Print this post Print this post

Man on a Mission

Katherine Russell, Before and After

Katherine Russell, Before and After

946 words

Finnish translation here

One interesting subplot within the Boston Marathon tragedy is the story of Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s wife, Katherine Russell. By all accounts and appearances, she was an utterly typical White American girl up until being pulled into his orbit. The establishment narrative has been from the start, and will remain, that she was a brainwashed and abused victim of her violent extremist husband. In time, Katherine Russell is likely to join Patti Hearst, Lee Boyd Malvo, and the entire nation of France in claiming Stockholm Syndrome, embracing the victim’s narrative and thereby absolving herself of any real guilt and accountability.

Tamerlan was certainly tyrannical, reportedly hurling furniture and verbal abuse at her with abandon. