3,092 words
At this point, it seems unlikely that Trump is going to prevail in his legal challenges. It’s possible that he will, but what do you think is more likely? If he doesn’t prevail, however, Biden’s “win” can actually be a tremendous win for us.
Why? Well, first let’s address the question of who “we” are. I hate to sound like Joe Biden, who seems not to know who he is (more…)
1,980 words
I’m one of those lonely people who red-pilled himself. It happened twice: Once in my early twenties and once in my early forties. And since a commenter on my previous article “The Tipping Point” asked for me to explain how that happened, I thought I’d share.
I became aware of the critical nature of race — vis-à-vis blacks and whites — in my early twenties after a few years of living on my own post-college. I can trace it back to the day I started paying my own taxes. (more…)
3,871 words
Camille Paglia infuriated feminists when she observed in Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson (1990) that males – as biological beings – are responsible for the development of civilized life and most of the world’s cultural creativity. What no one has wanted to say is that the implicit argument throughout Sexual Personae is that only white males have possessed the Apollonian rationality that “has taken us to the stars.”
1,440 words
Everyone felt it. The 2019 American Renaissance Conference had a palpable sense of forward movement. (more…)
Fidus, Lichtgebet, 1894
1,606 mots
English original here; Slovak translation here
Aujourd’hui, aux Etats-Unis comme dans la plupart des pays du Monde blanc, on dit au petit enfant blanc, à peine en âge de comprendre le langage, qu’il doit se sentir coupable des crimes de ses ancêtres. Coupable d’avoir découvert, conquis, mis en esclavage et tué des non-Blancs à travers le monde…quitte à ce qu’il se perdre en chemin. Coupable, non de ses propres crimes, mais de crimes commis par d’autres personnes de la même race que lui. (more…)
Anna Hayes with her prom date, Phillip Freeman.
1,896 words
I’m sure this was a painful read for many on the Alt Right. It was for me, anyway. The story, a familiar one, can be distilled into four basic parts.
Part One: Father warns daughter not to date black guys or he will cut her off.
Part Two: Daughter takes a black guy to the prom.
Part Three: Father not only cuts her off financially, but texts her an irreversibly abusive rant spiked with numerous F-bombs and N-bombs. (more…)
1,608 words
The morality fed to the majority comes from centralized (((media))) that normies are not acute enough to realize are under the control of a different tribe. They don’t actually like multiculti, they absolutely hate political correctness, but because the average human is just one cell in a racial organism, they take the tribal norm that is given and roll with it. Because of this, the accusation of being “racist” is deeply psychologically crippling. It is an outgroup word and accusation of tribal betrayal. (more…)
983 words 
With Death-By-Shillary occupying the Alt-Right headlines, it’s been difficult to fully reflect on what 2016 has brought us so far. We’ve had highlights including Alex Jones driving a Turk into a histrionic rage, Trump completely wresting control of the GOP using it as a stepping stone to the throne, the vampire Soros having the torch of truth shone upon him, and an increase in tempo of terrorist attacks in France. All very good things and causes for celebration as the Left melts down into nonsense, hysterics, and neo-Marxist incoherence. (more…)
1,788 words
For years I’ve been predicting it. With absolute confidence, I’ve been claiming that its arrival is a certainty. So why do I feel so surprised, and a trifle disoriented that it is now happening? What is “it”? It’s The Happening. I didn’t invent this expression. I heard a couple of people use it at the recent New York Forum. (more…)
“Light” by Fidus
1,153 words
English original here
V Spojených štátoch a vo väčšine bieleho sveta bude dnes každému dieťaťu dosť starému na to, aby rozumelo jazyku, povedané, že by malo cítiť vinu za zločiny svojich predkov. Vinu pre obsadenie, dobývanie, zotročovanie a zabíjanie nebielych na celom svete… A ako bonus vinu za odhadzovanie odpadkov. Vinu nie iba pre svoje vlastné zločiny, ale pre zločiny iných ľudí rovnakej rasy.
