Counter-Currents
1,592 words
Conserving the white race – more specifically, the people who hail from Europe – should be the highest goal of conservatism, for without a strong white race, nothing else so-called conservatives want to conserve is even remotely possible.
Western civilization is synonymous with white civilization. The two are inextricably linked and inseparable. Grecian thought, Roman statecraft, German Idealism, English law – these pillars of humanity rest squarely on the shoulders of the European peoples. Every meaningful aspect of civilization that was ever dreamed, designed, and built has been overwhelmingly and disproportionately accomplished solely on the backs of White people.
White culture has towered so greatly above all the others for centuries that to suggest otherwise is nothing short of parody. The Promethean fire that ignited nearly every worthy aspect of humanity was first lit in the Occident. Among our people is the same blood that gave civilization every meaningful thing that it enjoys today. For that, we should be both proud and humbled.
Thus, any meaningful concept, ideal, or heritage a “conservative” could want to save for future generations is predicated first upon ensuring that whites have strong communities and sovereign homelands. In the United States, for example, study after study shows that whites are the only racial group that supports less taxation, ending mass immigration, and upholding gun rights and free speech. Asians, Hispanics, blacks, Jews, Arabs: These peoples simply don’t have the same respect for these basic rights that were granted to this nation by its Founders. And why would they? None of them formulated or fought for those rights. They were ideas created by white men, died for by white men, codified by white men, and upheld by white men. In essence, these are white rights alone.
If you wish to prevent hate speech laws from being passed in the US, and if you wish to prevent further infringements upon the Second Amendment, due process, and “limited” taxation, you will never be able to accomplish any of it under a rainbow coalition of freaks and muddied hordes. The nation must first and foremost be majority white.
Looking at Europe, it would be absurd for me to suggest that if I were to replace all the citizens of France with Greeks or Danes that French culture would continue as it has. The French countryside might look the same, but the culture would change. So how can a person reasonably expect France to stay French with the demographics of Algeria and Morocco? Nothing can be conserved, be it culture or custom, without first conserving the founding stock of the people who created the very thing you wish to save, for they will always be its only proper curators.
Race matters to people in far greater ways than many imagine. I often hear sentiments about “color-blind” ideologies, mottos from gun rights groups that proclaim “patriots all bleed red,” and churches who assure us that God loves all His children equally and that a good Christian would never judge by “color.” The NRA loves it when they get a few non-whites to show up at their events, and good Christians believe that they share more kinship with non-white believers than do to a white non-believer. However, when pressed on the issue, how well do you think those belief systems would hold up?
Devout Christians who claim to place faith above race likely do not mean it. If you asked them if they would rather be neighbors with black Christians or white pagans, they might say they would rather be neighbors with the black Christians. What about living in an agnostic white neighborhood and sending their children to an all-white, but non-Christian school, compared to an all-black yet Baptist school in an all-black neighborhood? What about living in a country of whites that is only half-Christian, like New Zealand or Estonia, compared to the Congo, Guatemala, Colombia, or Ecuador, that are all over ninety percent Christian? Would any white truly choose the non-white option when pressed on the issue and forced to live the reality they espouse? Doubtful.
The current Pope is welcoming toward the hostile invaders often referred to as “refugees.” Does he – or indeed anybody who cares at all about Christendom – not understand what will happen to their beloved relics and holy sites in a post-white Europe? Does anybody believe that we can secure the future of these places without a white majority? Imagine a Europe with a twenty percent white population. What will become of the Louvre, the Sistine Chapel, Notre Dame, the Reims and Cologne Cathedrals, and the Pietà? Do you trust a group of low-IQ Saracens to ensure their maintenance? Do you trust people from nations with the lowest trust levels on Earth to not steal, embezzle, and destroy the institutions? If you care about your cultural and religious relics, above all else you must care about the future of the white race.
Of the free speech, gun rights, and libertarian advocates who wholeheartedly believe in those ideals, I ask: Have they seen the polls of ideology by race? They are never going to be able to achieve their goals with the demographics of Somalia. If you care about these values, you must first care about the well-being of the white race. No matter what your views, they all rely upon the guidance of the white race. Europeans themselves are the shield that defends all else.
To those who care about the well-being of women and children, animal rights, and environmentalism, these issues will also fall into the void without a strong white identity and self-determination. A study of ocean pollution revealed that up to ninety-five percent of all the plastic in the oceans comes from ten rivers, all of which are in Asia and Africa. Animal rights are an issue that, with the small exception of some Indo-Aryan peoples, is entirely non-existent outside of the white world. There are open-air dog meat markets all over Asia and horrific examples of animal cruelty within “migrant” populations all over Europe, from dogs being raped to death in Greece to kittens being dismembered and used to play soccer in Denmark in Arab neighborhoods. If you care about pollution and the treatment of animals, you need to first care about whites, as no other group will join your cause as they do not have the same reverence for nature that we do. While white nations create laws to protect endangered animals, others simply hunt them for profit.
If you look at crime rates in regards to rape and molestation throughout Europe and the US, you’ll find that non-whites are massively overrepresented as offenders. The clearest and most pragmatic way to reduce the number of women and children being victimized in our homelands is to simply keep the hordes away from our people.
Race is our reality. The white race matters more than a religious creed, education, wealth, ideology – literally everything. Even if you are fortunate enough to have high-functioning neighbors from other races, the conclusive evidence is that they will likely outbreed us in our homelands and thus create social discord, as heightened diversity in an area correlates to lower social capital. There is no justification for any of this. They can all go be good professors, engineers, doctors, and Christians in their homelands with their own people. We do not need them. We never have.
Race matters more than everything else; the rest is merely post hoc justification of the fact that we simply prefer our own. People will come up with any number of pretenses and lies, such as liberals who talk of “good school districts” – meaning majority white school districts. When people speak of a neighborhood that has “really gone downhill,” they never mean it became more white. They will say it has to do with poverty, culture, economic opportunity, access to the freeway, lack of religion, lack of education, and all sorts of other excuses to justify their preference to be segregated with their own. Within this line of reasoning lies the false assumption that racism and segregation are a priori evils. Quite the opposite: In-group preferences and social cohesion are so strong and so valuable to a society that segregation, exclusion, and in-group favoritism are a priori good as well as a posteriori proven to be necessary to create a high-trust and high-functioning society. They are both logically and factually desirable.
No matter their politics, education, income, or religion, white people manage to build nice, safe, cohesive cultures for themselves. There is a unique core aspect to our people – some metaphysical white quality that we possess. Before you can have your religion, your environmentalism, your safety, your gun rights, and your free speech, you must first simply be in favor of strong white identity, white self-determination, and white conservationism. Without that, nothing else is attainable.
Those of us engaged in this grand struggle are the only people trying to save the world. This is not merely about our race; this is about everything. If we become a despised and persecuted minority in our own homelands, nothing will remain. The world will fall into a dark, dystopian nightmare without us. The gravity of the situation should foster a deep sense of purpose and duty. Thus, go forth and never apologize for taking your own side. Never apologize for being a part of our beloved race, which has bestowed civilization with everything it has and takes for granted today. Be proud of your history, your people, and in the face of looming despair, dare to proclaim that tomorrow we shall live.
33 comments
One of the best essays I have yet encountered on this topic. For anybody not yet well-versed in the subject who truly wants to know WHY the white race should be preserved or if he/she wants to know “what’s so special about white people?”, this is the essay I would recommend. Essential reading.
I totally agree with your post and couldn’t have praised Houck’s essay more highly myself. I’m coming late to reading this essay, but I class it as one of the best — a real call to our very core values.
Angry Feminists, militant minorities and homosexuals haven’t made a blasted thing work in 50 plus years yet are determined to overthrown a working platform with over 2,000 years of success. If they would never become life threatening I’d say let ’em have it but they’ll eventually bungle their way into death squads and torture chambers.
Good essay. Very inspiring.
One quibble: If you asked [devout Christians] if they would rather be neighbors with black Christians or white pagans, they would surely choose whites.
This statement is not true in my experience. To a devout Christian, a person who worships any ‘god’ other than Jesus/Jehovah are worshiping Satan. Such Christians would rather have their daughter raped by a non-White Christian (who they can then ‘forgive’ for their ‘trespasses’) — and raise the miscegenated issue of such a rape — than have that same daughter date (let alone marry and have children with) with a pagan, White or not. To the extent that Christians interact with pagans, it’s always with the cover-story of ‘bringing the pagan to Christ’ (even if, in reality, it’s about sexual attraction).
I don’t hate Christians, I just think their misguided about the importance of race. Christian rule under the Catholic Church was largely beneficial for the White race. Without the rubric of ‘Christianity’, it is unlikely that Europeans would have organized to repel the many Muslim invasions that culminated in the Crusades in the Holy Land that put the Muslims back on their heels until very recently.
The problem with Christianity is the same as that with liberalism and libertarianism: The false assumption that the values of White people are universal and non-Whites just need to be inculcated with the right ‘ideals’ to make non-Whites become like Whites.
Whites are the material anchor for Western Civilization. It’s well established that human beings are not ‘blank slates. We are born with conceptual and moral categories built in. White understanding of the proper way to treat animals, nature, women and children is innate (though unequally distributed) and it cannot reliably be transferred to other people of other races (though it does seem to ‘take’ for some non-Whites).
One of the mysteries of race is why it is that White culture is so much less virulent than non-White culture. In multiracial territories, for every ‘good’ non-White who operates within a White framework there are 100 Whites to embrace non-White attitudes and behavior (‘wiggers’).
I think this is due to the fact that European culture requires application and focus along with a concerted, sustained force of will to create and understand. How complex is rap music for instance? At best it will be a copied section of somebody else’s hard (possibly complex) work, looped and placed over a simplistic repetitive drum beat. This is then spoken over in a stylised manner and sustained for a few minutes with little variation. There might be a chorus, or some kind of refrain but nothing so complicated as a key modulation or time signature change. And that’s usually it. It wouldn’t take much brain power to be able to get into that and nod along, and listen to the commonly boastful, self-aggrandising ‘lyrics’ and feel the ‘vibe’ etc., to understand the usage of simile and pop-culture references which pass for ‘clever’. Recent masterpieces have consisted of a looped beat usually with a nursery school type one voice melody and a phrase of a couple of words repeated for a few minutes. These are not the products of a concentrated force of will and focus. They are impulsive, ad lib improvisations based on very little time-effort and revision. To engage with this is low-effort, low bar of entry. It’s like the fast food of behaviour – easy to access, cheap, uncomplicated, and rewarding to the limbic system in a similar way.
I have long held an idea that jazz arose from emancipated blacks being exposed to typically complex Western music, and in particular the classical canon, and being entirely unable to comprehend the deeper intricacies of the works, thus producing in response a kind of aimless ‘virtuosity’ based on speed and technique but without bringing in any knowledge founded in study of music theory, therefore being incapable of extending their music into the realms which European composers were adepts at incorporating. There’s none of the typical counterpoint which characterises so much of Western music, and which relies on a set of rules that cannot be played ‘in the moment’ between several players who are riffing, hence the well-known ‘solo’ which jazz utilises rather heavily where one voice takes precedence and the others merely repeat a phrase. I’ve always found it odd when people clap after one of these sections, even though the music is not over. It’s like clapping for a circus performer when they pull off a difficult acrobatic manoeuvre. Nobody ever claps a soloist in a classical concert whilst the piece is still being performed… or at least they shouldn’t unless they have no class.
Non-whites are overexposed and portrayed as being successful in our societies, mainly rappers, warbling soul-sister songstresses and sports people, and that’s a draw to the young, in particular those who have little in the world to look up to and who find that they can gain some kind of acceptance and feeling of a place in a hierarchy. They can join in and believe it’s their culture because nobody in their environment is telling them that that is not the case. And it’s usually needed to be young to start joining in with that culture as you won’t have had time to develop any sense of racial identity thanks to the bombardment from the system which tells you everybody is the same.
This is getting too long now, the focus on music is mainly because i see it as the easiest entry-point into engaging with that culture and emulating the behaviours. Our culture takes years of sustained effort before you get to a level of competence or understanding of it, and unless that begins in early childhood, instigated by the parents, the amount of organic exposure one is likely to receive is next to zero.
White “openness” to other cultures is (one of) the key(s) to our success; other races/ethnic groups are overly closed and introverted. This is how we evolve and progress. Our vice is a function of our virtue: going too far. There needs to be an Aristotelian mean between openness and ethnocentrism. (Which is why “become ethnocentric like Muslims” is just as suicidal as open borders).
You couldn’t be more wrong.
I don’t think of it as rules in stone but transitional when necessary – just as no form of government will always be ideal.
Upholding the race to ensure its existence at all times certainly must be core creed now given what we have experienced. But the state of our societies, I feel, need time being closed off and independent. Overindulgence in other cultures and peoples creates a very necessary withdrawal and detoxification just as war can function as catharsis.
If in the event we were somehow able to secure our existence in a meaningful way it would be centuries until we return to a more culturally open society.
Absolutely fantastic essay. Terrific.
Almost as good as I can write.
Seriously. A 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I intend to down load and copy and circulate.
A great statement and a great voice in a great cause.
I’m starting to refer to this problem as the “white paradox”. It’s almost as otherworldly as anything Enrico Fermi might have dreamed up. Our very virtues are the instruments of our collective self destruction.
Quite a few of E Michael Jones-style Catholics probably see Kanye West more like kin than other white people. He says he supports millions of Hispanic immigrants because many of them are Catholics.
I find the man contemptible in so many ways.
If E. Michael Jones could choose between a Europe populated for 100% with black Africans but devoutly Catholic or a Europe populated for 100% with Whites but non-Christian, he would choose the first. Because it is all about “Logos” and not race.
He does some good work in criticizing Jews and their “revolutionary spirit”, but for white survival he is useless if not detrimental.
Positive and inspiring stories!? Is the endless deconstructionism, negativity, and infighting taking a break?
Great article Rich.
This is exactly the kind of thinking that has to leave the pro-white space and never come back.
0 / 10
This line of argument for preservation of European peoples is predicated on the “general superiority” of the white race. In the general society, THIS IS called “white supremacy.” You guys will disagree, because you might – for now – not have a desire to conquer others, and you might insist that the desire to conquer is necessary for a “supremacist” ideology.
So then, you would need to admit that you are “white supreemists,” or “white triumphalists.”
But the differences are not too great. This is because you all are not thinking forward to the effect that this line of thinking would have in a few generations if it was to become normative. In a few generations, a nation of people who find themselves to be incredibly, inherently superior WOULD OF COURSE believe that it is good and right for them to go out and conquer the world. This is especially true if your belief in superiority is intense enough, and fundamental enough, to justify basing your own political system on it. If it is important enough to justify expelling the other from your own countries, why would it not be important enough to justify Imperialism? This is why the mainstream doesn’t draw a distinction. There have been writers on this site who have tried to soften readers to Imperialism.
I know this because we whites have done this before. Come on, dummies. Don’t make these same mistakes again. They were terrible mistakes.
And, @Greg Johnson, what are you doing, guy? How can you trash Richard Spencer while ALSO publishing these kinds of supremacist articles?
You are counseling dishonesty.
I suppose you would have counseled Charles Murray not to publish Human Accomplishment, which documents the overrepresentation of whites in every important field of endeavor.
I think whites can be completely honest about our race’s accomplishments and still maintain that ethnonationalism is the best form of government.
I do not agree. I’ll do my best to continue to clarify my stance.
There is a place for analyzing racial differences, HBD. These racial differences could have societal implications. For example, they could help inform the question of *why* certain races lag behind in certain regards, across countries and within countries. And if so, that would affect the diagnosis of “racial injustice” within a diverse country. There are a few other great uses for understanding HBD.
As for the achievements of your nation/people, there are places for this, for all nations. At times, it is good for a nation to feed its people moralizing messages about their greatness. This goes for Persians, Chinese, Jews, and us. These messages are confidence-inspiring, and can therefore help us achieve more and feel better about ourselves. It is kind of like the “superiority complex” aspect of Amy Chua’s Triple Threat; it is very good.
As for the books about white people achieving more than other races…I rather think they are biased, correct? This kind of thing is much less relevant here in 2019, as Chinese/East Asian people are kicking white people’s asses in science and mathematics. Whites still dominate Environmental Sciences, though. Which is a shame upon our race.
