A Quest for a Morally Based Ideology for Pro-White Activism
Abstract
What strikes me from reading the Kevin MacDonald’s book, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition, is that, over the course of many thousands of years, the key to power over European peoples has always been based on the power of moral communities to make people conform. Because of our individualism, our social glue is not based on extended families. But Western cultures do have a social glue. Moral communities are the social glue of the West. While in non-Western societies social cohesion is attained via kinship connections, the social glue of Western societies revolves around reputation as honest, trustworthy, fair, and—most of all—as someone who upholds the moral values of the community. Dissenting from a moral community typically means ostracism, guilt, loss of job, or worse.
The thesis of this article is that we, the European peoples, need to defend ourselves against ethnocentric peoples whose agenda is to weaken the power of the White population by erecting moral communities in which White people are seen as evil if they defend their people and culture. The best route for us to accomplish this is to build on our very strong tendency to build morally-based ingroups via inducing shame and guilt in those who dissent from the moral code of the ingroup. Since I am an ethnic Swede myself, I will focus on northwestern Europe, and specifically Scandinavia, but most of the thesis should be applicable also to White Americans.
Background
MacDonald elaborates how the European peoples, particularly northwest European peoples, have a genetic tendency towards egalitarian individualism, and that European ingroups are permeable to members outside the ingroup provided they are trustworthy and demonstrate a reputation of good moral character that is in line with the moral standards of the ingroup. This goes all the way back to Indo-Europeans and northern hunter-gatherers several thousand years ago, although the current peoples of Europe have undergone a significant evolution since that time. The northern hunter-gathers were thoroughgoing egalitarian individualists, while the Indo-European warriors were only egalitarian within the aristocratic group of warriors (they established hierarchical societies with the military elite on top), but the group was permeable to talented people from outside the group. The moral code of honor kept the group together with strong bonds, and individualism meant that individuals could rise in the hierarchy. It was not based on kinship.
The hunter-gatherer groups were genetically inclined towards egalitarian individualism because of their evolution in the far north of Europe: The harsh environment of the north, in combination with a sparse population density, and therefore a low degree of competition for resources and no need for ethnocentrism, called for intelligence and creativity in surviving the harsh environment; outsiders who were willing to help and could demonstrate useful abilities were welcome; there was less need for kin-based power structures. It strongly fostered monogamy because one man could not support more than one woman and their children. The nuclear family was the building block of society, not clans. And these traits had a genetic origin—they were not just arbitrary “social constructs”!
Thus, evolution has created an individualistic, egalitarian, monogamous race, whose bonds are mostly based on a reputation-based morality, high trust, and ingroup consensus rather than kinship and ethnocentrism. They formed moral-ideological communities in which those who violated public trust, ingroup consensus, and other manifestations of the moral order, were shunned, ostracized, and exposed to public humiliation—a fate that would have resulted in evolutionary death in the harsh northern ecology.
MacDonald finds that European peoples are significantly more individualistic than other peoples, and within Western Europe, there is an ethnically based northwest-southeast gradient of a genetic tendency towards individualism, correlated with variation in family structure within Western Europe. In this gradient, Scandinavians have the most individualist family patterns in all of Europe.
Paradoxically, Sweden, as one of the most individualistic countries in the world, has chosen a very socialistic economic policy with a powerful state and powerful tendencies toward egalitarianism, conformism and law-abidingness. Thus, on the surface it looks like a collectivistic society. It is easy to think that individualism and collectivism would be opposites? There is, however, a clear logic to this paradox:
The paradox of “individualistic collectivism”
What is unique about Sweden is the underlying morality of that attempts to liberate the individual citizen from all forms of subordination and dependency in civil society: the poor from privately based charity, the workers from their employers, wives from their husbands, children from their parents and old people from their children.
The result is that Sweden is on the extreme end of individualist societies with an extreme independence from other individuals and groups other than the state. The state has the warrant of maintaining independence of individuals so they are not dependent on their families or other individuals. Through active intervention, it promotes egalitarian conditions that guarantee individual autonomy. There is a belief that a strong state and stable social norms will keep their “neighbor” out of both their lives and their backyards.
In older times, the peasants and the king often joined in a common struggle against their common adversary: the nobility. Therefore, the peasants came to view the state, in the figure of the King, as in some sense being “on their side.”[1] The patterns of individual freedom and lack of dependency on superiors go back at least to the medieval period. Feudalism did not happen in Scandinavia; farmers had a say in their government—typically not as strong as other forces like the nobility, but a force nonetheless.
For example, one scholar notes “the obvious egalitarian tendencies, personal freedoms, and legal and political enfranchisement so strikingly evident in historical, legal, and saga sources of medieval Iceland.” The leaders (goðar) who convened in the Althing were not territorial lords, as in Feudal Europe, but had reciprocal obligations toward the free farmers who elected them; farmers could switch their allegiance at will. The rule of law prevailed: “Built into this system of annual Althing courts was the concept of impartiality, embracing an intense desire to avoid partisanship” (Ibid.:11); judges could be disqualified on the basis of kinship.[2]
Nordic societies score at the top of social trust despite low on religiosity. This trust assumes (and is the result of) strong social norms and strict moral codes: Since there are virtually no kin-based power structures, trust is based on reputation-based moral codes where those who violate public trust and other manifestations of the moral order are shunned, ostracized, and exposed to public humiliation. For instance, Swedes are terrified to violate the moral consensus surrounding migration for fear of ostracism and, quite possibly, loss of job. Western societies are communities based on moral-ideological consensus.
This high standing on trust has had economic advantages in lowering the costs and risks of business transactions. But in modern times this trust has been on a steady decline as a result of massive immigration of groups who do not share the same moral codes because they are neither biologically inclined for that (their norms are based on kinship), nor have any such traditions. As Joseph Henrich notes, first- and second-generation immigrants from countries with intensive kinship remain relatively untrusting of strangers, foreigners, and people from other religions; they are less individualistic-independent and more conformist-obedient (pp. 207, 244). Further, people from societies with intensive kinship contribute less to group projects, volunteer less, are less likely to donate blood to strangers, are more willing to lie under oath to help a friend, and more likely to hire relatives. “Cultural transmission can perpetuate a clannish psychology for generations, even after clan organizations have vanished” (p. 195) (The Weirdest People in the World, 2020).
Thus, extreme individualistic egalitarianism results in moral-ideological communities with extreme levels of conformism and social anxiety. Individuals fear social ostracism for violating egalitarian norms and standing out from the crowd. It is not surprising that such a culture exerts strong controls on individual behavior to ensure conformity to the norms of a moral-ideological community. This clearly can be perceived as being a form of collectivism, despite the genetic origin actually having its roots in individualism!
The next level of paradox is that, over the last decades, interventions by the state have run amok to the extent that the individual freedom has been throttled to almost zero, except the “freedom” to practice any form of degenerate sexual activity. The social norms have run amok, strongly supported by hate-speech laws that have made it illegal to say anything negative about homosexual activism, or transgender activism, or the non-reversible transformation of children to the opposite sex, or even some forms of pedophilia. And it has become mandatory to accept that lesbian women should be free to have children via insemination without the need for any relationship with a man—only a confident relation with the state.
It has become very dangerous to deviate even the slightest from the stipulated “Core Values”[2] of Nordic society. It is not even accepted to have a view of your own! If you express a dissenting view in a group of more than six people, it can be illegal!
Thus: Egalitarian individualism has become totalitarian collectivist intolerance!
The weakness of individualistic societies
Besides the unpleasant totalitarian intolerance as a result of egalitarian individualism, there is a more existential threat: An individualistic society is extremely vulnerable to an influx of ethnocentric people—they can quite easily take over the society because they will always prioritize their own kin. This is especially devastating if the intruding group attains power over the media and the educational system (which is where the current moral norms are established and propagated) and political parties.
Jews excel in exploiting the weakness of an egalitarian individualistic host population by using universalistic moral arguments such as: all humans are equal in intelligence and all other traits that are linked to upward mobility; only racism keeps some groups down; you must open your heart to immigrants; minorities in your country are oppressed, etc. They can even tell people that it is morally wrong for Swedes—or Whites in general—to prioritize their own group, despite the fact that ethnocentric groups like our Middle Eastern immigrants and the Jews do it all the time! Because we live in a moral-ideological community, such moral arguments are easily absorbed by the native White population who are genetically inclined to be more trusting of strangers—especially when messages encouraging them to do so are are propagated by the media and educational system.
Hence, we seem to have no defense against such intruding groups. Historically, that has not been so much of a problem because prospective intruders have come from nearby, which means they had similar egalitarian-individualistic origin, and to the degree they were not, the strengths and merits of egalitarian individualistic communities was stronger than the threat of “aliens” trying to infiltrate us with a different set of moral norms. But over the last 50–100 years, the immigration pattern has been very different, with people coming from the Middle East and Africa. Africans would not have been a big problem if they weren’t supported by other “alien” smarter globalistic forces, because Africans have such a low IQ. But they are being exploited by Jews and other globalists as a battering-ram to break down the homogeneity of the Swedish population.
The rest of this paper will focus on ways to combat this threat from ethnocentric kin-based groups that invade and infiltrate our nation and transform it into something people of northwestern descent strongly resent. How to combat ethnocentric intruders
Is the Church our hope?
Many people claim that Catholicism is a safeguard against Jewish and Muslim intrusion into our societies and against unwanted transformation of our societies by these groups. Let’s take a look at what MacDonald finds about the Church in Chapter 5, The Church in European History, and then I will draw my conclusions.
Christian ideology has always been universalistic (i.e., blind to ethnicity or kinship, and equally applicable to all races), which is the very foundation for the current propaganda by the globalist elites that are leading us to nationless globalism. The church, however, had a very strong desire for power, and at the pinnacle of its power during the medieval period the elite followers of the religion saw themselves as a supranational collectivity with the Pope as their master. Hence, it had a fundamentally collectivist orientation that is so foreign to the northwestern European mind.
The church battled against other opposing collectivities, and the Europeans considered themselves part of a Christian ingroup arrayed against non-Christian out-groups, particularly Muslims and Jews who were seen as powerful and threatening enemies. Over the course of such battles, the church sought to break down kin-based power structures among the groups the church wanted to dominate. It did that by prohibiting marriage of blood relatives and only supported marriage based solely on consent of the partners. In the sixth century, the prohibition was extended to second cousins, and by the eleventh century it was extended to sixth cousins! And that even included affinal relatives (i.e., relatives by marriage)! Clearly, these prohibitions go way beyond those that would be healthy to prevent in-breading. It was exclusively a way to eradicate kin-based power structures in pursuit of expanding their own power!
It may be true that Christian ideology, once upon a time, essentially became a blueprint for an anti-Jewish group strategy, and that crusaders many hundred years ago successfully pushed back Muslim invasions. But the price for the power of the church was extreme universalism, which later proved to be very detrimental for Europeans. The church strived towards an ever increasing universalistic centralization of its papal power that expanded its domains throughout the world.
The extreme universalism that the church was propagating actually facilitated Western individualism and the egalitarian liberal tradition in the long run. Eventually, it led to the conception of Christendom as a collection of individual souls, all morally equal, united by their religious identification and ultimately paving the way for Protestantism and the Enlightenment. So, in essence, we have a church that fosters race mixing, whose universalistic agenda is an egalitarian world order with centralized power! What does that remind us of? Well, communism, the Kalergi plan,[4] and the New World Order!
In Sweden, this has been taken to absurd levels in the last few decades by the Protestant Swedish Church: The archbishop is a communist, and the church acts as a far left activist organization by taking clear political positions and by protecting illegal immigrants. It praises the phrase “Allahu Akbar” as being compatible with Christianity, and it holds ecumenical gatherings that incorporate Islam! It is compassionately in favor of mass immigration and it is totally uncritical to the claims of “refugees” no matter where they come from or why they crossed the world to come to Sweden. Most Swedish Christians believe that Jews are friends of Christianity, and they are in favor of all Jewish lobbing organizations. As a result, the Swedish Church is definitely on the side of globalism!
Catholicism does not appear to be quite as extreme as modern Protestantism in this respect, but it shares most of the globalist traits, and the trend of the Catholic church goes in the same leftward direction as the Protestant church, i.e., having a universalistic egalitarian globalistic agenda combined with pathological altruism. These churches have come to serve the interests of the global power elites.
Believing that the church will save us is like asking George Soros for salvation!
It should be noted, however, that this negative conclusion regards the churches, not necessarily religious beliefs. Christian people may very well find good healthy support in their religious beliefs and in the Ten Commandments, provided they are strongly opposed to the leftist advocacy of the Church in other areas.
Even if the church could be reformed and “improved”, it would not help the Scandinavian nations because most people in this region are not very religious at all, even though they might be born as Christians, and be members of the Swedish Church. To believe Christianity, whether Protestant or Catholic, would help us in Scandinavia is very naive—it simply will not happen!
In a few European countries, such as Poland, Catholicism has a stronger position, and in these countries it might serve as an entity that slows down the destructive forces of culture Marxism and Jewish power, although every effort will be made to have it serve the interests of the power elites.
Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism
MacDonald describes in detail the difference between implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Implicit ethnocentrism is more or less unconscious, e.g., simply preferring to be among people of the same race. For White people, its manifestations may be White flight or moving to a “Whiter” area, motivated at the surface level by better schools or nicer homes (not because they want to escape a community with many Blacks). Explicit ethnocentrism is to openly be in favor of or promote the interests of Whites, and be in favor of preserving the State as a nation where the majority of the population is of White heritage, or perhaps even of northwestern European heritage.
Northwestern Europeans are the least ethnocentric people in the world, and they are therefore the most susceptible to the propaganda that says: “thou shall not favor your own kind because that is racism.” Even though Whites are the least ethnocentric people, the ethnocentrism is there, and it can be controlled or suppressed: Evolutionarily ancient mechanisms in the lower brain can be controlled by higher brain centers located in the cortex that are sensitive to cultural information. Conscientious people are relatively better able to regulate the more evolutionarily ancient parts of our brain responsible for things like implicit ethnocentrism. Since Whites score higher than most races on conscientiousness, controlling (suppressing) ethnocentrism is easier for Whites on average. Their subcortical mechanisms responsible for ethnocentrism are weaker to start with and hence easier to control.
Thus: Anti-White cultural information can enable Whites to inhibit their ethnocentric tendencies. MacDonald describes in detail the extensive morally based indoctrination that all Whites are exposed to, effectively suppressing White ethnocentrism. There are overwhelming sanctions on explicit assertions of White racial identity stemming from the ability of the media and educational system to create moral communities that pathologize White identity and interests.
In Chapter 8, MacDonald suggests that the way out of the morass is to change the explicit culture, in particular to legitimize a strong sense of identity and group interests among Whites. He suggests that the first step should be a psychological one: “making proud and confident explicit assertions of White identity and interests, and creating communities where such assertions are considered normal and natural rather than grounds for ostracism.”
However, in a country such as Sweden, with its totalitarian intolerance, combined with a very weak degree of ethnocentrism, the above will be very difficult! Although praiseworthy, I suggest that before we make widespread explicit assertions of White identity and interests, we must start by establishing strong moral assertions that condemn and shame those who act against us, and that is the topic of the next section:
A Quest for a Morally Based Ideology
Given the extreme tendency of Whites to build morally based ingroups via shaming those who dissent from this morality that defines the ingroup, we should build on this asset! Over the course of thousands of years, the various powers over European peoples have all used morally based schemes to attain or maintain power.
If we are to learn something from the unprecedented successes of the Church, it must be their immense focus on the deliberate use of morality as the guiding rule and norm. What was crucial was not the belief in God as such, but the ideology that defined what was deemed to be moral and praiseworthy, what you should strive towards. More than just promoting a religious belief, it had a moral-ideological foundation. That moral consensus built group cohesion, which is necessary for a group strategy, which is of paramount importance to build up power or as a defense against enemies.
This history of the church clearly tells us that we need to build a morally based ideology that people can relate to. Logical arguments don’t bite, but moral ones do bite! Moral arguments, especially when they result in shaming, affect people by motivating them to actually change their behavior and attitudes.
Group strategies by ethnocentric peoples poised against Whites must be met by another group strategy. They cannot be met by individualism, and it can certainly not be met by logical arguments. The group strategy of Whites should ideally also be ethnocentric, but postmodern liberalism has created an individualistic, scattered, and divided society where Whites are willing to punish Whites for violating the norms of racial egalitarianism. Dogmas of “Core Values” are use to ostracize dissidents. As a group, it has made us defenseless and easy prey.
We cannot successfully go forward unless the present set of “Core Values” is deconstructed in favor of a new morally based ideology that is in line with White interests, without necessarily promoting an explicit ethnocentricity since the latter is subject to severe social sanctions. It must be a moral ideology that replaces the universalistic dogmas of “all humans are of equal value,”[5] “human rights,” and the modern-day Christian “compassion” towards all peoples of the entire world.
Whites are genetically inclined towards reputation-based moral values, which also means Whites are very sensitive to guilt. In the long run, we must advocate a certain degree of ethnocentrism, but we cannot start with that because, as noted, lack of ethnocentrism is our weakest point and expressions of ethnocentrism are subject to severe social sanctions. Reputation-based moral values are the only way to build cohesion so that Whites can act as a cohesive group and survive in a hostile environment of globalist elites whose agenda is to destroy homogenous and sovereign nations.
Some people might object by saying: “We can’t change the moral sentiments of the entire society! We are only a minority among all the liberals who dominate all the cultural high ground. I object by saying: Of course we can change that! History shows that there were actually very few who drove the moral agenda! We need to build on the fact that northwestern European Whites are extremely afraid of being regarded as immoral. We should shame those who neglect their own kind! It shifts focus from logical reasoning to an emotional state of being morally good or bad.
The new moral codes and the shaming must be directed towards liberal Whites so as to guide or force them into our cohesive group. Think of the Puritans who were experts in this field. They were very successful in becoming an elite, especially in New England, and dominating American culture until the 1960s. We can do that without the religious veneer. It is very powerful!
It’s said that forging individualists into a cohesive group is like herding cats. Doing so requires strong controls at the group level and an ideology that rationalizes the controls—exactly what Puritanism provided. Puritanism was an intensely controlling society based on a moral vision. We should do the same!
The powerful controls on thought and behavior of the Puritans made it a rather collectivist evolutionary strategy with salient distinctions between ingroup and outgroup. But over time it became less collectivistic since, as with all Western groups, it was permeable. Ultimately, the universalistic and altruistic aspect of Puritanism paved the way for its own displacement. It is a general characteristic of Western groups that they are permeable—barriers do not survive for long. But if our new morally based ideology develops into a certain degree of ethnocentrism by being less universalistic, it does have potential for long-term survival, and thereby long-term survival of the White race. It is a prerequisite for the preservation of the Western culture with its high-trust societies.
In times of war, moral exhortations, not logic, have always been used by Western elites as the primary means of motivating people for war. Moral propaganda always precedes declaration of war. Currently, we are in the midst of a fierce cultural war of values—globalism versus nationalism, miscegenation versus ethnopluralism. Hence, our moral stance is of paramount importance. Without a set of cohesive moral codes, we are defenseless.
Adaptive Moral Codes
Moral condemnation triggers a ”healthy” guilt. People will avoid or try to escape guilt and shaming. The escape should be to a moral code that allows for the survival and prosperity of our people.
In Sweden, even politicians have uttered: “Sweden does not belong to the Swedes”—and these politicians get away with it! Rather than starting discussions about historical facts, we should simply declare that such utterances are deeply immoral—a sign of a degenerate morality. We should take every opportunity to openly despise such persons. Remember that we are in the midst of a cultural war with implications for the survival of our people. We cannot afford to be soft and weak in times of war.
The positive moral imperative is that Sweden belongs to the descendants of those who have built the nation over thousands of years. Neglecting your own people should be regarded as the lowest forms of moral depravity!
People who accuse us of White Supremacy should be met with a claim that we worship Moral Supremacy of White survival and yes, Swedes ought to be supreme in Swedish society just as it’s taken for granted that Africans should be supreme in African societies.
Among nationalists, degenerate lifestyles are frowned upon, and there are a few moral codes that have gained strength in the last decade. Here are two examples:
Refuse porn!
Although there are ample scientific studies indicating that porn acts on the brain in similar ways as addictive and destructive drugs do, the moral imperative of refusing porn has an even stronger effect on people’s minds than scientific proofs do.
A corollary to the above is that those who engage in porn should be openly despised.
In Sweden, there have even been local politicians for the left-wing party (communists) that have been engaged in the production of porn movies—and they get away with it! Even the leader of the party has uttered that a porn movie can be “refreshing”! We should strongly despise such people! On accusations that we are just a bunch of old-fashioned moralizers, we should condemn those who haven’t the strength to build good relationships and a healthy family-centered society, and that porn consumers are comparable to drug addicts of low standards.
In a group of nationalists, it would be virtually impossible for a person to brag about a good porn movie he saw the other day—he would be looked upon as a despicable person.
Be the best version of yourself!
Many nationalists are engaged in martial arts and healthy food. What is important here is not whether you are super-strong and a good fighter, but the act of striving towards improving yourself. Make sure you do not become obese, and if you are overweight, do your best to improve the situation. Every person should do at least something to stay fit. Avoid junk food and pay attention to what you eat.
Slanderers try to depict nationalists who engage in martial arts as people who praise violence. The answer is of course that it is both a way to stay fit and prepare for self-defense. Those traits are edifying.
We should openly condemn and despise people who do not make the slightest efforts to get rid of obesity and who have a degenerate lifestyle!
The phrase “be the best version of yourself” is a very strong message! No one would want to go against that. Those who do not even make attempts at self-improvement are easy to condemn and despise. The fat sloppy ones are almost always liberals.
Women and the moral code
Men are much more inclined to think in strategic terms of society-level defense, security and protection than women are—it’s in the genes of men because men have always had more to gain or lose by social dominance, whereas women have often been the spoils of war. As a result, women tend to be focused on security within their face-to-face world, such as their family. Therefore, men have, for a longer time than women, been thinking about the implications of mass immigration of foreign fighting-age men, and the resulting threat to the society, as well as its moral implications. Women, on the other hand, have been completely occupied by trying to be socially accepted by their moral community and move upwards on the social ladder. Decades of vicious propaganda have made women lose their moral compass, and they have become morally very confused. Women are guided more by empathy. The following is a real-life personal anecdote:
I live in a semidetached house, and many years ago, my neighbor had a party where many women were invited. (He had lost his wife to cancer, and he had two nice daughters only a few years old, so it was very natural for him to look for a new woman among friends of friends.) These women seemed to be about 35 years of age, at least 30 but not much more than about 40. I was working on repairing my windows on the second floor, so I overheard the conversation that took place while a group of women sat outside on the terrace under a roof. The conversation went as follows:
One woman started to brag about how fantastic it was to have sex with a guy that was only 20 years old. The other women kept quiet for a while, so she went on to explain that it was so great that he was so much younger. I was somewhat appalled by this way of openly bragging about being more or less a slut, so let’s call her the slut in the following (although that epithet might be slightly too harsh). The other women didn’t know how to tackle this, but one woman slowly made fumbling attempts at saying something like: “so, this is important to you?” The slut said: “yes, it’s fantastic, it means a lot to me.” After a while, another woman said something like: “Well, I have kids, and there is so much around life with my kids, so I don’t really have much time for sex.” In essence, no shaming at all, only very lame attempts at a defense, such as “not having much time for sex”.
To me, it was obvious that these women felt unease in listening to this bragging slut. Maybe a few of them were actually jealous, since the media propaganda has been touting that having many sexual partners confers high status. It was very obvious to me that none of these women had the slightest clue how to handle this bragging slut!
Now, imagine that the slut was surrounded by a group of Puritans from old times! The sheer facial expressions from these Puritans would be enough to make the slut want to sink through the earth, and she would be so humiliated that she would have wished she was never born!
Traditionally, women have been very good at policing other women. That requires a strong moral code. Since women are inherently hypergamous,[6] women need to be policed in a monogamous society (which Western societies have always been), and that has generally been the task for other women. The Puritans were experts at that. Most of today’s women haven’t the slightest clue!
Activists for illegal immigration and “refugees” (who are vastly dominated by women) should be morally condemned, shamed, shunned, and perhaps even ostracized, for neglecting homeless Swedes in favor of e.g., Afghan men who claim to be 17 years old (while actually being much older, and quite often used as sex toys by these women). Such activists are driven by unrestrained empathy and a perverted moral code. It’s not a matter of logic or altruism, or even compassion. They are simply of very low moral character! Period!
Fortunately, a few women have risen above the low standards just mentioned, and these women with strong moral codes will be the vanguards of the new morality for women. It is hard for a single woman to oppose a group of mainstream liberals, but if a few vanguard women stick together in shaming moral depravity, they become powerful. Two cohesive vanguard women are not only twice as strong as one; they are at least five times stronger than a single woman! There’s something deep down in women’s psyche that realizes that slutty behavior is a pathology.
Other adaptive moral codes
A morally based ideology must of course encompass many more codes than have been hinted at here. The various peoples of European descent are likely to develop somewhat different sets of sound moral codes to be permeated throughout our nations.
Summary
We need to defend ourselves against ethnocentric peoples whose agenda is to weaken and ultimately destroy the power of the White population. The best route for us to accomplish this is to build on our very strong tendency to build morally based ingroups via inducing guilt among those who dissent from this moral.
In times of war, moral preaching has always been used by the elites in order to gin up motivation for the war, and it always precedes the declaration of war. Currently, we are in the midst of a fierce cultural war of values—globalism versus nationalism, miscegenation versus marrying your own kind, ethnic homogeneity versus ethnopluralism. Without a cohesive moral code, we are defenseless.
The present set of liberal “Core Values” must be deconstructed in favor of a new morally based ideology that is in line with White interests. The guilt for dissenting from these codes must be directed towards liberal Whites so as to guide them into a cohesive group that conforms to these values. With a set of cohesive moral codes in place, we have the power to defend ourselves. It is a prerequisite for the long-term survival of the White race and the Western culture with its high-trust societies.
[1] Lars Trägårdh, Statist Individualism.
[2] Byock, J. (2015)[2002]. The Icelandic Althing: The dawn of parliamentary democracy. In: J.M. Fladmark (ed.), Heritage and Identity: Shaping the Nations of the North. London: Routledge; originally: Donhead St. Mary, UK, 2002.
[3] In Sweden, the term is “Värdegrunden”, a word that has no direct translation into English, but the closest is “basic values” or “core values”. Every major company, every school, every institution, every public or private organisation, has a set of those “Core Values” listed in their guidelines. Every employee must abide and completely conform to these norms! It is the factual current religion of Sweden.
[4] https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/10/04/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-White-genocide-by-design-part-1/
[5] The term used in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is ’dignity’. The phrase says: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” But in Sweden, and several other countries, the term “value” is used instead, and the phrase that is perpetually propagated is: “All humans’ equal value.”
[6] Sexual Utopia in Power, by Roger Devlin
“With a set of cohesive moral codes in place, we have the power to defend ourselves. It is a prerequisite for the long-term survival of the White race and the Western culture with its high-trust societies.”
Didn’t Germany have this in place before WW II? Yet wasn’t supported by the rest of the West? How did it fall short or go wrong?
Thank you for this excellent article!
White Christians tend to believe that adherence to a divine
“set of cohesive moral codes” is
the only thing required to receive protection by God against enemies/( resource competitors )/( various calamities )/Satan . The codes are necessary to forming a sustainable group and offer no power to defend anything unless a code specifies a defense obligation such as for military groups . The group must have a specified mission to defend against enemies or other calamities . The vast majority of non-military White groups have no explicit defense codes . The venerable Ten Commandments have no explicit nor implied obligation to defend anything and were only intended for maintaining internal tribal cohesion ; and definitely do not pertain to ruling Jewish behavior toward an enemy/competitor . Christian theology tends to naively extend the Commandment benefits to enemies/competitors .
Apparently , WW2 German military leaders did not realize how readily the rest of the Christian world fall for the anti-Aryan propaganda and ally with the chosenhite jewmasterss .
Well you certainly hit upon that which is extremely important but where the Puritans are concerned it is too bad they were Calvinists. Wow what an error of belief that is and continues to be. If only they understood what Arthur Wallis knew and understood:
It is a mistake to view the sovereignty of God, as some Calvinists seem to do, as the hub of the Deity, with all of God’s other attribute’s radiating like spokes from the hub. God’s sovereignty (or ability to do what He wills) is clearly subordinate to His character of holiness and love. Because He is a moral being and has constituted man as a moral being, He cannot act without reference to His moral principles. Even a sovereign God cannot forgive the unrepentant or bless the disobedient.
Though man may be influenced from within and from without, God still holds him responsible for his moral choices. This is the consistent teaching of scripture, and we must not weaken the grasp on conscience that this provides by suggesting that since the fall man is no longer a free agent, no longer with a will of his own. This view, carried to its logical conclusion, not only has a tendency to absolve the unconverted person from his moral responsibility towards God, but by the same token to relieve the believer of his responsibility in terms of obedience and submission. Both could be tempted to take up a passive attitude and leave it to God who “works all things according to the purpose of His will.”
Yeah, if any Calvinists bring up predestination please give it a break. Jay Atkinson said it best about the foreknowledge of God:
“The enlightened spiritual mind will accept predestination as a result of the foreknowledge of God and not the exclusive unconditional election of Puritan preferences.”
It begins with us!!!!!
When Jm Bakker ended up in prison and wrote his magnum opus I Was Wrong he makes the confession he never understood what Christ meant by the words:
“Depart from me you workers of iniquity. I never knew you.” Matt. 7:23
Upon reading that I was floored truly floored at how someone in such a position of leadership could be so ignorant of what is essentially the foundation of a Christian’s life? In fact so dumbfounded was I that if asked this same question just weeks after my 19 birthday I could have answered his question easily enough.
“I never knew you” means does Jesus know what sins He had to die for in your life and do you know that he knows it!!!!!!!!!!!!
That’s it in a nutshell and for a man like Jimmy to build a multi-million dollar empire without knowing this just blows my mind! It further tells me that nothing about PTL was sanctioned by God. None of it!!!!! Chew on that!
Morality? How will we ever get back to that when in the words of St. Paul the law was never our schoolmaster. Laughingly go to any person and ask them to recite the Ten Commandments and see what you get?
As for foreknowledge what do the Calvinsts think that God foreordained or elected that Judas would betray his son with thirty pieces of silver? Or that He knew beforehand that it would happen and even warned in the scripture it was so? Thats the amazing thing about the bible we have the end of the story. I’d suggest therefore start paying attention otherwise?
The title of the article and the content is expressive of an individual who has not read nor thought to any great degree. Jacque Ellul, the French Protestant economist, lawyer, political scientist, theologian and philosopher said as much and said it much better. Within the pages of his work “The Technological Society.” Published in 1964 and still readable and relevant today. And Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn, within the text of his speech, delivered at the Harvard Commencement (Graduation) exercises, June 8th, 1978, also stated that politics in the West, destitute of all moral criteria, exposed the West to “, . .the absolute triumph of absolute evil.” He was also critical of persons such as George Kennan, who taught at Harvard and was also an member of that sinister organization, the “Council on Foreigh Relations,” who had stated: “One cannot apply moral criteria to politics.” Hilaire Belloc, also said as much in an number of his own works. Such as “Survivals and New Arrivals.” And, “The Servile State.” Which asserte that there were three ages of Man in the West: the Feudal State, which had come and gone, the Industrial State, which even Belloc could observe was in decline. Even before the end of the 19th century, and the final successor to these two antecedent “states” of Western Man: “The Servile State.” G. K. Chesterton, the great English convert to Catholicism and an long time friend of Belloc, iterated and reiterated the same general themes in his own works.
Evelyn Waugh also rehearses these same themes within the context of his various works of fiction. Such as “Decline and Fall.” And, “Brideshead Revisited.” Which is also, to some degree, an fictional “auto-biography.” Penultimately, Jacques Barzun also addressed these issues in his own works. Such as :Of Human Freedom, (1939), and From Dawn to Decadence, 500 Years of Western Cultural Life. Published in 2000. To some degree, and to an degree somewhat more esoteric, and, at times, incoherent and contradictory, as well, Thomas Merton, the great Cistercian monk of the second half of the20th century, also addressed these issues as well.
“One cannot apply moral criteria to politics.”
Politics is about “collecting” enough support for an agenda to achieve a governmental goal . Most USA Whites conflate politics with government in every way imaginable ; since both are inextricably entangled and often it is very difficult to clarify the differences between the two concepts .
There are no absolute and universal moral codes/laws . If you find an absolute/( no exceptions ) moral law , it would not be universal . If you find a universal/( same for all humanity ) moral law , it would not be absolute .
The chosenhite jewmasterss winners of WW2 were able to successfully acquire enough allies for victory largely because they wisely overlooked the moral discrepancies between themselves and their allies and successfully managed the moral discrepancies among the allies .
The jewmasterss are descendants of many generations of cosmopolitans since ancient Jerusalem and beyond . It appears that the jewmasterss know more about both politics and war than the elite non-jewish Whites whom are mostly not more than a few generations away from being immediate descendants of a typically non-political way-of-life of deeply rooted rural cultures .
I think the adoption of Bitcoin Standard with its Proof-of-Work ethical basis for truth and transparency is going to have massively far reaching and unforeseen consequences. Arbeit macht frei!
Cryptocurrency blockchains need to be applied to bank-to-bank and other commercial corporate transactions and not to personal consumer transactions . The banks will ignore it .
It’s incredibly distressing to see leading people in the white interest community fail to grasp that heritable individualistic tendencies of whites is the source of our moral superiority as well as our greatest weakness in power politics. There is a resolution to this existential dilemma but so long as white leaders fail to grasp it, we are headed toward Hell On Earth and with us the rest of the biosphere including the rest of humanity.
We’re doomed if this situation isn’t corrected soon.
…” heritable individualistic tendencies “…
Please explain what you mean by that ambiguous expression .
I’m not sure if the author of this article is a Swede or an American. However, if he is a Swede then it is a little bit insane to promote Puritanism as I believe the Swedish Church is Lutheran and is probably suffering from Holocaust guilt.
However, the promotion of Puritanism is a great idea for Americans as many Americans are either physical descendants of the Puritans, or spiritual descendants of the Puritans through the various Anglo-Protestant churches in the US which includes both liberal and conservative congregations.
So in order to get back to our Puritan roots I would suggest that we commemorate them during Mayflower Days on Sept 6-Sept 16.
These dates represent the Gregorian and Julian Calendar dates. The British adopted the Gregorian Calendar in 1752. Which is why when you study the Puritans and Pilgrims you will often see the Old Style and the New Style dates.
Then immediately after Mayflower Days is US Constitution Day on September 17 signed in the Year of Our Lord 1789.
So in this way citizens remember who planted the roots of our Constitution.
But also so that they remember that our Constitution was signed on a Christian calendar date.
It was not signed on the Islamic Hijri calendar. It was not signed on the Jewish Hebrew calendar. Nor was it signed on the various Buddhist or Hindu Calendars!
This is our 1620 Project.
This article does absolutely not promote Puritanism as a religion! Or Calvinism, or Protestantism, or Catholicism! We can do very well without the religious veneer. What is interesting about the Puritans is the way they successfully used moral codes to make people comply with norms, which was a powerful way to gain influence and power and to build a strong cohesive society.
White Christians tend to believe that adherence to a divine
“set of cohesive moral codes” is
the only thing required to receive protection by God against enemies/( resource competitors )/( various calamities )/Satan . The codes are necessary to forming a sustainable cohesive group and offer no power to defend anything unless a code specifies a defense obligation such as for military groups . The group must have a specified mission to defend against enemies or other calamities . The vast majority of non-military White groups have no explicit defense codes . The venerable Ten Commandments have no explicit nor implied obligation to defend anything and were only intended for maintaining internal tribal cohesion ; and definitely do not pertain to ruling Jewish behavior toward an enemy/competitor . Christian theology tends to naively extend the Commandment benefits to enemies/competitors .
Apparently , WW2 German military leaders did not realize how readily the rest of the Christian world fall for the anti-Aryan propaganda and ally with the chosenhite jewmasterss .
A very inspiring article!
History shows that our people become strong when adhering to good morals, and become weak when abdicating same. Parasites thrive best when the host body is weakened, which explains why human parasites push pornography on their host population.
One does not have to be Christian to embrace the 10 Commandments. Adultery, stealing, etc… is just as bad for followers of Wotan as it is for followers of Christ.
Being morally strong is very helpful but not enough to defend against determined predators/parasites unless the moral code has specific rules for defense .
Interesting article. Although, I don´t think we need an ideology, we just need to expose and deport the Jews. The reason nazism and fascism doesn´t work is because they´re essentially non-european ideologies, mimicking jewish zionism and communism. Europeans don´t want to live in a totalitarian military regiment; democracy, freedom of speech, the rights of the individual and equality under the law is natural parts of a normal european nation-state.
The only reason our normal european democratic nation-state doesn´t work, at the moment, is because the Jews are too skilled at usury and too clever at social political manipulation.
We just have to keep exposing the Jews. Always name the Jews behind neo-liberalism, neo- marxism, neo-conservatism, multiculturalism, queer-theory, modern art, post-modernism, psycho-analysis and all the rest of the hocus-pocus that they peddle.
It´s perhaps even more effective when we just criticize the phenomenon itself and let the Jews accuse us of being anti-semites for criticizing things that are plainly and unquestionably harmful and bizarre (usury, exploitation, peddling vices, turning pleasant white neighbourhoods into third world hellholes etc.).
From a fellow swede.
The moral and ethical norms of a community transcend race issue. Who would you rather have as a neighbor if given the choice between a white aggressive lgbt antifa type, who insists you must accept everything it believes, or non white christian family who lives according to the norms that once bound society together?
Contrary to popular belief these norms were not something enforced through religions of the book as dogma that must blindly be obeyed. The famous American Egyptologist and founder of the Oriental Institute in Chicago wrote:
“When that experience began, it was a dark day for my inherited
respect for the theological dogma of “revelation.” I had
more disquieting experiences before me, when as a young
orientalist I found that the Egyptians had possessed
standard of morals far superior to that of the Decalogue
over a thousand years before the Decalogue was written”.
(James Henry Breasted, Dawn of Conscience)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.76190
The book is well worth a read and matters mentioned in the above essay regarding Kings and the responsibilities of nobles are wonderfully described using ancient Egyptian texts. The utter chaos of the West at present is also echoed in those texts through the angst of an honest person who sees everything good which had created a civilization that had lasted millennia crumbling.
I’ll take white antifa over arab or subsaharian any day!
” The moral and ethical norms of a community transcend race issue.”
Only if maintaining racial integrity is not an issue .
The most venerable moral code known to humanity is The Ten Commandments . Those Commandments were and still are considered by many religious people to be divine moral laws for maintaining internal tribal/racial cohesion . The Commandments were never intended for enemies or other alien tribes and had no transcendent purpose beyond maintaining internal group cohesion .
Many White Christians believe that a strict robotic-like adherence to specified religious moral laws is the best path to being chosen for eternal life in heaven regardless of race issues . Clearly , they believe that inherited racial identifications are irrelevant to a high standard of living . Science disputes their belief .
I’m sorry, but the association of peoples based on common discrete biological traits really doesn’t need any “moral” argumentation. It doesn’t even need any defense. If I’m only attracted to brunettes with blue eyes, I don’t have to justify that to anyone nor do I have to explain the cause of my particular like, nor do I have to invoke any categorical imperative.
If there’s any shaming to be done, it should be directed only towards those who mistakenly believe that discrete characteristics require a moral understanding when there is no such understanding to be had at all.
I get it, but I was trying to make a scientifically sound argument that would appeal to White people who don’t have your intuitions or, if they have them, are ashamed of them.
