Hunter hunts Ben

“Racism” became stigmatized in the United States between 1938 and 1945. American racial attitudes, particularly in the Northern states, softened during this period. It became dogma that blacks were equal to Whites.

Benjamin Garland blames it all on the Jews. Why were millions of Jews let into the United States in the first place though? Why were they allowed to hijack our institutions? Why were they allowed to become so culturally, politically and economically powerful? Why were they praised by George Washington who said that the United States “gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance”?

The answer to all of the questions and more is one that Benjamin Garland refuses to entertain: it is because American Nationalism is civic nationalism. That’s why slavery was abolished. That’s why blacks were given citizenship. That’s why women were given the right to vote. That’s why universal manhood suffrage triumphed. That’s why husbands lost authority over their wives and children. That’s why Jews were accepted and treated as equal citizens from the beginning. That’s why traditional morality and religion has collapsed into this orgy of nihilism and consumerism.

We’ve simply taken the axioms and logic of American Nationalism to greater and greater extremes and we are living with the consequences.

(Read the full article on Ben Garland: here.)

Published in: on April 2, 2018 at 6:01 pm  Comments (25)  

25 Comments

  1. “Racism” became stigmatized in the United States between 1938 and 1945. American racial attitudes, particularly in the Northern states, softened during this period. It became dogma that blacks were equal to Whites.

    It became law the blacks were equal to whites much earlier, with the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments in the aftermath of the Civil War; and even earlier in those (mostly) northern states that allowed blacks citizenship and the vote prior to the War.

    Benjamin Garland blames it all on the Jews. Why were millions of Jews let into the United States in the first place though? Why were they allowed to hijack our institutions? Why were they allowed to become so culturally, politically and economically powerful? Why were they praised by George Washington who said that the United States “gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance”?

    Some good questions, but one even better: Why does Hunter not see that in a Christian land in which one particular Jew is hailed as God, it’s not strange the Jews have attained such power?

    The answer to all of the questions and more is one that Benjamin Garland refuses to entertain: it is because American Nationalism is civic nationalism. That’s why slavery was abolished. That’s why blacks were given citizenship. That’s why women were given the right to vote. That’s why universal manhood suffrage triumphed. That’s why husbands lost authority over their wives and children. That’s why Jews were accepted and treated as equal citizens from the beginning. That’s why traditional morality and religion has collapsed into this orgy of nihilism and consumerism.

    Largely correct, but not all of this is due to civic nationalism. For example, husbands losing authority over their wives and children has more to do with the “progress” of technology. If scientific birth control methods had never been developed, the sexual revolution wouldn’t have been possible, and feminism would have remained at the suffragette stage, a pale shadow of what it has now become. Kept barefoot and pregnant, women would still be dependent upon men, as they have been for almost all of human history. Also, if the technocratic welfare state had never been developed, there would be no alternative source of income for women to turn to, so there would be no escape from that dependence.

    Religion had already been collapsing for some time as a side effect of advances in scientific understanding. The process arguably was started in more recent times by such men as Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus, who together set forward a scientific vision of the universe as a machine, one that could keeping whirring along without any help from God. This quickly gave rise to Deism, the philosophical idea that God may have created the universe, but now has nothing further to do with running its day-to-day affairs. But if God no longer intervenes in everyday life, what good is he? A God who can’t or won’t intervene in the running of the universe according to the laws of physics is, for all practical purposes, the same as no God at all. Why pray to such an impotent God? Civic nationalism has very little, if anything, to do with the decline in prestige of religion.

    • I simply cannot understand such a thing as Transhumanism. There are thousands of Hominids out there who envision a future where any Human can have its conscience “uploaded” into a robot. There reason for wanting a future like this is so “there will be no suffering, no war, no sickness, no death.”

      But a future like this is a disturbing one when you think about it for more than a minute. Everyone will truly be equal, no matter their Race or gender, and on top of this, nobody will have anything to strive for: We will just be metal thoughts in metal bodies. What is the point in a world like that? Soon after an Earth like this comes into fruition, we will see no point in the animals, and in all of nature.

      The whole world will become a high-tech scrapyard in the name of progress. That is what the Enlightenment wanted for the world. And this is something which stems from Judeo-Christian values.

      • Transhumanists are crazy, including Guillaume Faye.

