Last month, the Norwegian Prime Minister travelled to the Earth’s southernmost point to mark the centenary of the conquest of the South Pole, where Roald Amundsen and his team, having spent months travelling on the planet’s coldest and most hostile environment, planted their country’s flag on 14 December 1911.
Yet it is the story of Robert Falcon Scott that is best remembered: in the Antarctic Summer of 1911 the British explorer was also making a bid for the Pole—his second, after a failed attempt in 1902, when the extreme conditions on the Ross Ice Shelf forced him and his party to turn around at 82º17’S, variously afflicted by snowblindness, frostbite, and scurvy. Scott and his men reached the South Pole on 17 January 1912, a month after Amundsen, and then perished on the return journey. Their tale, recorded in the explorers’ diaries, made Scott a tragic hero across the Empire—‘the Englishman who conquered the South Pole and who died as fine a death as any man has had the honour to die.’[1]
In 1911 Scott had followed a route to the central Antarctic pleateau that had been discovered by a team member in his first polar journey, Ernest Shackleton. Invalided home by the expedition leader after the team returned to base in February 1903, and much aggrieved by Scott’s decision, Shackleton soon organised an expedition of his own, announced at the time as the British Antarctic Expedition.
Ernest Shackleton
Polar historian Beau Riffenburgh’s Nimrod is the author’s account of that expedition, which spanned the years 1907 to 1909. As such the account is both educational and entertaining, balancing readability with comprehensive scholarship. It also includes information excluded from Shackleton’s own account, The Heart of the Antarctic, such as his biography, the character of the Victorian era, anecdotal evidence of unrecorded events, the expedition’s aftermath, and the fate of his fellow expeditioners in later years.
Objectively, Shackleton was a failure. His participation in Scott’s British National Antarctic (now known as the Discovery) Expedition of 1901-1904 was terminated early. He failed to reach the pole during his own expedition seven years later. His subsequent trans-Antarctic crossing expedition failed before his ship even reached the continent, trapped in the pack ice of the Weddell Sea. And on his final expedition he died within a day of reaching the first stop of an intended (sub-)Antarctic circumnavigation. Moreover, none of his many business ventures and money-making schemes prospered, and his life outside exploration was restless, aimless, and unfulfilled. His financial affairs were muddled, and he died heavily in debt.
Indeed, although a hero and celebrity across the Empire during the first two decades of the 20th century, he was largely forgotten after his death in 1922, outshone by his former leader and then rival, Robert Scott. Scott’s diaries, on display until May this year at the Scott Polar Research Institute in Cambridge (a scan of the whole polar journey diary is also available online), had by then enjoyed numerous editions. And in 1948 Scott’s conquest of the South Pole was immortalised in a film, Scott of the Antarctic, while Shackleton’s achievements received no such treatment.
It was not until until Alfred Lansing’s Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage, published in 1959, that Anglo-Irish explorer’s reputation experienced a revival, which continued thereafter until it finally eclipsed Scott’s, which was by then suffering from cultural shifts and critical examinations of his legacy. By 2002, when asked to choose the 100 greatest Britons by the BBC, polls ranked Shackleton 11th and Scott 54th.
What makes Shackleton remarkable, now universally acknowledged, is his leadership, which shone brightest when adversity was greatest.
The British Antarctic Expedition was not as well funded as its predecessor. The ship after which it has since been named, Nimrod, was tiny, old, and at the time of acquisition woefully in need of repairs. What is more, Shackleton had promised Scott not to use the latter’s base on Ross Island, so he had to set up his own base at Cape Royds—a location still on Ross Island, and therefore in violation of the promise to Scott, but nonetheless farther away from the South Pole.
Shackleton's Hut in Cape Royds, Ross Island
Shackleton's base at Cape Royds, Ross Island
Shackleton’s main preoccupation was reaching 90ºS, and, unlike Scott, he was not interested in the science. All the same, because his funding depended on it, he assembled an impressive team of scientists, which included among others T.W. Edgeworth David and Douglas Mawson. Thus, the expedition included auxiliary goals, both of which were successful: conquering Mount Erebus, an active volcano in Ross Island, and conquering the magnetic South Pole, at the time located within Victoria Land.[2]
The centre piece of Riffenburgh’s book is the South Polar journey. Led by Shackleton, his was a party of four: Jameson Adams, a Royal Navy Reserve Lieutenant; Frank Wild, a Petty Officer in the Royal Navy; and Eric Marshall, a surgeon, being his team-mates. The size of the party was determined by the number of surviving ponies, four in total, which were the only non-human component of Shackleton’s transport strategy. As originally envisioned, the return journey was to involve a march of 1,719 statute miles (1,494 nautical miles; 2,767 kilometres) over 91 days. When they departed from their base at Ross Island, on 29 October 1908, they knew only that they would need get onto the ‘Great Ice Barrier’ (the Ross Ice Shelf), an structure hundreds of miles long and hundreds of feet deep, and walk due south; the route to the pole, and the geographical features of the pole itself, not to mention any obstacles that may exist in between, were unknown.
Ski tracks on the Ross Ice Shelf, or Great Ice Barrier
Once on the barrier, years earlier, Scott had imagined that he and his party would be able to walk on flat ice all the way to the South Pole. As they neared the end of their march they observed mountains first appearing and then nearing on their right hand side. Once Shackleton passed the previous expedition’s farthest South, using a route farther to the east of Scott’s in order to avoid the heavily crevassed terrain that had previously slowed down their progress, he found the mountains blocked the way south. These were the Trans-Antarctic Mountains, which divide the continent into East and West Antarctica. By the time he reached them, a slow start and difficult conditions on the barrier meant they had already lost three of their ponies, fallen behind schedule, cut their rations, and become weakened by the cold, the physical strain, and inadequate nutrition. Indeed, the Edwardians’ state of knowledge regarding human nutrition and of the demands imposed on the human body by Antarctic conditions meant that by the time the explorers found a route up the mountains and onto the elevated plateau beyond their daily caloric intake of 2,500 was less than half of what they needed.
