History of American NS, 2

German-American Bund camp

1936-1941

German-American Bund

At its height, the Friends of the New Germany had approximately 10,000 members. This is ten times the number of members that Gau-USA had, and twenty times the number of its predecessor, Teutonia. However, sixty percent of FDND members were German citizens, not eligible for membership in the newly reorganized Bund. In a sense, Kuhn had to rebuild the Bund from the ground up.

Fritz Julius Kuhn was born in Munich in 1896. He served as an infantry lieutenant during the First World War, and had earned the Iron Cross Second Class. Kuhn and his wife Elsa emigrated to Mexico in 1923. They moved to the US in 1927, and Kuhn became a naturalized citizen in 1933. He settled in Detroit and was employed as a chemist by the Ford Motor Corporation. He took an active interest in ethnic politics, and became the leader of the Detroit chapter of the FDND.

A minor point, but one that is worth addressing: Kuhn’s title was Bundesleiter. Historians and biographers, however, in error frequently refer to him as BundesFüher. But Kuhn himself was quick to point out that there was only one Füher, and that was Adolf Hitler.

Under his determined and energetic leadership, the Bund grew steadily. By the time it ceased operations in December 1941, the Bund had an organized presence in 47 of the 48 states (the exception being Louisiana), with a combined 163 local chapters. A fully accredited chapter was known as a ‘unit’. As a minimum requirement, each unit had a unit leader, a treasurer, a public relations officer and a nine-man OD squad. Many units had a membership of over a hundred. Chapters that could not meet the minimum requirements were known as ‘branches’, and were attached to the nearest unit.

The Bund was divided into three departments – Eastern, Midwestern and Western – which in turn were divided into regions. The regions were subdivided into state organizations, which were further organized by city, neighbourhood, and even block-by-block where the membership warranted it. Total membership is unknown, but probably exceeded 25,000. The uniformed Order Division had an estimated 3,000 members nationwide.

The Bund published a weekly newspaper, with both German-language and English content. It was initially called the Deutscher Weckruf und Beobachter (‘German Wake-Up Call and Observer’). By 1937, it had a total circulation of 20,000. Three regional editions were published that carried local news and advertisements. In 1939, as part of an ongoing effort to Americanize the Bund, its full name was lengthened to Deutscher Weckruf und Beobachter and Free American. From that point on, for convenience’s sake, it was normally referred to simply as the Free American. Building on its success, the Bund published several other publications, including a youth magazine.

A notable Bund feature were its summer camps, which were located on Bund-owned property. There were 18 of these camps in all. Some were modest in size, but others, like Camp Nordland in New Jersey, Camp Siegfried on New York’s Long Island and Camp Hindenburg in Wisconsin, were large and elaborate, with facilities for year-round living. Camp activities included hiking, camping, swimming and other athletics. There were also communal cultural activities. Special programs were developed for young people, designed to build comradeship and to strengthen bodies, minds and character.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: Could one imagine this in today’s US? They wouldn’t even let them protest against a historic statue that the government removed in Charlottesville! One of the biggest lies of the American system is that it claims to allow freedom of speech and association. As we will see in the subsequent history of the Bund, it allows neither. The American system has ways of destroying dissidents through legal and paralegal system of penalties, as we shall see not only in the destruction of the Bund but of the pro-Aryan groups that followed it.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
The Bund was not a political organization in the normal sense of the word, and did not run candidates for office. It did, however, hold public meetings and parades, and these gatherings became a target for protests by Communists and Jews. Sometimes the protestors would physically attack the Bund members, resulting in bloody brawls. Clashes between uniformed National Socialists and their enemies received generous publicity in the mainstream media, which was eager to portray the ‘Bundists’ (as they termed the Bund members) as violent troublemakers. Back in Germany, the NSDAP viewed such publicity as detrimental to the foreign policy interests of the Reich. The same concerns that Hitler and Hess had over Gau-USA and the Friends of the New Germany had not gone away: instead, they were taking place on a larger scale and with increased media scrutiny.
 

The Bund’s 1936 trip to Germany

Nearly all Bund activity took place on a local level, but on at least two occasions, the Bund pooled its resources for a major national event. The first of these was an excursion to Hitler’s Germany in the summer of 1936. The second was a mass rally in New York City’s Madison Square Garden in February 1939.

The year 1936 was a watershed for Hitler’s Germany. When the National Socialists assumed power in early 1933, the country was in a dreadful condition as a result of the lost world war and fifteen years of democratic incompetence and corruption. It had been ravaged by the Great Depression and the depredations of the Treaty of Versailles. The economy was a wreck, unemployment was at a record high; many thousands of the most energetic and skilful Germans emigrated each year to seek a better life elsewhere. The media was in the hands of the Jews, as were other important segments of society. But after only three years of National Socialism, the Reich had been reborn: hunger had been banished, the economy was booming and the armed forces had been reorganized and strengthened. A new sense of optimism and national pride filled the population.

The 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin, brought countless guests and tourists to the new Germany. Among those visitors were Fritz Kuhn and some 50 members of the newly-formed Bund. The American National Socialists toured the country, and were widely feted as heroes. Uniformed members of the OD were accorded the same privilege as the German SA and allowed to ride public transportation for free. In Munich, uniformed Bund members marched with the SA, the SS and the Hitler Youth in a parade.

Shortly before the beginning of the second parade in Berlin, Bundesleiter Kuhn and his officers were granted a short, formal audience with Hitler. This meeting is what today might be termed a ‘photo-op’ – the Füher shook hands with them and chatted amiably for a few minutes. One photograph from the occasion shows Hitler and Kuhn talking together. As the brief audience wrapped up, Hitler told Kuhn, ‘Go back and continue the struggle over there’. Nothing deep or significant was meant by these words: they were just a courtesy by the Füher to his American followers.

Upon his return to the United States, Kuhn lost no time in misrepresenting his brief photo-op with Hitler. Kuhn told reporters, ‘I have a special arrangement with the Füher’ to build the NS movement in America. Rumours spread that there had been a second, private meeting between Chancellor Hitler and the Bundesleiter, during which Hitler had given Kuhn detailed instructions on strengthening Germany’s position in the New World. Kuhn did nothing to stop the spread of such tall tales, and instead maintained that he had received a direct mandate from Hitler to lead the American movement.

Kuhn’s dishonesty and false claims undoubtedly strengthened his position as the undisputed leader of the Bund. They came at a steep cost, however, because now they lent credibility to the charges made by the Jews and other anti-German forces that Hitler harboured aggressive aims towards America. The foreign-born Kuhn, with his thick German accent and mannerisms that some felt were off-putting, became the public face of domestic National Socialism to ordinary citizens. It was a face that many found hostile and threatening. Instead of building support and sympathy for the New Germany, Kuhn had alienated a huge swath of the American population.
 

What Hitler and the NSDAP wanted from German-Americans

Hitler had low respect for groups or parties in other countries that wanted to imitate the NSDAP. He realized that such copycat groups were inorganic and essentially foreign to their folk. This included not just the Bund, but also NS parties such as those in Denmark and Sweden. He commented that if Sir Oswald Mosley were really a great man as he presented himself he would have come up with an original movement of his own, instead of merely aping the NSDAP and Mussolini’s Fascists.

But this does not mean that he felt that there was no way for Germans outside the Reich in foreign countries to help build National Socialism. Regarding the US, the Füher felt that there were two primary ways that indigenous American National Socialists could help the New Germany:

1. Those German-Americans and expatriate German nationals residing in the US could most effectively help out by relocating to Germany. There they could help build National Socialism first-hand in the Fatherland.

And, in fact, many did exactly this. An agency was set up to encourage and assist with their relocation, the Deutsches Auslands Institut (German Foreign Institute). It was headed by Fritz Gissibl, former leader of Teutonia and the FDND, provided financial assistance to Germans who wanted to return to their Fatherland, and it helped them reintegrate into German society. In this connection, an association was formed for German-Americans who had returned, called Kameradschaft-USA.

2. For those German-Americans unable or unwilling to relocate to Germany, there was still an important task that they could perform. Since the earliest days of the Hitler government, Germany had been faced with an international economic boycott of German goods by the Jews and their many allies. This hampered the economic recovery and financial growth of the Reich. By working to weaken the boycott and promote German imports, pro-NS Americans could render immediate and tangible aid to the Movement.

Fritz Kuhn formed a corporation to organize an NS fightback against the boycott, first called the Deutsch-Amerikaner Wirstschafts Anschluss (German-American Protective Alliance), and later renamed theDeutscher Konsum Verband (German Business League). The DKV urged American merchants to ignore the Jewish boycott and to buy German goods for resale. It also encouraged American consumers to buy goods made in Germany. The DKV held a highly publicized ‘Christmas Fair’ highlighting German-made products and promoting their sale.

The DAI and the DAWA/DKV had the full and enthusiastic support of Hitler and the NSDAP. Uniformed marches, provocative speeches and confrontational meetings, however, were the mainstays of public Bund activity and did not meet with the approval of Reich authorities, who did whatever they could to discourage such activities and to distance themselves from them – to no avail.
 

The Madison Square Garden rally

On February 20, 1939, the Bund held a mammoth rally in New York’s Madison Square Garden. The event was billed as a ‘Mass Demonstration for True Americanism’. It took place in proximity to George Washington’s birthday, and indeed, a gigantic image of the first president formed a backdrop for the speaker’s platform. Over 22,000 Bund members and allies gathered for the occasion, easily making it the largest National Socialist meeting ever held in North America, before or since. Some 1,200 OD men under the command of August Klapprott provided security. Outside the Garden, 80,000 unruly anti-Bund protestors scuffled with the police in an unsuccessful effort to disrupt the meeting.
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Editor’s note: Eighty thousand? The anti-NS sentiment in America isn’t just a thing of our times! Incidentally, red emphasis below, of Kerr’s text, is mine. I just want to show that since the beginning of the American racialist movements, they never stopped worshiping the Jewish god:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Among the speakers were National Secretary James Wheeler Hill, National Public Relations Director Gerhard Wilhelm Kunze and Bundesleiter Kuhn. As Kuhn began his address, a Jew named Isadore Greenbaum pushed his way past the police, slipped between two OD guards, and rushed the stage. He was armed with a knife. The would-be assassin was quickly tackled by the OD and beaten into submission. Klapprott pulled his men off the Jew before he was badly hurt, and he was turned over to the police for arrest. Kuhn continued speaking without interruption. Later, some members and followers leaving the meeting were assaulted by the mob outside.

The Bund portrayed the event as a huge victory. And indeed, it was an impressive tactical and logistical triumph. The Bund had shown that it could organize a successful mass meeting in the face of massive opposition.

But the reaction in Berlin was not so favourable. From the standpoint of the German government, this was exactly the type of publicity that they did not want.
 

Bund ideology and outreach

The Bund formally adhered to the National Socialist worldview as expressed in NS Germany. But there was a problem: the US was not Germany, and the social, economic, political and racial situation in America did not correspond to that of Germany. The program and exact policies of the NSDAP did not fit the American scene. Kuhn’s solution to the quandary was two-fold: the Bund adhered strictly to German National Socialism internally, but in terms of public outreach it advocated an ideology that was an awkward fusion of National Socialism and the Christian Nationalism of the times. ‘Christian Nationalism’ was roughly equivalent to modern White Nationalism. It was not a religious movement, per se; rather, by ‘Christian’ it was understood that Jews were excluded. An example of this was a statement by Kuhn quoted in the New York Times:’ I am a White Man and I give the White Man’s salute: Heil Hitler!’

Publicly, the Bund claimed to be for ‘100 percent Americanism’ and opposed to ‘Jewish communism’. It never attempted to forge a specific American National Socialism, unique to the experiences and situation of the Aryan race in North America.

When it felt the need to give some intellectual heft to its outreach, the Bund would refer to the writings of Lawrence Dennis, who was the foremost American Fascist intellectual of the period, or to other non-Bund, non-NS theoreticians and commentators.

The German National Socialist Colin Ross attempted to provide some intellectual ballast for the Movement in America with his 1937 book, Unser Amerika (Our America). He gave lectures throughout the US which were supported and attended by Bund members. But in the end, he was an outsider, and it is unclear to what extent his work had any effect on the Movement in the US.
 

Decline and end of the Bund

The Madison Square Garden rally aggravated the increasing dissatisfaction of the German government with the Bund. The German ambassador, Hans Diekhoff, had a contentious relationship with the group. Public opinion, largely manufactured and manipulated by the Jews, was already strongly tilted against the Reich. The media wanted to portray the Bund as a violent, un-American subversive organization directly under Hitler’s command; every headline that played into that false image made Diekhoff’s already-challenging job that much more difficult. He sent repeated dispatches to Berlin urging the German government to sever all ties with the Bund and publicly disown it. But the truth was that there was little or nothing Berlin could do: Contrary to popular belief, the Bund was not under the command of Hitler, the German government, or the NSDAP. It was an independent organization that could conduct its operations in any way that it wished.

The average American had a negative appreciation of the Bund. It was widely assumed that the Bund was a ‘fifth column’, designed to aid the ‘Nazis’ if the Germans invaded the United States – which the media assured the public was Hitler’s ultimate aim.

Consequently, there was a widespread feeling that the government should ‘do something’ about the Bund. The Roosevelt regime was more than willing to comply, but there was a hitch: the Bund operated strictly within the limits of US law.

Eventually, the authorities found a solution: In May, 1939, Kuhn was charged with the embezzlement of approximately $14,000 of Bund funds. Kuhn had foolishly taken as a mistress Virginia Cogswell, a former beauty queen. He had purportedly used Bunds funds to pay for her medical bills and to ship some used furniture to her from California. The Bund hierarchy responded to the charges that Kuhn, as leader of the Bund, was free to use the money in question in any manner that he wanted to. But the government was out for blood, and in November Kuhn was convicted of misusing Bund funds. Eventually he was sent to New York’s Sing Sing prison.

The scandal, rocked the Bund, and resulted in many resignations. However, a new leader, Gerhard Wilhelm Kunze, stepped forward to lead the group until Kuhn was free again.

Bund operations continued until December 8, 1941 – the day after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, and three days before Hitler’s declaration of war against the United States. On that day the Bund national council voted to dissolve the organization, and it burnt sensitive documents before they could be seized by the FBI.

 
Other National Socialist and pro-NS groups

Although we have concentrated our attention on the German-American Bund, the Bund was not the only NS formation in the US during the pre-War period. We have previously mentioned the short-lived American National-Socialist Party of Anton Haegele (1935). In 1939, the Brooklyn chapter of the Bund – which was the largest in the nation – broke away and reformed the ANSP, under the leadership of Peter Stahrenberg. But, despite the excellence of its newspaper, the National American, the party was small and never amounted to anything.

Of the hundreds of other small groups that flourished during this period, the following are also worth mentioning:

• The Christian Mobilizers, a New York group led by Joseph ‘Nazi Joe’ McWilliams. Its uniformed branch was called the Christian Guard. Later, the group was renamed the American Destiny Party.

• The National Workers League, led by Russel Roberts, later a supporter and advisor of George Lincoln Rockwell. Based in Detroit.

• The Citizens Protective League, led by Kurt Mertig, later mentor to James Madole of the National Renaissance Party.

• American Nationalist Party (founded as the American Progressive Workers Party). Emory Burke, who would go on to be the founder of the post-War movement, was a member of this group.

Americans who were National Socialist or pro-NS also supported organizations such as Charles Lindbergh’s America First Committee, William Dudley Pelley’s Silver Shirt Legion, Father Charles Coughlin’s National Union for Social Justice, and the Christian Front.

To broaden its appeal, the Bund also held a unity rally with the Ku Klux Klan at August Klapprott’s Camp Nordland in 1940.

Flawed sci-fi genre

On Mondays a ‘market on wheels’ passes near my house that doesn’t exist in the neighboring country to the north: Indians who sell food and other household items to the more bourgeois classes. For the ridiculous price of $15 pesos (0.72 dollars) yesterday I bought this year’s version of Dune.

I still remember when I saw the first film version of Frank Herbert’s novel in 1984 and I thought it was a very bad movie. But the 2021 version is worse as the accelerating trend toward Evil continues in these eschatological times, as Savitri would say. I mean the mania of putting more and more non-white actors on the big screen. The $15 pesos I spent yesterday for a pirated DVD of Dune was a good investment, as I prefer to give that amount to an Indian than to Hollywood dogs (tonight my sister and my nephew will watch Dune on the Imax screen).

Although, with the exception of this darkening of actors, the visual aspect of the 2021 film improves on previous versions, there will never be a good movie because Herbert’s novel is flawed.

When I saw the 1984 film, I was unaware of the existence of psychoclasses. Recently, in one of my comments on Savitri’s book, I said that the Spaniards belonged to a higher psychoclass than the Aztecs, who killed and ate their children. The mistake of Herbert and all fans of science-fiction is that they ignore the existence of psychoclasses. With the exception of the books that I’ve been promoting on this site from the pen of Arthur C. Clarke, the only thing that the authors of the futurist genre do is extrapolate the present of this fallen West to a future where technology has been developed.

But that is not the future.

During the Middle Ages in Europe, the future of the Mesoamerican and Inca world would be the destruction, thanks to the Europeans, of an infanticidal psychoclass, a psychoclass of serial killers (see the central part of my Day of Wrath) through an amalgamation between Indian and Spanish in which, at least, the filicide aspects of the Amerinds were overcome.

That doesn’t mean that I identify myself with the Castilians. I represent a psychoclass superior to theirs inasmuch as I have always been repulsed by bullfighting (as I tell in one of my autobiographical books, my grandmother and my godmother were fans of this sadistic art). In other words, internally I already made another quantum leap from the Spanish psychoclass to a psychoclass that feels infinitely more empathy for animals.

The mistake of Herbert, who once had a personal fight with Clarke, is that he was blind to psychogenic evolution; that is, to the development of empathy (think about how Hitler’s first measure when he came to power was to pass laws to prevent the cruelty to animals). Herbert extrapolates the human psychoclass from our time to the future as if there won’t be any psychogenic breakthroughs. For example, one of the anachronisms of the movie that I saw yesterday is the hobby of the House Atreides (the movie’s good guys), who had representations of bullfighting art in their palace, including the head of a sacrificed bull on a wall.

In fact, it is impossible for the current psychoclass of humans to grow indefinitely because with such advanced technology they would only end up self-destructing (which is why we receive no signs of intelligent life in the Milky Way). Only the Aryan overman, the followers of a new Hitlerite religion, could inherit the stars.

Unlike Herbert’s Dune, in a few of Clarke’s futuristic novels humans stop abusing children and animals. When in 1992 I wrote him a letter, and asked him what was his favourite novel among the many he wrote, the famous British author informed me that it was The Songs of Distant Earth (except for my address that I’ve just deleted, Clarke’s letter can be read: here). The novel has its problems, of course. Clarke was bisexual and this shows in The Songs of Distant Earth. But at least he acknowledges that psychoclasses may evolve in the future.

But I would like to say one more thing about the darkening of the actors in the 2021 version of Dune and Hollywood in general.

Yesterday I saw a segment of Fox News. The axiological lie on which the US is based, a lie that is exterminating the white race in that country, is something that even anchors like Tucker Carlson share. Last night Carlson said: ‘…the funding principle of the United States, to sum up, is the Christian belief that all people, regardless of their skin color, are equal before God’.

Well, they certainly aren’t equal before me.

Spanish-speaking ‘conservatism’

Compared to the neighbouring country to the north, I consider Latin America the continent of the blue pill. There is nothing in MSM that resembles, say, Tucker Carlson. One has to search social media to find the voice of an Argentine, Agustín Laje, and his YouTube channel: a kind of Latin American Tucker who in the Spanish-speaking MSM would be inconceivable.

Here we see him with his colleague Nicolás Marquez and their book about the new left. Laje and Márquez debunk gender ideology and in their activism they travel to Spanish-speaking countries. Gender ideology is the equivalent, in this part of the continent, to anti-racism north of the Rio Grande. (Since whites are already an extreme minority on this side of the river, the next levelling battle is to denigrate the male versus the female.)

Vox is a Spanish political party founded in late 2013. Its president is Santiago Abascal. Vox is the party of the right in Spain: a more conservative right than the caricature that the Republican Party has become in the US today.

But Vox’s folk, Laje and the new Spanish-speaking right are limited to criticising the third feminist wave. Although the Spanish and Latin American media call them ‘ultra-rightists’ and fachas (fascists), they are actually progressive. Their criticism of feminism is not radical at all. Like Andrew Anglin, we not only reject the third wave that Vox rejects, but the first and second feminist waves, as can be seen in the sidebar book on Beth’s pretty boobs.

The pendulum has swung so much to the left that liberals such as Argentina’s Laje and Márquez, and those of Spain’s Vox party, are seen as conservative. They are not. See what I recently said about Vox in La Hora Más Oscura. In the case of Laje, in minute 21 of this interview with a woman, the Argentine says that the male rapist should face life imprisonment. Note that Laje is hated by the mass of feminists because they mistakenly see him as macho. If Laje and those of Vox weren’t, to some extent, conquered by the anti-male hysteria of our days, they would say that the woman who falsely accused a man of rape would also be sentenced to life imprisonment.

But they don’t say that: our new Orwellian laws only punish males.

The so-called conservatives are liberals, and this applies not only to Vox and Laje but to Tucker and Sean Hannity (the latter interviewed a transexual man not long ago). There are no exponents of true conservatism in the media, neither in the English-speaking world nor in the Spanish-speaking world. And by the way, we are not conservatives but racists.

Published in: on October 3, 2021 at 11:49 am  Comments (5)  

What is dead may never die

‘What Is Dead May Never Die’ is the third episode of the second season of HBO’s medieval fantasy television series Game of Thrones, first airing on April 15, 2012. In the image we see Yoren talking to Arya, a good man from the Night Watch who dies in this episode.

We see the first bad message in this episode when the warrior Brienne of Tarth wins a tournament against Loras Tyrell. Yesterday I saw the title of a video on YouTube about how the transgender guys who are now allowed to compete in women’s tournaments are destroying those sports because they easily beat the weaker sex. But the scene between Brienne and Loras sends the opposite message to us, and I find it amazing that Westerners are consuming this reversal of reality.

The tournament was held at the camp of the self-crowned King Renly Baratheon. Tournament warriors compete in full armour, and when the big warrior no one’s seen yet beats Loras, Renly asks:

‘Rise. Remove your helmet’.

The warrior does it and murmurs are heard among the spectators when they realise that the imposing blonde warrior was not a man but a woman. Renly continues:

‘I’ve seen Ser Loras bested once or twice, but never quite in that fashion’.

The implication is that warrior women can be as capable as warrior men. Now that, in my preparations to write this article, I opened the Wikipedia article on this episode, I came across a pop-up that informed me that on this day we should celebrate the Wikipedia initiative to close the gender gap in favour of women. Scenes like this one in the most popular television series of all time, in which a woman defeats Ser Loras, the heir to the immensely wealthy House Tyrell, support that cause.

That same episode shows us a second homoerotic encounter between Loras and Renly (the first we had seen in the first season). This second scene had disappeared from my memory since the first time I saw the series. It is very bad taste to put these things on the screen, but the white race is so degenerate that they can reject Martin’s profound message from the finale and not be disgusted by these homosexual scenes.

As I always do in my morning routine, I check my email and today I came across the title and first lines of the latest article from The Occidental Observer. It’s about Jews in the media but who is more to blame for the state of the West: they or the gentiles who consume the shit from HBO and Netflix?

Published in: on March 8, 2021 at 11:04 am  Comments Off on What is dead may never die  

Part of the problem

Tucker Carlson spoke last night. The charlatanism of the so-called white nationalists can be seen in a simple anecdote. Carlson’s monologue yesterday (see, e.g., the minute after this moment) has been one of the most powerful in MSM. I have often said that what the white race needs first is a baby-step: moving from happy mode to angry mode. And Carlson’s anger contrasts with the even tone of the articles that can be read these days in American Renaissance, The Occidental Observer, Counter-Currents and others. Not even in the recent podcasts of Richard Spencer can we listen any anger. How is that possible?

Basically, because people who had Christian parents in the United States (often Protestants) are prohibited from hating, or even uncovering the most legitimate emotions. As many of my visitors know, my specialty is not racial issues but the trauma model of mental disorders. And if there is one thing that follows from this model, it is that repressing our early traumas is what causes psychosis. It is true that when we were at the mercy of our abusive parents we could not explode our feelings. But if as adults we don’t report what they did to us, the result is a one-way ticket to any point among the entire range of dysfunctions that go from the simplest neurosis to the most serious psychoses.

There is no point in linking my recent posts about the situation in the US: the visitor can simply scroll down to read them. In short, it is unbelievable that a normie anchor like Carlson is already capable of handling the most elementary emotions while the racialists continue in that academic tone that is not going to lead the race to any revolution.

If you are white and your blood is not boiling over what is going on, then you are either asleep or part of the problem.

Published in: on January 19, 2021 at 10:19 am  Comments Off on Part of the problem  

Queen’s gambit

This is a postscript to my previous two posts on the TV series that has been a hit worldwide. Above, D.L. Townes playing Beth Harmon in The Queen’s Gambit. But the position we saw on Netflix is actually an old study composed by a man!

In chess there’s a current World Chess Champion, Magnus Carlsen, and in a parallel universe of players there’s a Women’s World Chess Championship (WWCC). Why are there separate tournaments of chess for men and women, if according to current egalitarian doctrine the latter are supposedly as smart as men?

Because women cannot compete with men in chess.

See the names of the top 101 players in the world according to the list of the International Chess Federation. There’s only one woman, Hou Yifan, ranked #88 in that list, which means that there are 87 players with a higher rating than her. *

In a nutshell, the Netflix series The Queen’s Gambit only advances feminist lies about women.

_________

(*) This FIDE list is updated every first of the month, which means that the ratings for Hou and the top 100 male chess players are subject to change (see my comment below, in the comments section).

Published in: on November 30, 2020 at 10:45 am  Comments (2)  

CNN lies

Look how a CNN anchor misleads her viewers regarding the score that I quoted, twice, in my previous post regarding the games between Garry Kasparov and Judit Polgar.

I guess CNN viewers are under the impression that a Netflix TV series was based on a real biography, as even Kasparov himself cucked in his very polite response to the anchor.

Published in: on November 27, 2020 at 10:19 pm  Comments (5)  

On Beth’s cute tits

Beth dancing to a degenerate piece of music
that was a hit when I was pubescent, with trophies
from all the chess tournaments she had won.

As a teenager I was a big fan of chess, and even in my early twenties I played daily in a park visited by middle-class chess players (I recount my adventures in Spanish: here).

The Queen’s Gambit is an American TV miniseries based on the 1983 novel of the same name by Walter Tevis, starring Anya Taylor-Joy in the role of Beth Harmon. It was directed by the Jew Scott Frank and the script was written by a gentile, Allan Scott. The Queen’s Gambit was released on Netflix last month and has now concluded.

The past few days I watched The Queen’s Gambit. From one of the first episodes, when Beth approaches the camera showing the shape of her beautiful boobs under her clothes, I realised the impossible chimera of this series that is causing a sensation in the world. But first of all I must speak a little about female tits in our species.

Decades ago, the biggest surprise I came across when reading The Naked Ape was discovering why men crave women. If we consider the shape of a baby bottle for milk, that is exactly the shape female teats would have if the objective were purely functional for baby sucking. But women’s breasts are completely different. Zoologist Desmond Morris, the author of The Naked Ape, explains the phenomenon of ‘self-mimicry’ in other species of apes. In these species, natural selection favours females to imitate their buttocks with their coloured breasts, in order to shift the aggression of the males to a more erotic channelling.

I was shocked to discover that my own species is a more aesthetic version of the same phenomenon of self-mimicry! But that is exactly what it is when we see the ape we are with a naked eye: the needs of the baby are secondary to the trick that Nature does to us so that we impregnate our females. Nature makes them absolutely irresistible to our instincts in order for the human species to breed.

But our species is also governed by the concept of the trade-off, and I will have no choice but to speak scientifically for a few paragraphs.

Why can’t there be a species that is a mix between a super-poisonous bug and a winged, big, beautiful and highly intelligent creature? In a fantastic world just imagine what power such a creature would have. In my science course at the Open University I learned about the concept of a trade-off between one aspect of an organism’s biology and another. A trade-off is a situation where, to gain some advantage, an organism has to pay a price: to compromise. In our species big brains are a good example. Our huge frontal lobes are certainly nice to have but they are costly in terms of the energy they use up, and make childbirth extremely difficult.

As explained in my Day of Wrath (see sidebar), this is the main cause of massive infanticide of babies in past history. Extremely immature babies are bothersome. A unique feature of the human race—prolonged childhood with consequent long dependence on adults—is the basis for the psychodynamics of mental disorders. The long childhood of Homo sapiens lends itself to parents abusing their young. After all, premature birth was Nature’s solution to the trade-off of bipedalism and the limitations of the pelvis of hominid females in our simian ancestors. (If Homo sapiens weren’t born so immature, we would have to stay within our mothers’ bodies for about 20 months.) The ‘long childhood’ lays a solid foundation for understanding the abuses committed by parents in our species and, therefore, the mental disorders suffered by the progeny. But that’s the price we have paid for our big brains!

