Featured Articles

Destroy the Goy: The Metaphysics of Anti-White Hatred, Part 2

Go to Part 1.

The Cancer of Human History

Note that Jared Diamond, supposed disciple of reason and realism, could not conceal his real feelings on the topic of European success and non-European failure. He spoke of the “stink of racism,” which is, of course, the stink of racism by Whites. He obviously likes the idea of African Blacks making “mincemeat” of Europeans and of Aztecs driving Europeans “into the sea.” In short, he’s a goyophobe, just like his co-ethnic Susan Sontag (1933–2004). In her most famous piece of writing, Sontag laid bare the anti-White hatred that is at the heart of anti-racism:

If America is the culmination of Western white civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something terribly wrong with Western white civilization. This is a painful truth; few of us want to go that far. … The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone — its ideologies and inventions — which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself. [italics in original] (See “Susan Sontag’s Jewish World,” Kevin MacDonald, The Occidental Observer, 17th October 2017)

Sontag indicts “the white race” as uniquely evil, uniquely culpable, and uniquely pernicious. In effect, she’s promulgating a blood libel that makes nonsense of leftist claims about human equality. The emotional fuel of anti-racism is hatred of Whites and the true aim of anti-racism is not equality but revenge. Jewish goyophobes like Stephen Jay Gould, Jared Diamond and Susan Sontag created this ideology using their high verbal IQ and their extensive ethnic networking in the media and academia. Blacks and other non-Whites, who could not have created this ideology by themselves, have nevertheless taken it up with great enthusiasm. Here is a recent example in the Guardian:

Is white America ready to confront its racism? Philosopher George Yancy says we need a ‘crisis’

In his new book [Backlash: What Happens When We Talk Honestly about Racism in America, 2018], philosopher George Yancy uncovers just how unprepared even well-meaning whites are for a courageous conversation about race. …

White America, all Americans, must witness the vileness. Backlash inundates its white reader with unmitigated reality, and asks white readers to dwell within a space of black trauma. And it asks the white reader to linger, to touch the truth about their whiteness and its complicity with that trauma. So, it dares to ask “good whites” to explore their racism, their hatred, their white racist microaggressions and complicity with white racist macroaggressions. The book is an outgrowth of a post-racial America that was always a lie. And it asks white readers, in the words of James Baldwin, to use it as a disagreeable mirror to look at themselves. …

White racism is thus a continuum, one that includes the KKK [Ku-Klux Klan], the loving white Christian and the antiracist white. Even good, moral white people, those who have black friends, friends of color, married to people of color, fight for racial justice and so on, don’t escape white racist injustice against black people and people of color; they all continue to be implicated within structures of white privilege and to embody, whether they realize it or not, society’s racist sensibilities. White people possess white privilege or white immunity from racial disease. And because of this, others of us, black people and people of color, reap the social, political and existential pains of that racialized social skin. …

White America needs to engage in a form of crisis regarding its false and oppressive identity. It needs to grapple seriously with why it needed to project its vileness onto black people and people of color in the first place. Perhaps it needs to see its emptiness, to truly love itself beyond its continued de facto segregated spaces, its insularity. The gift contained in Backlash offers an embodied way of rethinking, re-feeling and re-positioning what it means to be white. It is a gift that offers loss, which is so counterintuitive.

Today is white America’s time to weep, to become vulnerable, and un-suture itself, which means, for me, a process of suffering oneself to be seen, of remaining wounded. The gift of Backlash is a radical call to white America to tarry with its own racist vomit, and to linger with the stench of the racist catastrophe of which it is responsible, before any talk of “reconciliation” is even possible. (Is white America ready to confront its racism? Philosopher George Yancy says we need a ‘crisis,’ The Guardian, 24th April 2018)

Where Jared Diamond had the “stench of racism,” George Yancy has “the stench of the racist catastrophe.” And there’s more where that came from: Yancy speaks of “vileness,” “hatred,” “racial disease,” the “emptiness” of White America, and the “racist vomit” of White America. All this would be amusing if it were not so typical of Black self-righteousness and so redolent of the violence constantly directed by Blacks against Whites not just in America but everywhere Blacks come into contact with Whites, from South Africa to Britain. Read more

Destroy the Goy: The Metaphysics of Anti-White Hatred, Part 1

Ideologies are like engines: what matters is that they reach their destination, not what they run on or what they’re made of. But one vital difference is that an ideology can reach its destination without being internally consistent or conforming to reality. That isn’t true of real engines. Take the Mariner I space-probe in 1962. Its destination was Venus, but its mission failed completely because one small mathematical symbol was omitted from its on-board program.

The cost of failure

When the program ran, it “treated normal minor variations of velocity as if they were serious, causing spurious corrections that sent the rocket off course.” In other words, Mariner I didn’t conform to reality and didn’t get anywhere near its destination. The cost of failure amounted to hundreds of millions in 2018 dollars. But the mistake won’t happen again because the problem has been identified.

Now compare an ideology. The cost of failure in Iraq has amounted to trillions of dollars, but the ideology responsible — neo-conservatism — has not been discarded as dangerously useless.

On the contrary, neo-conservatism still flourishes. That’s because it reached its destination long ago: it got into power, seizing strategic points of American politics, media and academia. For an ideology, conforming to reality can actually be a disadvantage. The palaeo-conservative Pat Buchanan has been right again and again about the errors of American domestic and foreign policy. To neo-conservatives and others who have been wrong again and again, this has merely confirmed Buchanan’s wickedness and cemented his exclusion from power. As I’ve pointed out before: in the Land of Lies, the wilfully blind are king. An ideology can run on lies and still reach its destination.

The destination is power

Indeed, lies and fantasies can be a much more powerful fuel than truth and realism. The modern West has become a Pseudotopia, or Land of Lies, because false ideologies have defeated truthful ones. For example, governments across the West are no longer realistic about human differences. Instead, they deny these differences and insist that all human groups have equal potential. Why, then, do some groups fail to realize their potential? It can only be because they are prevented from realizing it. Racism, sexism and Islamophobia are at work, stifling potential, preventing equality. These hateful prejudices must be hunted down and stamped out.

Such is the ideology of the modern left, intended, so we are told, to reach the destination of equality and justice. In reality, of course, the destination for the left is power. George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) described the process as a satire on communism and the Soviet Union. The pigs promise equality and procure tyranny. Orwell very cleverly summed up their contradictions in “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” We can see the same contradictions in modern leftism. Anti-racists, feminists and LGBTQIA-rights activists claim that they only want equality and justice. But what they’re really after is power and privilege. They want to be “more equal than others.” Read more

Ancient Athens: A Spirited and Nativist Democracy


Pericles, Athenian leader at the city’s zenith

The Persian Empire was driven by a certain logic, certain feedback loops pertaining to domestic conditions and foreign relations, which led to that great state’s steady expansion.[1] The waves of this expansion were finally dashed on the rocks of Greek freedom, embodied in the city-states of Athens and Sparta. Athens and Sparta themselves were each driven by their own logic, their own virtuous circles of power, which defeated the Persian logic in Europe. If Persian power was that of a multinational military monarchy, a culture of empire, Greek power was that of patriotic, fractious little republics, defined by civic freedom.

The particular form of civic freedom and the virtuous circle of power at Sparta were very different however than those at Athens. At Sparta, a rigorous communitarian discipline was maintained by the demands of lordship, the need for the society to be constantly militarily organized to guard against the threat of rebellion by the enslaved Helots. The result was centuries of stability and regional power. At Athens, the virtuous circle of international trade and naval power led to rapid and constant demographic and imperial expansion, resulting in a short-lived empire which almost achieved hegemony in the eastern Mediterranean. Athens also underwent a stunningly creative artistic and philosophical flourishing with few rivals in all human history.

Athens and Sparta seem to embody a recurring dialectic in Western history: between sea-power, commerce, democracy, individualism, and technology on the one hand, and land-power, autarky, hierarchy, community, and discipline on the other.

The verdict of the philosophers and men of the Right has generally been harsh towards Athens: a regime characterized by excessive democracy, individualism, and belly-chasing. Nonetheless, the fact is that Athens was a uniquely dynamic and powerful state, and one which even as a democracy still embodied or honored many wider Hellenic virtues. The political works of Athens’ great lawgivers and statesmen, such as Solon, Cleisthenes, and Pericles, are not without ethnopolitical content. Athenian democracy was founded on family, patriarchy, community, military courage, ancestry, and an intense patriotism. One scholar as gone so far as to argue that the role of ancestry was so pronounced that Athenian democracy was based on an early notion of “racial citizenship.”[2] Read more

Derbyshire vs. MacDonald Revisited

I don’t believe I’m exaggerating when I say that Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique is one of the most important books of our age. Despite this fact, it has garnered remarkably little attention in traditional spheres, particularly academic circles. Of course, the reasons for this are obvious — the book is critical of Jewish behavior, it helps Gentiles understand how Jews are working against Gentile interests, and it shows that Jews control much of the content of academic and media discussion.

At the same time, MacDonald and his works have garnered immense attention from those who are often harmed by Jewish behavior or are excluded from areas of cultural construction, including many in the loosely-defined “Alt-Right.” Further, Prof. MacDonald has been indefatigable in his efforts to spread his views, appearing on countless podcasts and other Internet shows, speaking at conferences, etc. In my estimation, MacDonald is the hands-down intellectual leader of resistance to Jewish attacks on the White race, and in our circles he is honored as such.

Recently, a young man in the academic arena chose to address MacDonald’s work, which has given MacDonald a chance to once again defend his various theses on Jews. The academic is Nathan Cofnas, a graduate student working toward his doctorate in the philosophy of biology at the University of Oxford. (He is not a professor yet, though as a potential graduate of Oxford with a Ph.D.  —  and as a Jew who has published an attack on MacDonald —  his chances of gaining a good tenured teaching position are almost guaranteed.)

Fortunately for us, Spencer Quinn, a prolific writer for Counter-Currents, has ably summarized the debate between MacDonald and Cofnas. See Parts 12, 3 and 4.

This leaves me free to bring back a similar older debate among MacDonald, John Derbyshire, and Joey Kurtzman. Though these debates deserve a revisit based on their own merits, the fact that Cofnas has now revived similar discussions makes previous discussions all the more relevant.

I first wrote about Derbyshire’s opinions of KMAC’s work way back in 2008, then again in 2012. For the purposes of this current piece, I will crib liberally from those original two essays, though the links within have often not survived well.

Derbyshire’s first major piece on MacDonald appeared in the March 10, 2003 issue of The American Conservative under the title “The Marx of the Anti-Semites.” (Editors chose the title, not Derbyshire.)There Derb’s take on the book was mixed, beginning with “The Culture of Critique includes many good things. . . . Kevin MacDonald is working in an important field.” He even validates an important point of MacDonald’s work: “These Jewish-inspired pseudoscientific phenomena that The Culture of Critique is concerned with — Boasian anthropology, psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt School, and so on — were they a net negative for America? Yes, I agree with MacDonald, they were.”

Derbyshire, however, then concludes that “This is, after all, in the dictionary definition of the term, an anti-Semitic book.” What? That’s odd. I suspect I’m not the only reader sensing an unexplained contradiction here. (See MacDonald’s reply.) Read more

The Bestial of British Re-Booted: Whites and Blacks Should Not Mix

“Goldfish marries piranha.” That’s how I would summarize the marriage of the dim red-head Prince Harry to the conniving Meghan Markle. Like many others, I do not think the marriage will last. The Guardian and BBC have been very enthusiastic about it, so you can be sure that it’s bad both for the monarchy and for Britain.

A gigantic lie

After all, their enthusiasm is based on a gigantic lie: that the stale pale nation of Britain is immeasurably enriched by diversity and that non-Whites are our moral and spiritual superiors, having acquired deep reserves of wisdom and virtue in the long centuries of their oppression by Whites. As I pointed out in “The Bestial of British,” the truth is exactly the opposite. Britain is harmed by diversity and non-Whites are much more prone to criminality and psychopathy than Whites.

You can see that in Britain’s many meteor-murders, which is what I call a murder that flashes through the British media and then vanishes forever. The Black teenager Stephen Lawrence, who was murdered by Whites back in 1993, has returned again and again to the headlines, because his death can be used to demonize Whites and sanctify Blacks. Compare the White teenager Mary-Ann Leneghan, who was tortured, raped and murdered with extreme savagery by Blacks in 2006. That was a meteor-murder and she was forgotten long ago by the mainstream. So was the White teenager Kriss Donald, who was murdered with extreme savagery by Pakistani Muslims in 2005.

A laughing acid-thrower

The murders of Mary-Ann Leneghan and Kriss Donald provided vital lessons about non-White savagery and malice. That’s precisely why they are long-forgotten by the mainstream. The British media follow the agenda of the hostile elite, demonizing Whites, sanctifying non-Whites, and celebrating the steady and remorseless destruction of Britain’s traditions and culture. And in the same week as the wedding of “Harry and Meghan,” a far more significant story about Black-White relations was in the headlines. If the races and sexes had been reversed in this other story, the victim would have joined Stephen Lawrence as a permanent fixture in Britain’s political firmament. But the victim was a White male and the attacker was a Black female, so this will become yet another meteor-murder:

Woman found guilty of throwing sulphuric acid at former partner

A woman has been found guilty of an acid attack in Bristol that left her former partner with such terrible injuries that he was driven to euthanasia. Berlinah Wallace [a Black South African], 49, threw sulphuric acid over Mark van Dongen [a White Dutchman], 29, in a fit of jealousy and rage after he began a relationship with another woman. Bristol crown court heard that [in September 2015] Wallace, a former fashion student, hurled acid at Van Dongen, an engineer, as he lay in bed, laughing and taunting him: “If I can’t have you, no one else can.”

Van Dongen’s face and much of his body was severely scarred. The acid burned through 25% of his body surface. He was paralysed from the neck down, lost most of his sight and his lower left leg had to be amputated. He spent more than a year in hospital in Bristol before his family and friends hired a private ambulance to move him to Belgium, where he applied for euthanasia. …

Wallace bought the sulphuric acid — legally — online from Amazon for less than £10. [Mark van Dongen’s father] Kees van Dongen vowed to campaign to make sure the laws around the sale of acid are tightened. Amazon has declined to comment. A spate of acid attacks including the one on Van Dongen has led the government to move to reclassify sulphuric acid. Later this year it will only be possible to legally buy the substance over a certain concentration with a licence. The police’s actions before the attack will be scrutinised. It has emerged that Van Dongen was so worried about Wallace after they split that he contacted the police and an officer gave her a harassment warning. … (Woman found guilty of throwing sulphuric acid at former partner, The Guardian, 17th May 2018)

Berlinah Wallace was found “not guilty” of murder in the trial, but although that may have been legally correct, she was morally responsible for Mark van Dongen’s death. She set out to destroy his life and succeeded. And note this phrase at the end of the story: “A spate of acid attacks.” Why are such barbarous crimes happening so often in twenty-first-century Britain? Well, just like electoral corruption, they represent a triumph of liberalism. Anyone who has read the Sherlock Holmes story “The Adventure of the Illustrious Client” will know that acid-attacks were a problem here in the nineteenth century. Similarly, political cartoons by the great cartoonist James Gillray (1756?–1810) show that electoral corruption was a problem here too. But those problems went away as Britain became a more law-abiding and civilized country. Read more

Review: View from The Right: A Critical Anthology of Contemporary Ideas, Volume I

View from The Right: A Critical Anthology of Contemporary Ideas, Volume I: Heritage and Foundations
Alain de Benoist (Ed.), trans. Robert Lindgren
Arktos, 2017; orig. published, 1977, with an updated preface (2001) by de Benoist

After 40 years, and following translations into Italian and Portuguese (1981), German (1984), and Romanian (1998), we finally have an English translation of Alain de Benoist’s 650-page magnum opus. Vu de Droite: Anthologie critique des idées contemporaines was first published in 1977 when de Benoist’s GRECE (Research and Study Group for European Civilisation) think-tank was at the height of its influence. It took the French political and intellectual worlds by storm, receiving widespread attention in the mainstream press and winning the Grand Essay Prize from l’Académie française in June 1978.

It is little short of remarkable that we should have to wait four decades for an English translation of a text with such critical acclaim and intellectual pedigree. Credit for bringing about the English translation (published in three handsomely designed volumes and with an updated 2001 Preface) is due to Arktos Media, founded in part in 2010 with the goal of bringing the works of de Benoist to an anglophone readership. A final push to ensure translation of Vu de Droite was initiated in 2016, when seventy-three backers contributed a combined total of around $10,000 via kickstarter.com to bring the project to completion. The dedication and generosity of all involved was not in vain. Although we eagerly await the imminent publication of Volumes Two and Three, the first volume (published in late 2017) is an invaluable work in its own right. Intellectually thorough yet written with admirable economy and agility, View from The Right Volume I: Heritage and Foundations is a useful tool, an invaluable point of reference, and a resounding call to action which has lost none of its relevance or vitality in the decades since its first printing.

