The Great Awakening vs The Great Reset
Alexander Dugin
London, Arktos Media, 2021

The Book

If you are curious about the analysis of the Russian geopolitical philosopher Alexander Dugin, but do not want to tackle his Foundations of Geopolitics[1] or The Fourth Political Theory[2] you might consider this slim volume. The Great Awakening vs The Great Reset is the condensed Dugin. It is also the topical Dugin in that he discusses developments in America 2020–21. In fact, this book seems to be aimed at an American audience. I certainly do not want to discourage anyone from reading the above-mentioned longer works because even when he is vague and contradictory Dugin is interesting. Even when you disagree with his thinking, his writing is engaging.

A segment of the Western Right has long been intrigued by Dugin. The war in Ukraine, along with the outrageous assassination attempt on his life that killed his daughter Darya Dugina in August 2022, has made his writing even more relevant.

Alexander Dugin, born in Moscow in 1962, was a dissident from an early age. His politics and ideology have evolved over time. He was a youth member of Pamyat, dabbled in national socialism, was a cofounder of the National Bolshevik Party, and is now a leading advocate of Neo-Eurasianism. Along the way he obtained a largely autodidactic education becoming an accomplished linguist. He was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2015 for alleged involvement in the Donbas conflict.

Dugin begins The Great Awaking vs The Great Reset by explaining the book’s title. The term Great Reset comes out of the 2020 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland and is the plan for the completion of the globalist project. Globalism is not a new idea or phenomenon, but now “globalism is entering a totalitarian phase” (4). The Great Awakening represents the forces opposing the Great Reset.

Next the author gives a brief ideological history explaining how we arrived at our present situation. He goes all the way back to Willian Occam. The fourteenth-century English philosopher and theologian is often credited with laying down the foundations of nominalism. According to Dugin, nominalists view humans only as individuals without any collective identities. Collectives are mere abstractions. Later, Protestantism helped destroy the collective religious identity of the West, while bourgeois capitalism destroyed the guilds and estates. In the twentieth century, nominalism/liberalism was challenged by communism and fascism. But fascism was militarily defeated in 1945, and Euro-communism collapsed in 1989–91 leaving the field open for liberalism to enter its third (final?) phase in which it deconstructs ethnic, sexual, and even human identity. “After all, the human is also a collective identity” (13).

The globalist ideology requires a world government to replace nation states. But Russia, China, the Islamic states, as well as populist movements in Europe and North America, stand in the way of this plan. Turning his attention to the populist movements in the U.S., Dugin believes that “Trump’s removal as president of the United States was a matter of life or death” for the globalists (15).

While supportive of Trump, Dugin sees major deficiencies in Western right-wing populism. Principle among these shortcomings is that they draw on “the same liberal ideology—capitalism and liberal democracy” as their opponents (19). In addition, Trump did not have a coherent agenda nor a strategy to achieve one. As the author puts it: “it is clear that he was not and is not an ideological figure” (21).

Dugin is interested in the Q Anon movement “which couched its criticism of liberalism, Democrats and the globalists in the form of conspiracy theories.” The Qs intuitively understood the sinister nature of post-modern liberalism and were able to articulate that “at the level of the average American and mass consciousness, which are hardly inclined towards in-depth philosophical and ideological analysis” (22). Conversely, this was also their weakness. By distorting reality, the Qs made it easy for liberals to refute their allegations. The author believes liberals are as wicked as the Q people portray them, just not in the way the Qs believe.

In the next section Dugin continues his critique of populism which offers “resistance,” but without “strictly defined worldviews” (28). At present “the Great Awaking is spontaneous, largely unconscious, intuitive and blind.” Its reliance on conspiracy theories “is an infantile disease,” yet “it is the beginning of a fundamental historical process” (28). For now, the response by the Right appears completely inadequate. The global elites control world finance, the US military machine, intelligence services, academe, mass culture, mass media, medicine and social services. But, “the Great Awakening is just the beginning. It has not even begun yet” (30). It “does not yet have an ideological basis” (31). One could say that the raison d’être for the Occidental Observer website and the Occidental Quarterly journal is to formulate an ideology for this awakening. Dugin believes such ideology must overcome “the boundary between the Left and the Right.” That would involve “combining the demand for social justice and the preservation of traditional cultural identity” (35).

Not surprisingly the author sees Russia’s mission as being “at the forefront of the Great Awakening” (39), But, “even today’s Russia does not have a complete and coherent ideology that could pose a serious challenge to the Great Reset” (40). Though not solidified, an essential component of the Russian ideology is imperialism, and here is the rub! Russia’s “revival is inconceivable without returning to the imperial mission laid down in our historical destiny” (41). Despite having by far the largest land mass of any state on earth Russia cannot be great until it assumes the limits of the Soviet empire, or the czarist empire? In 1914 the Russian Empire stretched from Helsinki and Warsaw in the west, to Baku in the south, all the way to Vladivostok and the Sea of Japan in the east. Now is not the time to digress into a discussion of the Ukrainian conflict, but I will point out that Finland and the Baltic Republics, formerly part of the Russian Empire, do not share the cultural, linguistic, ethnic, and historical connections that Ukraine has with Russia.

The second half of the book is in the form of appendices starting with a 2021 interview by the German magazine Deutsche Stimme. Here Dugin reiterates his opinion that Trump and his supporters are only trying “to stay with yesterday’s version of modernity, of liberalism, of democracy” (47). This strategy is inadequate to oppose the Great Reset. Yet the establishment sees Trump as a threat that must be defeated at all costs including “election fraud—the stolen election” of 2020, (51) and, of course, continuing lawfare.

A bit later in the interview Dugin drops a bombshell. “I hate analytical philosophy, positivism, and the natural sciences of Newton or Galileo, which were pure catastrophe and a lie about nature and humanity” (56). One wonders how Dugin’s beloved motherland could produce precision munitions without reference to those hated natural sciences. It appears that the author is rejecting all of modernity. At times in The Fourth Political Theory Dugin makes a distinction between modernity and post modernity. I prefer to see modernity as largely positive, especially science and technology on a human scale, products of Western genius. Current social policies which attack all authentic collective identities are products of late-modern degeneracy which, hopefully, will clear the path for a Western instauration.

Next, in an essay entitled “The Great Awakening: The Future Starts Now,” Dugin makes a series of observations: The 2020 US election was “a coup d’état accomplished by a conspiracy of illegitimate elites. . . . A color revolution . . . at home” (61). Concerning political unrest in America: “If you start to use violence, you should expect the same in return. Antifa and BLM started the riots. Capitol Hill [i.e., Jan. 6] was the logical response” (62). In fighting for his cause, Dugin sees the “[t]he main struggle is now clearly international.” Do Russian imperial ambitions make this international cooperation more difficult?

In the last essay the author explicitly addresses his ideology—the Fourth Political Theory (4PT), the other three ideologies being communism, fascism, and liberalism. Dugin believes that “communism and fascism have a common basis with liberalism: Materialism—Atheism—Progressivism—a purely materialistic approach to the human being” (66). I would disagree that the revolutionary Right is “purely materialistic,” but in any case, the 4PT is an invitation to critique and fight liberalism, and “to search for the alternative.” (67).

Dugin is variable in his support of national identities. The “globalists are using some Muslims in order to destroy European identities. . . . [T]hey use some ethnic identities (for example Uyghurs, Ukrainians) in order to destablise the alternative poles” (69). True, the globalists who back Ukrainian nationalists are “cynical hypocrites” who care nothing about the Ukrainian people. But Dugin is selective in his advocacy of nationalism depending upon its compatibility with his Eurasian project. Tragically the Ukrainians find themselves pawns in a global power struggle.

At one point the author almost seems to echo the Jewish social critic Susan Sontag who infamously wrote: “The white race is the cancer of human history.”[3] For Dugin, “the West is the name of the disease on the body of humanity” (74). But wait, “we shouldn’t blame the West—we should blame the modern West” (75). I wish he had written “the post-modern West” or perhaps “the late-modern West.” But what is this Western disease? It is “a new barbarism” called cancel culture. “This cancel culture (which includes LGBT+, Black Lives Matter, and feminist tendencies) is like a call to cancel all other kinds of culture. It is genocide of the Western culture” (77).

As noted above, Dugin can be ambiguous and opaque. He explains all at the end of this short book. He claims that “The Fourth Political Theory is not dogmatic—it is totally open. It is just theorising. It is a process” (86). But those who have read his longer works know that these statements are not entirely accurate either. And assessing Dugin’s ideology must be done within context of his other writings.

Evaluating 4PT and Neo-Eurasianism

It is understandable why there is a Russophile component within the American Right. Russia is a majority White, Christian country that has eschewed the worst manifestations of sexual perversion prevalent in the West. In contrast to the feminized West, many perceive Russian culture to be masculine, its people physically tough, and stoic in the face of deprivation. Americans with these sentiments usually support Russia’s war in Ukraine. But a reality check is in order: Despite government support for traditional social values, the country has a very low birth rate, high rates of crime and substance abuse, and widespread corruption within business and government. Of course, these problems are not unique to Russia, but neither do their presence recommend this society as a model to emulate.

There is disagreement on the extent of Dugin’s influence on Kremlin policy. But he is a strong supporter of Vladimir Putin, and there appears to be considerable overlap between the goals and policies of the two men. So it is not unreasonable to assume that Putinism is the real world application of Dugin’s ideology. To simplify, we can conflate Putinism, 4PT, and Neo-Eurasianism. Two questions for the American Right: Are any of these ideologies applicable to the West? And can Russia and America be future allies?

The fundamental problem with 4PT/Neo-Eurasianism is that it is organized around multi-ethnic empires or civilizational poles with a particular emphasis on the interests of the Russian Federation, while the Western Dissident Right seeks to organize around ethno-national states. So while 4PT and the authentic Western Right have similar opponents—the economic, political, and cultural global elites, they have incompatible goals.

It appears that Neo-Eurasianism differs significantly from pan-Slavism or the ideology of Czarist Russia. During the Russian Empire, in order to be a subject in good standing one embraced autocracy, Orthodoxy, and mother Russia. Now all that is required is political loyalty to the Russian Federation. One can be a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, a Chechen, Ugrian, or Tatar it does not matter. In The Fourth Political Theory Dugin writes, “we must definitively reject all forms of racism . . . including biological and cultural.”[4] When Putin states he is fighting Nazis in Ukraine, he is fighting ethno-nationalists who oppose his imperium. The fact that much of the Ukrainian leadership is Jewish and the Zelensky regime is supported by the globalists muddy the waters considerably. Kadyrovite fighters go into battle against Orthodox Christian Ukrainians shouting “Allahu Akbar.” Of course, Muslims have always been part of Russia since the days of Muscovy, but under the Eurasian doctrine it seems their numbers and influence have increased.

The Dugin/Putin Eurasianism can be seen as the equivalent of American civic nationalism to the extent that both ideologies seek to assimilate multi-ethnic populations into a political entities—empires each in their own style.

The ideal situation from an ethno-nationalist view perspective would be for the eastern Slavic population of Russian to concentrate on solving their demographic crisis and developing their vast natural resources while serving as a bulwark against the Muslim and Mongol peoples to the south and east. Thanks in large part to Washington, the possibility of a Russian-Western alliance seems a pipe dream.

Following the Neo-Eurasian path means that Russia will go its own way, but there remain congruent interests between Russian and the West. As Henry John Temple, the nineteenth-century British Prime Minister remarked, “Nations do not have permanent friends or enemies, only interests.” Charles de Gaulle put it, “No nation has friends, only interests.” It should be possible for some sort of compromise partnership with Russia to emerge that preserves the political and cultural integrity of eastern European nations while addressing Russia’s political and security concerns.[5] The result would be short of an East-West alliance, but rather a peaceful coexistence with selective collaboration.

As for Alexander Dugin’s 4PT, his message is a bit seductive, for he is an articulate critic of globalism and cultural degradation. But his vision for the future is not ours and his ideology will not be the foundation for a Western renaissance.

---

[1] Alexander Dugin, Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia (1997) English Edition Independently Published, 2017. Available online www.maieutiek.ne/Foundations-of-Geopolitics.pdf

[2] Alexander Dugin, The Fourth Political Theory (2009) English Edition, Arktos Media, 2012.

[3] Susan Sontag, “What is Happening to America?” Partisan Review, v.34, #1 (1967) 57-58.

[4] Dugin, Fourth Political Theory, 43-44.

[5] A case for small nation nationalism has been made in such diverse sources as: Raymond Cattell, Beyondism: Religion for Science, Praeger, 1987.Wilmot Robertson The Ethnostate, Howard Allen, 1992.

In 1843 an explorer named Sir William Harris wrote that all classes of Africans were most pertinacious beggars.[1] How true was this and how true is it of Black people today?

Sir William Harris’s statement was well corroborated in the 19th century. Reporting on his time in north-east Africa, a German missionary described Africans as wanting everything for nothing.[2] He was approached by fifteen or twenty Africans every day, “all begging, and often after a very cunning fashion”. In 1850 a Scotsman familiar with southern Africa wrote that Africans would ask for something claiming it was for a sick wife or daughter and, if given it, would ask for more: your hat, your neckcloth and then your coat.[3] The traveller Sir Richard Burton wrote that an African’s first question on meeting a White man was: “What will you give me?”[4]

Sir William Harris went on to say that whatever Africans saw, they demanded, be it guns, knives, beads or dollars. “The love of acquiring property stifles every sense of shame; and no compunction is felt in asking for the cloak from off the back.” According to the naturalist Samuel Baker, it was not beneath an African king to beg. One once demanded his highland costume, then his watch, his compass and his rifle.[5] Baker refused to hand them over, but to pacify the annoyed monarch, gave him a pound of gunpowder and some bullets. When the king asked what use these would be without a gun, Baker reminded him that he had already given him a gun.

Not all primitive people resembled Africans. Christopher Columbus described the Arawaks of the West Indies as noble and kind, which he would not have done had they been pertinacious beggars.[6] Nor perhaps are all Africans like the Bantus, who account for most of those we call Black today. Perhaps the Pygmies and Kalahari Bushmen do not beg.[7]

But Bantus still beg habitually today, as they sometimes admit. In 2022 the president of Ghana urged his peers to stop begging from the West.[8] In 2023 the Rwandan president asked a Rwandan audience: “Can somebody tell me why we have become beggars?”[9] In 2014 an African wrote an article entitled “Africa, the Begging Continent”,[10] which quoted an eminent African describing Africa as composed of beggar nations. That was in 1967, when Obafemi Awolowo said that the only way for Africa to become self-reliant was to shake off the begging habit and find some initiative, courage and drive. Paradoxically, though, he added that the continent must not cease to use every feasible tactic and manoeuvre to extract ever more alms from its benefactors.[11]

Africa begs on the basis that it is needy, which gains it countless billions of dollars, which disappear and so it begs again. It is an accepted cycle. Nor does it beg alone. The United Nations begs on its behalf through schemes such as Agenda 2030, which requires Western (“developed”) countries to pass a portion of their wealth to “developing” countries on a regular basis — less to relieve suffering, these days, than to reduce international inequality.[12] Yet almost as soon as a wealth transfer has taken place, the UN finds that it was insufficient. In 2019, just three years after Agenda 2030 came into effect, the UN Secretary General wrote that in some areas a “much deeper, faster and more ambitious response” was needed.[13] Another UN official also acted like a beggar-turned-tyrant, stating that in some places more rapid progress was required.[14] Poverty continued to be concentrated in the world’s poorest countries, he stated tautologically, suggesting that their problem was that richer countries were not more generous. Nor have the vast amounts of “development aid” received by Africa over the decades resulted in much development. According to the UN’s list of the world’s least developed countries, 35 of the 48 are in Africa.[15]

The African masses beg. Set foot on the continent and open palms will be stretched towards you, I am told. In East and West Africa alike, parents send their children out to beg.[16] And so it seems that begging is as much a way of life in Africa today as it always was.

Black people beg in the West as well, where they have found their perfect counterparts in White donors. A few years ago it was hard to know who was working harder, the leaders of Black Lives Matter to ask for money or White people to give it to them. The “reparations for slavery” movement is another begging operation, so successful that California is already intent on giving a great deal of money to each qualifying Black person in the state.[17]

Racial politics is largely a matter of begging. This is what is going on when Black people complain that not enough of them are admitted to Oxford or Cambridge universities or when they seek higher-paying jobs or exemption from being stopped by the police. The method is always the same: call your intended benefactors racists, or threaten to do so or imply that they are, until they give you what you want. The rationale is equally simple: “I am Black”. Nothing more is needed.

But often Black people have no need to beg. Whites are already there, seeing to their every wish before it is expressed. True, it was a Black woman who in 2021 described the efforts of Black children as “kind of wasted” if they did not get into the top one per cent of universities,[18] but this was thirty years after Whites first lamented the small numbers of Black students at Oxford and Cambridge. The universities duly lowered the bar for Black applicants, only to find that the favoured students could not keep up and were therefore prone to drop out or get poor degrees. This gave anti-racists another disparity to come down on: the universities were “failing their Black students”.[19] Pro-Black discrimination was now needed not just to get Black students in but also to retain them during their courses and improve their results at the end. In 2018 a headline stated: “Universities must give more top degrees to Black students, under new proposals by regulator”.[20]

Whites are there first when it comes to employment too. It is not Black people who say that an employer has too few Black staff these days but the employer, who announces an intention to take on specifically Black people in the name of “diversity”. In 2021 Lloyds Bank gave itself four years to increase Black representation in senior roles to at least three per cent, using the word “diversity” as its justification.[21] The following year His Majesty’s Treasury stated that it aimed to boost the number of its Black staff to six per cent of the total, almost twice the percentage of Black people in the population.[22] Little did Lloyds or H. M. Treasury care about the non-Blacks who would be passed over in favour of less competent Blacks. Little did they care about the damage these under-qualified people would do to their operations. As anti-racist organisations, what they cared about was anticipating the hopes of the favoured race so as to save it the trouble of begging.[23]

It is the same with crime. Young Black men do not bemoan the fact that the police stop and search them out of all proportion to their numbers as they used to; the police do it, obsessed as they are with reducing the amount of contact they have with Black criminals. One of the main points the police aim to get across to the public is that they, the police, are racist. In 2020, the National Police Chiefs’ Council intended to “address racial inequalities in policing”, meaning to reduce inequalities of outcome by increasing inequalities of treatment.[24] In 2023 a chief constable proposed to do something about the “disproportionality” whereby Black people appear in court at a higher rate than others,[25] presenting the fact as evidence of the police’s “institutional racism”. Presumably the necessary corrective action was to stop arresting Blacks. Do the police care about the effect their anti-racist initiatives will have on the crime figures? Of course not! Already in 2000 one of London’s most senior police officers was boasting that he had reduced the number of young Black men stopped and searched by almost forty per cent in the previous year,[26] during which the number of muggings rose by at least two thirds.[27]

If these institutions expect gratitude from those they favour, they will be disappointed, as the old explorers could have told them. In 1891 Herbert Ward noted the ingratitude of the natives of the Congo, as when the mother of a baby whose life he had saved called him a witch for doing it, although she did creep up to his tent in the night and leave an egg there, which unfortunately turned out to be bad.[28] Samuel Baker found Africans “utterly obtuse to all feelings of gratitude”, noting especially their failure to express any trace of the sentiment when freed upon the abolition of slavery.[29] Sir Richard Burton explained that the African sees a benefit as “the weakness of his benefactor and his own strength; consequently he will not recognize even the hand that feeds him”.[30]

We see this today in the view taken by many Black people of the state benefits they receive. Instead of expressing gratitude, they complain that the benefits are too small. A commenter on a YouTube video wrote of his astonishment at seeing an African single mother on television, “living on welfare in a lovely spacious council-provided home with her five children”, moaning about her money worries.[31] Other commenters had found that whatever Africans wanted, they seemed to feel entitled to, nor did they show any gratitude when they received it. In 2022 the historian Simon Webb posted a video entitled “The ingratitude of Africa for all that Britain did for them in the 19th and 20th centuries”.[32] We gave our colonies roads, railways, schools and hospitals, judicial systems and written language, he pointed out, and now they were demanding “reparations”. At least, some in Nigeria were. This ingratitude is seen in non-African Blacks as well. Back in the 1970s a British-born Black activist, outlining his plan for Black people to take charge of Britain’s race policy, which would be one of universal pro-Black discrimination, specifically warned the White people who would assist in the project to expect no gratitude.[33]

If the old explorers found that Black people showed no gratitude when they received a gift, they found that they would not make one, either, unless they expected to do well out of it. The Scottish adventurer Hugh Murray reported that when Africans made a gift, they considered it “a deadly offence not to receive at least double the value in return”.[34] A Portuguese explorer named Francisco Valdez wrote that Africans never gave anything without expecting back something worth three times as much.[35] When an African gave a chicken to Anna Scott, an American missionary, she found that she “had to make him a return present of four or five times the value of his fowl”.[36] The Black reluctance to make a free gift continues. Black people rarely do voluntary work or donate blood.[37]

Robbery and theft are like begging without the request. One doesn’t ask; one just takes. Robbery is notoriously popular with Black people, who according to various statements made in the last forty years comprise eighty per cent of London’s muggers, which means that a Black person is around fifty times as likely to carry out a mugging as anyone else.[38] An early case was recorded by the Scottish explorer Mungo Park more than 200 years ago. He was accosted by a group of Africans, one of whom had a knife while another had a gun.[39] The first cut a button off his waistcoat and put it in his pocket; the second threatened to shoot him if he touched his compass, which was lying on the ground. Others went away with his horse. But it seems that Africans were rarely so bold. What they specialised in was theft.

The German explorer Johann Barth, writing in 1857, found the thievish propensities of the people of Logon “very remarkable”.[40] In 1670 the Scottish cartographer John Ogilby wrote that the urge of Africans to steal whatever they could lay their hands on, especially from foreigners, was innate, noting that if they pulled off a particularly ingenious theft they would boast about it.[41] John Duncan, although he found, as he put it, an extraordinary amount of depravity of every kind in Africa, was convinced that the African’s predominant passion was theft.[42]

In 1864 William Reade put it bluntly: “The Africans are all of them thieves. They have no sense of honor in that respect.”[43] Thomas Hutchinson wrote in 1858: “Show me a Black man, and I will show you a thief”.[44] Mungo Park wrote in 1815 that the most prominent defect in the character of Africans was their insurmountable propensity to steal anything he possessed.[45] “We found the people thieves to a man.” According to Charles Andersson, a Swedish explorer, theft was a prevailing vice with the Bechuanas. From what he had seen of them, he was certain that from the king to the slave, none would hesitate to steal the shirt off his back if he thought he could get away with it.[46]

Black thieves are not unknown in modern times. In the 1960s an anti-apartheid priest urged White South Africans to love their servants as children of God even if they stole from them, seeming to take it for granted that they would. Every riot sees Black people looting with abandon. My own first contact with the idea that not every Black person was necessarily well behaved came in the 1980s when I left a shop in an English city having propped my bicycle up outside to see it being ridden down the hill by a young Black man. It had only been there about thirty seconds.

None of this is intended to spread ill feeling about Black people, who have many virtues. For example, they tend to be cheerful. It is merely intended to throw light on what they are like with regard to begging and related topics, which a surprisingly large number of White people seem to be unaware of.

---

[1] This note and others below refer to Hinton Rowan Helper (“HH”), compiler of The Negroes in Negroland, 1868, New York: G W Carleton. Helper’s notes give abbreviated references such as, here, to “Harris’s Adventures in Africa, page 299”. Where possible these have been expanded to give the author’s full name and the title and date of the book presumably referred to. In this case, on p. 84 HH quotes Sir William Cornwallis Harris, Major Harris’s Sports and Adventures in Africa, 1843, p. 299.

[2] On p.87 HH quotes “Krapf’s Africa”, p. 175. This could be John Ludwig Krapf: the Explorer-Missionary of Northeastern Africa by Paul E Kretzmann, 1909.

[3] On p. 84 HH quotes Roualeyn Gordon-Cumming, 1850, Five Years of a Hunter’s Life in the Far Interior of South Africa Vol. I, p. 128.

[4] On pp. 82-83 HH quotes “Burton’s Africa”, p. 496, which could be any of Sir Richard Burton’s books about Africa, most of which were published in the 1860s.

[5] On p. 34 HH quotes Samuel Baker, 1870, Great Basin of the Nile, p. 386: “True to his natural instincts, the king commenced begging, and being much struck with my Highland costume, he demanded it as a proof of friendship, saying, that if I refused I could not be his friend. My watch, compass, and double Fletcher rifle were asked for in their turn; all of which I refused to give him.”.

[6] See B:M2022, Feb. 12th 2021, “Taíno: Indigenous Caribbeans”, https://www.Blackhistorymonth.org.uk/article/section/pre-colonial-history/taino-indigenous-caribbeans/.

[7] The Pygmies and Bushmen (the few who remain after almost being wiped out by Bantus) are together known as the Khoi-San today.

[8] africanews, Dec. 14th 2022, “Ghana’s president Akufo Addo urges Africa to stop ‘begging’”, https://www.africanews.com/2022/12/14/ghanas-president-akufo-addo-urges-africa-to-stop-begging/.

[9] Africa Web TV, April 3rd 2023, “Can We As Africans Stop Preparing Ourselves To Becoming Someone’s Breakfast? | President Paul Kagame”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRy69WPRJ-A.

[10] Premium Times, Feb. 6th 2014, “Africa, the Begging Continent, By Olúfémi Táíwò”, https://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/154708-africa-begging-continent-olufemi-taiwo.html?tztc=1.

[11] Olúfémi Táíwò in Premium Times, ibid., quotes Obafemi Awolowo, 1981, Voice of Courage: Selected Speeches of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, vol. 1, Akure: Fagbamigbe, pp. 29-30.

[12] United Nations, 2015, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development , https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N15/291/89/pdf/N1529189.pdf. Goal 10 of 17 is to “reduce inequality within and among countries”.

[13] United Nations, 2019, António Guterres’s Foreword to “The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019”, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/#sdg-goals.

[14] United Nations, 2019, Liu Zhenmin’s Introduction to “The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019”, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/#sdg-goals.

[15] United Nations, 2014, “Country classification”, https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/wesp/wesp_current/2014wesp_country_classification.pdf.

[16] tearfund, June 16th 2023, “Prayers for International Day of the African Child”, https://www.tearfund.org/stories/2023/06/prayers-for-international-day-of-the-african-child.

[17] Los Angeles Times, June 29th 2023, “California’s slavery reparations plan: Eligibility, payments and other details”, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-06-29/la-me-california-slavery-reparations-plan.

[18] This was Afua Adom on Good Morning Britain, March 31st 2021, “Is It Time to Scrap the Term BAME? | Good Morning Britain”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1K9B1OmN28.

[19] Telegraph, Oct. 30th 2018, “Oxbridge failing disadvantaged students, critics claim”, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/05/oxbridge-failing-disadvantaged-students-critics-claim/.

[20] Telegraph, Sept. 7th 2018, “Universities must give more top degrees to Black students, under new proposals by regulator”, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/09/06 /universities-must-give-top-degrees-Black-students-new-proposals/.

[21] Lloyds Banking Group, no date given (June 2021), “Ethnicity”, https://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/who-we-are/responsible-business/inclusion-and-diversity/ethnicity.html.

[22] Telegraph, Nov. 15th 2022, “Treasury aims to have six per cent of staff from Black backgrounds in race target”, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/11/15/treasury-aims-have-six-per-cent-staff-Black-backgrounds-race/.

[23] A fuller treatment of this subject would point out that it is our elites and those with power that lead the way in conferring special benefits on Blacks. The main donors to Black Lives Matter were corporations rather than individuals. It is California’s politicians rather than its population who are intent on paying “reparations”. It is big employers, including government departments, that pioneer the extension of racial preferences. A fuller treatment might also ask why these parties became possessed by anti-racism, where the ideology came from and what its end-game is. But these questions are outside the scope of the present article.

[24] BBC, July 30th 2020, “Ethnic minorities feel UK police are biased, report says”, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53843240.

[25] Avon and Somerset Police, June 16th 2023, “Chief Constable Sarah Crew on Institutional Racism”, https://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/news/2023/06/chief-constable-sarah-crew-on-institutional-racism/.

[26] This was John Grieve, Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. See Metropolitan Police, Feb. 22nd 2000, “Press Conference Held Re the Anniversary of the Lawrence Inquiry Report”, http://tap.ccta.gov.uk/[…]/b3cb2697adf8d9e1802…OpenDocument.

[27] Muggings in London went up by more than 75 per cent in the fifteen months to May 2000 according to calculations based on figures in the Telegraph, April 24th 1999, “Muggings soar as police tread softly”, and the Sunday Times, June 25th 2000, “Straw on rack as muggings soar”.

[28] Herbert Ward, 2019 (1891), Five Years with the Congo Cannibals, Ostara, p. 31.

[29] On p. 134 HH quotes Baker 1870, op cit, p. 53.

[30] On p. 82 HH quotes Burton’s Africa, op cit, p. 496.

[31] History Debunked, March 25th 2022, “The thing with Nigerians”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4elhOK34tk4.

[32] History Debunked, Dec. 21st 2022, “The ingratitude of Africa for all that Britain did for them in the 19th and 20th centuries”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYqtC_kR-Ns&t=1s.

[33] Whites should be prepared to do “any job however menial … without expecting gratitude”. Chris Mullard, 1973, Black Britain, London: George Allen and Unwin, p. 169.

[34] On p. 86 HH quotes Hugh Murray, 1853, The African Continent: A Narrative of Discovery and Adventure, p. 69.

[35] On p. 84 HH quotes Francisco Valdez, 1861, Six Years of a Traveller’s Life in Western Africa, Vol 2, p. 208.

[36] On p. 87 HH quotes Anna Scott, 1858, Day Dawn in Africa, p. 108.

[37] History Debunked, June 13th 2022, “The puzzling lack of Black blood donors”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiK4I_t-W04.

[38] In 1975 a march was held under the slogan “Stop The Muggers. 80% of muggers are Black. 85% of victims are White” (Paul Gilroy, 1987, There Ain’t No Black in the Union Jack, London: Routledge, p. 120). Twenty years later, Paul Condon as Metropolitan Police Commissioner stated in a letter to Black leaders that eighty per cent of London’s muggers were Black (Independent, Aug. 4th 1995, “Mugging: criminal or political offence?”, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/mugging-criminal-or-political-offence-1594666.html).

[39] On p. 88 HH quotes Mungo Park, 1799, Travels in the Interior Districts of Africa, p. 113.

[40] On p. 95 HH quotes Johann Heinrich Barth, 1857, Travels and Discoveries in North and Central Africa, Vol. II, p. 444.

[41] On p. 96 HH quotes John Ogilby, 1670, A Description of the Whole World, Vol I, p. 452.

[42] On p. 96, HH quotes John Duncan, 1847, Travels in Western Africa, p. 141.

[43] On p. 95 HH quotes William Winwood Reade, 1864, Savage Africa, p. 447.

[44] On p. 94 HH quotes Thomas Hutchinson, 1858, Impressions of Western Africa, p. 280.

[45] On pp. 94-95, HH quotes Mungo Park, 1815, The Journal of a Mission to the Interior of Africa, in the Year 1805, p. 193.

[46] On p. 95 HH quotes “Andersson’s Africa”, p. 372.

The political parties that most loudly proclaim their love of Celtic languages and cultures are crystal-clear about their vision for a better future. They believe that those languages and cultures need to be marginalized much more and driven much faster into oblivion. They also believe that the people who speak the languages and practise the cultures need to be murdered, raped, and robbed much more often. And be impoverished, demonized, and stripped of political power much faster.

The iron law of leftism

Does that sound like a paradox? It does, but it isn’t. It’s just the iron law of leftism in action. The law states that leftists always most harm what they claim to be most concerned about. For example, leftists in America claim to be deeply concerned about Blacks and their welfare. Sure enough, Steve Sailer has proved that leftist policies have been responsible for the rise in the number of Blacks murdered and maimed by other Blacks. And also in Blacks killed by dangerous Black driving. Similarly, leftist parties like Plaid Cymru in Wales, Sinn Féin in Ireland, and the Scottish National Party (SNP) claim to be deeply concerned about preserving and reviving Celtic languages and cultures. At the same time, they want to open the borders of Celtic nations to unlimited non-White migration. This is absolutely guaranteed to harm Welsh, Irish Gaelic, and Scottish Gaelic. How much do Somalis and Pakistanis care about those languages? About as much as the Jews Robert Maxwell and Bernie Maddoff cared about ethical business practices. In other words: not at all.

Migration from the Third World is also guaranteed to increase rates of murder, rape, and robbery, and to transfer ever more money from White tax-payers to non-White tax-eaters. By supporting Third-World invasion, Plaid Cymru, Sinn Féin, and the SNP have become dedicated traitors to the nations they claim to love. Fortunately, some supporters of these parties are starting to realize that they’ve been betrayed. In Ireland, working-class protestors against Third-World invasion are drawn from “the same demographic as Sinn Féin’s reliable voter base.” And when those working-class protestors marched in the Dublin constituency of Sinn Féin’s leader Mary Lou McDonald, some of them carried placards bearing “a photo of McDonald with the word ‘Traitor’ written across it.”

The cult of transgenderism

That’s a very healthy development. McDonald is indeed a traitor to the working-class Whites of Ireland. Like all mainstream leftists, she preaches racial equality while practising racial hierarchy. Leftists place Blacks and other non-Whites far above ordinary Whites in the leftist hierarchy of racial privilege and patronage. But McDonald is a traitor in another very important sense. She’s a traitor to her own sex. Just like Plaid Cymru and the SNP, Sinn Féin are fanatical worshippers in the cult of transgenderism, which states that sexually perverted men become full and authentic women simply by proclaiming themselves to be so. Nothing more than words is needed: a verbal formula grants a man still in full possession of penis, testicles, and testosterone the right to invade all female spaces, from dressing-rooms and toilets to sporting contests and prisons.

The child-abducting male pedophile Andrew Miller is 100% female, according to leftists

Once again, leftists are preaching equality and practising hierarchy. They claim to believe in sexual equality, but place the rights of sexually perverted men far above those of real women who don’t want those male perverts in their private spaces. Take the male pedophile Andrew Miller, who abducted and sexually assaulted a pre-teen schoolgirl in Scotland earlier this year. In between sexual assaults, he recharged his libido by watching porn and fetish videos on TV. He rejected the girl’s repeated pleas for freedom and told her that she was now his “new family.”

But I’ve actually committed a hate-crime by deferring to reality and describing Miller with male pronouns, because he claims to be a woman called Amy George. In other words, he’s a “transwoman” and leftism insists that he must therefore be 100% female. He isn’t, of course: he was born male and remains male, whatever his perversions might lead him to pretend.

The most loathsome creatures on earth

But leftists call anyone who rejects trans-clowns like Andrew Miller a hate-filled bigot. Indeed, leftist supporters of translunacy often compare their opponents to the most loathsome creatures that crawl on the face of God’s fair earth: they say that “transphobes” are like racists. The leftist organization Stonewall, which supposedly campaigns for homosexual men and lesbian women, has a simple message for lesbians who don’t want to have sex with penis-packing male perverts who claim to be women. According to Stonewall, real lesbians who don’t want fake lesbians in their beds are “sexual racists.” Yes, transphobic lesbians really are as loathsome as that in leftist eyes.

Petulant poison-dwarf: the troubled transphile Nicola Sturgeon

The poison-dwarf Nicola Sturgeon, former leader of the SNP, has gone even further. She said that when you begin lifting the stones under which transphobes dwell, “you’ll also find they are deeply misogynist, often homophobic, possibly some of them racist as well.” To self-righteous leftists like Sturgeon, racism is the worst of all possible sins, which is why leftists are always trying to attach the label of “RACIST!” to anyone who disagrees with them on any topic. In this case, Sturgeon was talking about opponents of an SNP “gender bill” that was intended to give male perverts even bigger privileges at the expense of real women. But the bill blew up in her face when it was revealed that a double rapist called Adam Graham had proclaimed himself a woman and been sent to a female prison under the name of Isla Bryson. Sturgeon resigned as SNP leader after the scandal, although it soon became apparent that her resignation wasn’t prompted just by the failure of her campaign on behalf of translunatic rapists. No, the SNP is being investigated for serious financial wrongdoing and both Sturgeon and her husband have been arrested and questioned by the Scottish police. Charges against them may be imminent.

Inadvertently touching on truth

This is another example of the iron law of leftism in action. The SNP and all other mainstream leftist parties loudly proclaim their concern for morality, justice, and equality. Meanwhile, they doggedly pursue one all-important thing. Not morality or justice or equality, but power — the power to privilege and to punish. The privilege is for themselves and their favorites at the top of the leftist hierarchy; the punishment is for their enemies at the bottom of the leftist hierarchy. But even though Nicola Sturgeon is interested only in power, not in truth or reality, she inadvertently touched on the truth in her abusive comments about opponents of translunacy.

Mhairi Black

So did another poisonous fem-pol in the SNP, the self-righteous lesbian Mhairi Black, who has assailed opponents of translunacy with the worst terms in her vocabulary:

Gender-critical campaigners are comparable to white supremacists, the SNP’s deputy Westminster leader has claimed. Mhairi Black said that “bad actors” and “50-year-old Karens” were responsible for the debate over transgender rights and suggested those who vocally disagreed with her views on such issues could not be “decent” people.

In comments likely to deepen an already bitter divide in Scotland, she said those who made “intellectual” arguments against extending trans rights were akin to past generations who claimed non-white ethnic groups were inferior. … Speaking at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, Ms Black said: “Once upon a time, you had intellectuals who made these big prolific statements about how race was a key factor.

“[They argued] ‘I think you’ll find statistics show that if you have more Bame [black, Asian and minority ethnic] people; crime goes up’ or whatever it is. We now rightly look back on that and go, ‘You were a racist. You might be an intellectual, but what you were saying was racist.’

“If you’re not educating yourself on things, then you can’t complain when people from a minority say, ‘You’re not treating us right’, and that’s exactly what’s happening with the trans community right now.” … Later in the talk, at The Stand Comedy Club, Ms Black was asked whether she believed that someone with a different philosophical view to her on gender issues could still be “a thoroughly decent person”.

She responded: “If you keep it to yourself, aye,” to applause from the audience. “To me, a decent person is someone who tries to make others comfortable and accept them, particularly when it’s a marginalised, oppressed group. “That’s just human progress. And to me being decent is being part of that progress, not hindering it.” (Gender critics akin to white supremacists, claims SNP’s Mhairi Black, The Daily Telegraph, 8th August 2023)

The self-proclaimed Scottish nationalist Mhairi Black bears a proudly Scottish name and has a passionate commitment to destroying Scotland. That’s why she’s a dedicated opponent of “racism” and staunch supporter of non-White migration into Scotland. Look again at her comments about those who use statistics to prove that non-Whites like Blacks are much more inclined to commit crime. She didn’t say that they’re factually wrong: she said that they’re “racist.” For Mhairi Black and other leftists, truth and logic don’t matter when it comes to race. Instead, we must close our eyes to reality, clear our minds of hate-facts, and repeat the sacred mantra: “There is only one race — the human race.” That isn’t true, of course, but truth doesn’t matter to leftists. What matters is power.

Transgenderism and trans-Westernism

Leftists know that censorship and silencing their enemies are vital steps towards the power they crave. Mhairi Black’s audience applauded when she said that opponents of translunacy should keep quiet about the truth: that biological sex is real and that men can never become women, no matter how loudly they claim to be. But the audience didn’t realize that, like Nicola Sturgeon, Mhairi Black was inadvertently touching on the truth in what she said about “transphobes.” There is indeed a strong parallel between opponents of translunacy and “racists” or “white supremacists.”

The parallel is that “racists” and “white supremacists” believe in biological reality just as opponents of translunacy do. Men cannot become real women and non-Whites cannot become real Westerners. Transgenderism is as false and harmful as what I call trans-Westernism, which is the belief that non-White people from corrupt, violent, and intellectually backward Third-World nations can become full and authentic citizens of Western nations. The ideologies of transgenderism and trans-Westernism are both based on the elevation of feelings over facts. How do we know that a bearded transwoman with a penis and no ability to menstruate or give birth is a full and authentic woman? Well, it’s because the transwoman feels that he is so. And he gets very upset when anyone disagrees with him, which is further proof, in leftist eyes, that he must be right. Feelings trump facts.

Bangladeshi, not British: the deluded trans-Westerner Rakib Ehsan

Similarly, how do we know, for example, that the goy-groveling Bangladeshi neo-con Rakib Ehsan is a full and authentic Briton? Again, it’s because he feels that he is so. After all, his Bangladeshi mother was the most patriotic person you could ever hope to meet. Rakib and his family love living in wealthy and uncorrupt Britain, despite their roots in poor and highly corrupt Bangladesh. That’s why Rakib is eager for lots more non-Whites like himself to migrate to Britain. They too will become true Britons and love living in wealthy and uncorrupt Britain, despite their roots in the poor and highly corrupt Third World.

Imagine that — non-Whites prefer living in countries built by Whites and will say whatever helps them stay there. But that doesn’t mean they belong in those countries. Even less does it mean that their presence is good for Whites. Rakib Ehsan’s subjective and self-serving feelings do not trump biological reality and turn him or any other non-White into a true Briton. Third-World people like him migrate to Britain and other Western nations for their own advantage, not to benefit the Whites who built and sustain those nations. Third-Worlders want to exploit the prosperity and good governance that they can’t create themselves in their own homelands. And once Third-World folk settle in the West, they set about re-creating Third-World pathologies, like the rape-gangs of Rotherham and the voting-fraud and corruption of ethnically enriched Tower Hamlets in London. These non-White settlers are trans-Westerners and their supposed new identity is as fake and infertile as the identity of trans-women. Men who claim to be women can never give birth to children and non-Whites who claim to be Western could never have created Western civilization. On the contrary, they’re capable only of aborting Western civilization.

But that’s precisely why equality-preaching leftists are so eager to import and privilege folk from the Third World. Non-Whites are very bad for the West and leftists hate the West and its achievements. That’s why they preach equality and practise hierarchy. Any group that is higher in the leftist hierarchy has the right to invade the territory of any group that is lower. Perverted men who claim to be women belong to the sacred category of transwomen and are higher in the leftist hierarchy than real women. That’s why leftists want those male perverts to invade all female spaces, just as they want Blacks and other non-Whites to invade all White spaces. Non-White migration must continue without limit and non-White actors must be able to take on any White role, from David Copperfield to Achilles to Doctor Who.

The abominations of Olivier

At the same time, Black roles are forbidden to lowly Whites. When the White Laurence Olivier, one of the world’s greatest actors, played the Black protagonist of Shakespeare’s Othello (c. 1603), his performance was acclaimed at the time as masterly. It’s now condemned as an abomination. But leftists applaud as Black women take on all White and male roles in Shakespeare. Once again, leftists are preaching equality and practising hierarchy, with Blacks at the top and Whites at the bottom.

Leftism is, after all, based on lies and interested only in power. That’s why it elevates sexually perverted men over sane and sensible women in the lying ideology of transgenderism. And why it elevates unproductive and unintelligent non-Whites over productive and intelligent Whites in the lying ideology of trans-Westernism. But the truth remains: men cannot become real women and non-Whites cannot become real Westerners. The consequences of ignoring truth and promoting lies are becoming clearer by the day throughout the West. That’s why more and more Whites are waking up to the Great Replacement and the lies of leftism. As Gregory Hood points out at AmRen, transphobe Matt Walsh once espoused race-blind civic nationalism and argued for it “with lazy, left-wing bilge.” Now he’s seen the blight and stopped the bilge:

BREAKING: New leaked audio of Matt Walsh arguing with his co-host about how you can’t “separate race and culture” and how Mexicans can never be Americans or “white”. He goes on to mock Indigenous genocide and boast about the superiority of white culture and society. pic.twitter.com/PjbFrBDziq

– The Serfs (@theserfstv) August 14, 2023

Walsh first saw the blight of transgenderism, then saw the blight of trans-Westernism. They’re both based on lies and fantasies. It’s just that trans-Westernism is much worse for the West. Matt Walsh is not unique. Once you’ve seen Clown World lying about men becoming women, it’s much easier to see that Clown World is lying about non-Whites blessing the West. And once you’ve seen the truth, your duty becomes clear: you have to fight in its defense.