Scott, Bowers, and co. sledging up the Beardmore Glacier in December 1911, following Shackleton's route.
On a starvation diet, Shackleton and his men ascended what they named the Great Glacier. The latter, subsequently renamed the Beardmore Glacier after the expedition’s biggest sponsor, happened to be also one of the largest in the world. Over the course of a month, the explorers pulled hundreds of pounds of food and equipment on wooden sledges along a fiendishly difficult and crevassed surface for what seemed an unending gradient, each hill revealing a new one behind it, their instruments revealing ever increasing altitude, day after day after day. Mid way up Shackleton found that their remaining food supplies would not last them to the pole, then still thousands of feet higher and still 287 miles away. He cut rations further.
The Antarctic Plateau
It was not until Boxing Day on 1908, 57 days into their journey, that the explorers reached the polar plateau, well over 10,000 feet above sea level. They stood at the edge of a miles-deep ice sheet extending out into the horizon. Riffenburgh is not as descriptive as Cherry-Garrard, who would be a member of Scott’s subsequent Terra Nova expedition and would later write the world’s best ever travel book, narrating his own and his fellow expeditioners’ incredible experiences on the White Continent. From Cherry-Garrard’s account of the conditions Scott found on the plateau two years later we can imagine what the Shackleton party witnessed for the first time in human history. The low temperatures on the Barrier already caused touching metal to give instant frostbite. At such temperatures the ice was iron hard. Back at base, photographic cameras had to be drained because the oil froze. The explorers generally considered a temperature of 32ºF (0ºC) boiling hot; -4ºF (-20ºC), at which boiling water freezes instantly when thrown up in the air, was very normal. Conditions on the plateau are much, much worse. On average it was colder still. Snow felt much harsher, the ice stickier; manhauling across it was like pulling heavy loads on sandpaper. The air was thin, due to the high altitude, but also loaded with ice crystals and thick to the sight, to the point where explorers often walked into a featureless whiteness that made invisible even a hand held before the face. The rarefied air caused respiration and heart rate to increase, in order to supply enough oxygen to the brain. For our standards, any diet had to be insanely high in fat: in 1909 a meal would consist of pemmican (50% pure pork fat, 50% dried meat) dissolved in a pannikin in a ‘hoosh’ with fortified biscuits, chocolate, and raisins; or months-old pony meat. Needless to say that when it is –50ºF outside, ones does not answer the call of nature in the open air.
Even this will be difficult for a city dweller to comprehend. Try doing a ten-mile walk. Then try it pulling a fifteen-foot-long wooden sledge on the asphalt, loaded with two hundred pounds of equipment—see if you complete even a mile like that. Then attempt it on a broken, uneven, undulating surface. Then attempt it again on that surface, going uphill, on a steep gradient. Then attempt it yet again in the rawest North Dakotan winter you have experienced or can imagine, and think even that was a mild day for the explorers. Now try that every day for sixteen hours every day for a week, breaking only once for lunch, and having to unpack and repack your tent and supplies ever time while getting freezer burns and having freezing gale-force winds blowing in your face. After all this, think about doing that while eating only a small fraction of what you need, from October until March. And then of doing it while you have the worst flu you’ve ever experienced. And then doing it with sleeping on a wet, frozen sleeping bag, in a tent so cold that your breath turns into a beard of ice around your face, separated by the rough rock-hard ice under your back by a piece of canvas. Finally, try to lead three men who do not take crap from anyone under these conditions on a journey to a theoretical and otherwise unknown location, with no certainty of success, low pay that may never be paid, likely death, away and cut off from everything and everyone you know, with no comforts, no means to contact anyone, no means for anyone to locate you, and no means to return home except via a ship that docks hundreds of miles away once a year and which will leave you behind if you are not there on the day that you are expected. If you are able to imagine all of this, you will have a sense of what made Shackleton so extraordinary, even for the much higher standards expected from the men of his day. But that is not all, as we will see shortly.
Robert Falcon Scott
On 4 January 1909, about ten days after reaching the plateau, Shackleton realised that conquering the South Pole would be possible only at the cost sacrificing their lives, for if they pressed on to claim their prize with supplies as low as they were, they would never survive the return journey. When other explorers would have chosen to plant the flag on the Pole and die in a blaze of personal glory, certain that their men would have followed loyally to their graves, Shackleton decided to put the safety of his men first and settle for simply extending their newly established farthest South record. Thus he led his men across the plateau, all of them knowing that the prize of months of toil and hardship was now irrevocably out of reach. Still, they went as far South as they possibly could. On the final day, leaving all their supplies behind, they made a final dash, even running at times, to the turnaround point. After several hours they achieved 88º23’S, 97 nautical miles from the Pole. So near, yet so far. It must have demanded enormous strength of character to resist going those final 97 miles—especially knowing that Scott was already planning an expedition for the following year, which would include a South Polar journey should Shackleton fail.
This was achievement in itself. Yet there was more to come. The explorers, much weaker and thinner than when they set out, now faced a return journey that they would have to complete in 50 days when the outward journey had taken them 73. The reason was not only food: they had a 1 March deadline; if they were not back at base by 1 March, their ship would sail home, leaving them for dead.
Although already skin-and-bone wraiths, the men achieved impressive distances. Supplies they had depoted along the way, however, were not enough and a pattern was established with one good meal at a depot, followed by many days surviving on biscuits until the next stash of supplies. By the end of January Wild had developed dysentery, and a week later the entire party was struck by severe enteritis, having eaten tainted pony meat. There was no choice but to press on.
