Frank Franz of Germany’s NPD
1,637 words
A recent study in the Journal of Public Economics draws a conclusion we arrived at a long time ago: Right-Wingers are better looking than Leftists. Researchers conducted several experiments, one of which involved showing subjects photos of various politicians and political candidates: members of the European Parliament, U.S. gubernatorial and congressional candidates, candidates for the Australian House of Representatives, etc. Subjects were told to rate the images on a five-point scale of attractiveness. Conservatives won in a landslide.
In “low information” elections, where voters have little concrete information on candidates, there is a demonstrated tendency for voters to go with whoever is better looking. Obviously, considering the above findings, this gives conservative candidates a natural advantage. Interestingly, researchers also found that when subjects were asked to guess the political views of those in the photographs, they tended to guess (correctly) that the better-looking ones were conservative. This shows that people are at least tacitly aware that there is a connection between being Right wing and being beautiful.
Michèle, Lady Renouf
Predictably, the researchers’ hypothesis as to why these differences exist is blatantly skewed, self-serving, and self-congratulatory:
A more general psychological explanation could be that good-looking people are more likely to perceive the world as a just place, since [based on studies cited by the authors] they are treated better than others, achieve higher, and are happier – and a frequent reason for people to sympathize with the left is a perception of the world as unfair. In line with this, it has been found that greater self-reported attractiveness is negatively related to a preference for egalitarianism, typically associated with the left: The more beautiful people consider themselves, the less they are in favor of redistribution.
I’d like to suggest a different hypothesis.
Henrik Palmgren and Lana Lokteff
Needless, to say there are a lot of good-looking liberals – most movie stars, for example. And there are some butt ugly conservatives. In fact, it used to be the case that on the far, far Right one typically met a pretty motley crew indeed, many of whom would be welcome at any casting call for “fat, ugly, menacing, possibly deformed, possibly inbred bigot type.” It’s really only in the past ten years or so that the aesthetics of “the movement” started improving, and drop-dead gorgeous folks started showing up at our events.
Leonard Fregin (left) and Hagen Grell
Of course, the vast majority of liberals and conservatives are just like the vast majority of people in general: average. People you would neither drool nor vomit over; just people you wouldn’t look at twice. However, to explain the dynamics of the liberal-conservative attraction gap you need to look at the extremes. The authors of this study have approached things from only one end and, as I have said, offered a typically self-serving analysis. Let’s start from the other end: the scrabby, vomit-inducing rump end that is the radical Left.
Brigitte Bardot, budding thought criminal
It’s hard not to notice that many feminists, SJWs, self-proclaimed socialists, beta-male cucks, and transgender freaks are as ugly as sin. Long, long ago I observed that the feminists who complained the loudest about women being treated as sex objects were also the ones least likely to suffer such mistreatment. (Sort of like the brittle, flinty female temperance crusaders who proclaimed, “Lips that touch liquor shall not touch ours!” thus giving men another reason to drink.) I need not elaborate further: I am talking about a phenomenon very familiar to my readers, about which much mirth has been made, a good bit of it immortalized in alternately gag-inducing and hilarious YouTube videos.
In late December, I went to a performance of Beethoven’s Ninth (an annual Yuletide event for me). Sitting not-so-comfortably in my tiny seat, but comfortably surrounded by white folk, my evening seemed well-nigh perfect. Until this fat, green-haired thing sat down in front of me. I am pretty convinced it was female, though I’m not so sure that it was convinced. And it had a companion, an equally indefinite, blobular creature with buzzcut hair wearing a black boiler suit. Something seemed wrong in a – how shall I put it? – . . . . . chromosomal way. But that’s probably just making excuses for them. The rest of the evening was my attention being pulled back and forth between the sublime Beethoven, Prince of the Western Blood Royal, and the bovine, green-haired reminder of modern rot. After awhile I closed my eyes – and realized this meant I might as well be home listening to the CD.
Nathan Damigo
My likeminded companion observed during intermission that no good-looking people dye their hair green. And the combination of hair dyed unnatural colors and facial piercings belongs 100% of the time to the butt-ugly crowd. These are people who have uglied themselves up because they have nothing else going for them. Had my mother seen such folk she would have shrunk back in horror and asked “Do they think that’s attractive?” No, dear mother. They do not. They think, correctly, that it’s ugly. Their “look” is a self-conscious revolt against standards of beauty they know they can never live up to. A beauty which, the other half of the time, they revolt against by declaring it “socially constructed.” This amounts to: beauty isn’t real, so my ugliness isn’t real, so I don’t have to feel bad. Since this doesn’t work as a coping strategy they amp up the ugly: layering over their unchosen, natural born ugliness, to which they cannot reconcile themselves, with a thick layer of chosen, trendy ugliness. Autonomy!
Alain Delon, National Front supporter
Of course, underneath the rationalizations it is all just a reproductive strategy. Natural ugly didn’t get them laid; so maybe exaggerated, hard-not-to-notice, hip and trendy ugly will. No it won’t, actually. People will go on being attracted to attractive people, leaving the fat, pierced, and green haired to sit it out. Nature will not alter itself to compensate those who lost out in the genetic lottery (unless they earn a hell of a lot of money). Thus, that frustrated libido must be channeled somewhere, and out it poots in the form of slave morality. The ugly resenting the beautiful; the fat resenting the slim; the weak resenting the strong; the unsuccessful resenting the successful; the abnormal resenting the normal; the low-testosterone resenting the high testosterone. But there is more to it than that: slave morality inverts natural values. It celebrates ugliness, obesity, weakness, failure, abnormality, and low-testosterone cuckiness.
George Hutcheson and Faith Goldy
This pretty much sums up the liberal base today. As the song says, there’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach ya. Yes, folks, we really need Nietzsche now more than ever. He gives us the key to understanding the liberal-conservative attractiveness gap: ugly people – as well as the weak, unsuccessful, and abnormal – turn to liberal politics as a kind of revenge against those who have what they lack. And as a revenge against reality.
Brittany Pettibone and Martin Sellner
Note how much of political correctness is about theorizing inconvenient realities away – I have already mentioned the “social construction” nonsense – or forbidding their discussion. In fact, just getting the pretty, successful, strong, and well-formed to tiptoe around the issue of their superiority is a victory in the tiny little minds of the slave types, for it is a form of social humiliation. A demonstration of the power of the slaves. Slave power has nothing to do with creating anything new or strong or healthy. It has to do with spitting at, stifling, and humiliating the strong and healthy.
Lauren Southern
Hence the real horrors that we are seeing today: the calls for white extermination, the pussy hats, the pathologizing of masculinity, “fat acceptance,” the celebration of “transgender” insanity, the “deconstruction” of “heteronormativity,” and so much else. Through all of it runs an absolutely unmistakable tone of undisguised, masks-off, unapologetic hatred. What Ayn Rand called “plain, naked, smirking evil.” It’s good that Nietzsche didn’t live to see this, as he would have gone even madder. Docile Friedrich would not have spent his last days tinkling the keys of his sister’s pianoforte. No, they would have had to find him a rubber room. And I may need one if things keep going this way.
Marion Maréchal-Le Pen and Julien Rochedy
Yet I find some solace in reminding myself of how pretty we are on the Right. Indeed, let us all take solace in this, and celebrate it together. Let us heap scorn upon the pierced, green-haired losers and fatties, the saggy-titted old hippies, the undoable, prune-faced feminist harpies, the underendowed, low testosterone cucks. And let us feel no guilt in not being “nice.” It feels wonderful to be liberated from the tyranny of niceness. It feels wonderful to pass judgment as nature intended: from atop our Olympian thrones of beauty and strength, sitting in mesomorphic majesty. Let us look forward to the day when the rats once more simply scatter when subjected to our withering gaze.
Good looking people are not conservatives because they’ve “got it easy,” as the above-referenced study suggests. No, in today’s world the beautiful, strong, and successful are under attack. Such people naturally gravitate toward a kind of conservatism because it is chiefly resentment against beauty, strength, and success that inclines someone to radical Leftist politics. As Nietzsche taught us, those who are physically well-formed and have no reason to resent reality naturally espouse the most natural of value systems: the one that celebrates beauty, strength, health, intelligence, fecundity, and life. This last is crucially important, for the philosophy of Leftism is, in its essence, a will toward death: toward the suppression of health, natural excellence, procreation, and, most of all, the differences, antagonism, and struggle that is life itself.
Leftism is not something that can be argued with. It is a plague of ugliness that must simply be stamped out.
26 comments
“It is an affirmation and a yea-saying. It knows that for the brave, for the strong and for the healthy, life is always joyous.” -Peter Peel
This plague can also be observed in China and it shows once again that China is leftist. People imagine that China is secretly fascist or right-wing but this is simply pure imagination and wishful thinking on the part of Westerners. China is a genuinely sick society that hates everything that is normal and healthy. The Communist Party teaches people from birth to hate normalcy, to despise and be jealous of Western and Japanese supremacy, and to worship the Party and Communism. Everything in this article can be applied to China as well. The leftist Chinese Communists are often ugly-looking people who make you cringe.
We’re damned good looking chaps all of us. Perhaps beauty is related to intelligence after all. the Greeks certainly thought so, plus virtue. My girlfriend is not too bright but she is a very conservative christian and beautiful by any standards.
Socialism is the politics of envy, the lust for power and the need to impose your will on others. They do not perform well in the real world and many of them are disgustingly ugly. They are often ugly inside too or pathetically striving to be admired for their goodness. It’s losers versus winners, we will always win anyway but we have to not let our guard down and continue our fight against the real forces of evil- the self-righteous. Muslims are mostly sickeningly ugly too, bearing their hateful envy in their faces. Like the Socialists they cannot make honest money themselves so they find ways to steal other people’s wealth and effort.
My girlfriend is not too bright but she is a very conservative christian and beautiful by any standards.
What assholery. No wonder feminism emerged.
Notice the pathetic feminist-style response here: it doesn’t argue that the original claim is *false*, but only that it hurts feelings (is “assholery”).
r/K theory posits that during times of string r-selection women become more male-like and males become more effeminate. Even going so far as to lead to rol-inversion where women start looking for male-like women to pair-bond with and men start looking for effeminated men for pair bonding.
While to the remaining K-strategists this will be incomprehensible and the (strong) r-selected women will look plain ugly. Quite possibly these women have role-inversed and are in fact lesbian.
Btw the average population is memed r-selected, but has an underlying inborn K-selection. Hence they will also be able to see the ugliness of the strongly r-selected women.
In view of the article above and his earlier article “Dystopia is Now!,” perhaps Jef Costello might care to review L. P. Hartley’s Facial Justice. The description of Hartley’s novel in Helmut Schoeck’s Envy: A Theory of Social Behaviour indicates that it might be worth reviewing.
This is one of the best articles I’ve read in years, bravo! The author does a deft job at extracting from the oft-misunderstood physical world of “Maya” the unseen, underlying reality of the situation in question. This “revolt against the beautiful”, this jealousy and hate, is at the absolute core of practically every social pathology… from Communism to many forms of common criminality.
Communism vs. Nationalism.
Cain vs. Abel.
The have-nots vs. the haves.
The ugly vs. the bautiful.
The demons vs. the angels.
The orcs vs. the elves.
Death seeking to kill Life.
This is great- but missing a screen cap of Dr. Johnson in shorts as filmed after the London forum. I’d put it between Nathan Damigo and Alain Delon. 😀
Thanks again, Jef Costello!
I will have to say that Hollywood in general tends to be the exception here, but it clearly has more to do with their desire for social status than genuine belief in the shitlib program I think. And action movie stars have always tended to be the most right wing, and the most masculine; Stallone, Arnold, Willis, Eastwood, etc.
While I of-course generally agree with the article, I would like to remark:
in our polar reality, to every yin, there is a yang. The way from yin to yang and reverse is: deconstruction. For creation to occur, one needs to be able to transcend the existing. Destruction is helpful for that (“Creative Destruction”, Schumpeter) : THAT is the significance of all things odd. They are needed, and they are to be respected (of-course only within the limits of the own tolerance level… the value of freedom is not violated). It is therefore also a fool´s errand, and more: existentially wrong, to hate on the odd… and, as is the “Rightist” way: to wish to “exterminate” it (“Extermination”, the great folly of the Right).
Beauty occurs when something is in harmony with the Being (the asian picture of “flow of Ki” ). Any insistance on only one pole of the two is inconsistant with that. “Rightist” beauty, IMO, often suffers from that. IMO, the left had a bit of a leg-up there some time… but where the left is dogmatic, not freedom-oriented, they of-course degenerate to what we today mostly see of leftists.
It is therefore also a fool´s errand, and more: existentially wrong, to hate on the odd… and, as is the “Rightist” way: to wish to “exterminate” it (“Extermination”, the great folly of the Right).
You make a good point. However, the Left are guilty of the same thing in every way, shape and form. I don’t see the left as having any deep understanding of polar reality either. If they do, it’s purely theoretical. They’ve read some books on old eastern philosophy and think they have the world figured out.
Beauty occurs when something is in harmony with the Being (the asian picture of “flow of Ki” ). Any insistance on only one pole of the two is inconsistant with that. “Rightist” beauty, IMO, often suffers from that. IMO, the left had a bit of a leg-up there some time… but where the left is dogmatic, not freedom-oriented, they of-course degenerate to what we today mostly see of leftists.
You are being a little vague here. The entire human species has descended into a degenerate state and it’s getting worse by the minute. I couldn’t even begin listing all the manifestations of this, but the incapacity to appreciate the polarity in all things and situations is probably the main one. When life was tough (i.e., living much closer to nature) for the vast majority of the population everywhere, they understood things in a way no one today can.
You could simply have said, that successful people will tend to recognize the power of an idea who’s time has come.
“…men who had more attractive bodies…scored lower on egalitarianism. We did not find a significant relationship between bodily attractiveness and altruism/egalitarianism in women.”
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201502/does-science-really-say-hot-guys-are-jerks
We look better and we are better, MSM be damned. Main thing is we really do look better. Long skulls.
Biology. Evolution. Blue eyes, blond hair. Exceptional rarity in the world of human biology. The common denominator of high culture. These physical features are always presented as the villains in Hollywood movies and on MSM news since WWII.
Ann Coulter or Jared Taylor come also to mind… but it’s a bit cherry-picking I guess.
Try googling Laura Huhtasaari, the True Finns’ presidential candidate. She’s the only one serious about stopping Islamisation and removing kebab.
Laura Huhtasaari, Finnish president candidate 2018 from nationalist True Finns party:
https://i1.wp.com/www.nykysuomi.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/laura-huhtasaari-suomi-takaisin.jpg?resize=800%2C470&ssl=1
https://i0.wp.com/www.taakka.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/laura-huhtasaari1c.jpg?ssl=1
Why is the young Brigitte Bardot included here? That fatuous face is from her emotionally ravaged days. Almost retarded in appearance. However, as she aged and wised up mightily, she became much better looking.
As Robert Griffin said, Brigitte Bardot is the real thing.
“Slave power has nothing to do with creating anything new or strong or healthy. It has to do with spitting at, stifling, and humiliating the strong and healthy.”
This is all spelled out in the Kurt Vonnegut short story “Harrison Bergeron”. I read it in High School. https://archive.org/stream/HarrisonBergeron/Harrison%20Bergeron_djvu.txt
A great essay. Altho Nietzsche did end up in the rubber room.
And how much of this transvaluation of morals is simply a Jewish collective psychological projection of their own inner feelings of inferiority despite their blessed chosenness onto western culture writ large. It is they who praise the outcast as they have always been the outgroup, and then channel this into typical Hollywood comic book themes. After all Nietzsche was the first critical theorist with Judaism’s ressentiment under the microscope, and he nailed it. The despised abnormal hero v. The authoritarian evil ideal of health and beauty. This is what happens when you allow a trojan horse virus to take over your race a la Christianity. Let me quote the character Eric Vornoff from the Hollywood cinema classic Bride of the Monster (1955) “Home, I have no home. Hunted, despised, living like an animal! The jungle is my home. But I will show the world that I can be its master! I will perfect my own race of people. A race of atomic supermen which will conquer the world! ha!” If that’s not a self-confessed allegory for jew-aryan relations I don’t know what is.
We should also consider how much of our racial psyche is and innate feelings for justice and fair-play also go into the crafting of your typical goy shitlib. A lot of those feeling are what makes us good, decent, honorable and better than our racial competitors. Once they realize its all a giant con game and they’ve been scammed by the greatest deceivers and venomous hypocritical snakes of all time the wrath of the awakened liberal Saxon will make conservative red pilled normies seem quaint by comparison. Once the double standards against white people are revealed I feel we will have a real show before our eyes. Hopefully only some are too far gone to be truth bombed back into the nightmare reality their policies have created. I would also say the inequality crisis is real and they should be told who the real characters that operate in this world of the 1% are. 2-3 %of population total but constituting perhaps at least 30% or higher of said 1%? Nepotism and tribal support having nothing to do with this? Their just so smart and work so hard and they deserve all that wealth, power and influence. Funny how Jews use conservative arguments to justify their dominance.
Some more data points:
https://www.returnofkings.com/150309/would-you-bang-a-famous-feminist
http://www.returnofkings.com/114644/27-attractive-girls-who-became-ugly-freaks-because-of-feminism
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.