      • “Everyone will truly be equal, no matter their Race or gender…”

        A completely artificial reality will have replaced Nature. It’s the Biblical vision come true, because in the Bible, Nature is the domain of Satan, full of temptations (Luke 4:1-5; John 12:31). Nature is an adversary, to be subdued by man (Genesis 1:28). Equality is the goal (Galatians 3:28).

        This leveling effect is why Christianity is such an excellent ideology for a technological society.

        “Soon after an Earth like this comes into fruition, we will see no point in the animals, and in all of nature.”

        The 1972 movie “Silent Running” depicted this.

        The hell of it is though, in a Darwinist reality, there is no alternative. “Progress” is forced, because if you don’t do it, someone else will, and then they will gain an advantage over you. For example, Putin has recently said that whichever country masters AI will rule the world, and he is likely correct. All of the white man’s worldly triumphs have been due to his superior techniques — the ensemble of techniques whereby he gets from the world what he wants, and reshapes it however he wants, which taken together we can call the global technological system.

      • It’s money, Mammon worship, the ultimate culprit, as behind tech lies gold over blood policies. These are three fundamental texts of this site, that have appeared in old or forthcoming versions of the book I compiled:

        https://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/civilisations-heroic-materialism/

        https://chechar.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/wagners-wisdom/

        https://chechar.wordpress.com/2017/09/20/revaluation-of-values/

      • “It’s money, Mammon worship, the ultimate culprit, as behind tech lies gold over blood policies.”

        Nothing lies behind the technological system. It goes where it has to, with whatever technique is more efficient. As I previously mentioned, efficiency was the reason both Alexander and the Roman Empire didn’t base their expansion on blood purity. If they had been obsessed with blood purity, they would have exterminated all the peoples they conquered rather than incorporating them into their system. It would have caused them all sorts of problems, Plutarch says this in his De Fortuna Alexandri:

        For Alexander did not follow Aristotle’s advice to treat the Greeks as if he were their leader, and other peoples as if he were their master; to have regard for the Greeks as for friends and kindred, but to conduct himself toward other peoples as though they were plants or animals; for to do so would have been to cumber his leadership with numerous battles and banishments and festering seditions.

        So for efficiency’s sake he adopted assimilation as his technique instead of extermination. The gold he got from selling slaves and concubines from conquered populations was another bonus, one that gave him more power. Further, his choice was forced, because if he didn’t use these methods, someone else would have, and then they would have been able to acquire the power he disdained, and defeat him.

        As a thought experiment, I agree that we can indeed imagine a world where someone values blood purity more than power, but then — unsurprisingly — they lose out in competition for power. Arguably, this is why the Third Reich didn’t succeed. If Hitler had put less stock in blood purity, and more in “Jewish physics”, then perhaps it would have been Germany instead of the USA that first developed the atom bomb.

        But the problem is, no one can really foresee where the technological system is headed. Nobody directs it. It’s like a train rushing headlong into darkness. Phenomena such as the computer consciousness represented by transhumanism or AI were entirely unforeseen developments until very recently; as unexpected as was the development of the A-bomb at the start of WWII. Further, if you are a determinist, as a scientific view of reality requires, then it follows that whatever happened had to happen. Inferior techniques are ruthlessly discarded by the system, just as, in nature, species lose out to more efficient species in competition for survival. The idea that you (or anyone else) can take over the development of technology and direct it in any direction you wish is just mistaken, an illusion propped up by the culturally Christian idea of free will.

      • Did you read any of the articles I linked above?

  2. Cesar, in case you are interested, I also found this video here:

    7 minutes in, this little idiot says “it was White Nationalism that defeated Hitler’s bizarre Aryanist Race cult”.

    How long until that Empire State Building-sized meteor hits Earth?

    • I sure as fuck hope it’s soon. These utter fucking fools delude themselves into believing that the American man of the forties was somehow better than he was today when in reality the average white American man of that era was a fanatical protestant with moderate views on race (even in much of the south this tended to be the case) and a penchant for tormenting his children with Christian doctrine.
      Racialism in NS Germany was far closer to reality than any of the outlandish American classism masquerading as “racism”- that’s for sure.
      Every American soldier who met his fate at the end of Axis guns during that war deserved far worse than what he got. That war sealed the fate of the Americans and Anglo Saxons.
      In a sane world they’d be known as the most reviled race traitors in all of history.

