Kindred nations

Some choice autism by Mycroft (emphasis mine):

Scripture distinguishes between kindred nations, who can gain citizenship after 3 generations, and alien nations, who won’t be citizens even after 10 generations. After looking into the origins of the USA and the British Peoples, I can say that the Boers are a kindred nation. In times ahead, Americans will be fleeing TO them, because it will be much worse here.

How are the Boers a kindred nation? We are all the offspring of Doggerland, genetically close. Norway, Denmark, Western Germany (Saxony), Holland, Frisia, Normandy, Brittany… these are all proper (and historic) members of the British group of nations. The Angles, Saxons and Jutes were Danes. The Frisians and Dutch often crossed the channel, for 300 years Frisia was underwater so they lived in England.

Bavarians are not kindred. Most Spaniards, excepting the remnant of the Visigoths, are not kindred.

Julias Caesar labelled the British people the “Belgae”. Common language, common genetics. Yes, they are distinct nations. Even brothers must live in separate houses, and have separate wives and families. But they are still brothers, closer to each other than cousins, definitely closer to each other than aliens.

HBDChick and Jayman have a lot of good information about the European peoples.

-Mycroft Jones
Comment on Generation Clocktower

I looked it up and found Deuteronomy 23, which also especially bans the children of Canaanite miscegenists (descendants of forbidden marriages). One quibble is that the “kindred” nations includes Egyptians specifically due to their historical charity toward Israel, not due to shared blood.

We are also taking entry into the assembly of the Lord as being interchangeable with citizenship but this is likely a justifiable substitution (this may require quite a bit of sperging). I’m still not a dominionist because we’re allowed to eat pork and our fidelity to the kingdom of heaven is only concerned with earthly things like good parenting, statesmanship, and politics insofar as, ultimately, these are expressions of that fidelity. But I do believe Christians ought to internalize the principles of the Mosaic law, like sanitary practices to avoid e.g. salmonella and HIV, and practice the spirit of the law to the letter (so to speak).

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Don’t trust the recent taint length study

There’s a study I’m seeing pop up in various right-wing places about how taint length correlates with testosterone and sperm count. For reference, here it is at le chateau.

Look…biology is weird, and for all I know this study is correct, but if your first impression is not “this is a psyop to discredit via disinfo and humiliation”, then you don’t understand your enemy. How hard is it to imagine a couple of coasties and roasties in a conference room laughing about how they’re going to manipulate your machismo into bragging about the size of your taint? I’m a highly credible professional physiognomist in a white jacket—I show people my credentials and they’re like, “we can’t believe these credentials, they’re so great, it’s incredible”— and a son of Esau who carries the spirit of Enkudu with a moral compass that always points troo North. And speaking as such an impeccable authority, I’m telling you…just wait a minute on this one.

Like global warming, it could well be true in a local or real sense. It’s the sort of thing that’s plausible in physiognomy and, honestly, my intuition is saying it’s legit. So prima facie it’s more likely true than not. But like global warming, there is another, very plausible explanation for where this push is coming from. So just hold off before you go bragging about how K-selected Republicans have giant taints, the real story will become clear over time.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

On cooperation

Guest post from Fox on the Discord, with the intention of clarifying a simple but important idea:

Regarding the previous discussion about alt-vox, alt-lite, 1488ers, alt-petersons:

Common goals of 1488ers, WNs and vox:
– Keep a native supermajority in european countries, and a white super majority in countries like america, canada, australia.
– decisions should be made on a national level, not by international/global institutions
– Keep/install social norms according to which: men should strive towards being masculine, women should strive towards being feminine,
a traditional family structure is desired, sexual deviance are recognized as such and not glorified

Common ideals of 1488ers, WNs, vox and peterson:
– men should strive towards being masculine, women should strive towards being feminine, some sexual deviances are recognized as such and not glorified
– man needs meaning, something “higher” (the three parties don’t agree on what this “something” is)