Body size is another example of trade-offs. In the animal kingdom being big gives you some advantages against predators but it also means you need more food. Being small means that you don’t need much food but it makes it easier for another animal to hunt you. That species can’t gain an advantage without having to pay a price means that there will be many ways to survive and prosper: and explains why there is so rich diversity in the animal kingdom.

In my Open University course I had to answer this question: Why a bird with a complete set of the five potentially very successful traits (a species of bird whose individuals lived a long time, reproduced repeatedly and at high frequency, and with large clutch sizes) doesn’t exist? The answer is because of trade-offs. A bird that produces large clutches cannot reproduce frequently because the production of each clutch requires a lot of resources. Also, large clutches require more looking after because in due course there are more mouths to feed. Large clutches are therefore likely to suffer higher mortality than small clutches while adults are absent from the nest.

The same applies to the surreal example of the impossible chimera I imagined above. Having assimilated the concept of trade-offs, let’s now remember old Schopenhauer:

In the girl Nature has had in view what could in theatrical terms be called a stage-effect: it has provided her with superabundant beauty and charm for a few years at the expense of the whole remainder of her life, so that during these years she may so capture the imagination of a man that he is carried away into undertaking to support her honourably in some form or another for the rest of his life, a step he would seem hardly likely to take for purely rational considerations. Thus nature has equipped women, as it has all its creatures, with the tools and weapons she needs for securing her existence, and at just the time she needs them; in doing which nature has acted with its usual economy [my emphasis—a trade-off].

The media lie is equivalent to ‘filming’ those flying and poisonous bugs which, in turn, are smart as humans: impossible chimeras.

In previous years I insisted a lot on how the most popular series of all time, Game of Thrones, made us see several female characters as brave warriors: something that never existed in the Middle Ages or in old-time chivalric novels (Brienne of Tarth, Yara Greyjoy, the wildling Ygritte, the masculinised female warriors at Dorne) or queens without a king to control them (Daenerys Targaryen and Cersei Lannister). Worst of all was that a girl (Arya Stark) killed the bad guy of the series, the Night King, in what I consider to be the climax of the whole series (Theon Greyjoy should have killed the Night King). In real medieval times, and in chivalric novels, all these women would have been similar to Lady Sansa, the only character who played a feminine role in most of the seasons of Game of Thrones (except for the end of seasons 6 and 8).

The goal of Hollywood and TV is to brainwash us by reversing sex roles to exterminate the white race. And it is a disgrace that even the greatest white nationalist novelist of the 21st century, the late Harold Covington, fell for this feminism in his most voluminous novel (see ‘Freedom’s Daughters’ in my Daybreak).

HBO produced Game of Thrones. Netflix has produced The Queen’s Gambit. HBO wanted us to believe that women can compete with men, and even surpass them, in matters of what used to be called the knight-errant. (Remember how Brienne of Tarth beat the very tough Hound in the last episode of the fourth season of Game of Thrones.) Now Netflix wants us to believe that in matters of the intellect a woman, Beth Harmon, can beat the toughest chess players and even the very world champion (Vasily Borgov in the TV series: Beth’s strongest competitor).

Some people in the media are publishing articles with titles such as ‘Is The Queen’s Gambit a true story?’ They claim that the series was inspired by the woman who has reached the highest when competing in chess tournaments: the Hungarian Judit Polgar, now retired from the competition although she continues to comment on professional chess games. But Polgar’s life was quite different from the fictional Beth Harmon whose photo appears at the top of this entry. It is true that in real life Polgar once beat the world champion of chess, Garry Kasparov. But what the Netflix series omit is the score of all their confrontations. In real life, Kasparov beat Judit Polgar 12 to 1, with 4 draws!

It seems important to me to present the scores of the best female chess player in history, Polgar, in her games against the male world champions (to date, no woman has been crowned world champion of chess). The source for the list below is Chess Life:

Kasparov – Polgar: 12-1
Carlsen – Polgar: 10-1
Anand – Polgar: 28-10
Karpov – Polgar: 20-14
Topalov – Pogar: 16-15
Kramnik – Polgar: 23-1

As we can see, Polgar is at a disadvantage against all of her contemporary world champions. The only world champion with whom she maintained an almost even score was Topalov. Her score against Karpov was not bad, and although her disadvantage against Anand is wide, her results are noteworthy. But against Kasparov, Carlsen and especially against Kramnik, Polgar took real beatings.

These are the pure and hard facts of real life that more HBO or Netflix feminist series won’t change. They want us to believe that women are interchangeable with us in matters of physical activity and, now, intellectual sports!

Nature has endowed the woman with feminine charms so that a man may impregnate her thanks to her inviting tits, and support her for the rest of her life. Nature didn’t give her muscles or brain-power equal to the man. We have more cranial capacity than women. Anyone who hasn’t read a chapter from the 2017 edition of The Fair Race (a chapter that no longer appears in the 2020 edition!) should read it now. It is the best way to understand not only our sexuality but also the sexuality of the fair sex.

