White Nationalism: What Was the Question Again?Jim Goad
Hello, all ye white people of Counter-Currents. It is my sincerest wish that you are having a day that is so unapologetically white, it renders everyone in your immediate vicinity permanently snow-blind.
Although I occasionally drift into writing about other subject matters because I’m not a monomaniac, the record will show that I’ve been a persistent vocal opponent of anti-whiteness since 1991, ever since I referred to myself as “white trash with brains” in the opening editorial to the first issue of my short-lived magazine ANSWER Me!
It was shortly before then that I realized we were trapped in a society that encouraged nonwhite identity while demonizing white identity, and I haven’t shut up about this catastrophic double standard for a moment over those three decades.
Ever since the mid-90s, and due to the fact that I’ve never hidden my identity or my true feelings, I’ve taken a series of very public lumps at the hands of an odd collusion of rape-hysterical feminists and a tight-assed Mormon DA who wanted to send newsstand owners to prison for selling my magazine. . . I’ve been blamed for some Hispanic Satanist head case who shot at the White House and quoted my writing in the process. . . I’ve been fingered for the suicides of three young British Goth-Nazis. . . I’ve gone to prison for hitting back some violent lunatic woman who had the entire legal system behind her merely by dint of having a vagina, even though we allegedly live in a patriarchy. . . and I’ve been repeatedly attacked in the streets of Portland by anti-racist skinheads who had carte blanche from City Hall to beat up anyone they tagged as a “Nazi.”
When the half-dozen or so of those proto-Antifatards grilled me about why I was wearing an iron cross necklace, I said, “It’s a white thing — why don’t you punch me?” And one of them did. And even though I was on parole, I beat his ass in front of his homeboys — in defense of being white. And I wrote about it under my own name, offering to fight any one of them.
I doubt that one in a hundred of you has that level of guts. But holy fuck, are you “brave” online, especially when no one knows your name.
Ever since I entered the Counter-Currents stable a week or so ago with an audible splash, commenters have started carping about how I’ve allegedly said “white nationalism is wrong” or that it “doesn’t work” or that I’ve somehow taken pains to morally distance myself from any of you.
Nope. It’s simple social distancing. The fact that you’re a white person doesn’t immunize you from the fact that you’re a person.
The misunderstanding — and that’s exactly what it is, and it’s solely on your part — stems from the fact that when I’m asked point-blank if I’m a “white nationalist,” I say that I’m not. And when asked to explain why, I say very clearly that I was born without a group instinct.
Never once have I said “white nationalism is wrong.”
If you’d been paying attention instead of desperately trying to flex your ideological purity for all the world to see, you’d realize that never once do I make any moral judgment about anything. All I ever focus on is true and false, not right or wrong. You can comb every word I’ve ever written or spoken, and the only things I find to be objectionable are lies and inaccuracies. That’s it. I’m that cold and clinical about it all.
So is it my lack of womanly romanticism and a need to huddle within a crowd’s warmth that offends you?
I get absolutely no joy being around people or feeling like I’m part of a social movement. That is an utterly sincere statement. I’ve been that way my entire life, I will always be that way, and your attempts to shame me out of being that way will backfire every time.
All I’ve ever made clear — sorry, it’s clear to me, but apparently it needs to be explained very carefully hundreds of times to many of you — is that my neurological wiring is that of either an introvert or an Aspie or a sociopath. Take your pick; it doesn’t really matter to me. I trust neurology over ideology, and one day I believe brain scans will be able to distinguish a party animal from a wallflower. On that day we will have scientific proof that I haven’t been lying about not being a “group guy.”
I doubt there’s anyone reading this who’s tried explaining their real feelings about race to an anti-racist without having the listener gaslight you by saying something along the lines of, “Well, sure, that’s what you say, but what you REALLY THINK is this. . .”
Guess what? You guys do that, too, and it’s equally as annoying — perhaps even more so because you’re blind to how divisive it is.
Take, for example, a review of my book The New Church Ladies on this site by a certain “Jef Costello,” which I’ve been informed to my amusement is a pseudonym. Yes, brave e-warrior “Jef” pretends he knows what I really mean — search for the word “translation” throughout that review. He also accuses me of posing and doing “shtick,” which is an egregious act of bad faith on his part.
He even commits the unpardonable sin of accusing me of seeking social approval, or at least of seeking to avoid social disapproval.
In what universe does that even make sense? Everyone who isn’t a white nationalist thinks I’m a Nazi regardless of what I say, whereas the dyed-in-the-wool “movement guys” accuse me of being an insincere poseur. I wind up getting shit from all sides, so how does social approval even factor into this?
Here’s the money quote from “Jef’s” review:
One also senses that Goad’s “I hate everyone, so I don’t belong anywhere” pose is a way to forever avoid any real commitment to a cause. Such commitment would, of course, require that Goad drop the adolescent rebellion bit, grow up, and form real alliances with others who are trying to do some good by combating the evil that Goad often brilliantly savages. But everyone keeps telling me that he doesn’t play well with others. Too bad, because if Goad actually took stock of where he falls on almost every position he takes, he would be a real asset to the struggling, divided movement that is trying to save his people and his culture.
He “senses” it? Guess what, “Jef”? You have shitty senses. Time to send back that slightly scuffed crystal ball you purchased on eBay.
Mind you, I’ve bitten my lip for three years about that review until now. From my perspective, I’m not the one who’s turning away potential allies — it’s the purity-spiralers such as the pseudonymous “Jef” who haven’t taken nearly as many punches in battling anti-whiteness as I have, yet are the mirror image of fanatical woketards who can’t wait to cancel anyone who is only 99% as “woke” as they are.
If you’d been paying attention, “Jef” and every one of your ilk who hide behind wacky pseudonyms such as “XYYMan” but who shit their pants at the thought of being doxed, it wasn’t until this moment that I’ve criticized any of you for being weak-minded herd animals whose brains have never shat out an original idea in your lives. Nope, the insults have only flown in one direction — toward me.
Ultimately, though, when you try explaining individualism to a Herd Brain, it’s like trying to explain lesbianism to a house cat; they just stare at you and then start licking themselves again.
I’m starting to suspect that people who are socially wired are neurologically incapable of conceiving that anyone is sincerely different than them in that regard, so if they claim to be different, it somehow is a lie told in the service of seeking social approval. They truly seem to be THAT clueless.
They don’t see how pathetically hilarious it is to hide anonymously in a crowd and accuse someone who’s never hidden of cowardice.
From their words and actions, I suspect that most people filter reality through moralistic and social lenses.
From my observation, though, the cosmos is sadistically amoral and stubbornly antisocial.
And yet it’s the highly sociable and passionately moralistic ones who seem to think I’m the one with a cognitive problem here.
And you’d have a much better chance convincing me otherwise if you didn’t storm out of the gate hurling insults, especially such misguided ones.
If you’ve read this far, I’ll assume that you’re white. And whether it’s a white/Jewish Antifa mob in the streets or a group of BLM coon-dogs who are head-hunting whites in the streets, when they encounter us, all they will see is a white person.
They won’t give a fuck if you’re a traditionalist or a futurist or a pagan or whether you think we should work within the system or if you believe there is no political solution — how would they know any of that?
All they care about is your skin color, because they’re gullible and religious-minded enough to have been brainwashed into thinking that your skin color denotes evil and that you should be killed for it.
It’s a good bet that not one of those anti-white headhunters is remotely aware of all the purity-spiraling, nitpicking, and status-jockeying that goes on in these “dissident” circles.
Unfortunately, I’m intimately aware of it. I’ve been accused by white nationalists, nearly all of whom cower in anonymity, of being “not one of us” with such bile so many times, it kills any desire I may have ever had to be one of you, not that I would have ever had such a desire. But it’s a definite turnoff.
Are you so naïve about human psychology that you think you can scold people into taking your side? No, that’s how you make enemies, at least if the person you’re scolding has a spine.
It’s as dumb as the anti-racist skinheads who thought they could punch me into toeing their party line. You’re not going to win converts by being prissy, bitchy little pricks.
Regarding white nationalism, my main question is this: How exactly do you plan to pull that off, especially within a two-party system? Can we at least agree that there seems to be a huge mass of obstacles in the way before that’s achievable?
For all the years I’ve spent getting my ankles wet wading in these backwater swamps, I can’t remember spending five minutes reading anyone’s concrete plans for exactly how they plan to build this ethnostate.
If living in an all-white country means I’ll be living in a place where the population hasn’t been brainwashed since birth into thinking I deserve to be killed merely for having European DNA, that sounds nice.
If it means having to constantly rub elbows with a bunch of tiresomely petty sniping backstabbing corny-ass fanatics who are constantly scrambling to out-white one another, that sounds like a screaming bore.
Groucho Marx, one of the funniest Jews who ever lived, famously said he’d never want to join a club that would have him as a member.
Likewise, if heaven is filled with Christians, I’ll gladly take hell.
And if the ethnostate is going to be packed to the rafters with humorless medieval LARPers who mistakenly think they’re able to read my mind, fuck, I’d rather live in Harlem.
All I’ve ever said is that I don’t approach these matters from the same angle as many of you do. But until today, I’ve never felt the need to personally attack any of you based on our differences.
But am I the only one who realizes how trivial our differences are?
Contrary to what so many of you seem to think, we don’t need to like one another or agree on everything.
All we need to agree on is the fact that war has unequivocally been declared on us. And it’s a war based in biology, not ideology. And due to biology, we’re all in this war together. We don’t have a choice.
If you want to support Counter-Currents, 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 weekend on DLive.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
‘If you’d been paying attention instead of desperately trying to flex your ideological purity for all the world to see, you’d realize that never once do I make any moral judgment about anything. All I ever focus on is true and false, not right or wrong. You can comb every word I’ve ever written or spoken, and the only things I find to be objectionable are lies and inaccuracies. That’s it. I’m that cold and clinical about it all.’
Wow a person who is entirely disinterested and objective.
The cold, dispassionate sniper hits the most targets.
Bravo, Jim … only in this time of confining conformity across every political spectrum would a free soul who is an unapologetic individual have to make a case like yours. It’s a very compelling indictment of the hampering herd-think that has infected the right, even as they accuse the left of being shallow for the very same sin. You’re the Sgt. York of this era … resistant, on moral grounds, to the notion of mindless carnage, but a far more lethal soldier than most when tested.
Yeah thats what the White race needs to be more individualistic and atomised!
I see the Goadfly has registered a palpable hit.
For myself, it seems likely that the sui generis, or the few among us willing to stand alone, will prove the most fit to move the dial, nudge the Overton etc.
And I take Goad’s thymotic vent in the spirit of honesty & clearing the air …not to mention that there are olive branches strewn throughout if you can peer past the cacti.
I think it’s pretty obvious he’s not encouraging us to be anything. He’s just explaining how he, himself, personally is.
Tell me, are you so accustomed to sheepishly follow what someone else says that you understand everything as an imperative?
There were White misanthropes, odd-men-out, and loners when Europe and North America were much Whiter than they are presently. They’re still around now. They would still be around in the ethnostate. Goad understands that you’re White whether you want to be or not. Your side was chosen for you by nature. Goad is step forward. You’re the one sowing discord and screeching about the crooked picture frame while the fucking house is burning down. This is extremely Jewish behavior.
We’ll said, Sandra Lynn, and I especially like the comparison with Sgt. York. One of the great strengths of some traditional white cultures was the allowance and even encouragement of those “free souls.” That hasn’t always been the case in alt-right circles, or whatever they should be called now.
There is an ideological purity problem on the Right that harms its mission. When good minds like Goad and Jordan Peterson are relentlessly attacked by figures on our side, it’s a distraction, causes division, and turns off decent-minded potential converts. Not everyone needs to be a full-fledged supporter of the Old South or National Socialism to do good work. There should be room for admirers of Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill, and for anyone who stands outside of a specific ideological framework.
‘If you’d been paying attention, “Jef” and every one of your ilk who hide behind wacky pseudonyms such as “XYYMan” but who shit their pants at the thought of being doxed, it wasn’t until this moment that I’ve criticized any of you for being weak-minded herd animals whose brains have never shat out an original idea in your lives’
Speaking as a person who went from being an atomised individual brainwashed liberal to being a racially conscious pro-White through independent thought this sounds like utter bullshit. Maybe you always were a free thinking renegade… maybe not and it is just a literary persona. I’m guessing the latter as almost nobody in life is always ideologically consistent-cool as it may sound.
By the way the whole ‘you are anonymous and therefore a coward’ stchick is really lame- especially in the age of mass deplatforming. By your standards most pro-White advocacy would never happen, people having jobs and mortgages and such.
I heard you on the podcast with the editor here complaining that at Takis magazine they never let you vent your full vitriol and yet this is your third essay here and you are already insulting the other writers and the readers and commenters.
Personally I have come a long way to seeing through radical centrism and false equivocations between radical leftists and people who have seen the Jewish problem (Jews dominate the modern world) i.e. the Alt right. Maybe you can collaborate with Sargon of Akkad?
But goodness what do I know I am just another anonymous shithead not even half your age who instead of growing up in White dominated environment must instead make my way in a world where I am demonised. Forgive me if I cannot afford the ironic distance.
How did being an individual work out for you by the way? You are after all here writing on a White nationalist website whose editor you have previously fallen out with through lack of choice.
Yours truly a (anonymous!) weak minded herd animal.
Quote “Maybe you always were a free thinking renegade… maybe not and it is just a literary persona. I’m guessing the latter as …”
Doing the mind-reading, just as he predicted you would. Sad. This is the takeaway core of his piece, IMO – also how the anti-Vietnam war protests were successful – why the anti-white movement is successful, now – sticking to ONE message and avoiding infighting:
It will be interesting to see how the comments section blows up after this one! Jim is my hero for a number of reasons, not the least of which is his whooping that Antifatard’s ass right in front of his boys. Legend. And I’ll be stealing “Antifatard” as an insult, thank you very much!
I’m partial to the term “Pantyfag” but that works well too.
The last thing CC needs are the necromancers of old grudges. Also, Goad, you’re not important enough to dedicate entire articles to yourself only – nobody else here does this without very good reasons. Settling petty scores doesn’t seem like a good enough reason for me.
And bravo to you for being openly obnoxious instead of hiding behind pseudonyms like the rest of us – it’s almost like many of us have something left to lose. I doubt anyone on the left ever bullied Stalin for using a pseudonym. The fact that you don’t care about being self-destructive has no bearing on the rest of us.
At the same time, there’s something to be said for sacrifice. Somebody has to do it, and our progress (or lack thereof) can be largely attributed to the number of our people who refuse to take risks.
Absolutely. Most people don’t get punched in the face and walk away from that unchanged. I’m not denying Jim’s struggles, I’m sure his struggle is the same as ours and I’m sure they’re what made him who he is today. But, to be blunt, equality is a myth and no two people are the same. Maybe if I get punched in the face like Jim was, I wouldn’t be able to fight back quite as effectively and overcome it. Does that make me a lesser white nationalist? I don’t think it does. White advocacy has long been the realm of meatheads who can take punches and dish them out as well, but CC has always been more of a site for Poindexters. I think Poindexters and Meatheads need one another, as any revolutionary movement worth its salt has a proper equilibrium of thinkers and doers.
Well thought. The association between pro-whiteness and low class-ness and plain thuggery (even if often undeserved) has hugely hampered the cause of Western and white preservation. People like Wilmot Robertson, Jared Taylor, Sam Francis, Kevin MacDonald, and Greg Johnson are or have been huge assets to our cause. The target audience we want to reach (or should want to and MUST) are upstanding conservatives, respectable people who are “mainstream” in the old (“white”) sense, but are now feeling dispossessed (as they have been and should feel) by the runaway train of “diversity”, which everyone now understands (as only some of us did back in the 70s, 80s, 90s) is really “antiwhiteness”. We are not going to reach these good people – MY people (I hope OUR people) – by the kind of tattooed a-hole in the cartoon above (even if I personally dislike the association of the 14 Words – to which no one can object – with this obvious jerk, as though there is some natural link between being an a-hole and embracing the 14 Words). Jared Taylor was correct in his original thought that our cause is obviously just and right, and thus that we must sanitize it in our people’s “public mind” (but ONLY in OUR people’s mind; we should not care what our racial enemies or competitors think or feel about us and our moral cause).
“I doubt anyone on the left ever bullied Stalin for using a pseudonym. ”
Vauquelin, I served with Joe Stalin. I knew Joe Stalin. Joe Stalin was a friend of mine. Vauquelin, you’re no Joe Stalin.
What level of pussy does one have to be to feel “bullied” from behind their pseudonym?
The same level of pussy I’d assume you have to be to feel slighted by anonymous comments.
I’m truly sorry you felt attacked, Jim Goad, but I’m sure that whatever criticism you received in prior comments and the reaction you’ve penned up now is all sparring in good faith. It’s obvious the nuances of white nationalism haven’t been worked out just yet, but with criticism and arguments such as these we progress to answers. Let’s not turn arguments into squabbles.
“The same level of pussy I’d assume you have to be to feel slighted by anonymous comments.”
Seeing as how one side is hiding and the other is not…how one side is making personal attacks and the other is merely responding to them…how one side used the term “bullied” and the other side didn’t…and how one side has risked nothing and the other side has risked everything…I’ll have to conclude you’re not very good at analogies.
The amount of stock you put into writing under your own name sounds more like self-aggrandization than some well-thought ethical stance.
Calm down, Goad. This isn’t “da yard.” Everyone knows you’re hard (that’s your schtick and you’ve done it ad nauseum), but you don’t have to go a-shankin’ every time someone “disses” you.
Sixty-something-year-old men who “Hear ye! Hear ye!” their pedigrees every other time they speak need an intervention. And since, doubtless, everybody IRL knows better than to waste their time doing that with the “smartest guy in the room” (who’ll just invective then to death), anonymous comments will have to do.
Dissent for dissent’s sake, contrary to what people who like to say “gadfly” think, is worthless.
Nobody cares about, much less is impressed with anybody’s individualism, certainly not in this day and age. Your well-known poor tolerance of criticism is a ridiculous and impossible quality for someone who addresses the public. What’s the meaning of these spontaneous outbursts? None of this is really that new to anybody who didn’t wake up this year from a decade-long hibernation.
I may have missed the point, but this article seems to be a rejection of political strategy.
Not everyone has to care about political strategy to be on or provide value to our side. Alienating those people with frustration or autism isolates us to our detriment. Even just gaining acceptance, normalization, is huge. Imagine if even a third of whites looked at us and thought ‘I don’t care,’ or ‘I don’t fully agree…but you guys are alright’. How different would things be for us?
Not necessarily a “rejection of political strategy” as much as an honest admission that I don’t know what would work.
But if there’s a strategic point to be made, it’s this: By acting like humorless, henpecking schoolmarms, many of you alienate TONS of people who otherwise have no problem with you. Basic human psychology, guys.
I used to carry your magazines in my bookstore and suffered a punch to the head, when I dared carry your ‘rape’ issue. Your ‘Greatest Hits’ was a huge hit with the local police department, though they sent their wives and girlfriends in to buy it. Anyhow, I always appreciated your unwavering honesty.
On the contrary, the political strategy is this:
“All we need to agree on is the fact that war has unequivocally been declared on us. And it’s a war based in biology, not ideology. And due to biology, we’re all in this war together. We don’t have a choice.”
That pretty much sums it up. All the other political issues are pretty much irrelevant, when people want you dead.
Yes, and the answer to that problem, the only logical one, would be to encourage race consciousness in white society and promote white nationalism. To shy away from that is to shy away from the solution.
All in all this is just a discombobulating piece.
Without the merest self-awareness or hint of irony, the pseudonymous “Vauquelin” accuses me of “shying away.” Super-WHOOSH!
Yes, I realize people can lose their jobs these days for saying what I’ve been saying in public for the past 30 years. I learned this lesson long before most of you did. I thought I detailed how I’ve repeatedly been antagonized both legally and physically by the left for this—how I actually fought in the streets over this when outnumbered not only 6-1 but by a Portland city government that gave these clowns carte blanche to punch all “Nazis.”
You think I don’t have bills to pay and a mortgage?
Also, some people seem to think I’m attacking the entire commentariat here. I thought I made it pretty clear that I was only addressing specific commenters who’d anonymously accused me of cowardice and seem to think they’re entitled to throw punches without getting knocked out in return.
Please, if you’re going to criticize this article, come up with some new material.
Well spoken. Sometimes I also get called out for being insufficiently radical, and I don’t care for that, but lashing out at my audience would be the wrong response.
I was replying to “Sick Of BS.” Well, heck.
I hope this doesn’t turn out to be your version of the “I Hate the Commenters” column that Gavin wrote for Taki’s.
You might not like me, because I’m not yet willing to lose my job for thought crimes, but I have enjoyed reading just about every column of yours I’ve ever read, and I’ve been reading them for a while. This one is the rare exception.
“You might not like me, because I’m not yet willing to lose my job for thought crimes”
Do and be whatever you want. I have no emotional investment in that. I’m not the divisive purity-spiraler in this equation.
I’ve been very specific in the type of keyboard warrior I’m addressing here. What people seem to be missing is how ironic it is for people who are terrified of revealing their identity but are so blind to their hypocrisy that they don’t see the irony in calling me a coward. That’s when I get involved.
Regarding white nationalism, my main question is this: How exactly do you plan to pull that off, especially within a two-party system? Can we at least agree that there seems to be a huge mass of obstacles in the way before that’s achievable?
For all the years I’ve spent getting my ankles wet wading in these backwater swamps, I can’t remember spending five minutes reading anyone’s concrete plans for exactly how they plan to build this ethnostate.
A few thoughts:
Political organization, networking, communicating ideas — all these things are obviously social activities. It is not a lone individual that can or will win the day but rather the successful political animal. Or the political animal who is successfully minded.
There seem to have been a few people (I am just musing out loud here) who have functioned like sacrificial victims to the genuine cause of ‘white well-being’. To some extent I see Spencer like this. Everyone who takes a really public stand receives all the attention but then is, more or less, destroyed. The System we live under has that capability. It can destroy who is wishes. It has that power. All the resources of the State as it were.