So the themes are:
– nationalism instead of globalism (both on an ethnic and on a political level)
– traditional family structure and polarity between man and women instead of modern perversions like feminism.
– some kind of “religion” instead of materialism

I think a principle everyone who wants to cooperate with others should internalize is: Do not criticize unless it is absolutely necessary. Most topics are not relevant for the common project, most points of contention are not important enough to risk alienating your companion. And regarding the important points on topics that are relevant – they aren’t relevant in most situations, either. So only start to criticize when there is a very, very good reason to do so (which includes that alternatives have been exhausted). Once you do that, you’ll be able to bond with other people (even over the internet), and out of these bonds, projects and friendships can arise. But this requires that you stop spreading and provoking negativity in your interactions with others.

If a companion is an asshole towards you, how should you respond? Don’t respond. Take the damage his words produce, do not try to “defend” yourself or “fight back”. Instead, gauge whether this is an exception and try to assess whether cooperating with this individual is still possible and worth the trouble. And if it is not, then just end the cooperation.

H/T TRS for comix:

Criticism is useful and necessary in the context of an irresponsible party giving negative feedback to a responsible party, where the expectation is that both will benefit from the improvement. But it automatically designates the critic as dependent and therefore subordinate, like a woman, child, consumer, citizen, or prisoner. But the general rule of power, as expressed by British aristocrats, is “never complain, never explain.” Criticism = complaining + explaining, whether constructive or otherwise.

“Never criticize except where necessary, and then always in private”. This principle comes from at least four sources that I know of: leadership, statecraft, training, and seduction. I break this rule a lot but you’ll note I’m also on the low end of aptitude for the skills of leadership, statecraft, training, and seduction (and would not have attempted them in a normal, less gay situation). See the Holm Center Training Manual chapter on Feedback for principles and concepts as applied to training, specifically. You can find it as a PDF online. For a deeper understanding, see Appraisal Theory. Or just watch the show Evangelion, which (on the psychological level) is about the interaction of Appraisal Theory and Freudian attachment theory.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

A white pill

H/T Boneflour, click through to soak up the details.

NY Town Recognizes That Demography Is Destiny: “Chester Buying Property ‘To Keep The Hasidic Out’”
VDARE

The below article about the town of Chester, New York, which is a little over 60 miles north of New York City, is actually an inspirational reminder that people can wake up to demographic threats.

[…]

There is so much truth in that story that you might be astonished it actually got published. The details of the public reaction and the political response are also stunning. Instead of proclaiming how “diverse” this will make Chester, the public correctly recognizes that an ethnic minority can enter into a new area and quickly take over political control if left unchecked. What is even more shocking is that the politicians seem to actually be listening to their voters instead of lecturing them on being more “tolerant” and “inclusive.” As a matter of fact, the political leadership appears to be taking immediate steps to halt any further advancements by the Hasidic community.

The situation involving the Hasidic community of Kiryas Joel in that region of New York might help to explain the rapid public and political reaction to the news that Hasidic Jews are moving into the town en masse. People who live there are aware of how the closely knit Hasidic Jewish community vote as a bloc and reproduce at a much higher rate than the surrounding population which ends up giving them a demographic edge. This inevitably results in the Hasidic Jews increasing their political control and actually just recently led to them carving their own town out of another and creating a strange type of ethno-municipality in upstate New York. [Call It Splitsville, N.Y.: Hasidic Enclave to Get Its Own Town, by Lisa Foderaro, The New York Times, November 19, 2017]

What this teaches us is that the biggest “red-pill” is witnessing something firsthand. These people have learned that demographics are destiny and they’re actually doing something about it.

The Infogalactic page for this town suggests nothing special about them except perhaps to confirm that milk is white supremacy. Other than a shockingly low rate of single motherhood (suggesting Belmont morality, though paired with Fishtown median incomes) and a slightly whiter population than the national average, it could be a million other towns across the nation filled to the brim with cucks. So VDARE’s conclusion stands: ordinary people really can wake up to this shit and take political action at the local level.