      • There’s a fairly good chance Americans and Anglo-Saxons will vanish from Earth while other White nations survive. The situation for White survival in the USA and Britain is difficult to say the least and both nations could be doomed.

    • I think what we’re really dealing with here is not just a Jewish Problem but a human problem. The average human prefers lies to truth. Humans deserve everything they get and indeed they deserve the Jews they’ve got. I can’t stand my species and I find the thought that one day all humans will be extinct to be consoling. That will solve all our problems. No humans, no problems. And hopefully no crappy afterlife where I have to spend time with my idiotic species.

      • If you really think that, you’ll love my forthcoming ¿Me ayudarás?
         
         
         
         

    • Context: I heard a news article that claimed that a meteor about the same size as the Empire State Building is headed toward Earth. It may pass Earth, but if the Governments think it will hit the Planet, they will use a sort of space laser to redirect the meteor’s route.

      Upon coming across the article’s Headline, I felt a surge of excitement come across me immediately. Most people will feel fear, because most people think they are important.

      I felt quite unhappy when I read about their little Death Star. If the White Race continues on the path that it is on, then the meteor is deserved. Of course, I do not believe that the meteor has been sent by God to exact terrible vengeance, but I do think that the meteor in question could not have showed up at a better time.

      It would be a shame that so many non-human animals will have to die though, when it should only really be the Humans, but as the creatures of the Mesozoic were evaporated, so should us of the Cenozoic. If the Universe never cared about those creatures, why should we be any different?

      I began to have this little fantasy after reading the article, of breaking into a System facility, and getting my hands on all their nukes. Then I… Guess: Sent the entire world into a nuclear winter. I would make sure that only few Whites survive, if that should be possible. I found this all strange when I thought about it, because I am not a “suicidal” person.

      However, if our Race improves itself, then we are too important for that meteor to exact any damage.

      @Joseph Walsh

      What you say about the Afterlife is funny, and I can understand it fully well. However, I would hate to miss the opportunity to spend thousands of years with a harem of pubescent Aryan girls. There is no other member of my species that I would spend time with in my Happy Place, least of all my own family. Hopefully there are some puppies as well :)

  3. Seems that must not have read my original essay that this is a response to, or you would’ve recognized Hunter’s strawman of claiming I “blame it all on the Jews.”

    Far from doing that, I wrote the following about our Jewish problem:

    “That doesn’t mean that we deny having problems of our own, or that Jewish subversion didn’t require already existing flaws in our society. It means that we recognize that a distinct racial enemy has infiltrated every level of our society and has demonstrably – in many cases admittedly – remolded it and reinterpreted our history to suit his own ends.

    Even if Jews aren’t the original sickness that is killing our race (maybe that is our individualist nature – who knows), no honest person can deny that they have accelerated it to a frightening degree, and are the ones found blocking the way toward any solution.”

    I also allude to there being a case against Christianity for our racial decline, but you side with the Christian who spends all his time attacking non-Southern Nationalist pro-white Americans (the majority of the Alt-Right) because he is butthurt about the Civil War and wants to pretend that the South had the race thing all figured out (they didn’t – far from it) if it weren’t us damn Yankees mucking it all up.

    Look: we want to win, and to win we need to have a broad appeal (and by that I don’t cucking or toning down our message, I mean being strategic in our approach). We’re not going to get very far with Americans by attacking America – that’s a nonstarter – and there is propaganda value in regard to rallying people to a cause by having a clearly defined enemy to point at – which is the Jew (I know you’ve read the chapters on propaganda in Mein Kampf).

    • Oops, looks like I missed a couple words:

      Seems that *you* must not

      by that I don’t *mean* cucking

    • Your ‘original essay’? Are you Ben Garland?

      • Yes, it posted my name as ‘admin’ I guess because I have a wordpress blog and was logged in to it

      • Welcome to this forum Ben.

        So you are not a Christian? Andrew Anglin, who sees no CP (Christian problem) seems to lean toward the POV that Wallace has been criticising.

        > ‘We’re not going to get very far with Americans by attacking America’.

        But what if America is guilty of the Judaization of the States? A form of Calvinist Xtianity (and here even Xtian Wallace is right) plus capitalism = the mess we see now.

        Are you familiar with Michael O’Meara’s writings about the US? He used to publish his stuff on Counter-Currents and focused on Mammon worship as a fundamental cause.

  4. “Did you read any of the articles I linked above?”

    That’s what I was responding to. Your third link is a wish list, basically what you would like to see if you were in charge of the technological system. But you aren’t. Nobody is. Let’s take one of your aspirations:

    Race-suicide, birth control values must be transvalued to Absolute will to biological fertility

    I’ve already covered part of this above in discussing blood purity, and how it loses out in competition for power if placed as a highest value. If you never obtain power, then you won’t be able to implement any of these changes, however worthy But beyond this, fertility isn’t an unqualified good either. Populations multiplying beyond the ability of an environment to sustain them will experience a Malthusian crash. Eventually, a form of birth control would be imposed, either by nature or by human beings on themselves. There’s no choice. Avoiding the having of unwanted children that couldn’t be supported was a prime motivation for the development of “the pill” and a prominent rationalization for safe medical abortion. As I’ve already mentioned though, these techniques led to other very undesirable consequences as a side effect, namely feminism and destruction of male power over women. Furthermore, nobody foresaw either these side effects, or the other consequence of white demographic eclipse. All were unintended consequences of a technological effort to solve a human problem. Progress!

    We might be able to imagine a world where there are unlimited resources and population can expand forever, and we might be able to dream about a world where only good things result from technological innovation, and there are never any disastrous unintended consequences. But that’s not the world we live in.

    • Did you also read ‘Wagner’s wisdom’? Although the author is a monocausalist (curiously, he asked MacDonald to remove all of his articles), his critique of the ‘One Ring’ was spot on.

      What you say reminds me the non-fictional writings of Arthur C. Clarke about technology, and also the comic books I loved as a child: Magnus, Robot Fighter, illustrated by the same artist of the Tarzan comic strip.

      I disagree with what you say. If Spartans or Romans had the hindsight of the writers of Who We Are and March of the Titans and knew that the One Ring was toxic, they would have probably wiped out the conquered non-whites.

      In our times it’s different. We have to play the game, otherwise the Chinese would beat the West in the marketplace. But the solution, of course, will be a Turner Diaries scenario: using all nukes, bio-and chemical weapons to erase the Enemy, even if it’s double-edged.

      • “If Spartans or Romans had the hindsight …”

        That’s just it. The future always comes unexpected; the application of technique always yields unexpected results. That’s what’s toxic.

      • The moral of the story: during and after the Apocalypse let’s try to destroy the Ring of Power and go back to the bucolic Shire…

        https://chechar.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/the-scouring-of-the-shire/

  5. Re: ‘bucolic Shire’ – stay in the 2nd painting below (cf. Plato’s Republic); don’t fall into the temptation of the Ring.

    The Course of Empire is a five-part series of paintings created by Thomas Cole in 1833-1836. It reflected popular American sentiments of the times when many saw pastoralism as the ideal phase of human civilization, fearing that empire would lead to gluttony and inevitable decay.

    The_Savage_State

    The Savage State ~ 1834
    New York Historical Society



    The_Arcadian_or_Pastoral_State

    The Arcadian or Pastoral State ~ 1834
    New York Historical Society


    The Consummation of Empire

    The Consummation of Empire ~ 1835-1836
    New York Historical Society


    Destruction

    Destruction ~ 1835-1836
    New York Historical Society


    Empire_Desolation

    Desolation ~ 1836
    New York Historical Society

    • All the evidence says that Darwin was right. The world we live in is a hell world, a war of all against all, where most creatures die by being ripped apart and devoured while still alive. In such a world, you can’t refuse empire, as to refuse only means you will be conquered by someone who accepts. Life defends itself until the end, in a hopeless battle that it must eventually lose. The path that runs through empire is only another pathway into the nothingness that will inescapably envelope us all.

      • In a comments thread, it was difficult to explain me. As I said, we must play the game now that other civilisations (China, Islam) exist. But after a Turner Diaries scenario, the goal would be to have… an archipelago of Archadian cities like Lys.

        Speaking of Arthur Clarke, have you read his very first short novel, Against the Fall of Night? Not Diaspar, but Lys is my goal.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: