351 words / 70:04
To listen in a player, click here. To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save link as” or “save target as.” To subscribe to the CC podcast RSS feed, click here.
Greg Johnson, John Morgan, and Michael Polignano reconvene for a new weekly Counter-Currents Radio podcast. This week’s theme is identity politics, pro and con.
Topics include:
Counter-Currents depends on the donations of readers and listeners. There are several ways to help.
First, you can use a credit card.
Note: Credit card numbers are not stored on our server, and all connections are secure and encrypted.
Second, you can use Hatreon.
“Hatreon” is like Patreon but for the “haters” who are being purged from Patreon as part of the vast ongoing deplatforming of white advocates and dissident Rightists. Hatreon helps creative dissidents enjoy steady, predictable incomes from patrons who make monthly pledges of support. Just go to my Hatreon profile page and make a pledge. (Use the invite code BNIHVDDYXEHW.)
Hatreon is run by a dissident Rightist like us. Hatreon is highly ethical and takes only a very small percentage of donations to cover their costs. I very much want Hatreon to succeed, so please sign up for an account today. Help Hatreon get off to a strong start — and help Counter-Currents stay in the fight.
Third, Counter-Currents also takes Bitcoin.
Our Bitcoin address is: 1ChE5DZVVZJpv8mnJ3fRrtSDrTikBh7uFL
In the coming weeks, we will begin accepting donations in all digital currencies, and we will publish a tutorial on how you can begin using them.
Finally, you can also mail donations to:
Counter-Currents
PO Box 22638
San Francisco, CA 94122
USA
We are profoundly grateful for the outpouring of generosity from a large number of readers. But we need to hear from all of you. Especially from our monthly donors. Please renew today.
Thank you for your loyal readership and generosity.
Greg Johnson
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
17 comments
I’m getting a weird “Failed – Forbidden” message when I try to download this?
Not sure why. Anyone else have the same problem?
When I first tried to download the mp3, the download wasn’t marked as having failed in the download tab, but it was far too small to be a working mp3 file (I think the file size was given as around 150 kb), so I downloaded it again, and it worked fine.
I’m able to download the mp3 fine.
Dr. Johnson, always happy to hear your thoughts on metapolitics. A radio show/podcast with you is sorely needed.
Interesting podcast, and I agree with Greg’s take on the Identity book. Not surprisingly, I believe the comment about “pan-European army – pan-European super-state” forgets later history.
Yes, it is possible to have a pan-European army without a pan-European super-state. But why focus on the battle for Hungary and instead focus on the lack of such a pan-European state, and the consequences of runaway ethnonationalism, in the two world wars that wrecked the White world.
We should have a pan-European confederated state that allows nations (or perhaps regions) to maintain their local identities and sovereignty, while having joint action for racial policy, foreign affairs, defense, large science/technics projects, and large cultural projects.
Indeed, if group strategies outcompete individual ones, this may apply to the larger, geopolitical level as well. Keep in mind that there are more Chinese than all the Whites worldwide combined, and consider the rising tide of color/globalist alliance against Whites, the entire world establishment working together – and even if that System collapses, the subsequent age of Race-Culture will be a Clash of Civilizations. Individual White nations vs entire civilizations won’t go too well.
I don’t speak for the identitarians, but I am familiar with the way they think, and I would say that the sort of Europe they envision is indeed a confederation, and not merely a return to individual nation-states alone. The fact that the identitarians have chosen the name they do, and don’t call themselves “pan-European nationalists,” reflects this mode of thinking. Their loyalty isn’t to the nation-state, it’s to their people, on multiple levels (Europe, Belgium, Flanders, etc.). And as I mentioned in the podcast, the identitarians have gone to great lengths to establish a pan-European identity that will overcome the chauvinisms of the past while still allowing for regional and other identities as well. In fact this is one of the central pillars of their movement, and why you almost always see members from other nations’ chapters of GI show up at GI events, wherever they are held.
All of this exists. It’s called the EU and NATO. Your thinking matches exactly that of Helmut Kohl, François Mitterrand and Angela Merkel of ten to twenty years ago.
The optimal group strategy for the institutions and agents of the EU and NATO is to disempower its immediate rivals for power, that is to say the european nation states. The most effective and ultimate way to do so, is to undermine the biological basis of said member states. This is exactly what is going on. The EU also plans to expand into North Africa and Central Asia.
Europe used to be a fortress when each country regulated its own immigration policy. European armies keep getting weaker despite or rather because of NATO integration.
The tired reference to the Ottoman empire is dangerously misleading. We don’t face a militarily powerful empire that could invade one country after another. Turkey is in fact currently falling apart and the North Africans are busy with their own squabbles.
And, as Greg points out, there would be no need to establish permanent, centralized institutions to deal with such a threat. Plus there’s the nuclear deterrence which should be enough to discourage any territorial ambitions.