Pull-off white nationalism? Pull-off achieving an Ethno-State? I would refer to Greg Johnson’s recommendation of a slow reversal of what has been done over 50-60 years of insidious effort. There is no way that such a thing will be ‘pulled-off’ and the metaphor simply does not work. The time that we are in, the process of decay, will have its own determining direction. In my own view, therefore, the principle ‘thing’ needed is the enlightened communication of ideas to those who, now, think and see very differently from how many of us think and see.
So, I will make reference to the need for extreme and circumspect foxiness. It is a form of cunning that I refer to:
Metis (/ˈmiːtɪs/; Ancient Greek: Μῆτις, romanized: Mễtis, literally: “wisdom”, “skill”, or “craft”)
The reference here is to the book Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture. (Marcel Detienne)
See also the Wikipedia page on “metis”. It is worth thinking about. Metis at all times involves concealment and trickery. Hiding one’s intentions. Disguising oneself. It means, quite literally, to outfox the predator. It means understanding the predator better than the predator understands himself! We are dealing with an extremely powerful predator-enemy. Therefore I would suggest as I have in my minor contributions here in the past to really take oneself in hand. To become extremely realistic in how one approaches the ideas we work with.
The enemy’s first step in undermining solidarity in a social movement is to exacerbate conflicts between leading individuals. There are operatives who are now doing this. I watched last night The Atlantic documentary “White Noise”. It is worth watching for a number of reasons. (Though it cost $5). First, it shows those ‘sacrificial victims’ who become the focus of the enemy’s ire. It also shows (at least this is what I noticed) the weaknesses of some of our most prominent players. Not to blame them of course. But it is a question of analysis of strategy and, as I suggest, of ‘metis’. We need a long-term strategy and genuine commitment. In my own case it has taken me 5 years (a bit more in fact) since I first encountered Counter-Currents to have gone through a wide range of reading material myself, first-hand, and in close reading. We have to understand that we are in processes of deprogramming ourselves.
I am not in a position to make a critical judgment of Goad’s statements here. But I would say that we definitely need to be extremely circumspect in all that we do and to redouble our commitment to what we believe and understand. In my own case this has involved arriving at definitions of what paideia really is, and what it must be for us. Like metis paidei is a rich and laden word.
What I have learned in may ways through Counter-Currents is that we are defining a revival of ‘proper paideia’ of the sort we must teach our children. And what we must cultivate in ourselves. This is not gained in a day. It will occur over a generation. And it is also possible that it, and we, may fail. But we still must hold to and cultivate the truth.
Very well said. Write more.
Jim, I get it. I’m an autistic introvert myself. I’ve never been interested in putting up with other people’s crap.
I assume what drove all the criticism of you from the “white nationalists” is the high regard they held you in. There are very few people with your level of talent, and they wanted to make sure that talent was committed to the team.
This is my “sense” of it.
Call me a do-gooder, a diplomat, or whatever, but funnily enough, I detect a lot of parallels between Mr. Jim Goad’s messages here and Mr. Greg Johnson’s. Setting dramatic stylistic deviations aside, both Jim and Greg recognize the biological battle-lines that have been drawn, as well as the fact that we are now at a stage of this fight that obligates all of us to be more active, be that in means financially, metapolitically, socially, &c. Props to Goad for doing that before it was “cool,” and as someone with somewhat similar neurological affinities against being turbo-social, I hope for his perpetual self-improvement (it’s a good way to keep yourself entertained without other people, at the very least!) in all matters. It is a funny thing for a man with such fiery prose to be making prescriptions against infighting and the like, but if the contrasting and once-conflicting figures of Johnson and Goad can put down the pitchforks and torches, that speaks volumes to every single solitary one of us.
I am very glad Jim Goad is with C-C. I am less glad he denies he is a white nationalist, attacks a white nationalist for calling him a white nationalist, and then claims to be a white nationalist, all in the same piece.
As a big fan of both Jim and Jef I have to agree with Jim about the puratyspiraling that unfortanely Ive taken part of in the past myself. However, I can understand the frustration many WNs have with some conservatives who doesnt want or dare to be openly pro-white, even though I agree that Jim has been more outspoken than most.
I have been openly debating these issues in Sweden since the late nineties and I agree with Jim that it’s frustrating when anonymous people attack you for not being radical enough. We need people who stay anonymous to help with the cause, but they could show a little humility towards representatives who speak openly about these questions.
The only thing i can add is “do no harm”. We need White Unity, not constant arguing.
“when I’m asked point-blank if I’m a “white nationalist,” I say that I’m not. And when asked to explain why, I say very clearly that I was born without a group instinct”.
Maybe I’m splitting hairs, but being ideologically a White Nationalist doesn’t mean that you have to officially or unofficially belong to a White Nationalist group: it just means that this is the philosophy or principles you believe in. It is just like (for example) saying that somebody could be a Christian, yet never go to Church because of ‘social distancing’, yet still remain a Christian.
BTW, I don’t mean to be critical, but I don’t know if you are serious or sarcastic when you write that your ‘neurological wiring is that of either an introvert or an Aspie or a sociopath’. Please keep in mind that white skin is not the only genetic difference between us and Blacks: we also have higher IQs (on average), and lower levels of sociopathy (Race Differences in Psychopatic Personality, Richard Lynn, 2019). That energy that binds our families and tribes together, our Ancestors called ‘frith’, and it was vital, so I hope to God (or Gods) that you are just an introvert.
Cheers brother, and all the best!
“White Trash with Brains”! I love it!
This is a tent of many stripes, and basically, it’s only our various shades of much lighter skin, mostly blue or lighter brown eyes, and unique blond and red hair colors that distinguish us from the vastly different races that inhabit the planet with us. But we Whites ourselves come in many different flavors and varieties too, which we must make allowances for today, in face of an ever-circling crew of enemies at our borders — our inborn borders as well as the legal ones. Many of our differences can be seen right here on our pages. For instance, I’m a ‘boomer’, which most here are not; a woman, which most here are not either; a classical music lover (what is ‘metal’?); a collector of European literature and history books, and a frequenter of art museums (but only the 18th and 19th Century rooms). I haven’t seen a movie in 10 to 15 years, (“Star Wars” et al, was such a letdown after having seen “2001” in Cinerama), though I love European detective TV dramas on PBS; and I’ve never seen or played a video game. Yet, here I am., for all the same reasons that you are here. Also, as an aside, I’ve ended up in a household of two roommates (married couple) who are socialist wannabes (i.e., Democrats), and one is the father of a relatively famous (within his milieu) front man for a ‘Death Metal’ band — talk about strange coincidences! Yet we all have civil conversations within the household, and with the son when he visits his dad for Thanksgiving or Christmas yearly. That’s what Whites do. Those of us of European ancestry, for the most part, exhibit reasonably good manners, self-control, and a somewhat chirpy attitude much of the time, which allows us to get on in life, exhibiting our greater wisdom and inventiveness skills which built and continue to maintain European civilization. However, we do have our social and mental outliers who stretch our differences to the max.
So, be nice, be kind, but use your superior brainpower and don’t take any guff!
I always enjoy your comments, Alexandra. Thanks for everything you contribute to C-C.
The purity spiralists are gnashing their teeth and spitting drivel over this one.
Reminds me of a YouTube video of some time ago where Jared Taylor was being interviewed by Gottfried (?) Gottlieb (?) and Mr. Taylor almost spit out his coffee in surprise when the interviewer went on a rant and said he’d rather live next door to Al Sharpton than a white homosexual.
Bottom line: if Gottfried/Gottlieb had a pack of anti-whites coming at him, Al Sharpton would simply laugh at his plight. A white positive homosexual would by default be his ally. The teams have been predetermined.
I would consider myself somewhat on the spectrum, which is something I’ve recently realized. In addition to that, I’m very introverted, have horrible social anxiety, and am pretty much a loner with no close friends whom I speak with consistently.
That said, I did two tours in Iraq when I was in the military and during the second tour I stayed in a very small room with about half of my squad. It was eight of us all crammed into a space the size of most people’s bedrooms.
Anyway, we all became, not just close, but *very* close. It was during this time I began to feel not just an abiding friendship toward my team, but something very much akin to love — what the Greeks called ‘Philia’, or brotherly love.
Many years later, I would read about a ‘Mannerbund’ and was instantly able to connect it to that particular deployment and the bond I built with those guys. I knew exactly what it was like to truly belong somewhere and to be ready and willing to die, no questions asked, for your fellow brothers-in-arms.
In any case, I guess my point is that despite my social shortcomings, I was able to experience a type of group solidarity that few do. The vast majority will never understand the depth of the bond I’m talking about. In a completely platonic way, I loved them and would have fallen on any grenade to save them.
I’m not saying this type of thing is done easily. In fact, it’s probably only possible under certain conditions. It’s not going to happen with your weekend softball team, or your drinking buddies. It’s something much, much deeper than that. And when the conditions relax, the ‘Mannerbund’ probably won’t persist (being the loner I am, I haven’t kept in touch with these guys). But I feel like even people like Jim Goad have the capacity to form them if it comes down to it. And in the future, it just may. Just my two cents.
So far as anonymity is concerned, I would certainly fear an outing even as someone that doesn’t really do any more than read/listen. Some people have a decent job that isn’t really replaceable. I’ve no problem admitting I’m an untalented individual who has to cling to his occupation.
The sniper finally snapped, lit a cigarette, stuck his head up and, predictably, was quickly dispatched.
“Why, in God’s name, would he make such a basic mistake!?”
“I don’t know, sir. I guess he just finally got sick of being called a ‘pussy’ for hiding all the time.”
While his trademark belligerence is sure to provoke some readers, Goad is on to something here. I think that WN often operates more as a counterculture than a political movement. It has the distinctive aspects of subcultures, with its own slang, gathering places, and even standards of grooming and dress. It also takes on probably the most important aspect of any subculture, in that it intensely scrutinizes every aspect of affiliated people’s lives, policing them for genuine commitment and demonizing shills.
The obsession with people’s hobbies is probably the most transparent example of this. It doesn’t really matter to a political movement if members watch football or prefer hiking, but that sort of thing sure as hell matters to subcultures and it sure as hell matters to WN. That stuff is off-putting and makes the political project seem less serious.
Where I disagree with Goad is the claim that no one has laid out a plan for how the ethnostate could be accomplished. Greg Johnson himself has discussed his “slow cleanse,” as one example. And it’s no revelation to anyone here how stacked the odds are against us. We are all well aware; many (like myself) often feel that it’s hopeless.
“I think that WN often operates more as a counterculture than a political movement. It has the distinctive aspects of subcultures, with its own slang, gathering places, and even standards of grooming and dress.”
Bingo. And just because I don’t have perfectly tailored Mod sideburns, I get attacked for presumably being a Rocker. It’s so fucking tedious.
“Counterculture” is one way of looking at it. Some of these people act like flat-out cult members, though. I suspect their intentions are good, but they seem blind to how alienating their behavior is. That’s the entire point of the article. But I suppose if they were capable of grasping the point, they wouldn’t have been behaving this way in the first place.
Just remember, it was through the creation of a synthetic “Counter Culture” that western institutions were ripped from LEGACY WASP America, via the carefully curated and artfully channeled angst of 1960s youth.
The problem with right-wing Counter Culture is that it is very rigid, often abrasive, sometimes stifling, and can ultimately be demoralizing rather than inclusive and uplifting. THIS DOESN’T MAKE IT LESS LEGITIMATE. Rather, I’m critiquing the reason we struggle to hold things together.
Side note: I’m a loner as well. Sometimes that is a strength, but if I’m honest, it has had the net of being a weakness in my life.
Let Jim Goad be Jim Goad. I for one am happy to see him on Counter-Currents and I don’t need someone to be a white nationalist ideologue to enjoy and profit from his work.
“All we need to agree on is the fact that war has unequivocally been declared on us. And it’s a war based in biology, not ideology. And due to biology, we’re all in this war together. We don’t have a choice.”
This is it. Despite what anti-Whites may claim. They don’t care what you identify as. If you express opinions contrary to the cult of antiwhitism you are a heretic. To anti-Whites we are all the same.
What is the way forward? For every one of us in the White positive sphere WN is obviously a beautiful vision. The question is how to we get from here to there? To do this let us take a moment to remember how each of us got here. Did we begin as WN? I for one did not. I began as a poor skinny-fat White kid wishing the anti-Whites would stop attacking me. Whether I was in class being psychologically abused by an anti-White teacher or on the playground getting spit on, punched, kicked, and otherwise abused by my inner city classmates, I just wanted the abuse to stop.
I believe that is where most of our people are at right now. Most people are neither brave nor are they visionaries. For them they may never get onboard with WN. What they want, what they need, is psychological defenses against the psychological warfare that their abusers are waging against them. Our people need arguments and ideas that they can use to defend themselves and their loved ones dignity against the unrelenting attacks of the vicious and unscrupulous anti-Whites they have to face everyday. They must be empowered with a narrative that places them firmly in the moral high ground.
This is a culture war. In this war we do not need to win over the enemy. We need to win over our people. We can do this by providing a narrative for them that their enemy will not. A narrative in which they are the good guys. When Whites learn to step outside of the narrative of others and to live inside and speak from inside our own story real changes start to happen. When the question is not “How will this affect the entire population of the planet including my sworn enemies?” but “How will this affect the White community?” Whites will wield tremendous power.
The moral legitimacy of advocating for White interests and White Well-being are not up for debate here. Our task is putting this at the center of the political discourse and putting the advocates of White ill-being on the back foot. Anti-Whites must be made afraid of losing everything if they are found out to be the scum that they are. When antiwhitism is as controversial and antisemitism. All else will follow including WN.
*When antiwhitism is as controversial as antisemitism, all else will follow including WN.
This is an excellent comment and very insightful way of thinking and developing a strategy, John!
This is about biology not ideology. So true.
“But am I the only one who realizes how trivial our differences are? ”
Not only are the differences in the white community mostly trivial but so are the differences between us and the “Darkies” (I’m showing my age here). Yes, I live here and we all currently hate each other but when everything returns to mean, as it always does, we are going to have to live with each other – even if on separate continents.
But don’t forget we have a common enemy, the one per centers, whoever they are. Here for example is the president of Ghana sounding off like your typical white supremacist, prepper or whatever https://www.henrymakow.com/2020/10/ghana-presdent-confirmed-world-lockdown-plot.html
Even he was bumped off youtube although our Canadian hero managed to recycle him.
But keep up the good work Jim otherwise we will never come up with a solution.
But I hear what you are sating Jim and I
“But don’t forget we have a common enemy, the one per centers, whoever they are.”
What the hell does that mean? What are the one percenters? I think that’s how hardcore bikers used to refer to themselves (in contradistinction to the 99% lawful masses). I think you’re referring to someone else. The Jews? The rich? The problem is race, not wealth.
I’m not a ‘joiner’ either, Mr. Goad, and I don’t have the experience or personal knowledge of all the petty infighting with dissident right circles, but I have learned a few things over the years (and different lives/experiences result in learning different things). Yes, most people are obnoxious – Whites included, but they are generally less obnoxious than other races. While it goes against my nature, the old saw about catching more flies with honey than with vinegar is actually true – so however valid your personal grievances are, try to develop a thicker skin. Finally, however much a loner one prefers to be, as you note at the end, we are all in this together due to skin color. I’ve come to realize that nothing I thought “I” accomplished in life would have been possible without the lives and organizations of Whites in the past, founding schools, churches, and towns, and setting up a system of morals and mores that allowed us to live together without killing each other over various irritants. And while I laud your combativeness re others, none of us will survive this solely on our own. We need to have each others’ backs, despite nasty book reviews or other quarrels.
All that being said, I still very much enjoy your writing and welcome the conflict it seems to invite. I don’t want to hear complaints of “too divisive” from anyone on our side. Jim is unapologetically White, and that’s enough for me. We don’t have to like each other, but we do need to learn to live with each others’ differences so we can, someday, unleash all our hostility on those who want us dead.
Jim’s not a ‘joiner’. I get that. And racial purity spiraling is annoying and generally counter-productive. If every person who was pro-White in some form or another were to ‘go free’ there’d be almost no one to fund pro-White ventures like C-C, so I, for one, feel no shame hiding behind a webonym.
Hamburger, you make more of a contribution than simply funding. You’re one of my favourite Commenters.
Thank you. Ever since the reply notification system stopped working for me, I don’t know if someone has replied to a comment. So, if you responded to me in the past and I didn’t respond, that’s why.
I also have a very low group instincts. The purity spiraling and virtue signaling only serve to further frustrate and push me away. You’re absolutely right about this war being based on biology and ideology, we were born wearing our uniforms. It’d be nice if so many on “our side” didn’t make themselves so insufferable.
A lot going on here. Some fair points, but a little too anger driven… I get, you’re an individual. Go figure most people here probably are. The true herd animals don’t really stick around counter-currents… You also seem to be a completely unrepentant individual and unwilling to sort of place your own boldly independent personality/tendencies within a broader group context. You’d rather just get angry. The herd is permanent. Its here to stay and its never going away. Lashing out at the “herd” is, well, pointless. You’re angry at purity spiraling white nationalists for being herd-minded, and questioning how they expect to win in current two party system. How exactly do you plan to win? I’d say you need some extremism, some people fighting for purity if you ever want to get out of this anti-white spiral that you know all to well has been gaining speed for God knows how long. The herds right now think “white bad, oppressive.” Youre not going to replace that with “no white not bad, let’s all be truth seeking individuals.” Truth is for the individuals, not the masses. You need to fight that with “white good, creates all beauty and civilization.” You don’t have herds thinking that, you dont have progress. You want to stay a pure individual, do your thing. Just seems ironic getting all bent out of shape about others working against the anti-white society with some good old fashioned group think (ie the ONLY time tested way to get power), because you’re upset they are judging you and aren’t appreciating your individuality…
I like the writings of Jim Goad because they’re often insightful and funny as hell. And, apparently, Jim is tough as nails, did prison time, and has kicked some Antifa ass. You can’t take that away from him. His most recent article here at CC, however, sounded a little too self-righteous and whiny for my blood.
A few comments, in particular, caught my eye:
(1) I’m glad Jim quoted Jeff Costello because after reading a few of Jim’s books over the years, I more or less concluded the same. It’s not that we have “shitty senses,” but rather because this is how Jim so often comes off in his writings. He’s just ‘too cool for school’ and the rest of us are just a bunch of wimps for not using our real names and getting into scraps with Antifa thugs.
I know Jim would accuse us all of misunderstanding him, but it’s hard to get around it when these are the conclusions of many who read and mostly enjoy his books. Jim comes off like he’s got a chip on his shoulder, and he’s mad at everyone and hates everything.
(2) “Regarding white nationalism, my main question is this: How exactly do you plan to pull that off, especially within a two-party system? Can we at least agree that there seems to be a huge mass of obstacles in the way before that’s achievable?” – Granted, there are no easy answers to these questions, but they have been addressed in some White Nationalists publications and articles. I don’t think anyone is seriously arguing the success of White Nationalism in the context of our current two-party system and government. It will probably occur after a series of State secessions from the Union and after much national upheaval and possible warfare. We also know that a White ethnostate is unlikely to occur where there is widespread national comfort, food and wealth. Take these away, and that’s a different story.
Also, who ever denied that there aren’t a whole lot of obstacles in our way? Is anyone seriously declaring that it’s going to be easy? What makes Jim think that such questions are not being addressed?
Regardless, even the questions that Jim raises are not insurmountable in answering. The problem is that we don’t fully know, and history has a way surprising us at times.
(3) “I trust neurology over ideology, and one day I believe brain scans will be able to distinguish a party animal from a wallflower. On that day we will have scientific proof that I haven’t been lying about not being a “group guy” – I think these distinctions and personality types have already in large measure been proven, though perhaps not to everyone’s satisfaction. Whatever the case, Jim has every right to not be a “group guy.” At the same time, this really isn’t the best attitude to have when Whites throughout the West have their backs against the wall as we do now. I hope it never becomes widespread among racially-conscious Whites. Jim has real talents, and some of our people perhaps just want him to get more involved in a cause that has greater potential than simply doing nothing and staying aloof socially and politically.
(4) “All we need to agree on is the fact that war has unequivocally been declared on us. And it’s a war based in biology, not ideology” – This is true. However, I think it’s a half-truth because ideology does indeed play an important role in all of it. It’s akin to an anti-intellectual Christian arguing that theology and doctrine isn’t important and that only loving other people is what matters. I think Jim would agree with this, although I don’t think the way he expressed it in the article was the best.
The truth is that our enemies attack us not just because of our skin color (biology), but especially because of our pro-White ideology. This is why so many Whites are so zealous to declare their anti-racist beliefs and that they’re one of the ‘good Whites.’ Ideology is vital to our cause and to our very existence. It’s simply not an either/or sort of proposition. As Whites who want a future for our children, we must think of strategies and an intellectual framework to help us navigate through the current mess we find ourselves in. This is why Greg Johnson’s work on White Nationalism is so important – it provides a framework, a worldview, an array of possible strategies, and it clears up a lot of smokescreens that people raise when discussing our movement.
(5) Jim may argue that calling commentators who hide behind a fake social media name as pussies, cowards, and keyboard warriors is only intended for those who criticize him, yet it’s hard to deny that he really intends it for anyone who is not quite ‘brave’ enough to come out openly and use their real names as he has. Jim knows good and well that there are many of us who still have financial obligations to meet, including entire families who are dependent on our support, which explains why we cannot afford to use our real names, etc. If the system protected us from legal retaliation that would not threaten our employment, it would be a different matter. But that’s not the way things are, and for some of us there would be a great cost if we were discovered.
In all, Jim says many good things, and I know he’s essentially on our side. If he doesn’t want to take a stand for White Nationalism, I understand. In his own way, he defends our people and for that I’m grateful for all that he’s done in his books and articles. There are ‘normie’ Whites who would probably be more inclined to read Jim Goad than some White Nationalist writers who have less humor and practical insight.
“Jim knows good and well that there are many of us who still have financial obligations to meet, including entire families who are dependent on our support, which explains why we cannot afford to use our real names, etc. ”
What makes anyone think I don’t have those same financial obligations—or even more burdensome ones than most people face? Why do you assume I “know good and well” what your financial situation is when most of you seem to assume I don’t face the same obligations?