People have personal preferences for sure.
https://www.amren.com/commentary/2018/07/why-white-men-fall-for-asian-women/
But is not the issue how individuals come together and form a society? That is when ethical norms become important. If white has become so degenerate through decades of media undermining then what value should be placed on that being the sole or principle criteria for forming a community.
All this seems academic now though it may be something to consider if a person believes in communities of the afterlife as some think Jesus alludes to in John 14:2, John 10:16 and which came naturally with ancient religions.
Whites became degenerate because they had totally inadequate defenses against jewish gangsterism ( aka collective political agenda to attain dominion over the world ) .
Most Whites are at least nominal Christians where their religion is a sheeple-oriented religion of self-enslavement to the chosenhite jewmasterss ; and most Whites are not more than a few generations away from being immediate descendants of a predominantly non-political way-of-life of rural cultures . Consequently , Whites typically and historicly are not very politically astute ( except perhaps for ostensible and usually mostly superficial electioneering campaign issues ) and thus have little or no sense of the disastrous ramifications of dominant cosmopolitan jewish collective political powers ; too many Whites lack the intelligence to connect the dots ( not mostly an IQ issue ) .
WN is concerned with preserving the White genomes from extinction by the zionist dominated ILLuminati driven genocide ( mostly “soft” for now ) against Whites . In other words , White moral degeneracy is not a direct result of a DNA racial defect since morals are characteristicly very ephemeral without constant and strong reinforcements .
The globalist Jewish plutocracy in power with Biden-Harris will be unstoppable with dissent.
http://imgfz.com/i/t8Os7bx.jpeg
I don’t think it’s possible to have a moral community without religion as its basis. The pagan Nordics had a religion of their own, which told them what was good and what was bad. Likewise the Greeks. Those religions died (or were killed off) and were replaced by another religion, Christianity: Orthodox Christianity in the case of the Greeks. Protestant Lutheran Christianity in the case of the Nordics.
Then Christianity gradually faded away in Western Europe and Scandinavia. It has been a little stronger in the United States, but the forms it now takes are mostly perversions of the true faith. In America we have “Christian” Zionism, which worships the Jews who reject Christ. We have the Roman Catholic Church, which has been to a large extent corrupted (the priesthood more than the laity) by Vatican II and is now headed by what I consider to be an anti-Pope. Mainstream Protestant denominations are little more than social justice warrior organizations that refuse to criticize anyone or anything (except “the intolerant”).
So Christianity in the West is pretty much dead. That means morality is dead. And, therefore, the ability to reason in moral terms is dead in the mainstream culture.
What we have as a substitute for religion and morality is “political correctness” which has been seized upon by corporations and globalists to use as a weapon against those who do not bow down to their agenda. That agenda is anti-White, anti-Christian and anti-nationalist.
I don’t see how you can successfully shame such people. To be shamed is to be threatened with the loss of something you value: Your good opinion of yourself, your reputation, your standing in the community. But the person who does the shaming must have a good reputation and high standing in the community. We don’t have that.
If I were talking to a Christian, I would say things are bad because society has turned away from God. When society does that, the anti-Christ moves in. “We do not fight against flesh, but against the principalities and powers of darkness” — that is to say, Satan. Satan is the god (small “g”) of this world. The only way to keep him at bay is to ally yourself with God (big “g”); that is all Satan fears; that is all that can defeat him.
“So (I would continue) here we are, and history shows that what I am saying is true. In the exact proportion that we have turned away from God, in just that proportion has society declined. We have now reached the end stage: every single institution in our Western societies is corrupt. Every single one.”
A Christian would understand what I’m saying. But what can I say to a non-Christian?
All I can say is: “You, like everyone else, wants what is true, good and beautiful” (unless you’re someone who worships evil). But you can’t have those things merely as a result of your own efforts, of politics, of some economic system, or anything else man-made. We are not, and cannot be, the author of those values or of the world we live in. We are not the creators, we are the created. Only a transcendent and active being can do such things. We call that being God. And there is only one. The multiple gods of the pagans? Too many cooks spoil the broth.”
It took a long time for us to devolve to the state we are now in. If I had to put a date on it, I would say 1789 — the anti-Christian French Revolution. That was over two hundred years ago. We need a Christian revival. But it has to be an authentic Christianity. One that recognizes that independence of nations, peoples and races — and rejects the Tower of Babel of race-mixing (only for the White race of course) and fake diversity. If there are no good churches out there, start one!
” We are not the creators, we are the created.”
Are you insinuating that YOU are not the original creative author of that above quoted expression ?
Wikings were not always monogamous, the elite sometimes had several wives, although it was uncommon.
Swedes are cheap and poor due to high taxes and high costs of living. Hence there is not much money to get of you are unemployed or temporarily sick from private charities (or friends).
I live in Sweden and I hear people complain about massimmigration and hate on immigrants all the time. We have massive white flight, when the browns and afro’s move in we move out.
As for the public debate it’s either the jews who own like 40 % of the media or the state (TV) that brought the immigrants you expect a lively discussion on the subject?
If a journalist writes something the owner or boss does not like it’s: ”by by, your fired”. Journalists have a hard time finding jobs also. This brings extreme PC.
The thing I think shapes our lack of debate also is our tradition of having friends we have known a long time and not being so open to new people as Americans for example.
This goes back to Viking times in the edda it said something like: ”when among new people, stay quiet and observ”. Or the saying : ”Speaking is silver, staying quiet is gold” (later than Viking times).
Also when they destroyed the villages and moved people’s homes out to their farmlands (a large reform).
Also I think our nations kings have been race-mixed, the whole Gustav Vasa line. And I think they have been partially anti white.
The large industries are owned by part gypsies and most of the media by part jews. Normal Swedes or WHITES have hardly any top positions.
Look at what people from the Vasa family did, both Reinfeld and Olof Palme was related to him and they changed the immigration laws and were manipulative bastards.
Swedes have been naive and they are pushed to the bottom.
Most politicians are race mixed (often both part gypsy and jewish) or actually Reinfeld was part black and obsessed with immigrants and blacks due to it.
The totalitarian faschist surveillance of Swedes and ”hate speech laws” has been passed without any debate it has been totally hid from the public. No-one knew before it was too late. Most Swedes are pro free speech.
As for the nordics trusting strangers, I don’t know. When the into-europeans came here it was the time of the ”broke skulls” due to conflict with the original hunter gatherers living here. And the Vikings were in effect often plundering people with different religions and also enslaving (trälar, not as bad as slaves but anyways) them and occupying foreign territory. Actually this was done even when we became christian initially although we calmed down.
Africans would have been a problem regardless. Some of the early ones were pimps and the like. Look at how their version of american gangsta ”hip hop” is spreading, on their own small labels.
Dude christianity was a way for Europe to make us calm down. Hence it always pushed the fake fraudulent ”we are all one…” PC stuff to make us calm down and stop waging war and the like.
True Christianity is aggressively against race mixing and subsaharian and arabs.
The Swedish Church has failed to get people to the churches and they are victims of their own propaganda for hundreds of years resulting in them hoping the immigrants will go to church when they fail to reach Swedes.
Most people are religious but it is kinda personal and almost not PC due to the state and media (see above) being anti christian, they created an anti christian hegemony.
I think Swedes are more etno-centric than American whites. We have less race mixing at least.
I agree, Sweden is ”totalitarian intolerance”
I think both moral AND logical arguments or INFORMATION.
We can also use TRUE religion moral and texts to inform people about God’s intentions.
Our ”morals” were quite different in Viking times. Now when we are tested and harshly so, with the misshaping of white women stealing of our land and all we built yeah morals may change, rapidly.
It’s a cultural and political and information war.
Yes alot of porn is watched in Sweden but in general people tend to not talk about it, still shameful, looser thing I think.
None of my friends or me have ever needed policing of their woman. I mean if it works and they like you, Nordic women tend to stay faithful most of the time.
Afghan ”kids” are used by gay, homosexual older men also.
How in hell can your write such an otherwise good piece without even one mention of that mini-Sataness, Kalergi 2.0, Barbara Specter ?!
Her blackmail of the Govt. in Stockholm, to obtain the funds to found Padeia, the institute to kill us with. Its graduation of hundreds, dispersed throughout Europe to fulfill her visions.
It’s not too late for you to feature the videos here of her visions and Jewish typical lecturing, that Europe will die without the Jews making it multicultural.
The most common video shows your Royal Couple sitting in the front row at her lecture and applauding con brio. Even awarded her the King’s Medal. YUK !!!
I think this Barbara Specter may have had some influence, but she is not a large part of public debate in Sweden.
The organization she leads mainly focus on giving European jews grants to go to Israel and do projects and the like I think.
As for our royalty I already mentioned them but they were PC before this kinda thing also I think. And they aren’t allowed to be involved in politics, their role is more as representatives of the state so to speak and they tend to stay out of politics although sometimes they say things that can be interpreted as political. I think the king has both expressed pro immigration things and also said it can be bad to bullying the Swedish Democrats (an anti immigration party) too much or the like.
Is she anti-white, I am sure she is and also probably very hateful …
> How in hell can your write such an otherwise good piece without even one mention of that mini-Sataness, Kalergi 2.0, Barbara Specter ?!
Yes, I know very well of this sinister Jewish entity filled with Chutzpah – we have many sinister entities of different kinds. For instance, just to name one more: Klaus Schwab of World Economic Forum. But I do not see how elaborating on these two specifically in this article would augment my message, clarify the problem, or sharpen my thesis.
I say: When you meet persons who act or speak in favor of people like Barbara Specter, you should shame them! Relentless shaming on pure moral grounds! Low moral character, low moral standard. Do not shout with anger like a haunted underdog. Do not speak about God or Jesus (as some commenters here seem to think would be a good idea), because that won’t work (at least not in Sweden). Avoid lectures of statistics and science (unless there is a sound interest in that, which is extremely rare). Instead, make them feel the unpleasant emotion of guilt, because if you succeed in that, it is extremely powerful!
So you are saying we should not give Swedes or the nordic peoples information about racial differences in IQ and genetics? Why not, Swedes tend to be very logical.
You gonna do like Sweden Democrats or AFS whine about the immigrants raping white women? How far will that take you?
How about the “nice” immigrants like East Indians or Latin Americans that hardly rape women you gonna applaud race mixing with them. How are you gonna argue against that without getting into race and GOD’s view on race mixing. These are vital components and truths that are greatly needed and whites everywhere need to be informed about this.
You can inform them about the issues of the multi racial society all day. At the core though must be a survival of our kind. The nazis in Sweden have failed.
And I think your policies are to degree not what will save is either.
Instead of giving people the truth you are giving them part of it and hoping it will be enough. I don’t think so, we have to go full force and give people ALL necessary information in a conscience and to the point manner, or we are doomed. Do you get what we are up against.
Most of Swedens financial elite is part gypsy (or tattare or both) and quite often part jewish.
Like most of northern Sweden is mixed with sapmi or finns and so on…
And it was Gustav Vasa who allowed the tattare to stay (a gypsy like population) after they were thrown out after a war outside Norrköping against them and people hating them (for being false, lying, stealing and murdering and the like), he invited them back from Finland, but they had to change their names… This is the dude which is kinda celebrated on our national day, a traitor.
Many of them are very anti-white.
And the politicians have chosen very PC people in as many as possible top positions.
Just look at the thing now with Biden being sworn in, 20 000 troops in Washington DC…
Real life has devolved to a blood sport. I lack good will and unlimited time to attempt to fight with morals, reasoning or shaming anyone. How, exactly, is that approach doing in America ?
The old timers here are thoroughly familiar with her and her mission. But we also have newcomers here and you failed to clue them in on her. I didn’t suggest, that you should elaborate on her, I bitched about not mentioning her once.
“Real life has devolved to a blood sport.”
I have never seen an apter, more revealing, or more valuable summation of our situation.
As one who is, like you, a member of the prey class, I thank you, Charles.
Ok, so you have neither the will nor time to fight, neither with reasoning nor shaming. That means you are not an asset! Since you are not going to do anything useful at all, the best thing you can do is to simply keep quiet so as not to spread negativism and defeatism! If you disagree, then DO something! And it has to be useful and strong!
This ” asset ” read his 71 pages STASI file in 1992, at their former HQ in East Berlin. Including an All Points Bulletin for my immediate, not unearned arrest. How long was yours ?
I wrote a 98% on my Formal Logic final at university; the highest in the course’s ten years existence. Regrettably it proves insufficient to follow your reasoning and imputations.
I will certainly do MANY things that will change the path for white people greatly.
But I assume your comment was directed at Charles.
As for people being critical of your strategy.
Yeah, Nordic people tend to be individualistic.
Hence we should agree on some basics and once we have a better pro white development at large these differences can be handled by democracy.
Personally I will never support ANY party that want’s more surveillance which rules out voting for SD for actually it rules out voting for any party in parliament today.
And also what do you know about what others do in favor of their ethnic group. Maybe I do tons!
Good point about the shaming people thing. Like jews or gypsies care…
Come on they couldn’t care less. You gonna “name the jew”.
Or just point out jews who act anti white?
You gonna keep away from race mixed idiots like Reinfeld? Who is probably not the least bit jewish, although his former wife may have been and the new one is probably part gypsy (he is part tartare or traveller according to speculations also).
Or what about the sapmi/eskimo Finnish environmental party member in parliament that moved together with a person closer to her racially one of these mongol “lonely coming kids” from Afghanistan or Iran?
a) K MacDonald: “There’s something deep down in women’s psyche that realizes that slutty behavior is a pathology.”
b) K MacDonald: “Therefore, men have, for a longer time than women, been thinking about the implications of mass immigration of foreign fighting-age men, and the resulting threat to the society,”
a) and b) are examples (for men and women) are natural human instincts in European people. Such instincts are being overruled for now:—
(K MacDonald: “controlling (suppressing) ethnocentrism is easier for Whites on average. Their subcortical mechanisms responsible for ethnocentrism are weaker to start with and hence easier to control.”)
—– The suppression referred to is putting us in an unnatural state like a twisted balloon – the current elite are keeping the balloon out of its natural shape. This requires a high level of effort on the part of the elite to maintain. Switching back to something natural and in line with all our other instincts will surely be swift and easy, just like relieving the twisting pressure on the balloon and letting it resume its natural shape. Being twisted out of shape as at present is clearly causing white people stress and anxiety.
The main cause of the twisting is the culture-setting TV. All it would take was a single TV channel that was beamed into everyone’s homes daily and was available just as readily as current mainstream channels are. Like Fox TV, but properly patriotic instead of just aiming at the conservative market in a way that tiptoes around like Fox does at present so as not to upset the left, in addition to which, Fox is also managed by fake-patriots who are really 5th columnists in the main. And the new channel would have to include films and history documentaries, and not just news, including about the War. The last one would be particularly powerful in resetting the psyche.
We all know that a white-interest/patriotic TV channel is not possible at present. The only reason it is not possible is because the left control the legal system and would close it down using the law – fines for breaches of codes, imprisonment for doubting the H or ‘racism’, and then the other companies refusing to co-operate with signal transmission & other technical issues, either because they do not want to transmit the channel, or, more likely they are being bullied by the woke – but this bullying would not be possible if the right controlled the law and stopped the bullying. Neither would going after the channel for ‘racism’ etc succeed either if the law was in the hands of the right, as ‘racism’ would no longer be an offence.
If the transmitter company refused to send the signal, fine them for ‘discrimination’ or something until they either do transmit the signal, or the fines mean the business has to close down and no channels at all are transmitted – either way we would have gained. This is just one example of how anything is possible with the law in our hands, but nothing is possible until this is achieved.
Please note, pterodactyl, that you are attributing statements to KM that ought to be attributed to Mr. Brandt, whether you agree with them or not. Inattention to detail never brings credit to the inattentive party nor does it strengthen whatever case he is making.
Pierre okay, I accept that, but the ideas and suggestions are all K MacDonald’s from his new book – anyway, regarding the matter in hand – a main theme of K MacDonald’s book is that white nations are currently following a dominant culture that is anti white interests, and the book puts forward ideas about an alternative culture that is pro white interests – so what do you think of the notion that a single national TV channel alone is all that is needed to change the entire culture of a nation, on the assumption that the white people are so stressed and uneasy in the current culture, that most would readily switch with a snowball effect to one that viewed white interests as moral and desirable.
In other words, it is not hard at all to get K MacDonald’s concept of a new culture to take hold and spread with a snowball effect, and would not require war, all it takes is just to go for the source of the poison – ((controlled)) TV and ((Hollywood)), and force a small corner of it to be pro-white instead of anti-white. The white people switching their culture to one of self-interest would be like relaxing pressure on a twisted balloon, and this task of ours is much easier than what the left had to do – twist the balloon. Untwisting is easy and quick.
I responded to an earlier comment of yours a week or so ago where you said the Roman empire took centuries to collapse and I replied that at that time the new ideas and ways of thinking had to spread via families, towns and cities ie through a network of people, so changes took a lot longer, but now, due to technology, shifts in cultures that took hundreds of years back then in Roman times, today the same magnitude of change can take place over a few years, and this applies not just to collapse (as in collapse of the Roman empire or the US) but to also the generation of a new culture, such as a new culture in the US (and other countries) that gives moral value to white interests.
Re lack of hierarchical societies in prehistoric Sweden – perhaps this is not possible in sparsely populated regions for practical regions, as the warrior class needs to patrol the others – suppose 50 out of 1000 are the warriors and enforcers including the priests and the soldiers and their wives and families – how can this 5% include enough men to guard the elite and also patrol their lands when the other 990 are spread over 10 square miles? – it is not practical to patrol such a large area on foot. On the other hand, the Europeans living in China at the time could have achieved this by means of riding on horseback, so a small number could easily patrol a huge large area, enough to generate a lot of wealth for the elite to access.
Note how it was possible for the Romans to patrol Britain because their mastery of transport enabled a small settlement of soldiers in a fort town like Chester to patrol a vast area. Their roads are still present today.
To explain our current predicament (white self destruction under the guidance of the current dominant culture) we need also to explain why the main foe of whites is not hostile foreign races who wish to dominate us (arabs, Jews) or even just to parasite off us (blacks), our main foe is a large subsection of WHITE PEOPLE who are totally dedicated to the cause of being anti-white, many making it the main focus of their lives. Often – (in fact, *usually*, in my opinion) – these people have nothing to gain and mostly actually have something to lose. The white bankers and the Jewish bankers and the multinationals included – for these particular opponents of white interest, white S. Africa was their target for decades, with no gain for any of them from the final version of S.Africa – no money or power for the lefties in a place of anarchy and warring tribes, and no wealth being produced for any parasitic global elite to feed off. In addition to these wealthy institutions, other instigators of the downfall of S.Africa were a subsection of the whites themselves in S.Africa who also plotted and planned tirelessly against their own people there, even including many who knew that they too would lose their own farms and businesses, as they were not wealthy enough to be able to flee abroad like the wealthiest whites were able to.
So, clearly neither power nor money was the aim for these anti-white whites who brought down white S Africa, as they got neither from the outcome, and even that which they still currently get will soon go down to zero.
I think it was the British leftie Tony Benn who said the happiest day of his life was when white rule ended in S.Rhodesia. This was after a long struggle of the whites there against China-backed Marxist R Mugabe (Mugabe was later knighted by the British government to show whose side the British elite were on).
For a white to be so intensely devoted over so many decades to ending white rule requires a strong motive, and we can dismiss power and money as the motive, but we can also dismiss a desire to help the downtrodden as the left claim is their motive, which is also described as ‘being a do gooder’ – we can dismiss this also as clearly the lefty whites and the Jews who ‘helped’ the blacks achieve black rule in S.Africa knew beforehand that when the blacks took over it is the BLACKS who would be far worse off in a land of resumed tribal warfare, starvation and disease.
This leaves some other motive embedded deep in the human behaviour wiring as it cannot be money, power, or wanting to do good for the downtrodden (meaning, wanting to help their lives to improve).
Perhaps humans and whites in particular are not a homogeneous group at all, perhaps we are more analogous to ants who have workers and soldiers. I do not suggest the right are like soldiers or anything like that – just that the behaviour patterns of lefties and patriots are so far apart that they surely must be as different in their wiring as worker ants are from soldier ants. Maybe whites will only have peace when these two groups of whites separate geographically (the outcome of cessation). Then let the diversity-loving whites live in their own areas, along with the diversity of course.
In this respect (divergent behaviour patterns) we can contrast humans with dog populations, in which all the members have wiring for very similar behaviour. Dog packs have selection pressure to make all the dogs in the pack end up the same as each other, whereas in humans selection pressure causes different subgroups to emerge. With man, in ‘the land of the honest’, the thief is king. This means the parasitic types (the thief type) which comprises a minority of whites amongst us but also Jews amongst us these days, this parastitic class whilst not working themselves nevertheless can attain a very viable lifestyle if they can live off the work of the others. So the left & Jews spend their time plotting and planning how to take wealth, whilst the rest are more interested in toiling and making wealth – so there is a sort of choice (programmed in the genes) between taker lifestyle or maker lifestyle, and both are ‘valid’ in terms of making it possible for each type, in the right conditions, to gain resources and to be able to feed offspring via their lifestyles. So those wired to have parasitic urges (some are clever ones like the Jews, others are the low-intelligence white criminal underclass, and also there is the rich and successful lefty whites) are attracted to politics, publishing, manipulation (TV), the legal system, money lending, living off welfare (not the Jews) – these are the roles that the Jews and left tend to gravitate towards and cover between them, and they certainly do not like to study engineering or carpentry and then make things if they can help it.
Suppose there is such a subgroup in white populations predisposed to seize any chance that comes along to gain at the expense of others. A corollary of this behaviour, something that would help them greatly, is to have also a hatred of the ones you take from. Without this hate they would have to say ‘I will steal/take but I feel terrible about it’ Not very conducive to success. Much better to hate the victim and see them as the enemy. So in the end the left (a) want to take from the better ones (b) also posses a strong hatred of the better, which facilitates their behaviour.
Perhaps the left today feel this hatred very strongly. They see the better group as the enemy. So when they see the 3rd world and their own people, they clearly spot their own people as the better and therefore the enemy. As they hate that with is superior, their hatred is manifest as a hatred of their own people. If you doubt this, consider the way the left react to the very word ‘superior’.
As K MacDonald says above, there is no place for logic in human behaviour, only deep ingrained behaviour patterns. When WWII was declared, men queued to join up, but never in any queue was the logic of why they were going to war ever discussed – no talk of borders in the Balkans, just a complete acceptance of all government slogans). So we should never expect to find logic in anything the white hating whites or the Jews do. We should not look for any self-interest component. When the Jews justify their hostility to whites, they refer to the H and other events, but in reality, they felt the hate first and then sought justifications second. The ‘need to avoid another H’, and revenge for what the Romans did are just justifications they have latched onto to explain their own feelings of hostility, as if there is no real reason, then the Jews and the left would have to say ‘I hate white people despite them treating me and others well’.
So the Jews and the left are quite prepared to sink the liner in which they live – including those who occupy the luxury cabins. Of course when it sinks they will grab the best lifeboats for themselves, just as when the elite brought down S Africa they sent their money abroad first, but in the end even the elite will have nowhere to send their money that is safe, as $10,000,000 on a disk drive can easily be changed to $1.0 at the touch of a button.
This is a review of an important book by K MacDonald as he describes the reason that white people in all white nations (except for Russia, I wonder why they are the exception?) are currently following a culture that is openly anti white-interests in a way that is no longer even disguised, and such a bizarre behaviour requires an explanation that must be rooted in the way humans are wired or programmed to behave, as it can have no explanation in logic.
Kevin Macdonald proposes the explanation for this bizarre behaviour, which is that the explanation for this behaviour lies in the individualistic nature of whites, which is genetically based, and he backs it up with data.
Then he proposes a solution on how to change the culture to one of self-interest by tapping into the same behaviour mechanisms.
Surely this is the most important issue of our times for all the West?
The article got followed by a few articles focusing on the US election fraud – understandably – but I hope this article can be republished again, as surely (a) understanding why we are in this mess (b) responding appropriately – is what matters most at present.