Protected minorities

The point I was trying to make in my previous post and in a related discussion is that during my first internet experience in 2006-2008, for the group of Alice Miller’s fans the subject of child abuse in the Muslim world was taboo. These pseudo-followers of Miller had in their minds a protected minority—Muslims—even when these Sub-Saharan Africans practice genital mutilation on pubescent girls on a massive scale.

The next internet group I became active was the counter-jihad blogsites, where I was active from the latest months of 2008 to the beginning of 2010. These people too had a protected minority in their little minds: Jews. They would not argue with me even when I typed long excerpts from an academic Jew that demonstrated that the Jewish problem was not a gentile hallucination at all.

Finally, when I arrived to white nationalism after distancing myself from Jew-blind counter-jihadists I expected that this later movement wouldn’t have protected minorities. I was wrong. Many of them still have a protected minority that, like the other minorities, is deleterious to our interests as Guillaume Faye knows: homosexuals.

The fact that Tom Sunic and Robert Stark have interviewed Counter-Currents’ philosophical catamite James O’Meara without asking him tough questions during their respective interviews, proves that at least some of today’s nationalists don’t have the moral caliber to say what the Nazis said about faggotry, or even the first American incarnation of white nationalism one or two generations ago.

That this “new generation” is fond of what my beloved Nazis called “degenerate music” means that they have a rotten soul compared to the one which flourished not so long ago.

On the electric guitar and more

“I apologize as it’s not my purpose to browbeat you, but your promotion of said ‘music’ is prima facie evidence that the West is defunct.” —Iranian for Aryans

Music is the external side of the soul. If a culture’s soul is rotten, the external side of that culture must be rotten too.

Together with sexual mores and architecture, music has been my litmus test that shows that many white nationalists have not really rejected the rottenness of our world.

In another thread the illustrious Roger said:

You are right that jazz requires some skill from the performer. What it does not require, however, is discipline from either the composer or the performer. It is inherently transient because of its improvisational character—if not for audio recording technology, alleged classics like Kind of Blue would have no posterity. The only thing that most jazz musicians bother to compose is what they refer to as the head, whilst the rest [is] improvised. Their structure is a binary A-B-A-B-A-B-A form: A represents the head, and B represents the improvisational passages led by each of the soloists. It is about showmanship and impulsiveness. That might be impressive for unruly teenagers and permanent adolescents, but it is not serious music. The mere form and structure of jazz prevents it from integrating any thoughtful counterpoint and orchestration. The harmony tends to be very basic and trite.

As for heavy metal, I don’t deny that people like Steve Vai and John Petrucci are capable performers with their electric guitars. Their problem is that they adore a bastardised conception of music, and they seem unable to perform without using artificial amplification and/or sound effects (which automatically close the instrument off to subtle dynamics and articulation). The electric guitar is one of the worst inventions of the 20th Century. Its steel strings create a sound which is not at all conducive to interesting polyphonic music (unlike, for instance, the classical guitar music of Fernando Sor). You will seldom hear an unaccompanied electric guitar, and if you do, it will be no more appealing to the ears than the accompaniment of an overbearing drum kit, a bass guitar, a screechy “singer”, and perhaps a keyboard synthesiser.

It might also be added that jazz and rock music are both highly repetitive. The song you have posted is a good example. Not only are the lyrics juvenile and unpoetic, “sung” in a lacklustre fashion, but the lauded guitar solo is unmusical and (as expected) affected by irritating wah-wah sound effects. James O’Meara might enjoy it, because it is filled with bent notes and whammy bar movements, defying the twelve-tone equal temperament which he so opposes. It certainly does not require the same discipline from the performer as, for example, Joachim’s cadenza for Brahms’ violin concerto. There is no attention to ornamentation (e.g. staccato, legato, trills), harmony or dynamics, and there is no real craft involved. Joachim’s cadenza has all of those things, and it requires a very high level of skill to perform all of the double and triple stops—and that’s just the cadenza! It is the least interesting part of the concerto, in my view, as I find Brahms’ orchestration far more compelling and ingenious than any violin solo. The third movement is more exhilarating than anything one can find in heavy metal, regardless of how much the New Right wishes to think of it as “Viking” music (as if!).

You also wrote:

We can not listen to Beethoven all day, we also need a more basic entree to lighten our daily burden, which is “folk music”. Which has to be reinvented after a total extermination process since the 40’ties.

This is wrong on several counts. Starting with your last point, it is not true that folk music needs to be “reinvented”. I rather like Breton and Scottish folk music, and I can testify that these are two very strong living traditions. If you visit Lorient during the first two weeks of August in any given year, you will have a hard time making it down a street without hearing at least one busker (or a group of them) performing traditional music. People flock in from all over France and Europe for the “interceltique” festival in Lorient, and the enthusiasm on the streets is a stark reminder of Old Europe (there’s rarely a black face to be seen, either).

I love it, and I find the music of the Breton bagads delightful. The sound has a wonderful sense of discipline, and the better ones have a strict regimentation of the different sections of the band. It is well-suited for outdoor events in general, and street parades in particular. This is just one example to show that the folk traditions in most European countries have not suffered a “total extermination”, contrary to your claim. Most people are disconnected from them in the West (many favouring the modernist music you offer as an alternative), but they still exist, and enough people take an active interest for competitions, festivals, sessions and concerts to be regularly staged. The strong rhythm of this folk music is designed to complement traditional dance forms like the hornpipe, the an dro, the hanter dro, the gavotte and the reel, incidentally (this is also a function of much classical music). Jazz dancing is a different thing altogether, as is the frenzied idiocy of rock crowds. To compare the two is laughable. One of them serves the cause of decency, and the other serves the cause of debauchery.

As for the first point, nobody is suggesting that we ought to “listen to Beethoven all day”. There is so much variation in the Western classical canon that it would take at least a decade to properly absorb the full catalogues of all the major composers—and that’s without even mentioning the all of the lesser-known composers of merit (neglected or unesteemed composers still have more value than slimy modernist music). Beethoven is the acme of late Classical music, but there is obviously more to it than him alone. Frequently played favourites in my house include Dowland, Buxtehude, Bach, Monteverdi, Josquin, Dufay, Byrd, Haydn, Elgar, Schubert, Rachmaninoff and Dvořák, with many others in between. It is not hard for an attentive listener to hear the distinctions between each one of these composers, nor to understand what it is that unites them as part of the same broad musical tradition.

I think it comes down to this question: are we to behave as animals or as men? Their music appeals to the body because of the primacy of its rhythm (and, in the case of rock music, its deliberate, artificial loudness). Western music, on the other hand, appeals to the soul. This is something that you appear to be contemptuous of with your comments about “repression” (a favourite word of the feminists). I do not hold out much hope of convincing you to reject the sensualism which underlies your assumptions about the purpose of music.

(Source: here)

“Give me the Old Right!”

I have told to myself in hundreds of soliloquies that white nationalists just cannot have it both ways. They cannot love pop music (which must not be confused with the legitimate folkloric music of the diverse western nations) and classical music at the same time. I have told myself in hundreds of self-conversations that that is like, say, for Captain Georg von Trapp trying to raise a traditional family while, at the same time, indulging himself in secret escapades to gay clubs (something that, of course, never happened in either the 1959 musical or the famous 1965 film, The Sound of Music).

The following are excerpts of some of the recent posts by a blogger known as Roger at Iranian for Aryans’ blogsite. (Warning: James O’Meara must never be confused with another contributor of Counter-Currents Publishing, Michael O’Meara).




Iranian for Aryans said:

It is with much felicity that I welcome Roger to this website. He has commented, in both a virile and eloquent manner, on this site with a sure knowledge of Western music. Perhaps more importantly, he has shown a dogmatic aversion to that which parades—and is paraded—as Western music (e.g., rock, hard rock, heavy metal, et al) in White Nationalist circles.

My wish is to provide a niche here, on this website, for those who are appalled, aghast, and disgusted by the asininity, vacuity, loathsomeness, and degeneracy of that which is promoted as a current and past manifestation of Western Culture by the ignoramuses of the “Right Wing”.