Beautiful tits that enchant us cannot go in the body that houses, at the same time, a superior brain of those whom her tits seduce: an elemental trade-off.

Postscript of 2021: Desmond Morris’ exact quote appears in the first indented paragraph: here.

Not demo-cracy but media-cracy

The reason I don’t like to comment on the news is that just commenting on it validates the System. For example, commenting on recent elections in the US validates democracy. And if you hate democracy you can afford not to comment on any of the elections in any Western country.

But what happened yesterday is something I cannot ignore. Prematurely all the media declared Biden the winner before the legal process of Trump’s lawyers, caused by irregularities like Big Tech censoring the truth, demonstrable fraud, ridiculous turnouts, dead voters and mockery of the proper legal remedy.

Since I live in a banana country I remember the fraud of 1988, after the vote for the president. Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas beat Carlos Salinas de Gortari although the latter was declared the winner. I still remember that day.

While the votes were being counted in this banana country, a ‘failure in the system’ was reported with the count of the votes as they were carried out. Before the ‘failure’ the numbers favoured Cárdenas. When the system was restored, Salinas de Gortari emerged as the winner.

The incident, known as ‘fallo del sistema’, sparked accusations of fraud in the election of the President. In 2009, former President Miguel de la Madrid confessed that the PRI lost the 1988 election, thus confirming the electoral fraud orchestrated by his government to impose Salinas de Gortari as the winner.

In 1988 many were waiting for Cárdenas’s call to defend the vote at the polls, but it didn’t happen because, according to his collaborators, a civil war could have been unleashed.

What strikes me greatly is comparing what happened here more than thirty years ago with what happened yesterday in the neighbouring country to the north. Apparently, it is no longer the government that governs the US, but the media.

Even in a banana country like Mexico many complained in the mass media (there was still no internet). The difference could not be greater with the US, where even Fox News joined yesterday to proclaim victory for Biden before the courts reach a ruling on the lawsuits of Trump’s lawyers (by the way, is Rupert Murdoch Jewish?).

One might think that the racialist right would complain. But yesterday Kevin MacDonald just said he was feeling depressed (I won’t link him or the other white nationalists I mention below).

Greg Johnson in an article with a long title (‘The Counter-Currents 2020 Fundraiser: This Weekend’s Post-Election Livestreams with Jared Taylor, Sam Dickson, Mark Weber, James Edwards, & Many More’) links to podcasts of this weekend. But those podcast webpages are very hostile to the visitor, including that of James Edwards. If you click it, a maze of links appears and if you click a link again, commercial-type voices appear, not Johnson’s voice. For a long time I gave up going to Edwards’ site because of how hostile it is to the visitor, but in none of the links that Johnson puts up does his voice appear (surely you have to listen to them only within the hours when the interviews are announced on the respective sites).

Jared Taylor’s webzine on the other hand hasn’t even said anything about what happened yesterday until this early morning when I write.

If we visit Twitter there is some more information if one sees what Trump’s sons are saying or what they are re-tweeting. But the media is censoring others who are complaining about the stolen elections.

If the media, including the internet, and not the American courts decide when to declare a winning candidate, the situation in the US is infinitely more serious than I imagined.

If I lived in the US I wouldn’t have voted. But I find it incredible that there was much more media opposition in Mexico in 1988 than in the US today.

It seems that Jewry has come to absolutely control not only the MSM but of social media and, except for white nationalists, no one seems to complain about those who control the media.

Although the Mexican media are a hundred percent anti-Trump, at least yesterday I got to see on television Rudy Giuliani’s conference dubbed into Spanish for the Mexican audience for a long time: something I didn’t see on Fox News where they apparently eliminated, yesterday, the Saturday show of Judge Jeanine so she wouldn’t say something similar to what Giuliani said yesterday.

The United States is really fried for not having rebelled, since Hitler’s time, about who controls the media. Richard Nixon and Billy Graham had a chance and did nothing. And the saddest thing is that people like Hunter Wallace and Richard Spencer, who should know better, have joined the Biden triumph chorus because Trump had disappointed them.

Only The Daily Stormer has been complaining yesterday and today as in 1988 millions of Mexicans complained about the fraud. But voices like Anglin’s are not heard in the MSM. When it comes to mass media Mexicans had far, far more liberty thirty-two years ago than Americans today!

Today’s world is infinitely more surreal than what I imagined, and the next few months will likely be more surreal—and more totalitarian. In this MacDonald is right to feel utterly depressed. My only hope is that the dollar will collapse making Biden the fall guy. The interregnum that began in 1945 will end with a crash in the 2020s that will resemble the hyper-inflationary crash of the German mark of the 1920s.

The rest will follow from there…

Quotable quote

‘Having a television in your home is like having a Jew in your living room’.

—Leonard Feeney (1957)

Published in: on July 11, 2020 at 6:17 pm  Comments Off on Quotable quote