Ale bude mu tiež povedané, že by nemalo pociťovať žiadnu hrdosť na úžasné výdobytky jeho rasy. (more…)
3,852 words
Sunday 9/4/2015
Tonight I went to the Cathedral of Saints Peter and Paul. Three weeks before the Pope’s visit and already electric with excitement.
1,718 words
Yesterday my colleague and I drove to Washington DC to attend a set of lectures called Beyond Conservatism, organized by the National Policy Institute (NPI) and held at the National Press Club. NPI is described as a think tank, and its primary activities include managing the Radix Journal web site, the publication of some books, and the organization of a conference about once per year. Does this constitute a think tank? I’m not sure. I would describe NPI as pro-white or identitarian, but of course you will find mainstream media outlets and leftist organizations describing it in nastier ways.
1,080 words
I was recently reading in the news about a group of English soccer fans who, while chanting “we’re racist,” refused to allow a Negro to board a train in Paris. This was, as one can imagine, inflated into an international incident, plastered across newspapers and websites, certainly more important to the System than those mild shenanigans in Rotherham (completely forgotten about by now). Let us for a moment forget that a Negro has no business being in Paris to begin with, and consider the deeper meaning of this incident. (more…)
3,389 words
My knowledge of the European New Right (ENR) is very scarce, no more than a few short articles and three books: Guillaume Faye’s Why We Fight, Alexander Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory, and Pierre Krebs’ Fighting for the Essence, Western Ethnosuicide or European Renaissance? I found Faye’s metapolitical dictionary substantively insightful and Dugin’s dissection of liberalism penetrating.
4,358 words
Ryan Andrews
The Birth of Prudence
Vdare.com, 2014 (paperback and Kindle)
“You are a white. The Imperial Wizard. Now, if you don’t think this is logic you can burn me on the fiery cross. This is the logic: You have the choice of spending fifteen years married to a woman, a black woman or a white woman. Fifteen years kissing and hugging and sleeping real close on hot nights. With a black, black woman or a white, white woman. (more…)
1,823 words
White advocates have no political power. White advocates have all the political power.
Those who don’t favor the genocide of the white race have been completely marginalized. And yet, in another sense, White Nationalists dominate American life.
To paraphrase Marx, where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as “racist” by the party in power? Where is the opposition party that has not cleverly retorted that their enemies are the “real racists”?
Sometimes it seems that American political debate boils down to accusing the other side of being like those evil White Nationalists. This suggests that the world recognizes that White Nationalism is “itself a power,” a power that cannot be ignored. You can love us or hate us, but you can’t pretend we don’t exist. Underlying every issue that is debated—guns, health care, immigration, foreign policy—is the reality of race, the undercurrent that is never spoken about by the Right but that dominates American life.
Much of white advocates’ political activity, other than pure education, consists of trying to bring this undercurrent to the surface. Unfortunately, White Nationalist political influence within the mainstream is chiefly negative. Associating with certain groups or figures hurts their credibility with the larger public, which is conditioned by the controlled media to remain anti-white.
However, there is a positive side to this. We aren’t here to elect Republicans after all. If activists concentrate enough on a certain subculture or political issue, it becomes associated with the white advocacy movement. Those hostile to white survival avoid it, but it can still serve as a way to attract unattached people who might be interested. Subcultures like folkish heathenism or black metal are cultural examples, and Southern nationalism is moving this way as a political example.
One can imagine issues like immigration or guns evolving in a White Nationalist direction. As groups that focus on such issues become racialized, many people will bail out, but those who remain involved will become more dedicated, and a “safe space” will be carved out for white advocates to organize. Furthermore, these spaces will still exist even if they are no longer respectable. This is why Leftists fight so hard to prevent white advocates from participating in even non-political venues, especially music scenes.
“The power to destroy a thing is the power to control a thing,” said Paul Muad’Dib in Dune. Believe it or not, White Nationalists have this power. Take the conservative movement. All it takes to demolish a conservative gathering is for one person to show up with a “racist” sign. There are costs to such actions, obviously. In the short term, it makes it more difficult for any white advocates who are trying to work within the movement. It increases the internal defenses of the anti-white thought police within conservatism. It empowers a progressive media, which gleefully trumpets any proof of racism.
However, in the long term, it creates an association in the public mind between a major political force and the cause of white people generally. Isn’t that what we want?
James Mason writes in Siege that white advocates must think of all white people everywhere as our army. They may not volunteer, but circumstances and political action will cause them to be conscripted. For white advocates, the overall strategic objective of political activity is to make race the defining difference between various political, cultural, and social groups, as a precursor to the formation of an ethnostate, the great dream of the White Republic.
Arguably, race is already the defining difference on a host of issues, but only on a subconscious level. The explicit issues are things like “limited government,” capitalism vs. socialism, or religion vs. secularism. We have to cut through the distractions and bring out what is already implicit in the narratives we see every day.
How do we do this?
Do we just show up where we are not wanted, screwing up mainstream conservative plans?
It’s a start. But this can’t just be trolling.
A successful movement has to have waystations that we control all along the political spectrum. Part of this means overt vanguardist groups for the true believers. But another part of it means creating cultural spaces: publishers, websites, bands, or spiritual groups. Yet another part of it means trying to reclaim turf from the Left, like unions or the environment.
However, for now, the bulk of White Nationalists’ power consists in the power to destroy.
If our goal is to make all white people our “army,” we have to deal with the fact that the largest group of politically active whites is affiliated with the Republican Party.
One of the perennial debates in White Nationalism is between attacking conservatives, working with them (or infiltrating them), or just ignoring them. The correct answer is essentially “all of the above.”
Everyone knows that there are certain issues—immigration being the key example—that come as close as they can to being defined as purely “racial” without crossing the line. The media knows this, non-whites know this, and white advocates know this. The only people who don’t already know this are the professional anti-immigration groups and activists, and this ignorance (deliberate or otherwise) is the thin reed that allows them to continue to operate and have a voice at the system’s table.
There’s no point in showing up to an anti-immigration rally talking about a non-white America. Everyone involved in the issue already knows that this is what it is about, and the battle lines are already drawn. All overt White Nationalist participation in the issue can do is make their job harder, lessen the numbers of uncommitted people who want to engage in the issue, and reduce the value of the movement as a whole. It is better to show up quietly, make new contacts, and educate and move them along separately and below the surface to waypoints further along the spectrum.
In contrast, something broad, like the general opposition to President Barack Hussein Obama, should be racialized. The two-party system leads to political groupings that are so broad that ideology is less important than emotional identification. “Team Red” vs. “Team Blue” means more than ideology. So forget the idea that the Republican Party is “anti-white,” because there is no monolithic party the same way there is in Europe. Anyone can call himself a Republican. The broader, more inclusive, and more race-neutral a Republican group is, the riper it is for infiltration.
The media are looking for signs that the Republican Party is transforming into an all-white, rump opposition party that opposes the President purely on racial grounds. White advocates should give them what they want. The case that should be made is essentially the Mantra: the system is anti-white.
A single sign at a Tea Party rally that says “Obama is Anti-White” will make every blog. A post on the Campaign for Liberty website that “the government targets whites” will go viral. Showing up to an Americans for Prosperity meeting to ask a question about why non-white small business owners get special advantages, which “hurts whites,” will become the subject of every discussion afterward.
The key is to racialize every mainstream issue, to make implicit racial polarization explicit. Constantly emphasize that (1) the government is targeting whites on racial grounds and (2) the opposition is organized on racial lines. The media will do the rest of the work, since they will promote anything that fits their own narrative of angry white males standing in the way of progress. So much the better.
George Lincoln Rockwell often spoke about “political jujitsu,” using the very power of the controlled media to his advantage. Rockwell accomplished this with outrageous stunts and imagery that could not be ignored, especially that of the swastika. Today, the media’s hysteria over “racism” has advanced to the point where such tactics are no longer necessary to get attention. Something as harmless as a Confederate flag at a war memorial or a white student union can throw the whole country into an artificially produced uproar. This is an opportunity to exercise power, because the media can do white advocates’ job for them.
Media people think that tax protesters are racist. Good. Argue that whites are hit with a “disproportionate impact” in any tax increase and that this is deliberately discriminatory.
Media people think that gun owners are racist. Good. Argue that whites disproportionately own guns because non-whites disproportionately commit crimes.
Media people think states’ rights are racist. Good. The best way to further this is to argue that Barack Obama’s “drive for equality” is about using federal power to target whites.
In every case, make the point that the egalitarian principles of the system are violated when it comes to whites. Make race the central question even on issues that were once considered race-neutral.
The media will broadcast these reasonable positions in tones of shock and outrage, but they will broadcast them nonetheless, and the effect is bound to be educational.
We want to increase media criticism of Obama’s opponents as racists. We want to increase the feeling that minority conservatives are Uncle Toms and race traitors for hire (which they largely are). We want to increase the reliance of the Republican Party on white voters, so it is harder and harder for them to ignore or betray white interests.
In our own consciousness, we need to consider ourselves already the true leaders and authentic spokesmen of our race, and we need to communicate that attitude to everyone else.
It’s important to clarify that this is simply a tactic. It’s a separate question if the Republican Party can be reforged into a pro-white party or used for anything practical. Nor should this strategy actually concede egalitarianism as a desirable goal. The point is to use the Left-wing media to sow discord in the controlled opposition and break some people away from it.
We should also do the same thing to the libertarians.
Simply criticizing Republicans from the outside is useful, but it is not enough, because it largely goes unheard. Race-based criticism from within, amplified by the media’s bias against the Establishment Right, can destroy the controlled opposition and open the way for a new alternative. A well-written article on Counter-Currents can be read by tens of thousands. A well-staged stunt at a Republican event can be seen by tens of millions.
We have power. We have the sexiest idea there is. We know this because they can’t shut up about us. Let’s use it. Whites will become our army when we force everything down to a simple choice: The System is anti-white. We are pro-white. Which side are you on?
2,990 words
English original here
Übersetzt von Deep Roots
Die Geschichte hat uns gelehrt, daß die grundlegendsten Notwendigkeiten für die Existenz einer gesunden und fortschrittlichen weißen Gesellschaft in der rassischen Qualität ihrer Mitglieder und in einem Moralkodex oder Wertesystem bestehen, das diese Qualität ergänzt und steigert. (more…)
4,463 words
A short paper on demography by Benjamin Franklin consisting of 24 numbered paragraphs, “Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, Etc.” (1751), provides interesting insight into the thoughts of one of the most astute and discerning of the Founding Fathers. I will focus primarily upon Franklin’s demographic insights and perceptions of race and whiteness, though he also discussed economics. (more…)
Andrea Mantegna, "The Adoration of the Magi," circa 1495–1500
1,216 words
In daily life, how do we determine who’s white?
Most whites never think about this. We have a psychological tendency to assume the answer is obvious. (more…)
3,400 words
One dictionary defines skinhead as a “racist young Caucasian man: one of a group of young Caucasian men with closely-cropped or shaven hair who often have racist or fascist beliefs, and are sometimes violent.”
The word “Caucasian” is incorrect as a synonym for white Europeans, though that is what is meant. Presumably here it implicitly excludes Jews as well, since everyone knows Jews can’t be racist or fascist. (more…)
Emma West and son: Somebody has to "talk up" for England
1,333 words
I saw the new film My Week With Marilyn the other night. I’ll leave it to Trevor Lynch or someone else to give the film a proper review, but what I’d like to focus on here is the recent spate of films and TV shows that hark back to the late fifties and early sixties. (more…)