Thus, prepare yourselves for a hateful passion (!) towards all ugly music that has corrupted, and continues to corrupt, Western peoples and is promoted by the know-nothings of the “(bowel) movement” as part of “real” Western heritage.

Roger said…

[James] O’Meara seems to have two primary objectives: to promote homosexuality and to promote degenerate music, both under the banner of “traditionalism”. These are the two recurring leitmotifs in his articles. Greg Johnson and Michael Polignano are evidently sympathetic to his crusade, or else they would not have published a compendium of his articles in book form. That aside, here is a slight elaboration of the earlier points […].

Then we have his false claim that Berg and Webern were Jews. Dodecaphonic serialism was invented by a Jew, but serious websites should not be pretending that the Second Viennese School was a wholly Jewish affair. It wasn’t. The collaboration of goyim should not be glossed over; instead, the enthusiasm of Berg and Webern for Schoenberg’s new music should be emphasised, because it is similar to the promotion of degenerate music by some white nationalists.

Far from being a great critic of the Viennese serialists, O’Meara shares their active scorn for the “bourgeois” Western tradition and seeks an alternative to it. He thinks himself clever for criticising the twelve-tone tuning system, but he does not provide us with any convincing reason to oppose it, nor does he justify his assertion that “the possibilities of expression are defective” in the Western tonal system (this assertion is self-evidently fatuous to anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the Western canon). I’m not sure what it is that separates his ideal world of “pitiless hordes of adolescent warriors in rainbow thongs” from the grotty cabarets of the Weimar Republic.

If he cannot get basic facts straight, he should not be pontificating to us about music—especially if the primary source of his diatribe against Western music is Alain Daniélou, a homosexual who rejected Western civilisation in favour of Indian Hinduism.

O’Meara would know all about that, being a homosexual himself. If this is what the “New Right” is all about, give me the Old Right!

Johnson and O’Meara are just wrong

A formal response to Greg Johnson (editor) and James O’Meara (author) about the latter’s new book defending homosexuality appears now in the new Appendix to The West’s Darkest Hour.

My article is entitled “On classic pederasty,” or “Pace Johnson and O’Meara, the Greco-Roman ‘lover-beloved’ institution was not ‘gay’ in the modern sense of the word.”

A question

One of the things that disappoints me in today’s white nationalist movement is that they are unwilling to pronounce value judgments about homosexuality. When they interview overt homos, just as Robert Stark recently interviewed James O’Meara (who must never be confused with Michael O’Meara), the questions are always respectful, as if Stark believes that the kind of behavior that James promotes is perfectly okay.

Greg Johnson will soon publish James’s book The Homo and the Negro for Counter-Currents (CC).

Johnson also included an essay of James in another book, the compilation of CC essays that has been released today and that contains no essay coming from the pen of the one who, in my opinion, was the best thinker among the writers that Johnson published in 2009-2011: Michael O’Meara.

My question:

Do you think that people like James are an asset to the movement? In Stark’s interview last week James mentioned his “wild boys,” the “heavy metal music” he loves, “drug induced mysticism” and said that all of this is compatible with “Aryan culture.” He also mentioned “androgyny”, “hermaphrodites,” “sexual rituals,” and that “all these are roots of Aryan culture.” James even spoke of “drugs creating Western culture” and that “the great opponent of that is the Jew,” who has hated “the horrible faggotry of paganism.”

(See my formal refutation of these sorts of claims in Gitone’s magic.)

In the comments section I’ve already mentioned James’ blog, Where the Wild Boys Are, with the arresting subtitle “Aryan Futurism, Heavy Metal Entheogenic Mysticism, and Pitiless Hordes of Adolescent Warriors in Rainbow Thongs.” Following next is what I already said at that comments section of my blog, some syntax corrected:

Who are the “warriors in rainbow thongs”? When James linked Johnson’s interview in his blog, he used a pic of a transvestite under the title “Shameless Public Posturing.” I guess James is trying to say that there’s nothing wrong with such posturing.

