Taking a Break

 

Thranduil by kagalin

Because of heavy school work, I plan to lower my posting frequency for the next few months. Keep in mind if you choose to browse older posts of mine that they are likely to be more and more ‘immature’ the farther back you go, that doesn’t mean that they don’t contain any valid information, but they are likely to seem a bit odd to newer members of my audience.

In the mean time, I will now provide a link to a philosophy channel on Youtube since some individuals have asked me, as well as Curt Doolittle, where to start on studying philosophy or various philosophers. The name of the channel: Rules of the Mind. There is also a traditional Catholic MGTOWist named Mark who has done some very thorough videos especially on Nietzsche you can click this link to go to his Youtube channel. (I haven’t been incorporating Nietzsche into my posts with the intent of annoying Christians; if Mark has learned something from Nietzsche, I think Nietzsche is of some worth to Christians).

Now since someone commented on my previous post bringing up the fact that male members of K-selected species are masculinized, and that this conflicts with the somewhat androgynous appearance of the elves (who have many K-selected traits), I will now show visual examples of the masculinity which male elves possess in spite of their beardlessness and long hair.

Feanor and his followers

Thranduil and Elrond:

The Noldor and Vanyar

There is a perverse tendency among some members of the right to equate ugliness and stupidity with masculinity. One of the reasons I began this blog in the first place was to counter this tendency.

The archetypal duality between the aesthetically harmonious, refined, intelligent man, and the extremely strong, bearded (I’m not saying beards are necessarily ugly), unintelligent one is actually quite old and can be seen in the Norse deities of Baldur and Thor, as well as in Greek myth in the conflicting characters of Apollo (beardless, intellectual) and Heracles (bearded, strong, unrefined). Because male elves visually tend to embody the former archetype more than the latter (in their behavior they often embody both), there is a tendency to see them as effeminate; I don’t exactly see them this way; they are just a different type of masculine than many are accustomed to.

In the United States, these two conflicting male archetypes were brought over, respectively, by the refined Cavaliers to the Virginia Tidewater, and the rough backcountry Scotch-Irish to Appalachia. This has, of course, led to vastly different cultural trajectories for these two areas of the South. Having grown up in the area of the US where the Cavaliers settled, I suppose that I was influenced by their ideas about aesthetics and masculinity, and you will find this reflected throughout my blog.

 

 

Advertisements

Inside the Head of an Ideologue

I was going to post this later, but now with the George Ciccariello incident, I have decided to post it today.

I have observed among many, two prominent post-enlightenment, post-Darwinian justifications for different Western political positions regarding the fate of European peoples. Both follow from the premise that evolution is true, but reach different conclusions.

Inside the Head of a Leftist

The usual Europhobic leftist may not realize it, but being a child of Whiggism and Critical Theory, he (or more likely a she) often, but not always, follows a line of reasoning which goes something like this:

Evolution is true, therefore God does not exist, therefore Christianity is false, therefore the people who believed in Christianity (Europeans, and their white American descendants) are bad, therefore Europeans should go extinct through mass immigration, low birth rates and miscegenation.

now obviously this is full of logical fallacies which I don’t need to point out, and the leftist more likely did these mental gymnastics with the aid of emotionally based thought patterns of empathizing with out-groups, than any kind of rigorous logical deduction. The point I’m trying to make is that these people aren’t thinking things through; to us they are cruel, but they are really just like zombies, or rather robots simply following the mental programming that everyone else has in their urban metropolitan area by following this flawed logical deduction which they most likely received in their education.

Inside the Head of an Alt-Right Shitlord

The ethnonationalist right (not Christian fundamentalists, neocons or neoliberals) of the present day will likely counter the leftist argument I presented above using something like this:

Evolution is true, therefore different races have evolved different adaptations for different environments, therefore different races possess different strengths, therefore the white European race possesses unique strengths which have made it successful at producing higher civilizations, therefore the white European race should be preserved by preventing mass immigration and miscegenation, and increasing birthrates.

Now to me this logical deduction seems mostly valid. If one were to try to avoid any possibility of committing the naturalistic fallacy, you could take it a step further and argue that the white European race and the qualities inherent to it serve as a necessary biological platform, or raw material, for continued, self-directed evolution to make this race even fitter than it already is; to create a certain higher type of man.

Conclusion

It is worth taking the time to pick apart the thought process of your opponent in a political conflict. Even though logic might not be enough to sway the masses, it is enough to embarrass people who think of themselves as rational intellectuals, and who are capable of understanding the flaws of their own reasoning. This is important, especially when dealing with high IQ leaders (usually college professors) of legions of SJWs. We can no longer deal with these people by simply calling them “white-genocidists” (even if it’s true), because it just makes us look like whiggish liberals as well; rather, we need to take the risk of close-range combat (exhaustive debate) to deconstruct the ideology on which their views depend.

Morgoth and Fingolfin. by helgecbalzer
Morgoth and Fingolfin. by helgecbalzer on DeviantArt

 

 

 

Why Nietzsche? How I See Things

Wanderer above the Sea of Fog, Caspar David Fredrich

Those of you who are more familiar with the German philosopher Fredrich Nietzsche may be wondering why an ethnonationalist like myself is blogging about him. It seems common knowledge that Nietzsche was against nationalism, so why do I bother to bring him up?

Update 2/19/2017 I wrote this a while back and may disagree with it to a certain extent.

Continue reading “Why Nietzsche? How I See Things”

Moral Instruction

Well, it seems that my post on Nominalism and liberalism has not been of much interest to anyone yet, so I have decided to write about something some people might find less intellectually demanding: morality. I previously stated in my first post that what Nietzsche called slave morality needs to decline in order for the West to have any backbone (and to prevent the extinction of ethnic European peoples). I still hold to this idea. In this post I will give one example of how one might find good moral instruction in a source some might find unlikely: anime.

As I began to get deeper and deeper into the broader nonreactionary movement, I began to encounter a mild fanaticism related to anime, particularly in the alt-right. Of course there was one mainstream Republican news reporter who mocked the alt-right back in January of this year calling it a movement of “childless single men who masturbate to anime”(I don’t actually know if Rick Wilson’s claim is entirely false!).

Whjven5uthxrrbafhusa

Continue reading “Moral Instruction”

Liberalism as a Derivative of Nominalism

I have recently been watching a series of videos explaining the origins of modern Western Liberalism in the Nominalist philosophical movement which emerged in Europe during the High Middle Ages. I will post the videos below. The author of the video series, however, does not explain the possible origins of Nominalism in the anti-Essentialism and anti-intellectualism found in the Bible itself (Gal. 3:28, Prov. 3:7, 1 Cor. 1:25), and how this anti-Essentialism was tempered for a period of time by the Church’s adoption of Hellenic (mostly Platonic and Aristotlean) philosophy, but later let loose by the Sola Scriptura of the Protestant Reformation. This untempered anti-Essentialism, particularly present in Evangelical Protestant Christianity (but also to an extent in Catholicism), appears to be what Nietzsche begins to react against as explained in Part 5.  After watching these you should be able to understand the Nominalist roots of feminism, transgenderism, and race denialism. It should also be clear why political correctness has a much tighter grip on the populace in countries with a historical Protestant presence like America, Canada, Britain, Germany, and Sweden, than more Catholic and Orthodox countries such as Spain, Italy, and most of Eastern Europe including Russia.