Fortunately, wind in Antarctica blows outwardly from the plateau, so the explorers were able to use their sail to keep up the distances.
The men finally reached their forward base at Hut Point on 28 February. They found the place deserted. There was no sign of the ship. No note had been left. Hoping the ship may still be in the vicinity, Shackleton decided to burn the wooden hut used for magnetic observations in order to attract attention. At first cold made it impossible to set it on fire, but after further attempts they succeeded. Not long afterwards, their ship came into view, having been anchored at some distance, and three days later they were off the barrier and aboard the Nimrod, on their way home.
I enjoy reading about the heroic age of Antarctic exploration not only because it is about as extreme as it gets on our planet, but also because it is emblematic of who we are as a people. As Oswald Spengler wrote:
At the base of every culture lies an idea that is expressed by certain words of profound significance. In Chinese culture these words are tao and li; for the Apollonian Greeks this cultural idea was contained in the words logos and to on (“that which is”). In the languages of Faustian man the basic cultural idea is expressed by the words “will,” “strength,” and “space.” Faustian man differs from all others in his insatiable will to reach the infinite. He seeks to overcome with his telescope the dimensions of the universe, and the dimensions of the earth with his wires and iron tracks. With his machines he sets out to conquer nature. He uses his historical thinking to take hold of the past and integrate it into his own existence under the name of “world history.” With his long-range weapons he seeks to subdue the entire planet, including the remains of all older cultures, forcing them to conform to his own pattern of life.[3]
The feats of Robert Scott, Ernest Shackleton, and Douglas Mawson, express a desire to conquer the limits of the Earth. Spengler would argue that Faustian civilisation had already been in its twilight for a hundred years by the time these men claimed swathes of the southernmost continent for the British Empire, mapping and naming hitherto unknown geographical features, setting up scientific bases and communications, and for the first time undertaking—along with Germans, Norwegians, and other European explorers—the scientific study of its geology and climate. Yet this was also a time when the British Empire, and by extension Faustian man, were at their peak of territorial extension and cultural influence. There was a great deal of nervousness and worry about the prospect of decline and degeneration at the time, but these explorers not only thought in terms of national glory—they thought of themselves part of a superior race of men. This was a mentality that was partially destroyed with the First European Civil War of 1914-1918, and definitively obliterated with the Second one that ended 1945.
In terms of exploration, putting an American on the moon remains the crowning achievement for the United States. The Faustian men of 1969, however, were already thinking in terms it being a ‘great leap for mankind’. Only sixty years earlier the glory would have been for the ‘British race’ and the British Empire, not the whole of humanity. However, Spengler would have seen Neil Armstrong’s phrase as a more perfect actualisation of what the German metahistorian called ‘Faustian universalism’. Spengler wrote:
this instinct, totally directed to the outside world, still nourishes the old Faustian will to power and the infinite; now it has become the direful will to absolute domination of the world in the military, economic, and intellectual sense. It can be felt in the historical fact of the World War and in the concept of a world revolution, the idea of forging the swarming multitudes of humanity into a single whole. The imperialism of Babylon aimed only at control of the Near East, while that of the Indie people was limited to India itself; Greek and Roman imperialism was bounded by Britain, Mesopotamia, and the Sahara, and China’s empire extended no further than the Caspian Sea. Modern imperialism, on the other hand, aims at possessing the entire globe. We recognize no borders or limits at all. By means of a new Volkerwanderung we have made America a part of Western Europe. We have constructed on every continent our special kind of cities, and have subjected the native populations to our own way of life and thought. Such activity is the highest possible expression of our dynamic sense of world power. What we believe, what we desire, is meant to be binding on all. [my emphases][4]
The above reflections may highlight our Western universalist outlook in terms of explicit power, but it is entirely consistent with Armstrong’s mentally extending the franchise of the United State’s accomplishment in space exploration to the entire human race, by implication ascribing to every human on Earth America’s and Faustian man’s particular aspirations. Not every human wanted a man to walk on the moon, millions probably never even thought about it. What is more, among Americans only a tiny group was involved in the effort, while on the other side of the globe their rivals in the U.S.S.R. where hoping that an American would not walk on the moon—at least before the red flag had been planted on the lunar surface for the glory of Soviet man.
Amundsen's team at the South Pole from left to right: Roald Amundsen, Helmer Hanssen, Sverre Hassel, and Oscar Wisting in December 1911.
From left to right: Lawrence Oates, Henry Bowers, Robert Scott, Edward Wilson, and Edgar Evans at the South Pole, January 1912.
A hundred years since Amundsen and Scott planted their respective flags on the South Pole, the space has been controlled by the United States for fifty-five years, and Antarctica is held up as a model of international cooperation, all claims made during the early half of the 20th century having been put aside and all future claims having been prohibited by international treaty since 1959. While Brazil, China, India, Japan, Pakistan, and South Korea have research stations on the continent, Antarctic research remains a largely a White man’s affair, and its exploration an almost exclusively a White man’s enterprise for much of its history. The ideal of an apolitical spirit of human scientific cooperation transcending all borders remains a Faustian ideal. Yet humans are tribal, and we know full well that that which drove our greatest achievements in the history of exploration and science—the will to power and the infinite—also spells our doom. The same way that a hundred years ago Antarctic exploration and conquest was imbued with racial pride and a nationalist spirit, a hundred years from now this may well be the case again, although it may not be our descendants who dominate that part of the globe, or even of space exploration.
It does not have to be that way, of course, and, should we prove successful in our cause, the White race may rise again with a new civilisation, the way that the Faustians rose as the Graeco-Romans fell. But will they have the same will to power and the infinite? If so, the legacy of our early explorers will continue to be honoured in centuries to come, and it will be the names of our ancestors, our gods, and our heroes that name planets and celestial objects as we discover them. Let us hope that there are men of Shackleton’s calibre out there, or that we are still capable of producing them.
[1] Apsley Cherry-Garrard. The Worst Journey in the World. London: Constable & Company, 1922.
[2] It is now outside the Antarctic Circle altogether, off the coast of Adélie Land
[3] Oswald Spengler. Prussianism and Socialism.
[4] Ibid.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Well, other nations has even greater explorere. China has its Muslim Admiral Zheng He (1371-1433), who sailed to Americana even before Columbus.
In 1404, Zhu Di changed Zheng He’s surname from Ma to Zheng as an imperial honor and in recognition of Zheng He’s extraordinary military abilities and loyal service, the emperor chose him from among his most trusted advisors as the ideal commander for the great voyages westward.
Zheng He is China’s most famous maritime explorer. His extraordinary ability and vision found brilliant expression in the great achievements of his life, including maritime exploration, foreign diplomacy, and military affairs.
China has named its first aircraft carrier after the Muslim Admiral.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/05/25/indonesias-cheng-ho-mosque/
@Rehmat: Zheng He was castrated b/c the Chinese knew that Muslim men made the best concubines.
This is tragic. White men shouldn’t compete like Amundsen and Scott did. We must cooperate, even if we are of different nationalities. We must live and fight. Dead men can’t fight.
The greatest stupidity of Western man of course is to “universalize” his achievements, which are the expression of his Faustian spirit. Individualism+universalism is a self-destructive formula. What the hell are Brazilians, Chinese, Koreans, Indians and even Pakistanis doing on the South Pole? Did not Western man discover it and thus can claim it as his own?
Western man is not only “universalizing” his technical and economical achievements with the “wretched of the earth”, he is busy “universalizing” his own countries – yeah even his own women – with them.
If there is anything Western man should do to regain his place on this planet it is to change his formula. That should be : individualism+tribalism. No more: “one great leap for mankind” but “one great leap for the White Race” should henceforth be his motto.
Christianity and Islam seek to convert the whole world to their particular concepts of truth. Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler offered no religious basis for their aggressions. Can high IQ White racist bigots create a propaganda religion based upon the following idea:
Question: Who is the greatest man who has ever lived?
Answer: Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
Question: Who is the second greatest man who has ever lived?
Answer: Attila the Hun, who is the greatest ancestor of the Second Coming of Christ.
This propaganda message would be taught to children and would be the basis for a new, more aggressive Christianity suited to White racist goals. Is the current form of Christianity a poor basis for White survival? What might be the alternatives to Christianity for White racists? Does a cohesive nation usually have a predominant religion? IMHO racial bigotry is good and religious bigotry might be good. Lack of bigotry means lack of animal instinct. If you are everybody’s friend then you are nobody’s friend. If you are totally neutral and totally tolerant then you are totally nothing. Shall the White European races tolerate their own destruction? IMHO cold weather created the White man, and 3,000 years of farming gave the White man the work ethic. Is Antarctica a logical place for fanatical White racists to attempt to create a White super race and Wunderwaffen that can change history? Is a base in Antarctica for White racists a real possibility?
Because of its remoteness, even by Antarctic standards, most of Marie Byrd Land (the portion east of 150°W) has not been claimed by any sovereign nation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Byrd_Land
@Athanasius:
YEP. And the Jews are known as the best hookers and pimps in world with 280 Jewish brothels in Tel Aviv alone with 20,000 Jewish prostitutes.
The picture in Uncle Sam is not much different than Israel. According to some sources – between 50,000 to 100,000 new prostitutes are added yearly to the US existing sex-pot pool. According to US law enforcement agencies records – 70,000 to 80,000 people are busted for prostitution each year – 70% female prostitutes, 20% male prostitutes and 10% johns – costing over US$200 million to the taxpayers. In fact, the fastest growing prostitution trend in the US is exploitation on children. An average of 100,000 American children are forcefully engaged in prostitution or pornography each year. Chad DeMeguil’s documentary Branded, exposes this dark side of the so-called “civilized society” of the US…..
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/human-trafficking-and-politics/
@Less IQ than a Jew:
Jewish Wikileaks and Goyim Christian Truth.
http://zioncrimefactory.com/jew-world-order/#comment-3374
@Less IQ than a Jew:
To create a new race that is hardened by the environmental selective pressures of a cold climate in a remote area of the globe is in itself not a bad idea, but Antartica is simply too extreme. Besides, how do you procure your food from such a barren soil? We can think of several areas in the world that are more suitable and they all are under the White man’s sovereignty : Siberia, Northern Scandinavia, Alaska, Northern Canada or Patagonia in South Argentina come to mind. Or we could think of Iceland, an area that has the advantage that it already is a sovereign nation and thus cannot fall under the joke of a “multicultural” regime like in the US or Canada.
As for a more suitable religion for the White man, a combination of a peaceful Jesus with an aggressive Attila the Hun would be contradictory for him. Besides, Attila the Hun and his hordes were intruders from Central Asia and nearly as destructive as his later colleague Genghis Khan. Here the Muslims clearly have an advantage over us. Their “ideal man” was prophet and warrior at the same time, something that bothers them least of all.
The best thing to start with would be a reasonable, secular morality based on sound Darwinian principles. Other things of a more spiritual nature could be added to it later on.
@Less IQ than a Jew:
You’re asking us to basically become Jews, with racial supremacism buttressed by religious obligations. That won’t work with us. The European functions best without systematic philosophies like the Abrahamic and East Asian faiths. We are not a spiritual people, we are a materialistic people who are interested in the here and now. The only way forward is through science and empiricism; more religious/philosophical ideas will just cripple again the way Christianity did 2,000 years ago.
