Alex on Kevin

The great questions of the time will not be resolved by speeches and majority decisions—that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849—but by iron and blood.

Otto Von Bismarck

No one has yet commented on my previous Linder post. Anyway, these are other comments of the same thread:


Alex Linder said:

Kevin MacDonald confuses politics with propriety. Always on his lips are appropriate, productive, responsible and the rest of the middle-class buzzwords. He is a conservative without realizing it. Conservatism is not where serious change comes from, as NS and Golden Dawn show. In fact, organized conservatism is the sworn enemy of fundamental change. GD lumps conservatives with communists as The System it fights. American WN were wise to do the same, as I have written repeatedly and explained in my strategy essay.

Originally Posted by Roger:

One minute, MacDonald says [in Jim Giles’ radio interview] that Linder’s pro-extermination stance is “crazy” and “wrong”. The next, he implies that if Linder’s tactic does succeed (though he thinks it won’t), he will have no objections to it. “If it works, it works”. So, he would support it even though he thinks it is “crazy” and “wrong”.

This is the same person who stated in an interview with Tom Sunic that he would support a deal with the Jews if it would help get rid of the Muslims from Europe, when the two of them were discussing Geert Wilders.

I like his books [MacDonald’s], but he has no political principles.

He just can’t publicly say he has no problem with jews being genocided. Anyone who knows the truth about the jews would have no problem pressing a button and making them disappear.


My two cents for this blog:

Too bad that in the next sentence Alex added: “The hololcaust is in fact a big lie.”

See what I say in the last pages of a book that will appear under the seal of my favorite publishing house. In my humble opinion, the next step toward a final solution is simply acknowledging David Irving as our best historian on the Reich, in addition to the axiological revolution that the movement needs for shacking off from ourselves Neo-Christian scruples. Only thus we will be able for a real historical fly (which won’t happen until the dollar crashes of course).

New edition

product_thumbnail.php

Note of June 2017: This book is no longer downloadable for free.

• The previous PDF of my compilation of articles included software errors during the transfer of Word to Lulu’s PDF, especially near the footnotes. These have been corrected.

• Michael Colhaze’s lyric piece, “Lords of the Ring,” has been removed from this new edition as per Colhaze’s own request.

• I added in its place two short articles: “On Hitler” by Ciaran, a pugnacious blogger who used to comment on The Occidental Observer, and still another piece by the Brazilian Larry Mars, “AA approach to the one-drop rule.”

• There are also comparatively minor modifications like adding photos of Dominique Venner beside the Cathedral of Notre Dame de Paris and a detail of Jacques-Louis David’s Oath of the Horatii on the very last page, etc.

I will try to get a hard-copy of Maxfield Parrish’s Poster Book that contains an illustration of Lady Violet so that I may scan it and add it to the cover, greatly improving the current cover pic. (Incidentally, the manuscript is still in the editorial process of a much more respectable publishing house; when it becomes available from there I’ll let my visitors know.)

Published in: on May 29, 2014 at 4:56 pm  Comments Off on New edition  

Linder responds

linderSurfing the internet in search of insightful thoughts by Vance Stubbs on the VNN forum (and I did find this one: “You can’t have a revolution until people are willing to put anger ahead of their comfort”) I causally hit this 2012 reply of Alex Linder to Greg Johnson:

Originally posted by Johnson:

Alex: Men are merely motivated by greed and fear, on your account.
 
Linder responded:

Did I say those were their only motivations? I said, or implied, fear is their main motivation. Fear of sticking out, in part, which is what happens when you embrace the right politics prematurely. People are PC out of fear more than out of positive belief it is a moral or good thing. Your politics fails to account for this most basic psychological fact, and so you and MacDonald and others are endlessly reaching out for these imaginary respectable middle-class people who just need to hear our arguments to be convinced.

You know what, bourgeois people aren’t stupid. But they are self-interested and, if not cowardly, then philistines—people only interested in causes that will net them personally some advantage, whether money or status. If you and MacDonald could deflate your egos, you might realize that people like Hitler already figured all this out. But like the bourgeois selfish you’re trying to reach, you only want to do what you enjoy—not what actually needs to be done. Your kind is basically irrelevant, and that’s why you never discuss Golden Dawn. That party’s experience directly contradicts every last assertion you make about the way your notional New Right will effect change.

Johnson quote: Morality is for kiddies, you say.

Morality is the name men give to their preferences. Or their self interest. Even if they believe it strongly enough to act against interest—very rare in this world—it still doesn’t change the fact their good and bad are merely labels for their own preferences. Morality is not absolute, no matter who asserts otherwise. If you’d spent more of your youth reading someone wise men like Twain, Bierce and Mencken instead of a fool like Swedenborg, you’d know that kind of thing.

Johnson quote: There is a pattern here: vulgarity, cynicism, nihilism—not to mention malignant narcissism and casual dishonesty and calamitously bad judgment of character. Nothing good can come from you.

I’m the cynical one? If I were cynical I would write tastefully and appropriately, that I might attract those unlike me. If I were cynical, I’d praise the South to the skies, and talk up their Book of books. If I were nihilist, I would stick to no principles. Or perhaps, following your example, I would proclaim one set of principles during the week, and the opposite on Sunday.

Then I would cynically say to myself, well, a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. That’s just how it is. Or I would publicly announce I’m a new fascist, building on the same proud legacy of old fascists that I’m also, by the way, simultaneously, and publicly, rejecting!… And then I would go to others’ sites and blame them for cynicism and nihilism? While not allowing them to criticize me at my own. [Johnson is good at that!]

Well, little semen-sucker, maybe your self-interested sybaritic syncretism is sans sense and, well, just plain silly.

__________________

Source: here.

Beyond OD vs. CC

trainspottersIn this comment at Counter-Currents (CC) Trainspotter did not find anything wrong with the American Gomorrhaites known as “Bronies” that even the ultra-liberal Wikipedia has a section criticizing them.

To understand the whole discussion that involves several exchanges between the two pro-white blogs CC and Occidental Dissent (OD), the reader would also have to visit the OD thread where it is discussed how the most featured writer on CC posted an article that contained descriptions of interracial sex between young males (screenshot: here).

In the past, OD’s admin has made false remarks against both, Trainspotter and me. But unlike Trains I don’t automatically side OD’s nemesis in the racial underworld: I am principle-oriented and dislike feuds.

Trains always stroke me as a commonsensical, reasonable voice in the movement. But what he said earlier this year at CC only demonstrates that, like virtually all American nationalists, he fails to see the fundamental etiologies of Western and American malaise (of which both hetero and homo Gomorrahean degeneracy is only a symptom).

See this article by Hajo Liaucius: a European who, precisely because he has always lived in Russia, has a detached perspective on American white nationalism like no intellectual I am aware of. Together with other articles of The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour, Liaucius’ piece shows that American white nationalists are blind about the primary and secondary factors in their nation’s decline: capitalism and their parents’ religion. (Jewish depredations are only a tertiary infection, but precisely because self-righteous American racialists are completely blind they miserably fall into “monocausalism.”)

This thesis of my compilation—that soon will be available in printed form—, of course, goes far beyond the pro-homo / anti-homo debate between OD and CC, and still has to be discussed in this site’s threads.

Published in: on May 27, 2014 at 11:47 am  Comments (15)  

Introduction

Note of June, 2017: This old edition is now unavailable from Lulu Inc., or even in PDF form.

product_thumbnailThe present collection of my miscellaneous writings is so diverse that I decided simply to order it by size. The first article, “The Return of Quetzalcoatl” is actually a translation from Spanish of a long chapter within Hojas Susurrantes, a translation which comprises more than half of the present book. The rest, much shorter articles also ordered by size, are edited versions of original texts that I authored and that originally appeared in the blogsite The West’s Darkest Hour. I am not including the dates of the original drafts because the editing process, sometimes after years of writing them, moved me to modify the ideological content of some articles. For all practical purposes the publishing date of most articles is 2014. The exception of course is my Quetzalcoatl, a study on child abuse that I finished in 2007, a few years before I became familiar with the pro-white literature. Since the Quetzalcoatl is a “book” within a larger book that still has to be translated, here I include brief notes inside brackets to explain some sentences.