The central purpose of View from The Right is to break the taboo on the assertion of right-wing ideas and to present clearly defined intellectual positions (or pathways to positions) on a wide range of subjects as they pertain to right-wing thought. In Volume I, these positions pertain to matters of European racial and cultural heritage, and the broader foundations of contemporary right-wing ideologies. The author describes (ix) his intention to “prepare a portrait of the intellectual and cultural landscape of the moment, to establish the state of affairs, to signal the tendencies, to open the pathways and provide benchmarks to aid (and incite) the task of thinking in a world that is already in the process of considerable change.” For the most part, this effort takes the structural form of powerful and succinct essay summaries of the state of current mainstream scholarship on a number of crucial and fascinating topics. These summaries are then supplemented with commentary from de Benoist and developed still further in his very generous footnotes. Translator Robert Lindgren also deftly assists the reader by occasionally including his own useful commentary on the text, along with a number of very helpful translations and updates of de Benoist’s scholarly citations. Read more

Review of Thomas Goodrich’s “Summer, 1945—Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate”

Sometimes a book comes along that changes the way we think.  Sometimes a book comes along that changes the way we act.  Sometimes a book comes along  that changes the way we think and the way we act. Such a book was Hellstorm—The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944–1947. That masterpiece by Thomas Goodrich changed forever not only how we would view World War Two, but it changed how we would view the world itself. For the first time since it happened, because of one bold and breath-taking book, the scales fell from our eyes and we were finally able to see free and unfettered what the abomination called World War Two was really all about. Swept forever into a dark, dirty corner was the filth and disease of seventy years of Jewish propaganda, seventy years of Jewish lies about the so-called “Good War” and the so-called “Greatest Generation,” seventy years of Jewish mendacity about who was bad and who was good. Suddenly, overnight, replacing those lies was an honest, impartial, unbiased, but driving, relentless, and utterly merciless account of the fate that befell Germany in 1945.

As incredible as Hellstorm was, is, and will always remain, we now know it was only half the story. While the bloody obscenity that was World War Two was being acted out against a largely helpless German population by as evil a cast of creatures as ever haunted any hell anywhere, a similar horror show was taking place on the far side of the globe. And what is revealed in Tom Goodrich’s latest book, Summer, 1945—Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate, is a story so savage and sadistic as to numb the senses.

While some of the events described in Summer, 1945 will be familiar to readers of Hellstorm, many will not. Clearly, the author did a vast amount of new research for this new book since much material is previously unknown, especially regarding the contributions of the “Greatest Generation” to its already ghastly list of war crimes against Germany.   In fact, what was previously revealed about the Americans in Hellstorm, horrific as it was at the time, was only the faintest foretaste of what was to come in Summer, 1945.  For example. . . .

Massive, monstrous, staggering as was the scale of Red Army rape in Germany, it now seems clear that the Americans were not far behind, if behind they were at all.  Simply put: No one in control cared.  Far from trying to halt the nonstop sexual attacks that their men committed against helpless German females, US officers, like Soviet officers, either ignored them, laughed at them, or actively encouraged them. Upon entering their communities, American officers forced Germans to write the age and sex of all occupants in their homes, then ordered the lists nailed to doors. “The results are not difficult to imagine,” said one horrified priest from a village where women and children were soon staggering to the local hospital after the predictable  sexual assaults commenced.  Some US generals even blamed the victims themselves for their own gang rape when they dared leave their homes to beg for food.  Lt. General Edwin Clarke  went  further when he announced that the thousands of rape reports in his area were nothing more than a conspiracy by die-hard Nazis to belittle and embarrass his well-behaved and totally innocent troops. Clarke apparently believed  that the hundreds of thousands of beaten, bruised and bleeding women and children were all liars with self-inflicted sex wounds.  Also, to drive home German defeat, it was noted that GIs were being ordered by their “political officers” to make the gang rapes as public as possible.  Although such brutal attacks were already common on streets and sidewalks, in schools and shops, an audience of family members was the preferred crowd for gang rape.  Forcing German men to watch was also favored by the Americans, just as it was by their communist comrades. Read more