I can download, but as I said once before, the download link is almost invisible. At least make the link a bolder color or use a download button. THANKS 🙂
As a European identitarian who isn’t a member of the official GI but has close ties to them I can try to answer some of the questions posed in the podcast.
Identity is a lot more than a 23 and me test score that tells me that I am white, that is not who I am. I am a part of something that my ancestors built and something that will live on for centuries. I am the land that feeds me, the language I speak and the norms, friendships and culture that surrounds me. I am a member of a tribe and that tribe isn’t just whoever has certain genetic markers.
Even in the US white nationalism is failed as a concept. Cajuns, Alaskans and Minnesotans are not the same people. Liberals in Boston are not the same people as Christians in the mid west. There is a reason why your founding fathers created the united states and not a state. I would recommend white nationalists in the US to focus more on the regional and what makes them unique instead of trying to invent a bond between them and very different people on the other side of the continent.
Different people of European origin still need to stick together for the common good. Most pressing is defending our lands and our peoples but also for large projects such as the space program. This is what identitarians mean with the dual identity, you should I identify with your tribe and with your greater civilization, not a 23 and me test. We want many European peoples to come together for a common good, we don’t want to have a European people.
Also race isn’t really a necessary discussion in Europe since there are extraordinarily few Slovakians who aren’t white. The problem of a handful mixed race people who identify fully with their European side is so small that making a huge fuss over it isn’t necessary. To sum up, how many people who don’t have the required 23 and me test score do you see at an GI rally? Here in Sweden we had 500 muslims in the country in the 1950s, most of them were here temporarily and moved back. The number of Arabs who have genuine routes in Sweden and who helped created the Swedish tribe is probably 0.
As for the question of Charlottesville I would say it is a mixed bag.
The number of people gathered was a smashing success, the media attention was phenomenal, the mental breakdown of the left was truly accelerationist and the they didn’t get to slowly and quietly dismantle your history.
Some things could be done better in the future. First of unite the right as a concept is flawed, you can unite the right in the sense of having the right in the same space but you can’t unite in the sense of having them work as one unit. Unite the right wasn’t a forest, it was 1500 trees. There should be a rally, not a place where everything and everyone is allowed to do what they see fit. Organizers should provide the banners, slogans and flags. Organizers should make sure that the people entering the area are people who are welcomed at the rally.
As for the rally it self the nationalists should strive to arrive together, control a space together and leave together. The scenes were nationalists, antifa, journalists and cops are mixed together in mayhem are bound to end in injured comrades and comrades being cornered and forced to use extreme violence. Have banners surrounding the demonstration and don’t let people who aren’t in the demonstration within the banners.
I agree with that the Alt-Right might have grown too fast. Organizing a rally with 1500 people in an area with a lot antifa is very difficult, especially if the attendees don’t have any experience and if the attendees aren’t naturally organized into tight knit activist groups. I think the American Alt-Right can learn from the demonstration cultures in Europe but also that you need to build and activist culture of your own. A large demonstration is built on thousands of smaller activities such as handing out fliers in a shopping mall, putting up posters on a wall or organizing barbecues. A demonstration can be seen as final mobilization and test of an organization, it should not be the first step. Focus on building strong local activist groups that have regular activities rather than a handful of mega-events.
Finally I have one question of my own Can I mail US dollars in cash to counter currents if I want to make an anonymous donation?
First, to characterize race-first White nationalists as people obsessed with 23andMe results (or who believe “Russians are the same as the Irish”) is as much a caricature as saying all European ethnonationalists want to re-fight World War II. In each case, you can find some who fit the description, but hardly most, much less all.
See the following on 23andMe and related tests:
https://counter-currents.com/2013/11/racial-purity-ethnic-genetic-interests-the-cobb-case/
“Even in the US white nationalism is failed as a concept. Cajuns, Alaskans and Minnesotans are not the same people.”
If WN has failed it has been due to poor leadership and freakish fossilized dogma, not due to the fact that we haven’t atomized ourselves enough! Two Alaskan families are “not the same people as well” – perhaps each family should establish their own micro-state (or igloo-state)?
“There is a reason why your founding fathers created the united states and not a state. ”
America is hardly the same nation made by the Founders. Local identities ultimately fail in America because the USA is no heavily “diverse.” Minnesotans can be Somalis. Alaskans can be Inuit. Christian Midwesterners can be illegal Mexicans brought in for a meat-packing plant. Boston liberals can be Jews. If you say then you are talking about White Alaskans and White Minnesotans and White Midwesterners and White Bostonians – well, yes, what do they have in common – race, they are White. In America, that’s the glue that holds it all together. Without race, local identities can – and do – devolve in to cucked civic nationalism. Let all the “people of Houston” stick together in the face of a natural catastrophe! Whites, Blacks, Browns – they all got that “south Texas” identity, don’t you know.
” I would recommend white nationalists in the US to focus more on the regional and what makes them unique instead of trying to invent a bond between them and very different people on the other side of the continent.:
European activists get frustrated with “uninformed Yanks” who “misunderstand Europe” and give “low-information advice.” Well, that goes both ways. Imagining America as a big Europe while every other person (nearly) is a racial alien of some kind does not work. A White American who is racially aware (or at least not cucked) has much more in common with a similar White American “on the other side of the continent” as they do with cucked Whites, or non-Whites, who share local cultural markers and identities. If Europeans cannot understand the overwhelming importance of race in America and American history, then the advice is not helpful.
“Also race isn’t really a necessary discussion in Europe since there are extraordinarily few Slovakians who aren’t white. ”
But it is absolutely essential in America for the converse reason. And is it really immaterial in Slovakia? I read somewhere they are headed for majority Roma status – I presume you don’t consider gypsies to be White. And beyond that – in today’s globalist society, the aliens are “just around the corner” – even in Slovakia.
“Different people of European origin still need to stick together for the common good. ”
Eliminate the word “still” and you are getting it.
Thank your comment.
While I am sure that white nationalism has had many problems and that some of them overshadow the problem of the slightly empty term white I do believe that America’s rootlessness is a big problem for nationalist movements in the US. America is still young and Americans clearly lack roots, to make matters worse people move a lot within the country even though it is continent sized. This has made it harder to build something than in a city where most of the residents have lived there for hundreds of years and where the area is culturally very unique.
I am not surprised that America is good at producing subcultures and other strange identities, Americans naturally lack an identity and a movement is going to have to create a positive identity for European Americans. However I am not sure if white is the best identity to build upon, there is probably something more real and tangible that exists in local communities than in the abstract idea of a white people.
I am not suggesting bonding together with Africans, Latinos and other ethnic groups that live in your area because they clearly aren’t of the same ethnicity. They are a foreign entity in your area. Just like Japanese means that you have certain ancestry being Cajun isn’t possible if you are of Ugandan decent.
Also just because you identify with your region and ethnic group doesn’t mean that you can’t identify with the greater European civilization. Of course Alaskans and Midwesterners should co-operate and work for their common best. Identitarianism is probably closer to what the founding fathers wanted than present day America. American identitarianism would consist of smaller local states of European Americans bound together in a federation.
Gypsies are their own ethnic group and don’t even pretend to be a part of the people that host them. I don’t think any Identitarian would want them to stick around because they aren’t of our ethnicities.
Largely I think it is a matter of semantics. When a Norwegian identitarian speaks of a Norwegian they obviously mean someone with certain physical features. I don’t think the GI members criticizing white nationalism envision their country full of people who look Chinese but who have adapted to local customs.
European identitarian “muh history”,” muh local traditions” and “muh national poets” are the equivalent to “muh constitution” and “muh founding fathers”. These idées fixes are very similar and they make us vulnerable to cuckoldry and deconstruction.
Many local and national traditions, traditional clothes, etc. are actually relatively recent inventions. Multiculturalists gleefully point this out whenever they can. Europeans used to speak very localized dialects. National languages were standardized very recently by the state and mass media. Many europeans would not be able to converse with their great-grandparents. Most of our ancestors used to live somewhat like the Amish still do today. Modernity has swept all of this away. But what stays the same is biology. Swedes and Slovaks differ genetically in substantive ways, not just by mere “markers”.
The defense of European identities against Spencerian american white nationalist deconstructionist attack is not to downplay biology, but rather to emphasize it.
If you think “White” is an abstract concept, I would suggest you ride the New York subway, walk through certain DC neighborhoods at night, visit California, or experience America’s racial realities in any sort of ways.
How is one’s biological and cultural identity “abstract?” More abstract is identification to a region where you yourself admit Americans can have a rather shallow history with:
” to make matters worse people move a lot within the country even though it is continent sized. This has made it harder to build something”
which essentially refutes your entire argument: “local identities” are weak and ephemeral, race is essential – existential – and follows you around everywhere you go.
“Gypsies are their own ethnic group and don’t even pretend to be a part of the people that host them. ”
But you said Slovaks don’t have to worry about race since they are all White. I’m sorry, but you don’t see to have all the facts.
White Americans need to follow their own directions, not listen to foreigners who don’t even know what’s going on in neighboring European nations.
Re Grave of Fireflies, yeah it’s sort of like Dunkirk where there is no polemicising and the enemy is simply a force of nature, without personality, and it’s from the POV of a young person just thrown into this. I wonder if the idea for this in Dunkirk may have been inspired by Grave of Fireflies.
I agree. I made the same point when discussing the film with Jared T.
“Europe used to be a fortress when each country regulated its own immigration policy.”
Did England and France effectively “regulate…immigration policy” before the EU? And how was NATO responsible for England’s pathetic desire to hold on to empire glory with “commonwealth” nations (with freedom of movement)? France was hardly a stalwart NATO member, and mishandled its own colonial legacy. Did Germans bring in Turks because of the EU or NATO, or because they wanted cheap labor?
Do you think that, sans the EU, Sweden wouldn’t have welcomed immigrants?
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
Lost your password?Edit your comment