Ideas Kill
According to the mainstream narrative, politics based on the interests of a specific people (a.k.a. “nationalism) is dangerous because it leads to ethnic hatred and war. Instead, we are told, politics should be based on certain universal ideals, such as freedom or equality.
The problem with this kind of idealistic politics is that it treats people like a malleable, generic mass that exists solely to enact whichever ideals it aims towards. The ideals are the subject of politics, and actual real-life people become mere objects.
This is how millions of Iraqis had to die so that Iraqis could be “free”. It is how tens of millions of Soviet Citizens had to die to be “equal.” It is how Germans can be replaced in their own homeland in the name of “tolerance”. An idea can live on without any one specific people, but a specific people cannot live on without its people.
Nationalism is the primacy of a specific people over ideas. Liberalism and communism are the reverse. It is, therefore, no surprise that one is more violent than the other. The former requires actual hatred towards another people in order for it to become violent, whereas the latter merely requires good intentions.
First, Exist.
Modern liberals typically do not believe in objective values. They deny a transcendent realm where such objective values could exist independent of human consciousness. Metaphysics is considered pure speculation, and only the material world is real. This is why liberal ethics is based solely around pleasure and pain, which can be objectively measured as responses to stimuli.
Despite their denial of values actually existing, liberals casually claim to “believe” in values such as human rights. What they actually mean is that they subjectively think such values and rights should exist. In this subjectivist view of ethics values are created in the minds of conscious beings, and as such are merely a matter of personal taste (which itself is not the result of free will but of the deterministic forces of nature).
Let us assume the liberal position is correct. In this view, values are nothing more than human constructs. Therefore, their existence depends on human consciousness. Without humans existing who can create values, there is nothing of value. Existence, then, is the value that reigns over all other values. And, paradoxically, because it follows à priori from a paradigm of subjective values, existence truly is an objective value. In fact, it is worth everything.
Civic Nationalism is Totalitarianism
All nation states must decide on their membership criteria, which can be materialistic or idealistic in nature.
A materialistic criterion for citizenship can be whether the person in question will increase the country’s GDP. This is the most popular political argument for immigration. We are told that we need a constant stream of immigrants because “the economy needs more workers”. In this neoliberal view, immigrants (and people in general) are viewed as resources to be mined, and their worth is determined by their economic utility. The unspoken implication of this system is that less productive natives should be deported, if only it were politically feasible.
There are three types of idealistic criteria for citizenship.
The first is humanitarian. In this view, Africans must become Germans so that they can have better lives. The purpose of the state, then, is not to protect and improve the lives of its members, but of its nonmembers.
The second view, preferred by civic nationalists, is idealistic in a very narrow sense: whoever believes in “our values” can be German – whereas the primary value is that anyone can be a German who believes that anyone can be German who believes in this primary German value. It is a circular “value” system that is based solely on unrestricted entry, without placing any specifically German demands on German citizenship. The state only insists that citizens adhere to that very same ideology and never conceive of a more organic and authentic way in which one could be German. It is analogous to a family in which you are loved, not for being who you are, but for believing the right things. This type of state must constantly monitor its citizens’ thinking for ideological purity, and will treat those who do not as extremist outcasts. It is totalitarian nature, but at least the people advocating it will not be called racists.
The third view is identitarian. Membership is determined by your fixed identity as a member of an extended family (“nation”), no matter what your beliefs are. Political arguments are treated as disagreements among brothers and sisters, and your status as a family member is not called into question. The same applies to the treatment of other nations. An identitarian state does not, for example, condemn Iran for holding other beliefs, but instead respects it as a state for and by Iranians.
People typically respect other peoples’ identities more than their views. Therefore, where states are built upon a certain view of the world, freedom dies.
Categories of Politics
Left
liberalism
gender neutral
fluidity
feeling
world
indulgence
embrace weakness
consuming
promiscuity
guile
subversion
utopia
Man above God
nurture
adjust your standards
trust your education
race is a social construct
beauty is subjective
subjective opinion
everyone is equal
jealousy
destruction
deceit
virtue signalling
words
opportunism
deconstruct
friends
struggle to change
rights of the perpetrator
license
love of strangers
vulgar
feeling good
degeneracy
subjective
relative
self-actualization
individual as social unit
strengthen marginal cultures
unrestricted entry, restricted exit
salvation through compassion
shape human nature
oneness
price
human resources
reside
mobility
transaction
branding
appearance
shame
reputation
nihilism
cynicism
hubris
scientism
facts
knowledge
optionality
control
universalism
generic
tolerance as an act of indifference
chaos
equality by law
difference as a problem
overcome nature
synthetic
explicit institutions
rights
future
profane
sex as act of lust
individuality
narcissism
psyche
global
utility
lack of diversity
generic humanity
intolerant of intolerance
Right
traditionalism
masculine & feminine
polarity
reason
nation
abstention
overcome weakness
producing
chastity
fitness
domination
reality
God above Man
nature
meet the standards
trust your instincts
society is a social construct
beauty is objective
objective truth
everyone is different
aspiration
creation
honesty
virtue
action
honor
uphold
family
struggle against entropy
rights of the victim
freedom
love of one’s own
sublime
being good
decency
objective
absolute
self-improvement
family as social unit
strengthen core cultures
restricted entry, unrestricted exit
salvation through faith and family
accept human nature
distinctness
value
workers
live
rootedness
relationship
identity
authenticity
guilt
conscience
meaning
hope
pride
science
wisdom
understanding
commitment
trust
particularism
specific
tolerance as an act of mercy
order
hierarchy by nature
difference as an asset
embrace nature
organic
implicit institutions
duty
eternity
sacred
sex as act of creation
personality
confidence
spirit
local
inherent value
cohesion
ethnic diversity
tolerant of intolerance
The Great Software Experiment
Body and mind are like hardware and software. Our worldview provides the framework that allows us to interpret the signals we receive from the physical world, much like an operating system allows a computer to interpret bits and bytes. Just like computers, humans have been carefully engineered – either through testing of random mutations (evolution) or by an omniscient God.
If we do not believe in God, then human hardware and software are the result of trial and error.
At this point in history, the only operating system proven to “work” on ethnic European hardware is Christianity. Despite all its flaws, it provided the spiritual and mental framework in which our genetic ancestors were able to survive, build Western Civilisation and dominate the world. In business terms, there is a “proof of concept” for Christianity.
“The world belongs to those who show up.”
Atheism, on the other hand, not only lacks a track record of success. There is positive evidence that atheism is genetically self-defeating. As Michael Blume from the University of Jena puts it, “Most societies or communities that have espoused atheistic beliefs have not survived more than a century (…) What I found was the complete lack of a single case of a secular population, community or movement that would just manage to retain replacement level.”
Furthermore, without a solid religious framework there is no operating system in place that can make sense of the infinite streams of data that the modern world provides. As a result, atheists are more likely to believe in everything (gullible) or nothing (nihilist). Gullibility leads to exploitation by manipulators, whereas nihilism makes people cynical, depressed and suicidal. Christianity provides just enough meaning and guidance to prevent despair and degeneracy, but remains vague and abstract enough to allow for critical self-examination and science.
Far from being irriational due to its “unscientific” nature, running Christian software in your brain is highly rational precisely within a strictly evolutionary framework where all that matters is genetic survival.
1984
I recently learnt that it has become common in Sweden for people to refer to men as “pregnant” when in fact it is their wife or girlfriend that is pregnant.
“Sven can´t make it to the dinner tonight because he is pregnant.” – This is literally what modern Swedes say.
“If you can control a man’s thinking, you do not have to worry about his actions.”
Carter G. Woodson
Imagine calling your husband pregnant and thinking you are free. Language control is the final and most powerful form of control. If you can make people believe lies about the most basic facts of existence, imagine what else you can make them believe?
Idiots Abroad
If you think Western men are superior…
… think again.
Perhaps the problem isn’t where they come from, but where they are. Among their own or in other people’s lands, far away from judgement.
Liberalism and Income Inequality
Income inequality has massively risen in the West over the past three decades. Almost all productivity gains since 1980 have been captured by the capitalist class.
What happened?
- “Liberation” of women: Throughout history, men were expected to work in order to provide for their wives and children. This changed with the “sexual revolution” when women were liberated from their family responsibilities in order to instead invest their time and energy into producing stuff as cogs in the corporate machine. Today, labor force participation rates are almost the same for women as they are for men. Basic economics dictates that the doubling of the labor force puts massive downward pressure on wages.
- Mass immigration: The same argument as above applies. Millions of new immigrant workers necessarily lower the wages of native workers. Only if the newcomers significantly boost productivity is it ever possible for mass immigration to increase average wages, and that would require them to introduce new skills and technologies to the economy which is very unlikely in the case of third world immigration.
- Outsourcing: The liberalisation of international trade has made it easy for companies to produce under third world and sell at first world conditions. This is sustainable only as long as the first world can keep up demand through a combination of debt, money printing (which the US can still get away with as the leading reserve currency) and brute geopolitical force. In the short run, workers in the West either lose their jobs or their wages stagnate, but at least they can buy cheap plastic crap from China. In the long run, they will have neither.
Liberalism is poison to the working class. The only people that materially benefit from liberal economic and social policies are asset-owning capitalists. Of course this is true to varying degrees. A self-employed electrician is not likely to benefit from a flood of women and immigrants entering the work force, nor can he outsource anything. Apple and Walmart, on the other hand, do benefit from these liberal policies, and they make sure to sell them to us (via corporate controlled media and academia) as humanitarian measures that promote freedom for the weak and oppressed.
Profits are the difference between revenue and costs. When revenue can no longer be increased through global expansion, corporations can only increase profits by lowering labor costs (salaries). How convenient that liberalism does just that!
Approved Identities
“I don´t care about my roots, I am an individual.” -> “So progressive!”
“I am not merely an individual, I am German.” -> “OMG, you´re literally a Nazi!”
“I am not merely German, I am European.” -> “So progressive!”
“I am not merely European, I am white.” -> “OMG, you´re literally a Nazi!”
“I am not merely white, I am a global citizen.” -> “WOW, stunning and brave and so progressive!”