I suppose it’s inevitable they we must dig through musty tales of history in order to find racial inspiration, since there is nothing inspirational in our people right now. We are going down without a fight, content to reminisce over past glories while we intellectually pontificate over the sad woes of our people. And, as is so frequent in these articles, toss in the obligatory mention of a Nazi-era German (Oswald Spengler) so that our readers do not lose sight of our connection to that period in our history either.
@Ward Kendall:
What do you mean we’re going down without a fight? What do you call WW2? In the grand span of history, 1945 was only a moment ago. Our end will practically be immediate.
@Rehmat: Someone has to service all these sex crazed Pakistanis we allow in our countries. The Jews love making money from other peoples’ vices.
@fender: And your observation neglects the fact it it just such ‘materialistic’ people who are most in the power of the Jews.
@Athanasius:
They’re not materialists, they’re just greedy, short-sighted opportunists who obey the orders of whoever finances their lavish lifestyles.
Epicurus, Democritus, Darwin, Shockley, and Wilson: all of them materialists. Not materialistic in the “I want the new smartphone” sense, materialistic in the “everything that exists is matter, and there is no ideal world.”
fender: “What do you mean we’re going down without a fight? What do you call WW2?
What does World War II have to do with the struggle to preserve North America as a home for white people?
One more explanation of this partially irrational behaviour lies
in the vainglorious nature of last 2000 years of white man rule. All these countless emperors, kings and other “nobless”,
being corrupted by Eternal jew to the point of total oblivion, trickled-down this mode of behaviour onto lower classes, driving those to attempt establish new “records” in everything
That is today’s vainglorious supersticious talmudic culture of west-man. Sorry.
@Athanasius:
Please don’t say that. Yours Jewish friends in porn industry could loose billions of dollars.
re: “In terms of exploration, putting an American on the moon remains the crowning achievement for the United States.”
Seriously, do you really think the USA placed men on the moon? Given the technology of 1969, do you?
Dan kurt
The History Channel is planning a Miniseries Mankind: The Story of All of Us
@Rehmat: I hope you are really a very insightful white guy who lives in South Carolina–in which case, the joke’s on me.
But sometimes, your non-sequiturs are so self-absorbed that I can’t resist.
@fender: We’re not going to “end.” Go to engineering or professional school, marry a nice girl, have six kids, and teach them about their culture.
I’d say the ‘mat’ is somewhere about Palistinian. Not white, not east asian, some arabic tribe.
@Wiggy: I thought he claimed to be Pakistani?
@fender: Well, Plato also is authentically occidental.
I actually meant materialism in the same sense that you did (but certainly you are also correct with respect to its consumerists meaning).
The zionists Protestants are not only a historical anomaly, they aren’t really all that influential. The Jew media overinflates their relevance so our ridiculous foreign policy and Israel’s egregious behavior can be imputed to Christians. But people like Hagee aren’t making any decisions that matter. In fact, there very few evangelicals in the upper echelons of the bureaucracy. What there are, are Jews, and people like Leon Panetta and Robert Gates.
Which brings me back to materialism. I think that most of the people who are selling us out are impervious sentimentality and abstract Platonic ideals of loyalty, fidelity, love, and faith in God. They, in fact, will be the first to affirm that they are empiricists.
On the other hand, from Richard Dawkins on down, they are full of beans. Richard Dawkins’ own theory of “memes” is about as Platonic as you can get (he is asserting the influence of disembodied forms!). And these people all believe in “personal liberty” and a specious perversion of Christian egalitarianism in a very platonic sense.
So my argument is somewhat vulnerable to the critique that our hostile elites and self-destructive whites are not, in fact, empiricists/materialists. But they use the ideology of materialism to undermine our own ethnic self-identity (on racial, religious, and cultural grounds).
@ fender:
Nice to see somebody on this website admit that the world is REAL, and not a halfway house to the supposed hereafter.
Let us hope, not.
To paraprase/reformulate an agument of Trenchant in another thread:
… and while some white imbeciles in 1912 are proud to put their frostbite feet on a white desert, with no other reason of having been there (“Kilroy was here”) claiming to extend the glory of the British empire and die in “Faustian quest”, one year later, in 1913, the Jews – keeping their feet warm – took over the US $.
Oh Alex, as far as white survival is concerned, your way off-base.
Like your antarctic heros …
@sylvie: women and men are Very Different. some women diss the men who made comfort possible. Strange but true.
The only thing that Feminism contributed to ‘Mankind’… is the suggestion that women be more than their sexual aspect. Now that is a good idea.
Women who delight in ridiculing men should be set out in the wilderness with warm clothing, a good survival manual, a map and compass, and 10 days of foodstuff for , say , a 7 day walk. Once they have experienced the angst of survival, then if they still want to diss men, let them continue their Rebellion and let them be Alone without Men.
There are no Faustian women, they cannot even conceive of it, just as they do not understand Contest, Guns, War. Of course, when the time arrives with the niggers at the door ….they suddenly get religion: Real Men please help.
I’ve been having some breakthrough/cathartic moments. I think I can see now why all of our views/emotions/instincts are on a convergent course…not just in terms of what is happening to our people and why, but also on the inner sense of total hopelessness. We try to put on a brave face, and given/recieve encouragement and speak of the importance of morale. But inside…I think we all know that there just aren’t any workable ideas in the WN community. I don’t mean that there aren’t any ideas that would not work given the right setting…of course…many of the ideas would be excellent given ther right setting.
But in the circumstances set against us, nothing that is being said, and nothing that has been tried out, has had any effect. And – I think – can’t and won’t ever be effective.
Not because our situation is truly hopeless, but because the WN community has not produced the right insights…and – due to the basic underlying values and/or preferences and prejudices, may actually be inherently incapable of producing the insights that would underpin a successful turnaround.
This does not change the fact that the WN movement features some of the most couragious and decent people who have taken stands on principle at great personal cost. Nor does it change the fact that the WN movement is the only hope for Western civilization and the survival of the euro-kindred.
How can this be? Well, it’s because our people are in a deep enchanted sleep, and that includes individuals who have it within their talents, knowledge and life experiences to come to see the path through the forest and save our people.
The WN community are the people who by some miracle woke up. The first miracle is that despite the discomforts and personal hardships and frustrations facing them, so many made a commitment to staying woken up, and concentrating their lives on waking more people up.
Then miracles like KM happened…people who dedicated academic careers to revealing an intensely vivid and objective explanation of the history, reas on, cause, motive, nature of what has happened to us.
If that had not happened, there truly would not and could not have been any hope for european desendent peoples. We would have slept walk to our extinction for sure. But because it did happen, there is hope.
But that hope does not lie in the worldview of WN’s. The hope is not in any of the ideas about solutions in the WN world. The hope is not for turning the clock back to some idealized past. It isn’t National Socialism.
In our heart of hearts I think we probably all know that there is nothing in those ideas that will actually work in the circumstances actually facing us.
But that’s ok, because that isn’t the great hope. The great hope is that by the efforts of KM and Matt Parrott and all the others, and all the commenters and everyone else who wakes up and does something…that eventually people will be woken up who for whatever reason, are the right people with the right life experiences and other qualities, to be able to first understand the enormity of the situation facing us…this part is now largely solved thanks to people like KM. And then, from within that vision of the true landscape of this peril, produce the insights and then the strategies and solutions that totally transform the landscape.
As WN’s we are aiming far too low. We are assuming that the only salvation will be a resurgence of our own tribalism. We are thinking that so terrible are our enemies that the only way we can survive is by abandoning some of our greatest and most worthy accomplishments. Our universalist spirit. Our idealism. Our history of, in apparently impossible or intractable situations, not just fighting back but coming up with whole new levels of paradigm shifting concepts, that render the enemy tactics impotent, and even sweep away the reason to be enemies at all.
We’re not bettered. Our solution won’t just be a struggle against the odds on the terms of the forces ranged against us. Our solution will completely transform the landscape of human relations. Our wish to preserve the continuity and health of our people will not even be central to that solution. It will be simply be one of many knock on effects.
The Israeli flag is white and blue and it has brainwashed you.
Anti-racism is anti-White. White GeNOcide. (FIND SLOGANS LIKE THIS AND SPREAD THEM.) Antarctica might be mostly irrelevant to WN but awakening White people to the truth about ZOG is essential. What are the 10 best anti-ZOG and anti-PC slogans?
@Ward Kendall:
If you truly don’t know the answer to that question, then 1) a brief reply on a comments section won’t enlighten you, and 2) you have a limited biological worldview.
@Joe Webb:
“The only thing that Feminism contributed to ‘Mankind’… is the suggestion that women be more than their sexual aspect. Now that is a good idea.” I must disagree. Feminism tore apart the ancient, elegant dance between men and women, that celebrated and balanced our differences. Women were always more than our sexual aspects. We were loved, cherished, protected and provided for. We were mistresses of our own separate domain. We were the guardians of all that was most sacred to our people. Now we are angry, stressed, and all to often scorned. We have become merely wage-earners.
As I read comments on this site, and others, I become convinced that our primary task is to make peace with each other. A formidable task, I agree, but a vital one. Love one another.
I am viewing this article in a tab. The tab does not show the entire name. It reads “Ernest Shackleton’s Fart”.
Just some levity as you head out into the anti White world.
@Alice Teller: agree and do not understand what you disagree with in my remark.
Feminism, Jews, Porn., JewTV and the various claims/doctrines out there are not compelling anymore to most folks, espec the young. So we see girls and young women dressing like sluts, even many white young men wearing their pants below their bums, etc. Sodom and Gomorrah are Gay. Gay spirits cavorting in the fields and frightening the horses. Heteros also gay. Gay spirits doing it in the streets. Total narcissism and nihilism and surrender to Whatever.
There is no tomorrow. Women are the most vulnerable because of their loving nature. Loving is personal and immediate. Thinking is not the natural mental state of women. That is Good because you do not love your mother because of her great Thought. This is true of father as well, but substantially less so. If Father does not think, he is not the Leader of the Pack. Like it or not, this is the way of the biological world. Exceptions prove the rule.
We love women because of their beauty and grace. Not that there is much grace in a slut….women spend a lot of time in glamour mags and TV looking at other women. This is simply more biology. I recall a feminist harpy a few years exclaiming that she did not care how high her ass was…pure sour grapes. Women ARE the embodiment of sex. The triangle of breasts and vagina, plus every other body part of the female body is sexualized. This is biology, and why Muslims cover up. They know.
Men are to some degree ditto, but much less. Woman looks to Man’s earning power to ensure the nest is built and furnished for children. This is Good, and any man who whines about this is a fool. So men and money is as natural as women and sexiness.
All of that said, it remains the project of men and women … mindfulness, to also demand psychological fitness which includes caritas, humor, intellect, conscientiousness, and compassion ( not to be overdone ).
Inasmuch as we are somewhat Fallen creatures (Whites too…) living the Good Life is not easily attained. What can be attained, for a start, is the natural man and natural woman in relationship of mutuality, not equality, that great Curse of a soured intellect.
I confronted an Asian twerp at my gym with his pants below his butt. I told him to pull his pants up or else. I could not use any racial or sexual references given my desire to remain a member of my gym. He gave me a little lip and I threatened him with going to the management. He relented. I went to the management anyway.
I had the berzerker steam up for the first time in a couple years or so. I would have hammered him if he began to fight. I was surprised at myself but later discovered that that was my Emma West moment…all the disgrace of our times expressed in a low-life with his pants below his filthy bum and his genitals at the ready. Killing time…in the jungle.
So, religion might find its way back to white racial survival, but I doubt it. WN might be our salvation, or, it has to be. What else? We are entering a period of protracted struggle. Biology wins in the long run. In the short run, there will be blood, as someone said (Cormac McCarthy?) Joe
@Joe Webb: I disagree that we needed feminism to tell us that we were more than just our sexual aspects. I come from a long line of women who have always known that equality is a step down. We are not victims. Men and women compliment each other. I am often shocked by the level of animosity displayed by both men and women toward each other.If we are to survive, we need each other now, not just when the wolf is at the door. He is always at the door.
@sylvie: Hindsight is always 20/20. We should use it to correct the past mistakes of our record and deny our neurotic imposters the opportunity to run a scam, rather than complain about our accomplishments. The psychopathic usurpers will make all kinds of crazy claims when confronted with truth. Deny them.
Faustian man is kicking off the next wave of exploration and settlement of the open oceans and space. This would mutually benefit white survival through a return to Orthodox Nationalism, the likes of which existed in Anglo-Saxon England prior to 1066.
Do you like this direction here? :
http://anglo-saxonisrael.com/
http://christogenea.org/
http://mk.christogenea.org/
This is the new Antarctic. You are the Scotts, the Shackletons, the Amundsens, the Wilds. Wild died a pauper not far from where I sit right here in Johannesburg, South Africa. Subsequent to his Antarctic explorations the man had a bash at a few other ventures in Africa. Not important whether he failed at them or not, the point is he went out and did it.
In Scott’s last penciled letter to his wife, written a few days before those remaining four froze to death out there on the freezing Antarctic plains (if memory serves Oates was the first of the five to go) he says to her that’s he happy, he feels no pain. By then he knew it was over. Considering what they’d they had gone through they probably died with relief knowing they’d done all they could. Regret never entered the equation.
WN is to Our Race now what the South Pole was to them then, only a lot more comfortable and with a lot more widgets and resources at our disposal. So Sylvie, by dissing our great explorers of yesterday you’re dissing us. I hope you regret what you wrote.
On brainwashing these articles are like your local laundrette, they’re brainrinsers whence we can all learn something, because to achieve what those great explorers accomplished you have to have a seriously focussed and wide awake mind.
@Ward Kendall:
“What does World War II have to do with the struggle to preserve North America as a home for white people?”
North America was lost the moment our forefathers brought African slaves to the continent by the millions. However, let’s, for the sake of argument, pretend that blacks had no history here; regardless of who won WW2 in this alternate reality, the tribe would be importing Africans here anyway.
@Athanasius:
Yeah, I agree, Richard Dawkins is a tool. He went on Bill Maher’s show wearing a shirt that said, “We are all Africans.” He also told Herman Cain something like, “You’re an African ape, and so am I” (Youtube has the video). Dawkins is a typically deluded Anglo jackass who uses flawed science to further his slave morality.
@Joe Webb:
Joe, get a reality check:
What did these pseudo-heros achieve for mankind? Been the first at 90° South?
They are symbolizing the absolute uselessness of some efforts of White Man.
Even the pictures they brought us from the south pole – I could have painted them before (without using my color palette).
This type of pseudo-machos is abundant:
While their race goes down the drain, they kick little round balls into goals, jump from bridges with a rubber string attached, are rowing across the Atlantik, climb some Alpine mountain on just another more dangerous route and so on.
Have a look at ther Guinness Book of Records to get an idea of our useless heros.
The WN mouvement needs another category of men. The type that achieves something for us all, not only for their personal ego.
But I gave you another argument to consider, and this is even more symbolic:
While (a large part of) White Men are busy in nonsense achievements like Alex’s South pole heros or exculting scores in footbal matches, the tribe works in real issues, dispossessing the imbeciles of their money, of their media, of their art concepts, of their history and even of their Christmas …
Some women need real men, not self-mutilating clowns. True, but not so strange.
@Rehmat: With such a great legacy of Muslim explorers, it is amazing they couldn’t find oil in their own deserts!
@sylvie:
I think you missed the point. The drive to be the first to the South Pole was the same drive that made us be the first into space (Gagarin) and the first on the moon (Armstrong). The Will to Power that drives all healthy life forms manifests itself in different ways across the human strata: in less intelligent people- who are always more numerous- it’s things like being the first eat a hundred hot dogs in a row, or being able to lift a car with your balls. But occasionally that same blind drive to power and glory will produce great geniuses who truly do lead their societies and their people forward. These are few and far between, but they are incredibly important. Besides, it took great intelligence and physical strength to sail hostile waters in those days; I don’t see how you can compare that to footballers.
@fender:
That’s exactly what I said.
For the tribe, “Will to Power” (Oh wey, another NS principle!) manifests itself in achievements like taking control of a host nation’s money/media/immigration policies and for “less intelligent people” in eating hundreds of dogs and getting frostbites at the South Pole.
I was just pointing to the time coincidence of the south pole conquest and the conquest of the FED.
Of course there are real achievements of White Man, like the space projects you are mentioning and sea navigation, but in this thread we are talking about a specific enterprise, which brought no significant scientific or technological progress, nothing remotely comparable to the effort.
@Joe Webb:
Joe, I think you read a different article.
Are you claiming that the Shackletons or Scotts “made comfort possible” to their women and families? Or to any one else for that matter ?
And all that for no results at all, no benefit to nobody, ridiculizing White Man’s effort while Jews take control of him?
@Mickey Meadows: Dear Mr. Meadows: I’m glad you ended on a note of optimism!
There are some workable ideas right around the corner (stay tuned!) But, you know, we are a different people, a spiritual people, and in the end a Nature people who have been away from Nature for too long but are now finding our way back, one by one, in twos and in threes. Ultimately we will be both lesser in number and stronger in materiel and spirit, along with being humbler – not least of which will be due to the knowledge that we took so long monkeying around with ideas and activities that would not and could not work.
@Marwinsing:
Great reply to Sylvie’s complaints.
Oates was a brave soldier and a gentleman. Suffering from severe frostbite and knowing he was slowing down the other three remaining members of the party (Evans had already perished somewhere near the foot of the Beardmore Glacier), he left the tent and disappeared into a blizzard in the middle of the night, sacrificing himself in order to give his companions a chance. He was only 32.
As to Sylvie’s complaints: the advancement of science begins with exploration. People like Shackleton, Scott, Amundsen, Mawson, etc., opened the way into the Antarctic, the world’s largest desert and most hostile environment. The expeditions they led also resulted in scientific discoveries in glaciology, geology, climatology, zoology, paleontology, oceanography, nutrition, and physiology. They also increased our practical knowledge about adaptation to extremely cold environments and its effects on materials. Thanks to the knowledge obtained during these expeditions it has been possible to build research stations all over the continent where scientists are constantly increasing our understanding of the Earth’s ice ages and both the modern and prehistoric climate. In future Antarctica will play a role in planetary exploration. In more ways than one these explorers exemplify our race at its finest and—importantly for those of us engaged in the apparently impossible task of overthrowing a hostile establishment—show once again that the apparently impossible can be achieved present the guts and the will.
@sylvie:
Not all achievements need to specifically and explicitely advance the collective. Being the first to the South Pole brought us no specific advantages but just imagine the pride Norweigians felt when one of their own was the first to set foot on a place where no other human head been. I suspect it was the same feeling that racially-conscious Whites felt when Armstrong placed his foot on the lunar surface (of course most Americans simply said to themselves, “what a great victory for humanity” while people like us said, “what a great victory for the European people”). Being the first to the South Pole, in my opinion, has intrinsic cultural value even though it may not specifically improve our individual lives.
@sylvie: perhaps I was too cryptic. The Faustian urge to go to moon or the poles, etc, results in scientific advancement. That scientific advancement, and its consequent technology, lead to “comfort” which is not a bad thing, assuming that comfort is rest and allows then real men to become heroes, espec for their families and race.
You are still dissing men because most of us like football and so on. Not all males are smart enough to achieve great things, and even fewer, much fewer, women achieve great things, greatness meaning cultural, political, scientific greatness. Women’s natural role is to enable greatness in their men by their steadfast loyalty and tenderness.
This is all simple biology. Women bring the children, and men protect them and the women too. If you diss the rituals of sport for men, you miss the biology of violence as the guarantor of racial and individual survival. I know a few liberal men who could not defend anybody. They are all supported by women. Disgusting.
Women like comfort because of biological traits that support children. Women all like to prettify themselves and the home. This is all normal.
When little boys stop carrying sticks and little girls stop playing with dolls, we are in big trouble. Of course, they never will.
The social rituals of women can be satirized no end, but I do not because of the Natural genetic basis of these female behaviors. So, take it easy on men because they are just doing what men do, especially white men. The man-cave v. the tupperware party. Totally natural, relax. Enjoy your man, and respect his genes, unless of course, he is useless as a man. In that case find another. Joe
@Alice Teller:
“Women were always more than our sexual aspects.”
This is true.
Men really do love (some) women for much more than their bodies. At least I do. And I know there are probably many other men who love women on a deep spiritual level. (And it’s unfortunate that both men and women are constantly being told that ‘all men care about is sex’ etc.)
Men long for that pure feminine embrace.
In fact, the spiritual feeling that some gals from my past give me is… everything. It’s the inspirational/creative force in my world.
A few gals from my past… I will never be with them in a sexual way — ever. But I love them more than I can describe with words.
I oppose so-called feminism because I love women.
I would take a little different view of the white man’s striving to do something resulting in reaching the moon, south pole, first in flight and so on because they illustrate why white men dominate the landscape of self made billionaires and millionaires, innovators, great scientists, etc.
The best among as cannot just be ordinary, and we hate the chains that bind us to ordinary lives. It is better to die trying for greatness for some men than to get up in the morning and do something bland. To a lessor extent, virtually all achievers feel that way. Hopefully, some of them (us) will channel that into overturning the screwed up system that enslaves us.
@Farnham O’Reilly:
Farnham – Yes sorry about that. The comment went over much more negative than was intended.
I stand in solemn amazement at how many white women Faustian man Rocco Siffredi has debauched. It’s a staggering number, only able to be reached by a Faustian man. It’s unbelievable how many tons of explosives Faustian man Winston Churchill dropped on Europe. A truly Faustian amount. Faustian Dwight Eisenhower starved an unbelievably high number of Germans. Praise him. Faustian Herb Boyer took control of nature and began genetically modifying crops. He’s Faustian to the extreme. Destroying that powerful adversary “the rain forest” is a tribute to the might of Faustian man. Loudest band in the world? Faustians, Man-O-War.
Hail him, hail Faustian Man!
@professorjoe:
Apart from sarcasm, your comment only shows that – like with everything – you have positive and negative expressions of phenomena. The negative Faustian man is indeed destructive, but what about the positive Faustian man? I define the Faustian man as someone who makes a great achievement by overcoming natural limitations. As such all great inventions that brought civilization foreward were the work of Faustian men.
BTW, many examples you gave were simply criminal men, nothing “Faustian” in their behaviour.
@Franklin Ryckaert:
Who cares what you define some made up term as, dude? Christianity, democracy, freedom – all lower case whites define things differently. Your negative is another man’s positive and vice versa. Are you saying that Churchill didn’t bring civilization forward? You’re saying that genetically modified organisms haven’t brought civilization forward? Back to bed, old timer. Navel gaze, complain on line, and die off. That’s the course for you all now.
@professorjoe
What an excellent End to this thread!