The compilation in Day of Wrath is a sister companion to my longer compilation of several pro-white authors and bloggers in The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour. The free, online PDFs of both texts is meant to be downloaded in the homely computers of those who fear that the anti-white regimes will eventually censor the internet.

Published in: on May 20, 2014 at 10:19 pm  Comments (10)  

Unschooling

The history of the drive for compulsory schooling is not guided by altruism, but by a desire to coerce the population into a mold desired by the Establishment. Western governments should not be permitted to remove children forcibly from their homes, with or without the parents’ consent. Nietzsche wrote: “There are no educators. As a thinker, one should speak only of self-education.” In other words, schooling only confuses teaching with true learning; or to use a contemporary popular metaphor, schooling is The Matrix.

Unschooling is a philosophy that rejects compulsory school as a primary means for learning. Unschoolers learn through their natural life experiences including household responsibilities, personal interests and curiosity, internships and work experience, travel, elective classes, family, mentors, social interaction and especially books: the true university. Unschooling encourages good reading initiated by the children themselves, provided the parents’ home contains a traditional library.

While courses may occasionally be taken, unschooling questions the usefulness of standard curricula, conventional grading methods, and other features of kiddie brainwashing.

The term “unschooling” was coined in the 1970s and used by educator John Caldwell Holt. While often considered a subset of homeschooling, unschoolers may be as philosophically separate from other homeschoolers as they are from advocates of conventional schooling. The fact is that so-called homeschooling is still within The Matrix, and while homeschooling has been subject to widespread public debate, in the totalitarian system that is exterminating us little media attention has been given to unschooling.

Holt asserts that youths should have the right to control and direct their own learning, and that the current compulsory schooling system violates a basic fundamental right of humans: the right to decide what enters our minds.

Unplugging your kids from The Matrix means a total repudiation of the viruses designed for the white mind at school. As a personal vignette let me say that by the end of the last century I was studying for a degree at The Open University of Manchester, where they did not ask me any High School diploma whatsoever.

But I don’t necessarily agree with everything that Holt says. For instance, only if National Socialism is established in some western states would I approve the indoctrination of children at school.

That would be a healthy education of course. Not the anti-White, anti-West brainwashing that is omnipresent in the current compulsory schooling system.

Published in: on May 18, 2014 at 1:48 pm  Comments (13)  

The death of the dollar

I [Koos Jansen] had the privilege to meet with Jim Rickards, while he was in The Netherlands for one day, to do an interview about his new book The Death of Money. Accompanied by friend (and author of the book The Big Reset) Willem Middelkoop we met at the hotel were Jim was staying and for one and a half hours we fired questions at him. Below you can read the highlights of the conversation:

 

March 12, 2014

Koos Jansen: Do you think there will be a collapse in the worldwide monetary system, including chaos, social unrest and bank failures because all policy makers will do too little too late?

Jim Rickards: My new book, The Death of Money, is about the demise of the dollar. A world wide monetary collapse and the collapse of the dollar are the same thing. The dollar is the keystone of the system today, if the world loses confidence in the dollar the whole system collapses. Could there be disruptions, social unrest and other problems before the monetary system collapses? I think we’re seeing them already, in the Ukraine, in the Crimea and the Chinese navy sending vessels to these islands they are in disputes with near Japan. US monetary policy was also a contributing factor to protests in the Arab Spring’s early stages. We’re seeing signs happening already and that will continue.

I do expect that policy makers will continue to pursue the wrong policies, they won’t make the structural adjustments that are needed; unemployment remains high, growth remains weak and deflation continues to have us in its grip. These are all things that will lead to social instability, income and wealth inequality and we could see a lot of stresses before the collapse of the monetary system.

Central banks and governments have made it clear that the big banks can’t fail. That’s what they stated, all these too big to fail banks will not be allowed to fail. Now what are the consequences once they’ve said that? It invites reckless, parasitic and exploitative behaviour on behalf of the bankers. This allows them to grow too large which destabilizes the system. I don’t think we’ll see big bank failures along the way, but big banks will fail as part of the collapse. It’s the policy of too big to fail that leads to the dysfunction of the system that will lead to the collapse.

