Alt Right since it’s inception in websites like this one, Alternative Right and the Occidental Observer, it really does amaze me how much has changed over the years. On the one hand we have much more developed rhetorical methods (i.e. memes) that can readily put our enemies on the defensive, while on the other hand vulgarity and coarseness has proliferated like a fungus.
I do confess to occasionally laughing along with the headlines and antics of the daily stormer, but the way that alt right women are treated there is beyond the pale and truly sickening. Women who are taking risks for the cause are being run down as “thots” ,sluts and worse.
Between this and the kind of foul mouthed ranting one often hears on some podcasts, I do fear for the future of the movement.
One difficulty I have with this subject, other than the fact that “white sharia” is really dumb, is that I respect the guys who are promoting it. Anglin and Weev have done great things. They’re also very determined. So we’ll be hearing about white sharia, unfortunately, for the next year or so, regardless of anything the rest of the movement might say on the internet.
They are, I think, aiming for the beta-upriser demographic filled with white versions of Eliot Rogers and Chris Harper-Mercer. They claim the opposite, but that’s the group most likely to be stirred by white fantasies of brown barbarism. (I’m not knocking beta-uprisers, since they have many real complaints.)
For interest’s sake:
Eliot Rogers – The Supreme Gentleman Movie Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHEajW-xjqg
***
Azzmador’s confrontation with Oathkeepers seems to have disappeared from the link I have above. It is now here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xVE1ZjoiC8
— Irmin
We don’t pick policy points to garner readers. We garner readers through the strength of our rhetorical techniques alone. Anglin could sell whatever ideology he wants, because he is a skilled polemic. Our embrace of WHITE SHARIA is not about picking up any given demographic. It is a vision of the kind of world we want.
We want utter brutality to reign. We want a totalizing force that lays waste to everything we view as wicked. This includes the reduction of women to property, just as they were for the near entirety of European civilization, but it is hardly limited to that. WHITE SHARIA is not really about women. It is a thought experiment in which white Europeans are unleashed fully upon themselves. What would happen if those of us who supported the values of European classicism were running around with rocket launchers and slaughtering all who opposed us? That’s what WHITE SHARIA is about. Women is but a small and essential part of it.
Nothing women do makes me angry, not at them anyway, because women have no agency. They think and do whatever other people (in person, on social networks, or on TV) tell them to think and do. Females are a liquid that takes the shape of its container. My daughter is frustrated that she cannot make an important decision; the course of action she favors is whatever the last person she talked to favored.
Lack of agency means that females do not respond to incentives. If you cut off all welfare benefits, ceteris parabis, feral single women would be giving birth in alleyways.
When women misbehave, it is because men are making poor decisions for them, and letting a woman live by herself and manage her own life is a poor decision.
Do you believe that blacks will respond to incentives, like cutting off welfare, but that women will not?
“White sharia” is nonsensical. Those who mindlessly repeat stupid memes like that have no intellectual and historical understanding of what sharia is.
If you want to understand Islam then read and listen to Dr. Bill Warner.
I read weev’s rambling reply and it made no sense either. It appears that Daily Stormer is not only managed and populated by trolls but they’re actually mentally ill.
People say they’ve done great things. Really? Name one. They do put effort into their website but to what end? If there is any actual productive value coming out of Daily Stormer it has to do with some other contributors and not from Anglin and weev.
Weev talks about destruction, but has he actually ever been in a fight? What about shorty Anglin who used to date Asians? They couldn’t win a fight if their lives depended on it.
Those who dwell on attacking women, not legitimate criticisms of feminism and actual whores, but spitefully attacking women which they do every chance they get for being too fat, too skinny, wearing shorts, etc, show themselves to be misogynistic cowards. They attack women because women are vulnerable and they aren’t a threat. That’s a sign of a sadistic sociopath.
One of the very few times Anglin has been truthful is when he made a long, pathetic post about how he’s addicted to internet porn (we know what that includes), he’s depressed, he has no prospects, no woman will have him, he has to pay prostitutes to have sex with a woman, and he has no career.
Daily Stormer reminds me of VNN. Both are managed by sociopaths and they wallow in anti-social behavior. VNN’s years of nonsense culminated in what? Psychopath Frazier Glenn Miller attempted to kill Jews, only they weren’t Jews, and instead he killed innocent whites including a child. Similarly, two young white guys were killed by a white Muslim who had associations with Daily Stormer. Anglin responded by banning all Muslims. Yet here they are still promoting Islamic culture and memes. They’re willfully stupid and poisonous to our movement.
I was promoting what I called “Aryan sharia” a long time ago before the meme sprouted on the stormer, and this is why. Every race with the exception of Europeans have their women in a subordinate role which translates to marriage, families, and reproduction. This is most obviously true of all the races under the cultural tuttelage of Islam, but also of the Asians, down to the primitive African tribes who apparently have more biological sense and affinity with inborn natural hierarchy than we do. Cultures and civilizations that reject this die. Now, this doesn’t mean we need to cloak them with exotic garments, it simply means society should be structured so that when a white male reaches the age of sexual maturation he will paired with a corresponding white female…how this is accomplished, via arranged marriage or simply finding a girl on ones own and falling in love doesn’t matter. The fact that the majority of white, Western females have already had multiple partners before they find the guy they ultimately settle down with violates an eternal natural law..which is to secure the genetic integrity of ones own biological offspring. White sharia effectively means little more than returning to the culture we had pre-Jewish revolution of the 60’s, when we had courtship and marriage. If we believe in inequality and hierarchy then this is a simple logical extension of our own philosophical premises. I think the problem people have is they associate “sharia” with something barbaric and primitive…but to the contrary, it would be regulated, clean, and a vital component of another fundamental element of a racialist government… Eugenics. This is why at the end of the day I see no alternative to the groundwork laid by National Socialism. Yes it is true that Americans are too libertarian minded to have Prussian socialism…but I believe the coming war for survival will level all previous behavioral and belief patterns. Think about it..unless you find a conservative christian family somewhere on a farm, when you meet your girl she’s already had sex with countless partners…and in the cities, because Jewish cultural programming has encouraged miscegenation between white females and non-white, preferably black men, this is just a reality we face in our present dystopia. I have been in physical fights against nonwhites over this issue, so it hits home as a life and death survival issue. A race that does not control its women will not survive. The ideal position we would hope to achieve is to cone to a time when white women willingly and happily give themselves to the sacred duty upon which nature has bestowed them with devotion and love, and we can again enjoy the harmony we had in previous golden eras of our race.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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.