I consider myself fairly tolerant toward homosexuality. But tolerance is restricted to the homos who live discreet lives and keep their preferences in the privacy of their homes. Overt transvestite behavior crosses the line. And not only transvestism. Consider this:

James’ blog features the below image at the top of his blog (just as I feature the face of Botticelli’s Venus above). Note the blood/semen—whatever—running through the hairy legs, presumably of a male with rainbow butts.

The Wild Boys is a novel about the violent world of homosexual renegade boys. It was authored by William Burroughs, a well-known writer who despite marrying a Jewess he picked up boys in steam baths and moved in a circle of homosexuals and runaways. Something analogous without the overt sexuality can be said about the grotesque cheering that, in the commentariat section of CC, Jef Costello got for his review of Fight Club: another nihilistic novel written by another homosexual.

Am I living in a different cultural world from the one that white nationalists inhabit? Like the monocausalists who cannot see that Christian axiology is involved in the darkest hour of our civilization, nationalists seem to be clueless about the fact that some of them are part of the cultural movement that is driving our civilization straight toward the abyss.

This is the pic advertised in James’ “About Me” section of his blog. Does this look like a white nationalist to you?

Even a child could easily grasp the idea that nationalism means a nation for whites with hetero men enjoying the privilege to woo young females (see the first Max Parrish pic that I advertise in this blog) and found large families: an institution that, in the recent Stark interview, James seems to abhor. Yes: both James and I suffered from abusive Catholic upbringing. But unlike me James doesn’t seem to have come out in one piece after such upbringing (cf. my essay, “A woman chasing after her revenge” to see what do I mean).

Last February I watched a documentary of the Hassidic Jews in New York. Guess what? They forbid among themselves the sort of heavy metal music and “drug induced mysticism” that James so heartily approves; the kind of nihilistic films and novels that are reviewed at CC, and even the internet: the only way to convince all of their women to get married, according to the rabbi interviewed in the documentary.

Hitler and the Nazis saw it clearly too. They forbade non-closet, overt homosexuality and degenerate music. And male bonding among the Teutons was basically heterosexual. They ended up forming families—nothing of the sort found in the novels of outright degenerates like William Burroughs.

Fleeing Gomorrah

Recently Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents published still another apologia of rock, this one written under the pen of James J. O’Meara (who must never be confused with Michael O’Meara, whose essays I’ve been republishing recently). Obviously this not only corroborates that Johnson likes rock, but that he believes that this sort of music is, or could be, healthy inspiration for white nationalists (the same happened to Kevin Alfred Strom; cf. my previous entry).

Nothing can be farthest from the truth! As I said in recent posts (here, here and here), together with sexual mores music is the most obvious acid test to see whether someone subscribes the decadent culture that has been killing whites since the Second World War. In the case of sexual mores, this claim can be demonstrated objectively (I’ll soon be reproducing shorter, more readable excerpts of Roger Devlin’s work rather than those long articles). Unfortunately, in the case of music this can only be appreciated subjectively.

For every être supérieur virtually all rock is trash, and the fact that some of the most sophisticated nationalists promote this decadent music has moved me, now definitively, to part ways from those who object that whites are committing cultural suicide, blaming instead the Jews for all our problems. For one thing: pop music for mass consumption can only degrade our souls, and the fact that white nationalists, the vanguard to defend their race, promote this trash can only mean that even whites conscious of the Jewish Question are committing cultural suicide.

Together with the 9/11 conspiratorial myths that they embrace, the nationalists’ musical tastes demonstrate that their degenerate cities badly need to be purified under Heaven’s fire. Biblical wrath is good for white sinners (cf. Michael O’Meara’s essay that I reproduced yesterday, which I rebaptized as “Most Americans will have trouble feeding themselves”). If my interpretation of the human soul is correct, musically and sexually the uncontaminated nationalist—does that entity exist?—should feel utterly alienated in today’s culture. Conversely, by liking and promoting heavy rock and black metal nationalists are part of the suicidal culture that I call Gomorrah. This is my open letter to white nationalists:

Who among you feels extreme loathsomeness, Jeremiah-like abomination toward the pop music composed after the 1950s for mass-market consumption? Who feels like Lot in Gomorrah? Am I alone fleeing the city with my two daughters?