1,434 words
The “Karen” meme has quickly spread like wildfire across Twitter. It’s a more easily referenced offshoot of the previously unnamed “I would like to speak to the manager” joke that was more broadly associated with tannie haircuts and Ray-Bans than anything else. Now that there’s a name for it, it’s easier to crack a joke, especially at the expense of those who seem to embody the trope’s worst attributes. The typical Karen is a white woman, enraged at some kind of slight, especially those that the Left finds ridiculous or appalling — like the alleged stereotype of white women calling the police on black men for existing.
This so-called Karen archetype has been defended as a sort of last stand for polite society. Karen would just like things to work right for once — who doesn’t want that? Her attitudes feel especially prescient given that we live in a world where things seem to be going wrong more and more often. When people that don’t speak your language or share your customs cause you problems in your everyday life, creating friction in the most mundane of activities, it might seem right to just scream and demand some kind of intervention by the authority in charge.
It is easier now to defend Karen from a position of white positivity simply because the term, like many, has been bastardized beyond recognition by leftoids of various stripes. “Karen” is devoid of any meaning beyond “white woman with an opinion I dislike” to the Twitter crowd, much like “boomer” simply came to mean “old person with an opinion I dislike” to the same group. To see white women ruthlessly mocked and attacked is enough for many of us to feel the need to defend them.
There’s just one problem with this. Karen is not a last stand for a nice, white country. Karen is a last stand for the status quo she grew accustomed to in the last several decades, a world in which her entitlement went unchecked and the underclass she could boss around didn’t talk back. The Karen archetype doesn’t have much of an identity, if any, beyond herself. She will harass white teenagers and Mexican fast-food workers with equal zeal. A Karen is merely a blandly conservative AWFL — they differ solely in the types of people that they love to complain about to the authorities.
It’s a sad reflection of the society constituting the United States that identities are now based almost entirely on who you think it’s appropriate to narc on. This is the result of a legal system and more general social morality that upholds egalitarianism and “blind justice” as a supposed virtue. When a member of your ingroup behaves “badly,” it’s in your interest to shield them from social or legal justice, especially if you believe the behavior they engaged in is not actually worthy of punishment. Conversely, the legal and societal codes of conduct can be used as a tool for raining down hellfire upon your enemies, as the Left has done to the Right for years.
Karens, functionally, form an ingroup of one. They got comfortable with the generally amenable heydays of the 2000s, and learned that they could often use the social punitive system to get what they want out of a given situation. They lack any real frame of reference for how life should be except for the way that their life has been. The peak of civilization for the serial complainer was the invention of social media, since they could now make scenes in front of the entire Internet.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here
Consider the sorts of situations that we inevitably see Karen in. They’re always upset about minutiae that are products of the decadent American experience, whether it’s her coffee order, her grocery coupons, or wily teenagers who dare to socialize on her barren cul-de-sac. She might be more benign than the average AWFL, who directs her attention towards more sympathetic targets — especially people on our side. But we stand to gain nothing from defending the neurotype of a bitchy woman. Her choice in victims is wholly incidental. We share no common ground with these types, as a Karen is more interested in maintaining a social order that is predicated upon immigration, wage-slave service positions, and a very atomized social structure. She doesn’t realize this, and will often appear to be opposed to such things, but this posturing falls apart upon any close examination.
Suburban housewives with bad attitudes lead very isolated existences. They have a comfortable roost they can return to, insulated from the other people, with whom she only engages during her errands. She’s dependent on some kind of serf class — whether that’s created by importing third-worlders or depriving her own kind is irrelevant — to do her bidding when she ventures out, and she gets very upset when this coddling atmosphere is disrupted. Karen isn’t raging against the death of the West, she’s raging against the logical outcome of the systems that previously made her lifestyle possible. Her unsustainable, typically male-funded and government-subsidized free ride is crumbling before her very eyes, and she’d like to speak to the manager about it.
Our movement is not built upon defending white women’s access to cheap and sugared coffee. It is built upon struggle, and will require dismantling just about everything that Karen knows and loves. Her life philosophy is bourgeois by nature — she wants a long, comfortable life, and is enraged by the denial of those things, not by the breakdown in social order itself. To assume we can court these kvetching mobs by couching our rhetoric in cheap, insincere platitudes about efficient grocery store checkouts would be exactly that — cheap and insincere. Karen isn’t interested in anything we have to offer — duty, honor, resilience — so why should we interested in anything that Karen has to offer?
It’s natural to be defensive of the social norms that prevail in your country of birth. That’s what a lot of this intellectual movement is shaped by, and why we might sympathize with those upset that it’s all going to hell. But it’s also important to recognize when these norms are not rooted in healthy, manageable modes of production and association. The United States has not been building resilient societies since at least the end of the Second World War, and especially not since the passage of the Immigration and Civil Rights Acts in the 1960s. The things that seem to popularly constitute the American lifestyle depend upon cheap labor, outsourcing, and micromanaging the sensibilities of vocally disruptive groups. Karen ultimately stands for nothing other than deracinated consumerism and her own indignation. The outspoken women of the day are little more than feminists attempting to lord power over their perceived inferiors. The backlash they’re receiving now was and is inevitable — it’s not enough just to be a woman anymore, as there’s plenty of aggrieved groups below them in the progressive stack.
An all-too-common error made by white nationalists is one that many white people make in their daily life. We like to assume the best of people, and in our case, we like to assume that almost all white people can be convinced of our ideas. We’re often willing to accept some very defective people simply because they express sympathy for our stated goals, and we also spend a lot of time rationalizing our pursuit of individuals that want nothing to do with us. Revolutionary movements have always been made up of a small minority of fighters. There’s no need for us to white knight for or court the interests of groups that are irredeemably damaged by the trappings of modernity — especially not bob-cut, middle-aged women with chips on their shoulders.
Karens are, by and large, an unpleasant anomaly in a society that is sick to the core. To defend them on the basis of astroturfed, idealized interests in a white society that they do not hold is to risk credibility and hazard guilt by association. At the end of the day, a bitchy woman is not some kind of Joan d’Arc weaponizing her shrill protests against the neoliberal global order.
She’s just a bitchy woman.
If you want to support our work, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every Friday.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
29 Comments
Her choice in victims is wholly incidental.
Within the context of racial awareness, this is never the case.
I don’t defend White ‘Karens’ because they are a ‘bitchy woman’. I defend White Karens because they are White and White Solidarity trumps all other concerns in our current situation.
#StandWIthWhite
Damn right HamburgerToday. You either stand with White, or you’re a shill for the Jews and their minority henchmen.
Amen. White Pride World Wide. Her motivations are wholly irrelevant. Every other race understands that ethnocentrism is the prerequisite for survival. Look at how politically powerful blacks are, and that’s only because of their willingness to form a bloc. We have to be our own bloc, in EVERY aspect of life.
I agree with Hamburger’s comment totally.
The problem with the tendency in this article is that some of these “bob-cut, middle-aged women with chips on their shoulders” could be your mother, or your aunt, or a friend of someone you know.
Look there are quite a lot of white people I don’t want to save. There are some I am honestly happy to just feed to the dogs. They are trash. They are maggots. They deserve their enriched helltopia, it’s all they understand. Let them have it. They are beyond saving. But I’m simply not convinced that’s the case from what’s being described in this article.
What purpose does it serve throwing her under the bus, for some silly elitist principle ? And where does this thinking end ?
I personally believe we have to carry the interests of whites in a broad sense, including some of their alleged failings, but again I’m not sure what Karen’s particular failing is exactly. I think we’ve just lost the plot if we now believe middle class housewives are some sort of barrier to us.
There are White people with whom any of us might have serious disagreements. My gut feeling is that most of those disagreements can be brought to an acceptable resolution as long as the discussion and negotiation is just among Whites. As White Nationalism moves forward, we should leave no White behind, no matter how degraded or deluded they might be. In the very worst cases, they can be (gently) quarantined from the population. Whites who cannot stop hating themselves and their kind would most likely welcome ‘social distancing’ from Whites who do love themselves and their kind. Self-segregation works.
Thanks, HT. My thought immediately. I dislike bitchy feminists, but I dislike minority incompetence and criminality (and oh so racial bitchiness!!) far more. Maybe the motivations of many “Karens” are not Occidentally metapolitical (Oh no! you mean “Karen” hasn’t spend decades pondering Spengler, Evola and Heidegger? can’t be!). But ANYTHING which causes any white to become aware of the dysfunctionality of any nonwhite – and to actually get in the minority (or their hiring managers’) faces and start bitching about it – is in itself a very good thing.
One can even be forgiven for imaging that, sometimes, noticing colored outrages just might be the first baby-step toward an eventual full-step Awakening. The more of that the better.
How embarrassing! I reread my now posted comment, and see a mistake.
Replace “imaging” with “imagining”. Thank you.
I see no reference here to the “Christian Cooper” incident that recently went viral, but the MSM is latching onto the white woman with the unleaded dog as a “Karen” (her name is Amy Cooper, no relation to the black man obviously). I wonder if you were aware of this incident when you wrote this?
I have to confess something. I find myself on the side of the black man in this situation. Not completely, he is an asshole for recording it and uploading it to Twitter and attention whoring about it. But at the heart of the matter, I really do dislike certain attributes that this woman displayed.
Who knows what happened before he started videoing. I have my doubts that he was really “bird watching”. I mean, that’s often male code for “checking out the women”, so maybe. But my guess is that he embellished the story by claiming to be doing something quasi-intellectual, or at least as non-threatening sounding as possible. Whatever, it doesn’t matter. Her dog was unleaded in an area where dogs are supposed to be leased. My feeling is that he was just scared of the dog (which seemed a bit aggressive in the video) and to be fair, he was within his rights to ask her to leash it.
So the questionable thing here is, we didn’t see how he handled the “asking”. Did he make a demand, did he speak to her in a threatening manner? Well, I’ll be honest, I don’t see why someone would behave in a threatening way, and then nonchalantly start videoing the response of the woman he just threatened. He might have been a bit rude, but I doubt he threatened her.
So this is where I take his side. Our “Karen” did something that women are apt to do. Overreact and get hysterical. And this isn’t just endemic to “conservative” type women, either. Nor white women exclusively. If you are an “internet Nazi”, you’ve seen the very same kinda of reactions from liberal women of all stripes. Threats to report you to the police for slightly racist or antifeminist humor or comments. Accusations of being an incel who can’t get laid, living in your momma’s basement. Being called a creep, or accused of stalking. When women don’t get their way about something, often their default is victimhood and power dynamic weakness. They use the only real weapon they have, their vaginas.
I really dislike this Christian Cooper for making the MSM rounds to glean his 15 minutes of fame from this. I dislike the pulpit that he’s being given. The truth is, this “Karen” would have just as quickly exploited a white man with damaging accusations given certain contexts. Maybe even in the exact same scenario. In fact, she might have even gone the “rapey” route had it been a white guy. It was low hanging fruit to pull the race card, but had the guy been white, she might have called the cops and said “a creepy white man is stalking me”.
UNLEASHED.
Spell correct changed it to unleaded for some reason.
He absolutely did issue a veiled threat. Christian Cooper had dog treats in his pocket and quoted himself on Twitter regarding her dog being unleashed.
“Look, if you’re going to do what you want, I’m going to do what I want, but you’re not going to like it.” So he meant to lure the dog from her with treats and do God knows what. Or perhaps it was an idle threat. How the Hell would she know?
Who died and some jogger park patrol agent?
He came up to her in a threatening manner. His words were intended to intimidate. Something like, well in that case, you won’t like what I’m going to do. He called over her dog and was pulling out dog treats.
Of course she felt threatened by some unhinged kaffir who wanted to play vigilante animal control officer.
According to his own Facebook post written by him, he threatened her. He says he told her that if she was going to keep doing what she was doing the he was going to do what he was going to do and ‘she wouldn’t like it’. Then he started to call her dog and pulled dog treats from his pocket that he says he uses to lure unleashed dogs. A reasonable inference of poisoning could be made.
Ok I stand corrected. He obviously was issuing threats, if he had admitted to them. I was ignorant of the full scope.
So this means that we effectively can no longer identify a potential assailant by any racial characteristics whatsoever (even the previously PC “African American” identifier) when reporting a potential crime in progress to police.
Hello police!!?? An upper primate of the human variety, it appears, is threatening my dog! Describe them? Human! Not tall but not short, and their weight should not matter to you! I’m not sure what pronoun they use, I’m afraid to ask! but please hurry!!
I also wondered if this article had to do with the Amy Cooper-incident.
I’m a bit surprised that Christian Cooper was wearing a blue face mask and is pictured by media as doing so regularly given the relation to the whole street gang culture. There’s even an active Crips chapter in New York. Is is normal for blacks to walk around with gang paraphernalia and then go ‘bird-watching’? I also had a sneaking suspicion that something happened before the filming started and I see it confirmed here. How dare she identify her assailant to the police!
“So because of my predilection to be suspicious of female motives, I find it hard to fully submit to every scenario simply because they are white. In this case I will defer to the antiwhite narrative, simply because the black man admitted to threatening her dog. But I can’t mindlessly do this every time.”
Having been there I understand how you feel and you don’t really have to take a side but perhaps when you’re asked to next time, remember this absolutely cringey Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/FTI_US/status/1265348185201008641
Because oh boy, they certainly are going to take sides against you when you’re doxed no matter how reasonably you present your case. It’s really not about gender or truth when these people call for her to be replaced with an African. It’s about race.
If we lived under real law instead of the mummery of ‘civil rights law’, the ‘Karens’ of the world world would like not exist. If this was Amy Cooper trying to ruin a White man, the problem would be more complicated, but that’s not the situation. The situation is Entitled Black Man vs Entitled White Woman. All I need to do is see the words ‘Black’ and ‘White’ and I know which side I am on. White Solidarity is the only way forward. Mindless, relentless, intransigent White Solidarity. #StandWithWhite
B.S.
Karen’s aren’t attacked because they’re bitchy, or mildly conservative or anything besides the fact that they are white.
The latest Karen wa as threatened by a black man while walking her dog without a leash. This incident will discourage white women from calling the police on threatening black men. Do you know what comes of that? More dead white women.
Congrats. You disgust me.
Yes. People should have figured out by now that every symbolic attack is either a prelude to a physical attack or a method for covering up a previous physical attack. The choice is clear: White Solidarity or White Genocide. I #StandWithWhite.
I am very suspicious of some negro male claiming to have been out just bird watching, and in an area where many White females are (dog walking). Please. How many negroes, male or female, do bird watching? I would not at all be surprised to find out he was there to see if he could catch a White female alone to do some kind of sex crime.
This particular scenario lends itself to the interpretation that Buck is gay man cruising in Central Park. ‘Bird watching’ is a nice cover for such a thing as it non-threatening. ‘Birdwatcher’ is to Black homosexuals what ‘jogger’ is to Black thieves.
The #Karen meme is an anti-white & anti-civilization canard.
Carin’ about standards is what makes civilization possible.
Talking to the management is sometimes the first step to the realization that our country has been stolen & the management is complicit.
I side with white people who give a damn. #ICallWithKaren
I agree that we have to sometimes “bite our tongues” to fight antiwhite attacks, but for many of us, myself included, this is very difficult, because we have personally been the recipient of false accusations at the hands of a scorned woman.
There’s explicit pro-white vs antiwhite politics, and then there’s generally “right wing” vs “left wing” politics. Usually these dichotomies aren’t in conflict. Nationalism is the true right wing, after all, and nationalism inherently creates an imperfect solidarity, even between the sexes.
It’s when you try to behave as nationalists within the context of the chaos that is democratic liberalism that we become a bit incoherent at times. I am by nature against the “believe all women” bullshit. We had a robust debate about this in the case of Weinstein. Sometimes you have to see past the racial and ethnic grievances to (at the very least) conclude that both sides of some situations are essentially one evil against another equal evil. Fame and money hungry whores are just as evil as Jewish movie producers with casting couches. They both deserve each other at the end of the day.
So because of my predilection to be suspicious of female motives, I find it hard to fully submit to every scenario simply because they are white. In this case I will defer to the antiwhite narrative, simply because the black man admitted to threatening her dog. But I can’t mindlessly do this every time.
Society is certainly stacked in favor of feminists and against men – esp White men and esp White Real men. And women abuse their new status in this PC hellhole.
But I think many “Karens” (to the limited extent I grasp this phenomenon – most of my time online is spent at intellectual sites like CC, or very apolitical/practical ones, and I don’t watch TV) are less entitled feminists than Old School White women who complain about deviance or have certain behavioral expectations which are the product of the “old days” (pre-Diversity) and which lead them to complain about declining standards, often associated with nonwhites. My aged mother fits that bill exactly, as do some of her neighbors. As they die off, we are the worse for it.
And anyway, in almost any conflict between White and nonwhite, the White is in the moral right. I would say, objectively, 99% of all interracial conflicts involve White victims, nonwhite perps. So without very, very strong evidence to the contrary, the proper position in any such interracial conflict is to take the White side (and I would say this even for a nonwhite who cared about justice).
Being a “fame and money hungry whore” is just ordinary human sin. We are not saints.
“Jewish movie producers with casting couches” are lording over our entertainment industry. We should treat them as enemy combatants, members of an occupying force.
Women should not be whores. But if they are whores, they should limit their whoring to their fellow white people.
Unfortunately, our friend-enemy detection systems are fatally compromised. Yours too.
This argument reminds me of the Jussie Smollet (sic perhaps) blunder. When it came out that Jussie lied, the media and the politicians defended him, which further called their motives into question.
Dave Chapelle did the opposite. He immediately threw Jussie, one of his own people, straight under the bus.
So you tell me. Did Dave betray his blackness by betraying Jussie? Was his reaction a major civil rights set back? Did people stop supporting open borders because of what Dave said? Of course not.
If anything, Dave’s reaction to the Jussie Smollet situation boasts his meta political prowess. He took an optics nightmare, like Smollet, and won the day with a few jokes.
This is the battle we have to fight. We can’t be seen coming down in the wrong side of these issues. People will be repulsed by our defense of people like Karen.
And don’t get me wrong. I can side with Karen to the extent that she actually cares about standards.
But the argument is that Karens don’t care for standards as much as they care about having a minority underclass to abuse at their leisure.
In this regard, she’s not someone who should be supported.
“But the argument is that Karens don’t care for standards as much as they care about having a minority underclass to abuse at their leisure.”
Man, have you ever internalized the enemy’s propaganda!
Can someone link to his Facebook post?
Have to disagree. I want all white people to be able to have long, comfortable lives if they want them. White people shouldn’t have to struggle against poverty just for the sake of it. I want efficient grocery store check outs, and Karens to be able to buy cheap, sugary coffee for drinking when driving their five kids to summer camp in an SUV. Karen stands for white standards of behaviour and service. Karens did and thought everything they were told too and are discovering they have been lied too, that the brown checkout goblins are actually surly if not dangerous and violent. It’s the current year, there is no reason for Karens not to feel entitled to a safe country with a economy that’s pleasant to be in.
I didn’t think it was possible to misinterpret a meme so badly. “Karen” had nothing to do with upholding standards. It’s entirely about a sense of entitlement in low rent trailer trash. If karen was about holding standards they would start with their own grooming standards and fashion choices. Lose the never fashionably acceptable mudshark haircut and their wardrobe of love pink sweats and bootcut jeans. However, ironically most of the time I see people doing Karen shit they’re black.
This conflict is an opportunity to demonstrate that our side is not hostile to women, contrary to accusations. This is especially important at a time when the left suffered a few blows that highlighted that feminism is expedient to them, most notably with Biden. Even trannies are more important to them, as can be seen with TERF scandals. Given the lack of impact that WN discourse has on the public, this is also about sorting our own stance.
The article correctly says that Karen has come to mean “white women” (not even with an opinion) in common parlance, but then veers off into an overly particularistic definition that is no longer really correct. It’s clear that Amy Cooper is suffering ostracism because she is white and the other man is black. This again reinforces the message to white women that their demographic credentials are nothing for the left.
Generally, there is no reason to treat white nationalism as anti-feminist or especially traditionalist. White nationalist regimes like Australia, New Zealand, Rhodesia were some of the first to implement women’s suffrage. Subcultures like the skinheads had skinhead girls in heavy boots, jeans, etc. Many of the prominent WN spokespeople are women. Nationalist parties like the National Front or AfD are often led by women, and contrary to ideas about ‘anti-woman’ women like Thatcher, these parties are socially pretty liberal on sex. Working class white women understand all this, but the middle class are brainwashed into a kind of delusion that combines racial self-hatred with the belief that gender exonerates them from being hated by the ethnic minorities.
It is important not to forget this and not get too influenced by the men’s rights opposition.