Our New Victory Song

Having grown up in modern Satania, I’m ignorant of how many exceedingly beautiful things old Europe produced.

Remember one of the tests for a witch was to read her a passage of the Gospel.  If she didn’t cry or show emotion, she was said to be a witch.  I think the same is true of this song.  If you can watch this without feeling a surge of hope and victorious zeal, you’re not a Christian.

I’ll be singing this song whenever I take major stabs at the Devil…

Posted in General | 2 Comments

The Cambrian Vision

I’m going to be frank with you, dear readers:  I’m not a fan of David Duke.

Everyone’s talking about him because of his recent interview with Alex Jones.  Jones, for those who don’t know, is a popular talk radio host who discusses conspiracy theories and the “New World Order” from a quasi-libertarian perspective.

And God bless him for hosting Duke – that’s a big step for talk radio.  He moved from being a clown in my eyes, to being pitied.  He’s given Duke a national platform.  Did Duke capitalize on the opportunity?

I wont give a play by play review, but I thought Duke came across as sporadic, ambiguous, and even clownish.  God knows I’m the last person to criticize personal demeanor on a talk-show, my oratory skills need serious refinement; but it’s Duke’s message, not his presentation, that bugs me the most.

Years ago, when I first began dabbling in “the movement”, I had the good fortune to hang out with Don Black, creator of the Stormfront website.  We had some drinks.  I wasn’t as clear headed as I should have been but I wanted to make a good impression so I walked over and told him how much I appreciated what he and his generation have done for the white race.  I’ll never forget his answer:

“Why?” he asked.

“We’ve utterly failed you…”

I was content with light-hearted platitudes, but Mr. Black was deadly serious.  I realized, after surveying the history of white racialism, that he was right.  The mindset of the guys in the sixties, seventies, and eighties, gained only marginal success then and most certainly wont work now.   That’s why hearing David Duke’s flaccid “anti-racist” and “anti-supremacist” talking points drive me up the wall.

His morbid focus on the “jew problem” is a hallmark of American white nationalism, but in my view, is perilously short-sighted.  It’s like a man with cancer thinking that if he can just drink enough ginger ale, his stomach will eventually calm itself and all will get back to normal.  Jewish Zionists are only a symptom of the West’s problem; Satan is the cancer.

Satan operates by shutting off all Earthly channels to Christ, convincing men to re-enter the tomb and metaphorically dissect the body of Christ (I mean: give Him an intellectual autopsy to scientifically and systematically determine how He ticks).  Only problem is, the tomb is empty and Satan laughs as men dissect abstractions.

Christ is in the heart and hearth of the European people…of white people.  Reconnecting with that spiritual vision is the only cure for our cancer.  David Duke doesn’t have that vision.  Rockwell didn’t have it.  The paleoconservatives like Russell Kirk ought to have had it, but they were too afraid to grasp it.

I want that vision or nothing at all.

Posted in General | 16 Comments

Frankly My Dear, We Don’t Give a Folk…

Rhett

…lorist the time of day when he lobs disingenuous and inaccurate talking points in a Southward direction.

“You’re a racist *and* a traitor”, says professional cuckold and self-proclaimed “folklorist” John E. Price in an article making the social media rounds.  He’s mad at one of his neighbors who dared fly a Confederate Battle flag; his anger spews out of Pennsylvania and targets all Southerners who ask for cultural respect.

But that’s not enough.  Price goes further by attacking the media establishment itself – long known to be friendly to the Southern cause.  If that last line strikes my Southern friends as odd (the media supports our Lost Cause?!) chalk it up to Price’s lack of expertise in his chosen field.  Hard to be both accurate and a mouth-foaming cuckold.

What are they teaching left-wing academics these days?  Does Price know anything about historiography in a post-modern world?  I doubt it, else he’d be more careful before zealously championing a Yankee folk-myth as if it were the Gospel Truth.  To paraphrase his view: any attempt to interpret history as a non-Yankee is malicious “revisionism”.  And the malicious revisionist, especially the Southerner, ought to be damned to Secular Puritan Hell!

A good folklorist would view unique American folk-myths, and if he were in a patriotic mood, try to see the best in all of them while weaving together a fair analysis of the cultural milieu.  That’s what Southern historian Clyde Wilson advocates in his essay “Recovering Southern History”.  On the folk myth, Wilson says:

“…history involves the elaboration of a commonly shared mythology that provides part of the cohesion of a national or cultural group through the celebration of common ancestors.  I mean mythology in the highest sense, not in a trivial sense.  I do not mean that such history is the opposite of factual, but that it is true in a sense that transcends the merely factual.  It is an ethical and aesthetic symbolization that serves the purpose of social unity.”

Price has stepped away from being a myth preserver and entered the realm of myth maker.  He tries his best to perpetuate a historically fallacious, philosophically shallow myth, created by French Jacobins and their Yankee counter-parts, and popularized by MTV and modern government schools.  He’s so religiously devoted to this myth, he doesn’t bother to defend his mythic presuppositions.  Slavery, for example, is bad, mmkay?  There’s no attempt to prove this.  It’s merely assumed and pointing out that Southerners fought a war for slavery is, in Price’s mind, a form of reductio ad absurdum.  “That flag defended slavery, so there!”

Has Price ever read a pro-Slavery polemic?  Has he read Fitzhugh or Calhoun?  Has he read Ruffin or Rhett?  Has he seriously wrestled with their arguments and proven them false?  No, he hasn’t.  He wouldn’t dare.  To wrestle with pro-Slavery arguments is to expose his religious presuppositions, and that’ll never be allowed.

No, Price doesn’t want to argue with a Southerner at all.  He doesn’t dare.  He didn’t knock on his flag-flying neighbor’s door, nor will he respond to this post.  No, religious zealots like Price prefer to get an unwitting pro-Southerner trapped in a classroom where they can abuse the bully pulpit and strong arm the poor boy via grade point average.  (How the hell did the likes of these win the War?!)

I could take the time to walk through all of Price’s assertions about the South and explain them from within a Southern mythos, but he’d just call me “racist”.  I could take the time to point out Price’s inaccuracies, like the way he calls South Carolinians “traitors” by citing a Constitution that was no longer legally binding on South Carolina, but he’d not be open to reason about that either.

No.  About the only thing Price and I can agree on is our dislike of “Gone with the Wind”.  It’s too romantic for Price – too unromantic for me.  If Butler had died, ramming his ship into a Yankee vessel, maybe killing off one of Price’s equally pretentious ancestors, then all would have been well in my view.

But like Rhett, who has had enough of Scarlett the Harlot, we Southerners no longer care about the John Prices of the world.  They’re too cowardly to try and enforce opinions on us anyway.

…and if Mr. Price would like to prove me wrong, he’s welcome to knock on my door and enlighten me.

Posted in Defending Dixie | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

From the Marsh to the Coast Like a Demon Ghost

scarecrow

I had to dredge the dark net, but I’ve finally managed to acquire a copy of Disney’s “Scarecrow of Romney Marsh”.  The irony is, it’s a pirated copy and, like the main character, I had to smuggle it into my possession.

I realized while watching that I’m one of the Scarecrow’s men, and not just because I’m fairly adept at black-market media acquisitions.  No.  I’ve been fascinated with Robin Hood-type characters since I was a child.  I have no idea why, but turning outlaw against the state on behalf of an oppressed people – the Robin Hood mythos – has always struck me as the height of romance.  (For the uninitiated, I don’t mean romance like the romance novels in the grocery store.  I mean “romance” in the old sense:  Adventure.  Danger.  The fantastic!)

Once I’ve become the most dashing and infamous of America’s outlaws, I might tell, in my memoirs, the story of when I first realized I had the spirit of an outlaw.  But the details of that are too private for now.

What I will say is that, apart from being entertaining, my past infatuation with the hero / outlaw has lead me to consider what the difference is, exactly, between the Scarecrow of Romney Marsh, and a regular criminal.

I think it’s this:

Once a man goes rogue, he’s got to deal with the state and all the other rouges.  But the difference is, of the three (the Scarecrow, the State, and the Rouges), the Scarecrow is upholding his sense of honor and charity.

…the other two are mindless and heartless.

They’re civilized savages.

Posted in General | 6 Comments

Lord Have Mercy, On the Working Man…

I wasn’t intending to direct my criticisms in  “Tribe Uber Alles” towards the new “Traditionalist Worker Party”.  I was railing against perceived sentiments in the Alternative Right as a whole.  Matt Parrott, though, took my comments personally and wrote a response.  He was right to do so.  While I hope I haven’t discouraged any of my friends spear-heading the new party, I’m glad my post elicited a response if for no other reason than it’s always educational to see Matt Parrott clarify important doctrines.

Maybe it’s my Tidewater upbringing, with all its emphasis on old-world hierarchy, but I’ve always had a problem with the “Distributist” program.  It’s too egalitarian.  I’m committed to the idea that not everyone can govern themselves – certainly not everyone is fit to govern a society.  Maybe Fitzhugh was onto something when he suggested that not just blacks, but also poor whites ought to be formally subservient?

…if someone finds that shocking he needs to reflect more on our current situation.  The old Southern canard is right: we’re all plantation workers now.

The distributist program, be it Chestertonian or an evolved amalgam, has egalitarianism and Marxist class theory at its base.  The Haves vs the Have Nots.  The Bourgeoisie vs the Proletariat.  Or, as Rick Santorum says: the Bigs vs the Littles.  It’s this class theory I meant to criticize in my Tribe Uber Alles post.

A few years ago, Lew Rockwell posted a splash page of material analyzing various class theories.  There’s much to learn from this body of literature, certainly, but I realized it wasn’t scratching my Kinist itch so I set out to form the rough outlines of a Kinist theory of class.

It didn’t turn out to be as exciting as I thought; it devolved into little more than the recognition of wealth differences within a family, with interesting implications for currency wars, foreign politics, and monarchy.  It does, however, help clarify my disagreement with Marxists (and all those who similarly emphasize economic status over blood ties):

Imagine, if you will, a peaceful family.  But then, hark!  A knocking at the door.  A gang of storm troopers barrel into the house, separate the members, and force them to associate in terms of who produces the most value.  This hellish vision is a clear contrast to the natural balance of the family.  It’s true, some members naturally have more than the others, but each has a God-ordained role in the “great chain of being”.

Now my friends with the Traditionalist Worker Party would likely agree with this view, allowing, of course, that all members are treated with the dignity and respect their status deserves.  Matt Parrott’s concluding paragraph hints at this.  But they still play on the old Marxist and classical liberal idea of segregating people based on economic status; at least, segregated in their political theorizing.

This is fine to a point.  I aim to support my friends with their new party.  I realize political parties are vehicles of action that provide more maneuverability, fund raising, and the like, and that Trad Youth is wise to pursue it.  I also realize that the folk mind in America thinks of itself in terms of economic status and thus, economic status must be addressed.  But these practical matters aside, my heart will never be in it.

I don’t even think it makes sense.  How much property or how many means of production must a person have before he is no longer to be considered a “worker”, for example?  Don’t rich people work?  I know they have lots of leisure time, but their investments, in my view, represent stored working power that is actively being risked in whatever financial venture they’re invested in.  Maybe it’s physical labor that makes one a worker; but that means writers, poets, artists, et al. are no longer to be considered workers.  The lines here are blurred and seem, in many cases, arbitrary.

…as a matter of fact, I think such lines can *only* be coherently drawn within the context of a Godly family-based political situation in the first place, where, given the formality of status, everyone is clear on their position and everyone is equally clear on how they fit into the national situation.  I almost said:  “…on how they fit into the nationalist machine”, but it’s not a machine.  It’s more of a flourishing organism.  A tree!  A tree that the French “working class” chopped down like metaphorical lumberjacks.

At any rate, to reassert, I understand the utility of taking economic class status into consideration, especially in modern America.  And I certainly hope my rants haven’t discouraged anyone working on the Traditionalist Worker Party.  But again, my heart can never be in it.

As a post script:

If they’re aiming their door-to-door campaign efforts in Appalachia, they’ll have to work on their talking points.  Appalachians don’t like being told they’re helpless creatures who need a  political party to swoop in and rescue them.  They don’t need a bunch of pretentious college kids from back east teaching them how to live.  (Of course, that’s not who Heimbach and the Worker Party are, but I’m worried they might be perceived that way by stalwartly independent hill-folk).

Posted in General | Tagged , , , , , | 15 Comments

If I Had Been There **Updated**

candidates

Baier, Kelly, and Wallace:  Thank you all for coming to tonight’s debate, the first of the Presidential primary debates, held in the beautiful Quicken Loans arena in Ohio.

[Baier flips a switch under his desk, causing an electric billboard to light up with the words “applause.”  The carefully selected Fox News audience does as they’re told.  The billboard is hidden from the television cameras.]

Baier, Kelly, and Wallace:  We’ve ranked the candidates according to early polling results, so, here in the middle, is Donald Trump!

[Baier flips the switch so the billboard reads “awkward silence” and the crowd reacts accordingly.  The rest of the candidates approach the stage, accompanied by raucous cheering from the crowd.]

Baier, Kelly, and Wallace:  We’d like to begin tonight by setting out the rules…

[They’re interrupted by sounds of gun fire.  The audience begins to scream, but only after Baier instinctively hits the “scream” button for the billboard.  The candidates on stage are confused and defensive.  Men in camouflage masks, carrying automatic weapons, bar the doors and take control of the TV cameras.  Then, from stage left, a striking figure, tall, bearded, dark hair, light piercing eyes, and holding an intimidating 12 gauge shotgun, steps in front of the crowd.]

Shotgun:  Actually Baier, Kelly, and Wallace (BKW), I thought I’d lay out the rules this evening.  You all may know me as the infamous domestic terrorist who’s been killing abortion doctors, lynching black criminals, and looking good doing it.

[…he grins at the crowd…]

Shotgun:  You’re all businessmen, so I hope you all know when a man like me means business.  I’m going to be asking the questions tonight and I expect you all to behave.  I’m sick of this bread and circus show and want real answers for a change!  Do you all understand?

[BKW, the candidates, and the crowd, cringe with horror.  When Shotgun glances at BKW, Wallace feints and falls into Kelly, who screeches.  Shotgun waves his firearm in the candidate’s direction – they nod quickly and express murmurs of inaudible agreement.]

Shotgun:  Great!  So first thing’s first.  You’re all supposedly against abortion and speak strongly against Planned Parenthood’s selling of infant body parts.  Well and good, but some of you are only a few generations removed from people who used to *eat* infant body parts, so…if your ancestors used to eat babies, then leave the stage right now.

[Ben Carson immediately gets defensive.]

Carson:  But…But… I’m going to ring in an age of racial harmony!  A raceless utopia, where things like “skin color” no longer matter!  I’m going to…

[Shotgun interrupts, pointing his shotgun at Carson…]

Shotgun:  Get off the stage, carpetbagger!  You want to be president?  Run in Zimbabwe or Tunisia, where you belong.  You Republicans and your fetish for token blacks.  I ought to shoot all of you right now for even allowing it.

[The crowd recoils in fear.  During the commotion, Rubio slowly inches to stage left.]

Shotgun:  You too, Rubio.  I see you!  Get out of here!

[When noticed, he breaks into a run.  Shotgun’s men open one of the doors and let him out.  Meanwhile, Ted Cruz starts sweating, visibly nervous.]

Shotgun:  What about you, Cruz?  Did your ancestors eat babies?

Ted Cruz:  No!  No sir!  I’m as white as they come!

Shotgun:  Really?  Weren’t you bragging that your father was from…from… [Shotgun appears to think]…umm… Cuba, right?

Ted Cruz:  NO!!!!  No way!  I’m as white as they come, really.  Just look at me!  I’m a red-blooded American!

Shotgun:  Yes, but “Cruz”?  What kind of last name is that?  Sounds like you’re related to Montezuma.  You got some Aztec in you, Cruz?

Ted Cruz:  No, No!  You’ve got it all wrong.  I’m Ted Cruise, like Tom Cruise, you know?  He’s a good white actor!  That’s right!  I’m like Tom Cruise!

[Just then, before Shotgun can decide how to deal with Cruz, Donald Trump interrupts with characteristic impetuousness.]

Donald Trump:  Hell, I *still* eat babies!  Once a week for breakfast!

[The crowd gasps and before anyone can process what was just said, Shotgun slams the butt of his firearm into Trumps jaw.  He hits the floor amidst an explosion of blonde fluff, his hair flying off in all directions.  Shotgun’s men carry him away and dump him out back in the garbage.  This display of violence is too much for the out-of-shape Chris Christie, and he collapses with an apparent panic attack.]

Shotgun:  Can someone help that fat bastard?

Rand Paul:  Well, excuse me sir, but I have a few medicinal marijuana cigarettes with me.  My father was a doctor and said they’re good for calming people down.  It might help Christie.

Shotgun:  Alright.  Well done senator.

[Rand Paul offers Christie a joint, but Christie, still in a mild panic, refuses it.]

Christie:  Get that foul thing away from me!  I’m dedicated to my big-government constituents who want to keep marijuana illegal and perpetuate the massive “war on drugs”.  And I’m also dedicated to my baby-boomer constituents who’ve been carefully trained to accept government regulation of herbs and plants.  We can’t have them thinking they’re in charge of their own bodies!  So, get it away!

[Rand Paul backs away, confused.]

Shotgun:  No.  Wait, Rand.  Put the cigarette in Christie’s pocket, then my men will dump him out back with Trump.  He can either smoke it and calm himself, maybe prevent a heart attack even, or he can stick to his tyranny and die.

[Christie wails in fear and anger as Shotgun’s men lift him up.]

Christie:  I need sweets for my blood sugar!

Shotgun:  Well, you want to rob Americans of their social security benefits, why not rob the dumpster of sweets, instead?

Christie:  You wont get away with this! I know how to deal with terrorists!  I’ve devoted my life to dealing with people like you!  You’ll pay!!

Shotgun:  You hate terrorism so much?  Then stop supporting it by keeping drugs like marijuana illegal!  Terrorist groups are funded, in large part, by the sale of illegal drugs.  Countless minority communities are empowered by the illegal drug culture and produce violent offenders!  Get him out of here, men.

Christie:  I’ll get you!  I’ll rip the Bill of Rights in half if I have to!

Shotgun:  Well, governor, Americans used to know how to deal with tyrants.  The majority may not remember, but rest assured, I do.

[Something in Shotgun’s last words silenced Christie, who went limp and allowed himself to be taken out and thrown into the garbage.]

——————————————————————–

**UPDATE**

I apologize, but I don’t have the heart to finish this.

I was going to eliminate the candidates, one by one, until only Rand was left, leading my readers to suspect I supported him, but then he was going to get it because of his support for Israel and his back-peddling on the Civil Rights act.

Bush was going to grab up a few dozen guacamole bowls and flee the building with his Mestizo wife in tow.  Kasich was going to brag about his father being a mailman while scampering off into the “shadows” to live with the “shadow people”.  Ted Cruz was going to repeatedly try to steal Rand’s thunder until I punt him from the stage.  Scott Walker was going to get left there alone, forgotten by everyone.

…or something like that.

I hate American politics and view this as a dog and pony show.  The candidates are carbon copies of each other in all the ways that matter; they differ in the trappings – flare to lure in a gullible public.  None of them will save us.  None of them.

Our salvation (I’m talking about our Earthly political and social salvation, not our spiritual salvation) will come from elsewhere…from out of the pages of a Walter Scott novel.

Posted in General | 2 Comments

Shotgun Takes Aim at Russia

putinpuppy“Nothing makes a man more nationalistic than to think his country is owned by foreigners. He can adjust in time to losing a war. That only means the enemy was stronger. But to lose his economy means the enemy was smarter; the period of occupation lasts longer, and so do the scars.” ~ “The Bourne Identity”

I’ve read a series of books about Russia lately.  I want to understand what’s going on over there if only to have intelligent opinions when my friends bring up Putin’s antics.  The Russians are, after all, saying some very pro-family and pro-Christian things.  They’re openly defying the politically correct Western ethos and seem to promote nationalism.  But the indoctrinated Red-state baby boomers, including all the Republican presidential candidates, have a different idea.  To them, Putin isn’t a pro-family, traditionalist hero; he’s an ex-KGB agent trying to secretly re-build a communist empire so he can take over the world.

Fr. Raph Johnson introduced many alternative rightists, not only to Eastern Orthodoxy and monarchy, but to Russia and the Eastern European political situation.  I’ve listened to hundreds of hours of his podcast audio.  His enthusiasm for Russia and Eastern Europe never rubbed off on me but I did pay close attention to his interpretation of events.  If not for Raph Johnson, my study into Russian politics would have landed me in the Neo-Con camp.  But thanks to him, I was able to see a different story behind the one being spun by  English-speaking commentators.

First, I read Bill Browder’s “Red Notice.”

Browder was one of the jewish bankers trying to take financial control of Russia after the fall of communism; he was one of the only Western investment bankers willing to exploi…er…I mean… invest in Russia initially.  Browder, like most jews I’ve met, comes across as a likeable guy and his book was exciting and well written.  It tells how he muscled through the underbelly of the fledgling post-Communist market in Russia.  He made a successful investment in Russian vouchers which catapulted him to fame in the Western banking world, making him the go-to liaison for billionaires and hedge fund managers  Everyone wanted a piece of the Russian pie.

He went into business for himself, starting his own hedge fund in Russia.  It was initially successful, but then he ran afoul of one of the infamous Russian “oligarchs”.

“What’s an oligarch” you ask?  After the fall of communism, the KGB was left holding the majority of Russia’s assets.  Eventually, deals were made and a small group of filthy rich business men, about a hundred or so, ended up with thirty percent of the entire nation’s assets.  These men are referred to as the “oligarchs”.

Browder paints his clash with the oligarch as an example of Russian ineptitude and stubbornness.  Russians do not want their neighbors to succeed and will stop at nothing to screw them over, even if it hurts their own interests.  This didn’t make sense to me.  I thought there must have been another reason for this powerful business owner to clash with Browder’s hedge fund.  Browder hints at it himself:  the Russians have a backwards notion that foreigners shouldn’t make money at Russia’s expense.

Long story short, Putin kicks Browder out of Russia.  Browder, as jews are wont to do, went crying to the media, raised a ruckus in 2012, and managed to persuade the American government to pass the Magnitsky Act which barred the offending Russian “oligarchs” from traveling to the U.S.  My readers may be familiar with how Putin retaliated against the Magnitsky Act; he barred the Western adoption of Russian children.  My friends in the alternative right were applauding this, citing the morally decrepit nature of Westerners and seeing it as a slight against the degeneracy of America.  Well done Putin.  Browder, however, saw it as a horrible attempt (he drones on and on about it with typical jewish melodrama) to use children in a political game of cat and mouse.

What troubles me about Browder’s story is that, according to him, foreign investors take no controlling interest in the companies they invest in.  If that’s so, then my paradigm, building off Raph Johnson’s work, which says that Russia is protecting its national integrity by forcefully regulating (through bully tactics) its economy, would be wrong.  And Browder’s paradigm – of Putin as a bloodthirsty, greedy, tyrant, interested only in keeping his power and wealth, would be true.  Why would Putin’s wolf pack attack Browder if Browder posed no thread to Russia?  The only explanation would be that they wanted the hedge fund’s wealth.

I suspect there’s more to the story than Browder’s willing to tell us though – for example, he doesn’t disclose all of his investments.  He mentions his investment in Russian oil, but I suspect he was also trying to muscle in on Russian media and television.  And even though he claims he wouldn’t have exerted any influence over the companies, is that really true?  What would you think if an enemy of yours up and buys 30 percent of your house?

Even if Browder has accurately described Putin’s tyrannical “tactics” (unexplained police raids, etc.), in my mind, they were warranted.

Heck, Browder brags about being at a meeting of international bankers and powerful rich people.  There, he saw George Soros as well as many of the infamous Russian “oligarchs”.  They were concerned that Boris Yeltsin would lose the election to a communist and all their chances for investing in Russia would be lost.  They were all on edge, but assured Browder that they’d “make sure Yeltsin would win – they controlled the media, after all.  If these interests were able to control Russia before Putin came to power, then – were I Putin – I’d be very touchy about them trying to reassert themselves financially.

No – Putin, in my mind, was right to throw Browder out of the country and he’s right to carry on his legal campaign against him.  That’s what a real nationalist leader ought to do.

Next I read “Kleptocracy: Who really owns Russia” – a fascinating book detailing the exact nature of Putin’s rise to power and outlining the make up of his “shadow” government which, from my perspective, seems more like a quasi-feudalist arrangement.  Even in this book, also written from a view that’s hostile to Putin, the author mentions how “paranoid”Russians are about foreign financial interests.  “Kleptocracy” was written by a reporter and aims at educating the reader more than entertaining – so it’s less of a narrative account, like Browder’s had been, and more a book-length time-line of events.  Snooze.

I’ve read other books and, of course, hope to continue my study as my interest allows.  But for now, I’m choosing to see Russia as Raph Johnson sees her – a quasi-feudalist state, where Vladamir Putin forcefully wrested control away from the “oligarchs”, centralized it to himself, and set up a loose system of “tribute” and under-the-table pay-offs.  “For my friends, everything.  For my enemies…the law!”

…and God bless him for it…

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | 33 Comments

Tribe Uber Alles

trapped

If being a nationalist means we have to accept Eastern European class theory, with all its Marxist presppositions about “workers” and “owners of capital”, etc. then I’m not a nationalist.

Also, if being a racial nationalist means we have to be socialists, where the wealth of the racial nation is truly common (common-wealth) and class divisions (if there are such things) are mitigated with everyone having roughly the same amount of wealth (excepting small fluctuations), then I’m not a racial nationalist.

While my political position has often been classed under the fascist label, that says more about the ambiguity of the term “fascism” than it does about me. (I can’t wait to read Gottfried’s book on the subject).

I’m more of a medievalist, a neo-feudalist, or a tribalist. An anti-ist-ist, who envisions a series of decentralized, confederated duchies, where people don’t define themselves in terms of a Marxist financial class, nor in terms of their political and / or religious affiliations (hence the lack of “ists”), nor by the color of their shirt collar; rather they define themselves tribally.

I’m a Terry!

…and watch out because one day, if you’re unlucky, Terrys might come shouting out of the woods to sack your house, steal your women, and sip wine from the skulls of your mechanized police force.

Posted in General | 5 Comments

Idaho Hussy

huntress

As a radical, extremist, taboo-breaking, conservative Southerner, I often find that I have ostensible agreement with those on the far left – in this case, I’m as annoyed by the “Idaho Huntress” (a hussy who slaughters beautiful animals while bragging about her kills on social media), as my left-wing friends.

I’m opposed to her for numerous reasons. For example: I’m an ardent opponent of feminism so I hate seeing women trying to compete with men in traditionally masculine endeavors. It’s not cute.

That aside, I wonder if my view of hunting in general, might represent a compromise between the likes of me and the likes of PETA?

I like deer hunting, especially as it’s practiced here in NC.  There are too many of them, they’re pests, and they’re darn good eating. Few people kill deer without eating them.

I’m also not opposed to hunting for sport. Fox hunting, for example, is a traditional English sport and requires mastery of the equestrian arts (riding a horse, jumping obstacles, etc.) as well as mastery of the hounds and mastery of all manner of woodsmanship. That’s a noble sport. Quail hunting and duck hunting, also, strike me as noble and sporting hunts, requiring skill with dogs and a finesse with the firearm. The same goes for bow hunting or hunting with black powder rifles; they require skill and mastery of a craft.

And consider the hunting of exotic animals. For this, I would be alright if the hunters channeled their inner Beowulfs and fought the animals fairly. You want to kill a lion? Go after it with nothing but a bone knife. I’ll respect you then…

But here’s where my friends with PETA and I might find agreement:

The indiscriminate slaughter of beautiful exotic animals via a scope and rifle (sometimes the hunter never even leaves the safety of the safari vehicle), especially if there’s no intent to eat the animal and harvest its parts in some way…strikes me as cowardly and offensive.

We’ve got the most beautiful environment in the universe, on loan from the Creator. We ought to be ashamed if we don’t honor it.

Posted in General | 3 Comments

The Attack of the Frozen Chosen

frozenfrog

Being a leader, in whatever capacity, requires the balancing of multiple interests; this is true of the alternative right in…heh…in spades.  Lately, my friends in the Traditionalist Youth Network have been attacked from a few vocal Calvinists.  These attackers, mind you, would never associate with Trad Youth and wouldn’t be caught dead at an event  holding a picket sign.  Many don’t even use their real names; they launch their criticisms from the safety of web anonymity.  They don’t like this mixing of factions and want the Alt-Right tent to include only the preapproved.

Now I love racially self-conscious Calvinists and consider myself one, but trying to get them to do anything is neigh on impossible.  Whatever I’ve suggested in the past is either ignored, treated as a joke, or rationalized away.  “Frozen Chosen” indeed.

There’s an old metaphor about crabs in a bucket.  When one tries to climb out, the others drag it back down.  The same is true, it seems, about the pro-white movement in America.  Whenever a group gets active, it gets dozens, maybe even hundreds, of anonymous web voices trying to drag it back down; to slow its momentum.

And while there is something to the idea that Christians and pagans can’t mix – I don’t want to live in a pagan white nationalist utopia, for example – the idea that all forward progress and relationships ought to end in light of Christian theology, is not only asinine, it’s unhealthy.   Christianity isn’t a cult where, upon entry, all previous ties of friendship and camaraderie must be cut.

The Calvinist’s attempt to critique TradYouth lies, in my opinion, in their love for theological systems over love of people.  In contrast, I love God, not a theological system; yes, I hold to most of the Calvinist tenets, but I do so loosely, without much care.  If someone proves to me the Bible says something other than what I currently believe it says, then so be it.  I’m not going to die fighting for Reformed theology.   And here’s the important point:  NOR do I think so little of Holy Scriptures that I try to twist and turn them to enforce my personal likes and dislikes.

I’ve literally had puritanical-minded zealots try to present a Biblical case to me about the color of carpet in a church’s sanctuary.  Really?

I’ve hit on this theme before at Shotgun Barrel Straight:  I believe there’s a profound difference in what Richard Weaver called “Southern Religiosity” and that northern variety that was transplanted in the South after the War and is today called “fundamentalism.”

I hold to the Southern religiosity.  As I see it, I’m an intellectual heir of the likes of C.S. Lewis, Walter Scott, and the author of Cambria Will Not Yield.  Most of the Kinists, however, including those Calvinists attacking Trad Youth, seem to be the intellectual heirs of the puritans, the Covenanters, and the Scholastics.  There’s a great deal of interplay between the two groups and Kinists are a mixed bag about which tradition they fall into (sometimes it’s determined by how the individual Kinist feels that morning)…but I’m firmly in the one camp while many are in the other.

…chalk that up as one more way I’m an awkward fit in the Alternative Right.

I’m willing to work with pagans against white genocide, just like I’m willing to read and enjoy works written by non-Christians.  If we don’t love and understand our comrades, then there’s no way they’ll ever see the hope that’s in Christ.

Our frozen chosen friends could learn from St. Patrick.  Dive into the midst of the pagans; show them the better way…they will respond!

Posted in General | 9 Comments