Great piece of thinking outside the box. It reminded me of the last paragraph of Daniel Concannon's post.
"But this is what you get with Con Inc con artists; a bunch of Team Red razzle dazzle that spins you around until you're so off balance that you begin spewing the same anti-White dogshit you'd expect to hear from Team Blue, as both teams work in cooperative harmony to keep you away from Team White."
Antiwhiteism is self-inflicted. It's a coalition of pathologically altruistic self-flagellating Whites and self-interested non-White racial groups willing and ready to milk the White cow.
No, it’s not ‘self-inflicted’. All you need do is look at the relentless onslaught by jews against Whites who say ‘It’s okay to be White’ to see that the damage is not solely or even primarily the result of self-immolation.
Whites could hold all kinds of racially-destructive views as long as there were no non-Whites to exploit those views.
It's ok to be White? How WEAK is that? It sounds like asking others for approval of your own existence.
It's FUCKING GREAT to be WHITE! That's not exaggeration. That's reality. You are a member of the most successful, most civilized, most dominant group that has ever walked this Earth. And you have a need to ask for approval from others?
Now, the Jewish question. Jews worldwide are 15 million. Whites are 1.2-1.5 billion. That's 1%. How weak is it blaming the fate of 1.5 billion on a group that is 100 times smaller? Did you notice it's the same thing that Blacks do (blaming Whites)? It's time to leave the Jewish plantation. A better option might be: drink juice for breakfast, and dominate for the rest of the day. It's hard to achieve much in life, either as an individual or as a group, if one is trapped in victim mentality.
I'm happy to be White. I don't know why you think it requires such a worked-up response.
'Victim mentality' us a phrase created by jews. It was focus-group-tested to cause Whites to remain silent in the face of racial abuse
Whites caring about Whites because they are White *and no other reason* is the foundation of White survival and thriving. Everything else emerges from that fertile soil.
The worked up response wasn't targeted at you, rather at the slogan you mentioned. The 'you' in my response was more of a rhetorical device.
The concept of 'victim mentality' AFAIK was 'invented' completely independently of the White/Jewish considerations. Jews invented a lot of things (e.g. theory of relativity). Reality of a concept doesn't depend on who invented it, but how well it corresponds to reality.
I'm agnostic on the Jewish question (i.e. 'Jews are bad'). I don't know of one source that makes a proper quantitative scientific case for this, only narratives and verbiage. What we do know is Jews are overrepresented everywhere at the top because of their high IQ and perhaps other traits. So their overrepresentation is also expected in prominent positions you or I don't like (yes, even anti-White politics). Also, some really smart pro-White advocates, namely uncle Jared, are at worst agnostic on the Jewish question.
The ‘theory of relativity’ wasn’t invented by a jew. Like most so-called ‘jewish inventions’ it was a pastiche of previous creative effort by non-jews.
The ‘reality of a concept’ is an abuse of language. A ‘concept’ cannot have ‘reality’. Such nonsense comes from believing in fantasies like ‘YAHWEH’ and ‘CHRIST’.
The jews are the jews.
They’re bad for non-jews and always have been. That’s because being a jew means resisting all assimilation to other value systems (and the people’s who create them).
The concept of ‘victim mentality’ was invented by jews. It’s a worthless idea that is targeted solely at non-jews.
Have you ever heard in a jew tell another jew to ‘get over your victim mentality’?
I haven’t. At least not seriously. As a joke, maybe, to show off jewish power and and reinforce their fake ‘holocaust’ grift.
To the extent that someone is a ‘victim’ then feeling like a victim is normal and healthy because at least you’re not in denial about your situation.
‘Victim mentality’ is a just another kind of denial.
'Irony' is the eye of the beholder. I see nothing ironic about picking up a tool and using it. Baudrillard's theory of the countervailing forces of 'the ruling class' and 'the masses' is adaptable to the 'leaderless resistance' network-cellular model under which White Nationalism has survived (and advanced) for the last 40 years.
I’ll do as I please. And I’m not ‘raping’ anything. Baudrillard’s theory of the power of ‘the masses’ doesn’t belong to anti-Whites. It belongs to anyone able to put it to good use.
Given Baudrillard’s working class background, I doubt he’d be as squeamish as you about how his tools were used.
Using Baudrillard’s theory to justify racial dominance is like quoting Fanon to defend colonialism. The theory wasn’t built for that, and twisting it doesn’t make it coherent.
Fanon was a dumb darkie. He made up a story about how oppressed darkies were by Whites and the cause of darkie unhappiness.
Baudrillard was a genuine social-cultural-semiotic theorist. I seriously doubt he’d have a problem with Whites resisting an anti-White ruling class.
But, for some reason, you do.
Baudrillard’s examination of the sources of power of ‘the masses’ applies just as much to the White ‘masses’ as it does to ‘the masses’ in general. Because, of course, all specific members of a genus belong to the genus. That’s how ‘genus’ works.
Baudrillard give White Nationalists a way of understanding why aligning the movement with ideas about ‘special knowledge’ or ‘educating the masses’ is simply doing the work of the anti-White regime. What White Nationalists struggling within the judeo-darkie anti-White system have to do is to create a sentimental infrastructure - ‘Whites caring about Whites because they are White’ - which Whites can use to gravitate toward one another, creating another ‘black hole’ of belief and behavior outside the reach of the judeo-darkie semio-cancer.
As for using Baudrillard in combination with the ‘leaderless resistance’ approach taken by White advocates since the 1980s, it seems perfectly coherent to me. But, then, I’m not trapped in judeo-darkie notions of what Whites should think or how they should think about White survival and thriving.
Enhancing the ability for White Nationalists to prevail through stealth and guile is not something the regime wants. And neither do you. Which is why ‘critiques’ are completely wasted.
I can use Baudrillard as I please to achieve the goals of White Nationalism by creating the conditions for the collapse of the judeo-darkie regime while concealed in the shadow of the White majorities.
Baudrillard is a interesting and profound thinker. Virtually anything you read by him will be challenging and worth meeting the challenge. 'In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities', however, is the one I come back to again and again.
Great piece of thinking outside the box. It reminded me of the last paragraph of Daniel Concannon's post.
"But this is what you get with Con Inc con artists; a bunch of Team Red razzle dazzle that spins you around until you're so off balance that you begin spewing the same anti-White dogshit you'd expect to hear from Team Blue, as both teams work in cooperative harmony to keep you away from Team White."
https://gab.com/KeepNHGranite/posts/114865098103531603
Thank you, C.
Astute comments over at C-C on Epstein too.
Thank you, C.
Antiwhiteism is self-inflicted. It's a coalition of pathologically altruistic self-flagellating Whites and self-interested non-White racial groups willing and ready to milk the White cow.
No, it’s not ‘self-inflicted’. All you need do is look at the relentless onslaught by jews against Whites who say ‘It’s okay to be White’ to see that the damage is not solely or even primarily the result of self-immolation.
Whites could hold all kinds of racially-destructive views as long as there were no non-Whites to exploit those views.
But there are.
And their name is ‘jew’.
It's ok to be White? How WEAK is that? It sounds like asking others for approval of your own existence.
It's FUCKING GREAT to be WHITE! That's not exaggeration. That's reality. You are a member of the most successful, most civilized, most dominant group that has ever walked this Earth. And you have a need to ask for approval from others?
Now, the Jewish question. Jews worldwide are 15 million. Whites are 1.2-1.5 billion. That's 1%. How weak is it blaming the fate of 1.5 billion on a group that is 100 times smaller? Did you notice it's the same thing that Blacks do (blaming Whites)? It's time to leave the Jewish plantation. A better option might be: drink juice for breakfast, and dominate for the rest of the day. It's hard to achieve much in life, either as an individual or as a group, if one is trapped in victim mentality.
I'm happy to be White. I don't know why you think it requires such a worked-up response.
'Victim mentality' us a phrase created by jews. It was focus-group-tested to cause Whites to remain silent in the face of racial abuse
Whites caring about Whites because they are White *and no other reason* is the foundation of White survival and thriving. Everything else emerges from that fertile soil.
The worked up response wasn't targeted at you, rather at the slogan you mentioned. The 'you' in my response was more of a rhetorical device.
The concept of 'victim mentality' AFAIK was 'invented' completely independently of the White/Jewish considerations. Jews invented a lot of things (e.g. theory of relativity). Reality of a concept doesn't depend on who invented it, but how well it corresponds to reality.
I'm agnostic on the Jewish question (i.e. 'Jews are bad'). I don't know of one source that makes a proper quantitative scientific case for this, only narratives and verbiage. What we do know is Jews are overrepresented everywhere at the top because of their high IQ and perhaps other traits. So their overrepresentation is also expected in prominent positions you or I don't like (yes, even anti-White politics). Also, some really smart pro-White advocates, namely uncle Jared, are at worst agnostic on the Jewish question.
If you've got any good sources, send them my way.
The ‘theory of relativity’ wasn’t invented by a jew. Like most so-called ‘jewish inventions’ it was a pastiche of previous creative effort by non-jews.
The ‘reality of a concept’ is an abuse of language. A ‘concept’ cannot have ‘reality’. Such nonsense comes from believing in fantasies like ‘YAHWEH’ and ‘CHRIST’.
The jews are the jews.
They’re bad for non-jews and always have been. That’s because being a jew means resisting all assimilation to other value systems (and the people’s who create them).
The concept of ‘victim mentality’ was invented by jews. It’s a worthless idea that is targeted solely at non-jews.
Have you ever heard in a jew tell another jew to ‘get over your victim mentality’?
I haven’t. At least not seriously. As a joke, maybe, to show off jewish power and and reinforce their fake ‘holocaust’ grift.
To the extent that someone is a ‘victim’ then feeling like a victim is normal and healthy because at least you’re not in denial about your situation.
‘Victim mentality’ is a just another kind of denial.
The irony is so thick. Why do you do this?
'Irony' is the eye of the beholder. I see nothing ironic about picking up a tool and using it. Baudrillard's theory of the countervailing forces of 'the ruling class' and 'the masses' is adaptable to the 'leaderless resistance' network-cellular model under which White Nationalism has survived (and advanced) for the last 40 years.
Please don’t rape Baudrillards theory like this. Use something else, this ain’t it.
I’ll do as I please. And I’m not ‘raping’ anything. Baudrillard’s theory of the power of ‘the masses’ doesn’t belong to anti-Whites. It belongs to anyone able to put it to good use.
Given Baudrillard’s working class background, I doubt he’d be as squeamish as you about how his tools were used.
Using Baudrillard’s theory to justify racial dominance is like quoting Fanon to defend colonialism. The theory wasn’t built for that, and twisting it doesn’t make it coherent.
But you do you 🍔
Fanon was a dumb darkie. He made up a story about how oppressed darkies were by Whites and the cause of darkie unhappiness.
Baudrillard was a genuine social-cultural-semiotic theorist. I seriously doubt he’d have a problem with Whites resisting an anti-White ruling class.
But, for some reason, you do.
Baudrillard’s examination of the sources of power of ‘the masses’ applies just as much to the White ‘masses’ as it does to ‘the masses’ in general. Because, of course, all specific members of a genus belong to the genus. That’s how ‘genus’ works.
Baudrillard give White Nationalists a way of understanding why aligning the movement with ideas about ‘special knowledge’ or ‘educating the masses’ is simply doing the work of the anti-White regime. What White Nationalists struggling within the judeo-darkie anti-White system have to do is to create a sentimental infrastructure - ‘Whites caring about Whites because they are White’ - which Whites can use to gravitate toward one another, creating another ‘black hole’ of belief and behavior outside the reach of the judeo-darkie semio-cancer.
As for using Baudrillard in combination with the ‘leaderless resistance’ approach taken by White advocates since the 1980s, it seems perfectly coherent to me. But, then, I’m not trapped in judeo-darkie notions of what Whites should think or how they should think about White survival and thriving.
Enhancing the ability for White Nationalists to prevail through stealth and guile is not something the regime wants. And neither do you. Which is why ‘critiques’ are completely wasted.
I can use Baudrillard as I please to achieve the goals of White Nationalism by creating the conditions for the collapse of the judeo-darkie regime while concealed in the shadow of the White majorities.
What I’m saying is that what YOU are doing right now is if I used Fanon to defend colonialism. It is absurd.
Baudrillard deserves better. If he were alive today he probably kill himself immediately after seeing you grape the shit out of his work.
Baudrillard is a interesting and profound thinker. Virtually anything you read by him will be challenging and worth meeting the challenge. 'In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities', however, is the one I come back to again and again.