A person’s choice to be anonymous is just as valid as the choice to be an individual who doesn’t join groups.
This isn’t a binary-either/or issue.
I’m not denying that you have financial obligations, Jim, perhaps ones even greater than those who comment on this site? What I was trying to convey was your dismissive and condescending attitude toward those who don’t use their real names, and how you know good-and-well that most of us do so not because we are pussies, but because we have financial commitments to our families, etc.
Once again, if our Bolshevik overlords didn’t come after our employment and seek to unravel our personal lives, it would be an entirely different matter. But this is not the current state of affairs.
To reiterate for maybe the dozenth time on this thread. I thought I’d been clear as a bell about this, but obviously some skulls are thicker than others:
I’m not attacking anonymity per se; only people who hide behind screen names to shout COWARD at people who DON’T hide. This is something I’ve personally encountered maybe 1,000 times online.
To clarify my clarification:
In a general sense, yes, I’m against anonymity for reasons already detailed on here. And yes, I understand why people do it. But I don’t see how things will get better if everyone hides. I also think it’s a bit of a punk move to expect someone else to take all the incoming bullets before you’ll feel free to poke your head out of the sand again, and that seems to be how the anons operate. They’ll let someone else get destroyed first.
But the specific people I was targeting in this article are the anons who don’t see the screaming irony in referring to people who make their identity public as cowards.
Thus, my line on here about how one abdicates their right to talk about bravery if you’re not even bold enough to identity yourself.
With all due respect Jim, I understand quite well that you were addressing your criticism to those who were calling you cowardly while they themselves failed to see their own hypocrisy while hiding behind a pseudonym. What and I others were referring to was your generally condescending attitude to those who refuse to use their real names as you have. You might have intended it only for those who dared to challenge your bravery, but how it was conveyed seemed entirely different.
“Why do you assume I “know good and well” what your financial situation is when most of you seem to assume I don’t face the same obligations?” – I never assumed that you “know good and well” mine or anyone else’s particular financial situation. Rather, again, the point was that it should be obvious to someone as intelligent as yourself that we all carry financial obligations, some more than others, and therefore this should explain why the majority of us won’t use our real names. I wasn’t suggesting or stating that you were to know the precise degree of financial commitments that I or anyone else has.
I think this article reflects extremely well on counter currents, being willing to constructively critically review their own material.
The kind of bold intellectual courage that makes this site such high quality.
Mr. Goad, an honest question: Did you choose the “true identity” path, or did it choose you?
In other words, have you over the years not been as discreet as you should or would have been otherwise (had you known better), or was it an intentional choice from the get-go?
Also, if you had a loved one with the same controversial views as you hold and most of us here hold on race, would you advise him or her against anonymity if anonymity were still an available option (i.e., if he or she had not yet been doxxed)?
I advise against anonymity across the board. If I were king, I’d make it illegal—that would immediately erase 99% of what’s annoying, toxic, and dishonorable about the internet. Hell, even standup comedians get to see the losers who are heckling them.
If you think the FBI can’t trace you merely because you call yourself WhiteMan1488, that’s pathetically naive. And if you’re merely concerned about losing your job, consider this: I can’t think of ANY profession where it’s more of a career-killer to express these views than in media. I don’t think most people care about their air-conditioner repairman’s politics, but saying the things I do will track you eternally as a writer.
Here’s why I’m against anonymity regarding the expression of any ideas which go against the prevailing egali-totalitarian grain:
1) The enemy interprets it as surrender—which it is.
2) I’d like to hear anyone try to explain how they think things can possibly better if everyone hides. I get the sense that many are waiting for someone ELSE to take the bullets on your behalf before they dare peep their heads out in public again. That’s fine if that’s the way you want to be, but you immediately abdicate your right to talk about bravery. We have some tool on this thread who simultaneously accuses me of “shying away” while accusing me of being “self-destructive” because I DON’T shy away. Can this sort of person even hear how that sounds?
I shouldn’t have to explain that I know far better than most what the legal and social costs are when you refuse to hide.
What’s annoying as hell is to keep explaining the following concepts:
1) It’s weird to have willingly taken far more shots than most of you, yet to be accused of somehow sitting on the sidelines, especially when these faceless critiques appear to come from Dissident-Come-Latelys who’ve never risked anything.
2) It’s tiresome to merely say, “Hey, I’m a lone wolf,” then have the lemmings accuse you of rejecting or morally condemning everything they believe in as well as rejecting them personally. That’s all I’ve ever said—I’d rather do this myself than as part of a line dance. It’s a wonder that many of you don’t break your legs from leaping so recklessly to false conclusions.
Well, I’ve always liked your articles Jim. I’m a 58 year-old who has had IRL scuffles with people of color on the streets. I avoid these “cultural misunderstandings” now since I’m an old man. I welcome a more cynical, streetwise approach to the articles on the site. However, I still read many articles of the high brow set as well. There is a raw gut punch to your writing that the person on the everyday pavement will understand whether it makes them feel comfortable or superior or not. I’m you’re here.
Hey Jim, just wanted to tell you I shared your article on Ellen Degenerate with my 12 year old brother a few months ago and I’ve never seen him laugh harder.
I have nothing to say about the article because WN is gay and I can’t really be arsed to read it when I have Paradise Lost on the desk.
Also the people you attract, as shown by The Headache Factory, are fucking losers who cling to anyone with a morsel of a talent like it might pass onto them. You really do bring out the dregs.
PS, my Dad went to prison, English one in the 80s, and he said it was similar to Shit Magnet, but he still didn’t think much of the book. You make Philip Roth seem like he is selfless and only concerned for his fellow man rather than himself. If you were Jewish, you’d have a 100 more published books and living it up in New York with a head of hair.
I thought as well Jef was wrong about Jim in some respects when I read the “Churchladies” review… This was my comment:
“I can’t think of anybody on this planet who has less fear of social exclusion than Jim Goad.
Calling him “cuckservative” is really absurd und unfair as well, and he’s no Gavin McInnes either. “Redneck Manifesto” is in some ways still more “leftist” than Goad’s later writings, for example by (unconvincingly) focussing on class rather than race. But he has definitely adopted a firm race-realist p. o. v. ever since. Few people who knew his extremely provocative and intentionally offensive work of the 1990s would have guessed that he would end up at Takimag’s – in fact, this seems only logical to me, as subversion and provocation have shifted to the right.
I agree with Jef that Goad’s “equal opportunity hater” pose is sometimes annoying (I stumbled upon exactly the same parts Jef cites for criticism) and probably a shield (which is legit), but having read and loved his stuff for decades, I think it is in the end more of a feature than a bug, as are most of his other flaws. It is the way he “ticks” as a writer and probably as a human being, you can’t have his best without his worst. He is probably a much better fighter as a lone wolf guerilla than he would be in a regular unit. It also gives him an openness of mind and independence I find very refreshing. ”
“I agree with Jef that Goad’s ‘equal opportunity hater’ pose is sometimes annoying”
What’s annoying is assuming it’s a pose rather than sincere.
Well, I don’t doubt it’s sincere, but I guess you don’t need to emphasize it so often. Most people got it by now. 😉
Jesus, I’m cringing. I don’t think this contributed anything thought-provoking except in the way that spectacles are thought-provoking when they leave you marveling at how someone could have become the kind of person that is manifestly responsible for them.
Also, the pseudo-intellectual edgy amoralist distinction between true/false and right/wrong (as if it were impossible that claims about right/wrong could have *truth conditions*) is just astoundingly stupid. This is what happens when you become a talking head—you spend so much time running your mouth that it never occurs to you that you could learn to see things with the complexity that they actually have by shutting up and consulting people who have been writing about such complications for millennia.
Signed, an anonymous person who, as others have pointed out, has something to lose.
Jim, you are among the very few people I follow on Twitter and Groucho’s quote is my leading profile header. I have zero followers and like it that way. Thanks to you joining CounterCurrents, the forecast is calling for after-shocks well in to the foreseeable future followed by clear skies. I can’t wait to check out the other material at this site.
I am reminded of the Betty Boop- Bimbo’s Initation “Want to be a member?”
I’ve only encounter your writing and podcast interviews randomly while ‘suffering’ as they say ‘the net’.
But, it seems that ever time I have, you at least mention, or talk at length about, being in jail and frighting.
I wonder if those are ‘the’ most formative experiences in you life? And how they translate in the whole ‘white’ thing.
Start with “answer me!” and the “redneck manifesto”.
Thank you but I’m really not so interested as to undertake research.
Like I said, I’m just a sometimes accidental Goad reader and listener and wondered if there was a relatively simple answer as to why he so often mentions ‘jail’ and ‘fighting.’ But, your suggestion implies that ‘fighting’ and ‘jail’ denote a more complex psychological phenomenon and how it relates to the whole ‘White’ thing with him.
I might add, that I have never been to jail but two years as a drafted infantry solider comes pretty close. And, I was no stranger to occasional ‘fisticuffs’, as it were. Yet, those experiences never conjured any sense of White identity. That had to wait for the assault on the European history and culture that I love and studied to the graduate level.
There does need to be a unified movement for white people, but the system is counting on its main adherents to be spergs, squares, midwits, schizos, and generally negative Neds and Nancy’s. I’m honestly surprised they haven’t accused you of being a Duginist-spherical-earth-crypto-jew-shill. You’re not REALLY popular in this sphere until someone accuses you of being a Duginist.
Jim Goad at Counter-Currents.
The comment section will never be the same.
The white community is loaded with puritans whose only goal in life is to feel special by having special ideas. As soon as somebody approach their pure view with a bit of non-pure dirt in it, they’re attacked more vehemently than any commie out there.
And who’s laughing all the way to the bank?
I think the worst part of this piece is how a personal grievance with colleagues and commenters is being given the façade of ideoligical disagreement. All because a fellow CC writer had very reasonable criticism of his book, even when ultimately recommending it, and even when commenters were hazing the new guy / testing him on his beliefs, even though they were ultimately welcoming. The bottom line isn’t that he hates keyboard warriors, white nationalists or purists, it’s that Jim Goad can dish ’em out but he can’t take ’em, which is a damn shame. Maybe it’s true what they say about Americans: they can’t handle banter.
What’s the main take-away from this? Goad isn’t to be criticized? It certainly can’t be that, it would bestow an undeserved sacrosanctness not enjoyed by any other writer here. Let’s just hope that us lowly anonymous internet users can learn to bite our tongues and walk on eggshells to the degree that Mr. Goad won’t go full BLM on CC and write another tantrum piece any time soon.
It’s fairly ridiculous when one’s suicide note, like that of the Greenhow woman at Mt. Shasta, reads like something Detective Sledge Hammer would have written And the idea of a plot to assassinate Bob Dole! Perhaps by constructing a staircase in front of his path as Wiley Coyote might. What is it with this pathetic British fixation on U.S. politics? The British invasion of 1996 was aborted.
Jim Goad has every right to hold a grudge and ‘punch back’ metaphorically at those who have snidely taken shots at him. Why not? Jim’s been taking hits for 30+ years. Very few people could imagine what that’s like. And guess what, it takes it’s toll. Please remember Jim’s been an irreverent renegade for decades, and has taken body blows from every angle. Most people couldn’t take the nasty bullying he’s had to, and I bet most of us don’t know anyone in our real lives that is half as honest and leaves themselves open to attack as Jim does. I relate profoundly to the anger and irritation Jim shows. Greg also occasionally shows his impatience and annoyance, and I respect them both for that. We should be riled-up, our culture is being flushed down the toilet!
I am a street artist in London, I make work anonymously as I don’t want to be attacked or arrested because putting my work on walls is illegal. I have spent years making work that very few people seem interested in. I spent all my money on this work, and huge amounts of time. I understand Jim’s annoyance when it comes to people who simply can’t see any grey, or any nuance in multifaceted thinking. But think of those who do actually get it! These are the people we should cherish.
I call it nuance, and I see tons of it, I think Jim Goad does too. In fact if you follow Jim’s work, you will see he’s a deeply empathetic person, but he’s also highly discernible. That’s at least how I am and hence how I relate to Jim Goad. There’s barely a public figure out there that I’d like to share a beer and a conversation with, but Jim Goad is one! Although I think he doesn’t drink.
I feel very strongly as a dissident and an outsider or individual, that people like us bring nuance to the argument that many ‘normal’ people, highly intelligent people and other outsiders can truly relate to.
We should be able to have an open dialogue, that’s the whole reason we hate progressivism, because it doesn’t allow free thought! Many authentic, truly creative people are very often loners, that doesn’t mean we don’t like people, we are however, comfortable in being alone. We really don’t need or want the comfort of the crowd. But please understand, that doesn’t mean we’re not allies. We are. We simply have allergic reactions to authority and rules and actually don’t want full membership, sure, put a plaque on the wall, honorary member etc, etc, just don’t expect us to come to all the meetings.
One last thing, Jim and Greg are amongst my most beloved people in our world, and although extremely different in many ways, what really attracts me to both of them are the same things. Honesty, open-mindedness, and a relentless search for the truth, based on reality and not ideology. *Apologies to you both if that’s not quite right!
Thank-you both. And thank-you Greg for giving Jim your exceptional platform, where Jim Goad can be Jim Goad and free! More power to you both.
Take it from a Jew who has transversed the dreaded libertarian to alt-right pipeline: don’t underestimate the power of groups and networking. How do you think Jews have the power and influence I’m sure a lot of the people on this site are cirical of? Jews are exerpts at networking. “A good lawyer knows the law, a great lawyer knows the judge, an excellent lawyer goes to the same synagogue as the judge.” That’s pretty much how Brown v. Board of education was decided, the Jew judge schmoozing with the Jew lawyer discussing how they can convince the other goy judges to diversify the schools. How did that work out?
I respect Mr. Goad’s unbridled individualism and his criticism of certain aspects of the dissident right/wignat movement. That being said, I hope Mr. Goad can reconsider the advantage of a group strategy of like-minded thinkers and people as I reconsidered my worldview having read many dissident writers, including yourself, Mr. Goad.
‘Jews are exerpts (sic)’
If Jews are excerpts I’d hate to see the full text! (Do-doosh!)
Most amusing comment here so far!
Well, Greg wasn’t kidding when he said he was going to give Jim his creative freedom and Jim is certainly making the most of it.
More and more whites are ‘waking up’ more and more whites are dropping the pseudonyms, more and more whites are getting fed up. Good on him for being in the vanguard, but people have alot to lose (I myself though not exposed nationally lost everything personally after C’Ville) cut them some slack, things are building to critical mass.
What happened to you?
Jim Goad brings something to the table.
I am a Christian Jim Goad is not. So what?
Some of us here take the title WN, Jim Goad does not.
Some of us on the right side of the divide like Jim Goad, some do not.
Let it all alone and just read his stuff and take away from his writings the value that we can.
Like Jim says we are all in the same boat.
The White one.