———————————————————————————————————
Where White Supremacy does NOT belong is in statecraft and as a justification for white survival.
Firstly, it should not be necessary. You yourself have explained that we could be the lowest of races and cultures, and still have a right to exist. There are plenty of nations that have successfully negotiated self-determination, despite not proving their “greatness.” So WS is extraneous.
Secondly, as I said earlier, there are weird cognitive effects of basing your political order on Supremacy. If you insist that a good, decent country can only be made of whites, and that non-whites are so destructive to a decent society that they must be COMPLETELY REMOVED ENTIRELY, what does that imply about the non-white countries? Wouldn’t it imply that they must be intolerably awful? Wouldn’t it imply that the countries full of brown people are inhumane “shitholes?” And if whites are so superior at civilization and statecraft, wouldn’t the humane thing for us to do, to be to somehow, maybe gently and subtly, maybe explicitly and openly, rule/administer the non-whites? THIS IS THE RICHARD SPENCER IDEOLOGY, GREG! This is literally what the guy you hate so much always says!!!!! And these are the very arguments he makes!!!!! If you disagree with this line of thinking, I’d love to see you debate Richard Spencer on it, so that you can get really deep into the real points of disagreement, because most people have a hard time finding them.
Now we all, personally, wouldn’t engage in Imperialism. Maybe we have trauma from historical documentaries, and can’t stomach this kind of will-to-power. Maybe we personally will be satisfied with Polands and Finlands, and will say that we just have to tolerate the inhumanely awful non-white countries because our moral stance is non-interference. Fair enough.
However, if we teach our children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren to think like this, how will these messages evolve through time? To be honest, most of us don’t *really* feel the White Supremacy in our bones, as we have lived in diversity and know that WS is exaggeration. But what will happen when your grandchildren become hardcore, true believers? There is an excellent change that they would think “Wouldn’t the brown people be SOOO much better off under the rule of the Master Race?” Five generations down the line, when white guilt doesn’t hold our descendants back, who knows if they will do the “humane” thing for the world, and try to rule it. Come on. Nazis didn’t come out of nowhere. Colonialism didn’t come out of nowhere. It came out of White Supreemism.
Lastly, there are huge optics issues. People have a moral aversion to chauvinism, whether it be nationalistic, sexist, or even just interpersonal. Societies are better without chauvinists, they are socially toxic people. This is why decent people in society hate chauvinistic rhetoric, and flee from the movement for white survival when they hear it. And, as I said in point 1, it is not necessary, so why do it? If we were to succeed in creating White Supreemist states, the entire non-white world would hate us with a violent passion for our chauvinism. I rather don’t want to try to negotiate trade deals or alliances under such conditions.
White Supreemism is a stupid, risky, and unnecessary tactic. There is a rare place for some morale-boosting about the achievements of whites. There is also a rare place in the world for some solemn racism. But the places are rare. And the WS rhetoric, in our movement, is nothing close to rare. And, as in the 7-11 pieces, this WS rhetoric is a keystone to many people’s argument for European ethnostates. It all needs to be burned to the ground.
Sutter, Don’t you think that the globalists who are demanding open borders for all white countries today want to rule over us? Do you really believe that their intentions are pure and have nothing to do with controlling the population of every country? If you trust these globalists, then you are the dummy.
My people have history that we can learn from now. Our ancestors had to learn the hard way through trial and error, but we can learn from our past and see that allowing a corrupt ruling elite to preside over nonwhites is not only immoral but is detrimental to whites’ well-being.
Whites MUST have homelands of their own in order to continue to exist and have self-determination, and on this there can be no compromise.
What you are saying is that a white superiority complex will inevitably lead to white supremacism and hence imperialism. In the past that was indeed true, but not now. Whites have learned from history.
Similarly the Japanese consider themselves as “superior” to all other peoples, but there is no ambition in Japan to translate that into imperialism. They too have learned from history.
Believe it or not, but there is such a thing as a “modest” superiority complex.
I did not say Imperialism is inevitable, I just said it could happen, and that I think it is rather likely.
I do allow some modest Supremacy, obviously. But it is not “modest Supremacy” to base your political system on white Supremacy. To do so, would be to make WS a FOUNDATIONAL part of your society, a CORNERSTONE of your political order. If race-realism is the basis for ethnic cleansing and a white political order, it must be an incredibly, overwhelmingly consequential thing. It makes no sense to be “modest” about WS if it is treated as being so overwhelmingly important. This is why our ancestors went in the directions they did: those directions were logical to them.
It is funny that you mention the Japanese. They had a superiority complex before WWII, but not much of one now. Do you know what happened in WWII to make them change?
I think the Asian countries in general, nowadays, have a bit TOO much respect for the West. It has been ticking off young Chinese people. In China and Japan, English signs are quite common. In Japan, western music dominates and controls their own musical tastes, and they themselves know that they are getting their music from the West. I’d say they view the West as rather equal.
Now, the Japanese spoof and malign the chauvinism of whites. I am a bit of an anime/manga lover, and in the past 10-15 years, chauvinistic white people are increasingly portrayed in anime/manga.
You can see white people acting chauvinistic in Attack on Titan and Black Clover, as examples of some of the popular ones.
White Supremacy is in the news worldwide, and the world hates it. If WS wins in the West, the world will spite the West with infinite fury. This is a really dumb idea.
@sutter:
“White Supremacy is in the news worldwide, and the world hates it. If WS wins in the West, the world will spite the West with infinite fury.”
I’ll do you one better: How about the fact that the vast majority of White people react with outspoken contempt to the idea that interracial breeding might be a bad thing? How about the fact that the vast majority of White people view non-whites as innocent victims of oppression, and view their own race as guilty oppressors who don’t deserve sympathy even when horrors like the Paki rape gangs in Britain that ran from 1997-2014 are exposed. How about the fact that the vast majority of White people, yourself included, are psychologically incapable of getting over themselves when it comes to the “White Man’s Burden,” which is the pernicious desire of Whites to constantly try – and fail – to “help” non-whites and “uplift” them because it is the “morally right thing to do?”
Personally, I think the biggest problem that Whites face is other White people. Many will disagree with that, but here’s the point: Do not concern yourself with what non-whites think, because at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what they think. What matters is what our own people think, and well, that ain’t looking so hot.
Thanks for your statement DP84, “I think the biggest problem that Whites face is other White people.” Our ethnic group has seen something of a transformation over the past half century or so. One significant portion of our group has managed to devolve into a new invertebrate species. It’s quite amazing! Unfortunately, one of the side effects, aside from the inability to stand upright, seems to be a degeneration of cognitive power. The pitiful wretches don’t seem to comprehend their condition, or for that matter, take notice of the environment they live in. It would be a sad story if it weren’t for the burden they place on the rest of us!
I agree wholeheartedly with DP84. At the end of the day, the supreme question is turning around White thinking, not worrying about what the other 200+ nationalities think. The vast majority of them are not facing demographic annihilation in their own homelands. We are. Take a look around you – we are in the final century of any kind of recognizable White homeland, anywhere. So of the 1,000 things I am currently worried about, the frequency of “chauvinistic white people” in Japanese manga appears nowhere on my list.
When someone you love is at death’s door, you try to revive him in any way you can; you don’t stand there idly fretting if one day he might oppose you or disappoint you in some way, hemming and hawing about whether it “could happen” or is “rather likely.” All of these imponderables about what might happen in 4-5 generations strike me as ludicrous. We are allowed some “modest Supremacy” (however one is supposed to interpret that phrase), but won’t someone please think of our great-great-great-grandchildren and their relations with Burkina Faso! In reality, we should consider ourselves lucky if our descendants survive the demographic bottleneck and grow up in a world that does not seek to eradicate them. If they survive, it will be in no small part because their ancestors gave them something to be proud of, rather than an incurable case of self-doubt worthy of Woody Allen.
P.S. What is “infinite fury”? And where on that scale is what we are suffering now?