This culture war will not be won in the streets, or in the mountains, but rather at the dinner table, in HOAs, at PTA meetings, in zoning commissions, and yes, in digital distribution of superversive comic books and subversive talk radio. The next twenty-six years are going to feel like a marathon…but then, that’s why they call it a “race”.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Generation Clocktower goes silent (for once)

Vox is doing good work by repeating himself over and over on this point:

The entire USA is gradually going the way of those ruined cities and towns. Western civilization is in full retreat; there is literally nowhere it is expanding. While the Alt-Right is inevitable, the survival of white America as a distinct identity group is not. There will absolutely be a collection of sovereign and rival ethnostates in the territory that was once the USA, there is no longer any question about that. The only question is if there will be any white, or American, ethnostates among them, or if white Americans will go the way of many an American Indian tribe before them, eliminated through genetic adulteration and failure to sufficiently reproduce.

The long retreat

Typically this sort of post would precipitate a discussion about how one lone gunslinger with a high-powered rifle and an angle grinder could finish what Charles Whitman started. But I noted there was exactly one LARP in the first comment, which was quickly shot down, and the usual suspects were conspicuously absent from the thread. That’s a serious culture shift in a very short time enforced by clear, repetitive communication from an authority figure. You can’t solve massive societal problems when everyone around you is convinced the cycle of history will solve them automatically if we all just sit back in our armchairs, crack a beer, and lol. So there might still be a tiny glimmer of hope for this prepubescent nation.

It would be better if the Boomers all got cancer but it’s enough if they can be repressed.

Unfortunately, the cosmopolitan’s curse predicts that Vox will fuck this up by openly displaying his contempt for American whites, and tell them all to kill themselves. This is how he treated the white South Africans recently and, for all that they will probably benefit from a spanking, you can’t build white refugias out of contempt. Keeping the example of the Visigoths in mind as a cautionary tale, the correct white nationalist response is to throw them a life preserver (provided they aren’t going to drown us in the meantime). Then, stick them in an apartment well across town for a while to see if, like a recovering alcoholic brother, they can grow up and learn from their mistakes. (All forms of eustress require a refractory period, ego death especially.) You don’t do this because they deserve it, or because it’s entirely safe, or because you expect a return on investment, you do it because they’re extended family.

If it were me, I’d resettle them in Arizona. They don’t have any historical baggage about Hispanics and they still need to learn how boundaries work.

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Separation of action and consequence

If you think about it, the “separation of ownership and control” is such a general phenomenon that it can be applied to every failing institution in the West: the breakdown of the family, the externalization of risk by corporations onto their wage slaves, and the absolute irresponsibility necessary to advance one’s career in any field. It is the antithesis of Extreme Ownership and represents a mass movement toward externalization of responsibility and internalization of charitable feeling.

You can define a person’s in-group, out-group, and their “Other” by how they respond to the happiness and suffering of others:

-Seeing your in-group happy makes you happy, seeing your in-group suffer makes you suffer.
-Seeing your out-group happy makes you feel nothing, seeing your out-group suffer makes you feel nothing.
-Seeing your Other happy makes you suffer, seeing your Other suffer makes you happy.

With the rise of narcissism in the Western population, what we’re seeing is everyone’s in-group collapsing like a black hole to include only themselves. Even highly agreeable people have become so solipsistic that other people are viewed merely as instruments of their own imagination, such that they don’t even observe that the objects of their pathological altruism are suffering from it. They merely assume, in keeping with philosophical solipsism, that an inner feeling of goodwill and warmth toward the universe is identical to world peace and utopia.

As I’ve explained before, externalization of consequences is functionally equivalent to disingenuousness—both its strength and weakness are to insulate the disingenuous person from negative feedback. It is fundamentally a low-testosterone life strategy because eustress is dependent on high testosterone.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Immigration as managerial revolution

Please recall Steve Sailer’s favorite analogy for citizenship, the interests of shareholders:

By “citizenism,” I mean that I believe Americans should be biased in favor of the welfare of our current fellow citizens over that of the six billion foreigners.

Let me describe citizenism using a business analogy. When I was getting an MBA many years ago, I was the favorite of an acerbic old Corporate Finance professor because I could be counted on to blurt out in class all the stupid misconceptions to which students are prone.

One day he asked: “If you were running a publicly traded company, would it be acceptable for you to create new stock and sell it for less than it was worth?”

“Sure,” I confidently announced. “Our duty is to maximize our stockholders’ wealth, and while selling the stock for less than its worth would harm our current shareholders, it would benefit our new shareholders who buy the underpriced stock, so it all comes out in the wash. Right?”

“Wrong!” He thundered. “Your obligation is to your current stockholders, not to somebody who might buy the stock in the future.”

That same logic applies to the valuable right of being an American citizen and living in America.

Steve Sailer
Sailer vs. Taylor, Round II —”Citizenism” vs. White Nationalism

If your first instinct is to argue against civic nationalism, you may want to click through and read the apologetics first.

The “nation state” has two important parts, nation and state, with nation being the modifier and state being the substance (although static mores make for a very platonic sort of substance). By report of 4GW theorists, the nation state is in crisis due to the accessibility of massive peer-to-peer information technology to the “shareholders”, so that information warfare is no longer monopolized by the culture warriors of the 1960s and their spiritual progeny (think “defense distributed”). But in the meantime, the state is quite intent on its own survival by replacing its shareholders with low-effort voters and shutting down the internet. (No white population can out-normie the Hispanics, no matter how much Game of Thrones they watch.)

With that conflict between state actors (aka “executives”) and civil shareholders in mind, here’s an interesting connection by the modern Tocquesville, philosopher James Burnham:

This development is a decisive phase of the managerial revolution. The so-­called “separation of ownership and control,” paralleling the growth of the great public corporations of modern times, has, of course, been a widely recognized phenomenon. A decade ago it was the principal subject of the widely read book, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, by Berle and Means. In this book, the authors showed that the economy of the United States was dominated by the two hundred largest nonbanking corporations (they did not discuss the relations of these to financial houses); and, second, that the majority of these corporations were no longer, in practice, controlled by their nominal legal owners (that is, stockholders holding in their names a majority of the shares of stock).

They divided these corporations according to “types of control.” In a few, control was exercised by a single individual (more often, single family) who was legal owner of all or a majority of the stock; in others, by individuals or groups which owned not a majority but a substantial percentage of the stock. Most, however (in 1929, 65% of these 200 corporations with 80% of the total assets), they decided were what they called, significantly enough, “management­-controlled:” By “management­controlled,” as they explained, they meant that the management (executives) of these companies, though owning only minor percentages of the shares of their corporations, were in actuality self­perpetuating, in control of the policies and the boards of directors of the companies and able to manipulate at will, through proxies, majority votes of the nominal owners, the shareholders. The American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation is the classic example of “management­-control.” Though briefly, Berle and Means also took up the extremely important point that in the nature of the case there were sources of frequent conflict between the interests of the “control group” (most often, the management) and the legal owners. This is apparent enough to anyone who recalls the economic events of the past generation. Many books have been written about the difficulties of the run­-of­-the­-mine common stockholders, often as a result of the policies of the “control group” of “their own” company. Wealth, power, and even other possible interests (such as maximum industrial efficiency) of the control group quite naturally do not often coincide with maximum dividends and security for the common stockholders.

The Managerial Revolution
Pg. 55

In my opinion, the actual managerial class fits Burnham’s theoretical definition less well than my archetypal description of alchemists in Overwatch Theory.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment