We're Heading Back To The 1930's!

It's remarkable to take a week off from the political internet, as I've just done. With the grind of sifting through the infantile pigswill of the liberal media removed from your daily routine you find that your mind begins to heal itself. The synapses of the brain which were burdened with processing a constant flow of insidious lies and contempt for you and yours are allowed some respite as the flow of anti-white trash is reduced to a manageable trickle.

 Eventually, alas, the fishing rod is put away, the suntan peels and you flip open the laptop to discover that the libshits have cranked up the ''We're heading back to the 1930's!'' trope to warp 5. We're hurtling back to the 1930's faster than ever before, lefty economist Paul Mason writes in the New Statesman:

Suppose we reverse the premise of the film Good Bye, Lenin!. Instead of a communist waking up from a coma in a newly marketised Germany, we get a technocrat from the Blair/Clinton era waking up today – to a world gripped by economic nationalism, great power politics and xenophobia.
What would be the biggest mind-bender? What would the patient’s family, trying to hide the harsh reality, struggle with most?

What Are You, A Racist?

Racial egalitarianism has become the de facto state religion of every Western nation. It is enforced with the ferocity with which the Medieval Popes enforced belief in the resurrection or the virgin birth. Hate speech laws, or their socially enforced equivalents, are the new dogma. Racists are heretics, condemned by the media, academia and state as being evil and wicked people on a par with murderers, rapists and paedophiles. Even if they do no physical harm to anyone, their very ideas are viewed as being so dangerous as to require them to be cast out of polite society, hounded out of their employment, shunned by their friends and family for fear that they too might be sullied by their association with a known racist. A mere accusation of racism is a scarlet letter which marks someone out as a wicked and dangerous individual prone to irrational hatreds. Intelligent people of robust character cower in terror at the prospect of an accusation of racism and the social and financial ruin it may bring.

However, the racial egalitarians are at a serious disadvantage compared to the Popes and Witchfinders of centuries past. The worldview they seek to impose by terror is not metaphysical, unknowable and therefore impossible to disprove.  The entire concept of racial egalitarianism, and by extension "racism", is utter bunkum and does not stand up to the slightest scrutiny. When accused of "racism" the first thing to do is to ask your interlocutor to define precisely what they mean by racism. By refusing to meekly submit, but instead engaging in reasoned debate you, at a stroke, reverse the balance of power in the argument. They have hysterical shrieking. We have logic, facts and evidence. As Augustine of Hippo once said, "The truth is like a lion. You don't have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself." 

Set out below are some off the various definitions of racism you might be presented with, and some suggested arguments in response.  I would welcome a discussion of typical liberal responses to these points in the comment thread below.

Detailed explanations of the racial differences in IQ, physiology and behaviour are beyond the scope of this article, but for those unfamiliar with the basics of race realism this abridged edition of Race, Evolution & Behaviour by Prof J Phillipe Rushdon is an excellent starting point.


1. Preferring The Company of Your Own Race

The most extreme liberals will suggest that to prefer the company of your own race, or even to exclusively date among your own race, is racist and therefor morally reprehensible. Dealing with this accusation does not require delving into the minutiae of racial differences or arguing that some races have less favourable traits than others. Even if all races were of equal merit, it is a simple matter of freedom of association and the fact that people generally find it easier to socialise and get along with people who are similar to themselves in terms of background, temperament, cultural interests and so on. 

If a leftist demands evidence of this seemingly obvious point,  Professor Robert Putnam of Harvard's 2007 study on the negative impact ethnic diversity has on social cohesion is a useful reference. Discussion of this point can also provide an excellent opportunity to point out liberal hypocrisy on this issue as detailed in this excellent article from Affirmative Right which sets out the extensive measures self proclaimed anti racists take to avoid diversity in their own lives and the extent to which their advocacy for different treatment based on race, through Affirmative Action and so on, suggest an implicit belief in racial differences.


2. You Hate Whole Races or Ethnic Groups 

This argument is simply absurd.  If you hate every single member of a race or ethnic group simply because he is a member of that race or ethnic group you are an idiot and not of the intellectual level required to properly comprehend this blog. No one in their right mind believes this. Most members of every race are simply trying to live their lives as best they can in accordance with the abilities and temperament God gave them. However, acknowledging this basic fact does not preclude you from recognising differences between ethnic groups, or considering one group to be broadly preferable to another, on average. 

3. Prejudice Against Another Racial Group

The liberal might respond  that it means to be prejudiced or to discriminate against members of other races. To this, I would reply that prejudice is a good and essential human trait. To be prejudiced means just that, to pre-judge. To apply a default opinion, based on previous experience, to a member of a group based on previous experience of members of that group. Of course, this default opinion is subject to change once further information is known. One member of a group with whom we have had previous unsatisfactory dealings might prove himself to be of good character, in which case the prejudicial opinion can be replaced by an evidence based opinion of this particular individual.

I can well understand why a decent respectable black person may be frustrated by strangers constantly assuming that he is a potential criminal. However, the blame for this negative perception of his group should be directed towards the members of his group whose actions give the group such a bad reputation, rather than the person who uses his previous experience to attempt to prevent himself from suffering harm. To go through life without the judicial exercise of racial prejudice would be to go through life as innocent and vulnerable as a newborn babe. A healthy dose of racial prejudice would have protected the girls of Rotherham, Rochdale and elsewhere from suffering horrific sexual abuse from Pakistani Muslims, whose group were known to exhibit such behaviour. By stripping people of prejudice we strip them of one of their most valuable self defence mechanisms.

4. Members of One Race Are Inherently Superior to Members of Another Race 

This allegation is foolish from its very conception. Differences between the races only truly reveal themselves at the macro level in the differences in the averages between groups. Liberals will smugly point to a Neil DeGrasse Tyson or a Thomas Sowell, as if the existence of one cultured and intelligent black person disproves racism. Outliers do not disprove averages, they are already included within them. The fact that some people are on the right hand side of the bell curve does not disprove the existence of the bell curve. The bell curve could not be accurate without them. Similarly, there are many low IQ or badly socialised whites, but these are already included within the averages. They do not disprove them.

Another argument often used by liberals in this area is that there is greater difference within the races than there is between them. Of course this is correct. There is a greater IQ gap between a black (or white) professor and a black (or white) retard than there is between the average black IQ and the average white IQ.  There is a greater height difference between a black NBA star and a black midget than between the average Swede and the average Chinaman This goes without saying, and no sensible person would suggest otherwise.This argument is a complete straw man. 

5. Cultural Differences and Cultural Stereotypes 

 One frequent source of allegations of racism is the perpetuation of racial stereotypes, to the extent that the more deranged liberal will see any depiction of a black man eating fried chicken or an East Asian being studious and good at mathematics as inherently racist. These issues relate to culture as much as race. We might perceive Germans as being generally bossy, Spaniards as being generally lazy or Italians as being generally over emotional and vain. To the most committed racial egalitarian it is possible to be racist towards someone who is the same race as you. These are the depths of madness we have sunk to. 

This argument is very similar to the prejudice argument, to which the leftist thinks "not all X are like that" (NAXALT) is a devastating riposte. I know an industrious Spaniard and a black man who hates fried chicken so these stereotypes are nonsense. 

The very fact that different cultures exist in different parts of the world is proof that different ethnic groups have different traits and are culturally distinct. All stereotypes have a foundation in fact and our commonly perceived reality. It would be impossible to promulgate a stereotype that Swedes were short or the Japanese were lazy, as these are completely at odds with our lived experience.  It is not wrong to notice these differences. It would be a very boring world if humanity was completely uniform, which is what those communists who profess a belief in the glory of diversity ultimately wish to make us.   

6. The Belief That the Races Are Different 

All of the foregoing allegations are straw men or semantics. Biological racial differences the crux of the matter. It is where we are strongest, which is why the typical liberal will prefer to dance around the margins on the preceding issues.

"If you believe the races are different then you are a racist". If this is the definition to be applied then I would stand tall and proudly proclaim that, yes, I am a racist, and that any well informed and honest person should be one too. Racial differences are not a just a question of my opinion or belief, they are indisputable scientific facts. 

No liberal can argue that the races do not have different average IQs, or bone density, or gestation periods, or musculature, or brain sizes, or testosterone levels, or propensity to certain diseases. Or, at least, if he does argue them he will find himself with absolutely no evidence to support him. The notion that the races are functionally identical, save for a different coat of paint, is the keystone upon which all racial egalitarianism stands, and it is not only utterly false but completely indefensible.  This is the rhetorical ground upon which we must stand and fight, because here we are sure to win.

The liberal will respond to the data on racial differences in a number of ways, some of which are listed above such as the utterly irrelevant point that there are greater differences within groups than between them. Yeah, we know. Another frequently deployed canard  is that all humans share 99.9% of their genes. Again, yeah, we know. We also share 98% of our genes with chimpanzees, 90% with mice and 65% with chickens. Small genetic differences produce huge variations in outcome. 

The races are different, and the racists are right. 

The People vs The Gammon

A rather off the cuff livestream/rant on the appalling behaviour of the British champaign socialist left and their obsessive drive to have the Brexit vote overturned.

 Please like and subscribe to the YouTube channel I'll be doing far more in the future.

The Quest For European Identity

 I've long been a secret fan of the spectacular soundtrack to the famous video game known as ''Skyrim''. I no longer have the time to fritter away endless hours on video games, but I often find myself returning to the music of Skyrim when writing or reading. Based on my listening habits YouTube suggested that I might be interested in listening to a new full album of orchestral arrangement's by Jeremy Soule, the composer of Skyrim's soundtrack.

Soule's style is heavily influenced by Wagner, Sibelius, Mozart and Debussy. As can be seen by the titles to his ''The Northerner Diaries'' Soule, an American from Idaho, has a longing for the frozen north of Scandinavia and it shows in every melody he writes. Grandiose vocal arrangements contrast with delicate piano pieces, it's ethereal, epic and an ode to high adventure and the heroic spirit.

Hangout 7: From Russia With Hate

Having decided to blow the cobwebs off the YouTube channel I discuss the politics of the World Cup in Russia, with Arya, Jim and Laura

Become a Patron!

Of Lice And Men: Patrick Little VS. Nick Fuentes

I recently watched a debate between Patrick Little, who recently ran in the California senate race, and conservative E-Sleb Nick Fuentes. Little of course has come to some degree of prominence by loudly and stridently calling out Jewish power in America and further afield, Fuentes runs a YouTube channel and is busy carving out an ''edgy but not too edgy'' niche within the American conservative scene.

Nationalism and the War of the Discourse with Guessedworker

I finally had the chance to talk to my old friend Guessedworker in a wide ranging discussion on nationalism, the Alt-Right, liberalism and philosophy. 

John Rambo And The Eternal White Woman

Surprising as it may seem I actually love the Rambo films, and I say that fully in the knowledge that at least 2 of the 4 movies are blatant Neo-Con 1.0 propaganda. Whether or not Sylvester Stallone would qualify for citizenship in the ethno-state is up for a debate, but Rambo is essentially an overblown and often comically violent depiction of the European warrior archetype. In an age when everything is wrapped up in irony topped off with a feminist ribbon, Rambo is a blessed relief. 

 ''John Rambo'' which appeared in 2008 is the least political of all the Rambo movies. At 62 years old Stallone's legendary war vet looks like a giant hamburger with a bandanna wrapped around it. 

It's been 20 years since Rambo fought alongside Al Qaeda and the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan. Now retired in the Thai jungle John earns a modest living ferrying people on the river, fishing with a bow and arrow and catching snakes. 

 Life is good for Rambo, but then an attractive, starry eyed, idealistic white woman (Sara) arrives, complete with two beta-orbiters in toe and, needless to say, everything goes to hell, literally. 

Sara before diversity......