@Sutter, you’re mis-attributing why Japanese manga is portraying white people negatively regardless. Japanese people have been soaked in American propaganda for a very long time and they preach the same trash to Asians that they do in our own countries. Whites are evil. Whites are responsible for all of the world’s problems. Contrasted with our numinous negro myth that is constantly perpetuated everywhere, also explains why in Japanese manga blacks are almost always portrayed positively. I remember watching an interview with a Japanese journalist and Jared Taylor. The journalist spewed the same anti-white nonsense back at Taylor about how oppressed blacks were.
Also in the case of China, Chinese people have a massive superiority complex and they are essentially taught that from a young age. Chinese people are basically told that whites demeaned and humiliated them for 300 years that is a much more powerful narrative than “they get their music from us” or some other cultural nonsense. They resent whites a great deal because their propaganda is enormously anti-white. Being proud of ourselves and acknowledging our accomplishments isn’t making that resentment happen. The full-blown anti-white rhetoric (which is preached globally) is.
I do not agree with your rant at all, though it was interesting, entertaining, and informative to read such a diverse opinion on these pages. I admit I am new to White Nationalism, but at 76, I have absolutely no desire whatsoever for supremacy or imperialism over any person or country. However, I will fight like a Scottish Wildcat to save Western Culture — Art, Music, Literature, History, etc. — from the depredations and scholarly ‘corrections’ by non-whites wishing to destroy and replace that culture, and ultimately our very people. Got that straight?
This article is so eloquently written. As a writer, Rich puts into words what many of us know deep in our hearts to be true, but have never spent the time to properly articulate it in such a concise and succinct manner. Furthermore, this is a reality to check for people who may mistakenly get swept up in the flavor of the month movement of the groyper. Placing religion before race is putting the cart before the horse.
Bravo, Rich! Well done article my fren.
We saw how bad it got under eight years of the anti-white Obomba administration. Just imagine being forever a minority, with your choice of places to live all being the likes of Detroit, Tijuana or Port-Au-Prince. The dystopian future is staring us all in the face. Leaving that to our future generations, instead of what was left to us, is pure evil.
Minorities in the West feel no gratitude or admiration towards whites for constructing prosperous, settled and technologically advanced nations. On the contrary they earnestly believe those achievements were stolen from their own peoples by white conquistadors, slavemongers and rapacious imperialists.
This narrative, once the preserve of lunatics, afrocentrists and Leninists, is gaining ground and is now being taught in schools and colleges, and commemorated with public monuments and holidays. We need to put out the message that it is a lie.
Ancient Greece alone made more cultural progress than China, India and the Islamic caliphate combined. The achievements of Europe and European peoples in arts, philosophy and sciences are without peer. As another poster points out one has only to compare the pitiful rubbish put out by ‘Stormzy’ and friends with Bach and Mozart.
Every day I read something on these pages that just makes my day. Today it was “This narrative (that white conquistadors, slavemongers and imperialists stole ideas from Africans in order to build white civilization) and which “was once the preserve of lunatics, Afrocentrists and Leninists” — just sent me into peals of laughter and provided me with my daily dose of pure merriement!
As a raving Anglo-Saxon — with a wee bit of Celt and Viking — I thank you profusely for making me aware that such nonsense is out there.
Wow ! Great article ! Sharing with my friends and family. And, oh yeah, make white babies. This is a love story – not a hate story. Love your genetic inheritance, love your ancestors, love your history. Believe your own eyes. Find a strong white mate – cherish them – and make lots and lots of beautiful white babies… and home school them if you can. It is your duty.
Thank you for this post which brings us back to ‘ground zero’ in our fight for survival. This is definitely a love story, which hopefully will result in magical new relationships that will bring forth new lives into our midst.
As an addendum, I don’t think the fine Christian nation of ‘The Congo’ would last five minutes if the white Christian missionaries and other do-gooders just decided to up and leave and go home to their own countries, along with the white businessmen.
A great article, utterly and uncompromisingly truthful, sobering and inspiring, that is worth repeated reciting and savoring.
The antidote to modern Christianity is the existence of the gnostic gospels and their non-orthodox teachings. A gnostic spiritual awakening is a deeper understanding of one’s self. That understanding must account for racial spiritual identity – and our uncreated self. (And, oh yeah, less reading more breeding white brothers and sisters)
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