Jim-R-interview

Koos Jansen: Will the coming collapse of the monetary system be more severe than any prior one?

Jim Rickards: The point I’m making in the book is that the international monetary system has collapsed three times in the last one hundred year. In 1914, 1939 and 1971. So it does happen, it’s not that unusual. When it happens is not the end of the world. What it means is that the major trading powers, the financial powers, come together and reset the system. There is actually a name for this, it’s “the rules of the game”. That’s not a phrase I made up, it goes back one hundred years. So the major powers will rewrite the rules of the game, but here’s the problem. The last crisis we had the Fed reliquify the world. There were tens of trillions of dollars in swap lines with the ECB, they guaranteed all the bank deposits in the US and they guaranteed all the money market funds in the US. It did prevent things from getting worse, but the problem is the Fed raised their own balance from $800 billion to $4 trillion after the liquidity crisis. We had a liquidity crisis in late 2008, but we haven’t had one in the last five years. So now what happens if we have a liquidity crisis tomorrow? They’ve got no more dry powder; they can’t go to $12 trillion.

The next crisis will be bigger than the last one, and it will be bigger than the Fed because they already trashed their own balance sheet. Then the only balance sheet left is the IMF’s.

Koos Jansen: How will the power be distributed in Asia after the monetary reset?

Jim Rickards: It will be based on gold.

Willem Middelkoop: I know wealthy Americans taking measures like getting a second passport and moving their money offshore. Do you see this happening in your surroundings?

Jim Rickards: Yes, I see it all the time. There are billionaires who build vaults in their own houses because they don’t trust Brinks.

Willem Middelkoop: What does that tell you?

Jim Rickards: It tells me that they see what I see, in some ways, but not willing to talk about it. They’re ready for the collapse but want to milk the system in the meantime.

 

_____________________

For Rickards’ CV see here. The whole interview can be read here.

Published in: on May 9, 2014 at 11:36 am  Comments (16)  

Not even one…

If I remember correctly, it was Mister Deutsch the one who commented in this blog that no single wealthy white, or any head of a Western state, is doing absolutely anything to defend his race from extinction.

If you scroll down some posts here you’ll see that a few months ago I was complaining that my Mac broke down, and that I could only resume blogging through the permanent loan of a laptop (not by a pro-white advocate by the way).

Well, since I could not afford the thousand dollars that a Mac store was charging me, I allowed the Mexican technician who for years has worked with my family to deliver my Mac to a friend of him who purportedly promised to fix it for half the price.

That was three months ago… It is now clear that the guy stole my money, my broken Mac and the information in it! This happened because I could not afford the fees of a proper repairing shop.

More than blaming the Mexicans who swindled me I blame wealthy whites. I don’t have in mind those who have made contributions to the WDH, only the really wealthy whites reluctant to sponsor the movement.

But forget my blog, my books (presently I am working on a PDF of my personal essays) or this catastrophe in Mexico. Think instead of one of the best minds in the United States, Michael O’Meara, whom I have quoted extensively in this site. How is it possible that he found himself doing blue-collar jobs in the US simply because nobody was sponsoring him after he was fired by the academia (for maintaining politically-incorrect views)?

And Michael is not alone. It really seems that there is in fact no single rich man on the entire Earth who substantially sponsors the best minds in the movement. That’s precisely why I don’t believe that Jews are the primary cause of Western malaise—it is the whites themselves the ones who have lost an elemental lust for life.

rockwell_with_pipe

For those who don’t visit the addenda of this site, I urge them to do a careful reading this Sunday of my March post, “Greatest American ever,” in which hatnote I said: “In his autobiography This Time The World, Commander George Lincoln Rockwell, who some consider ‘the greatest American that has ever lived,’ describes his experiences dealing with pathetic conservatives in the 1950s.”

The article shows that the difference between a National Socialist and a conservative is that a NS man is genuinely concerned about his race, while a conservative is only concerned about his money. The anecdotes that Rockwell uses in his autobiography are fascinating, a real treat: a must read to understand our present tragedy.

Published in: on May 4, 2014 at 11:19 am  Comments (2)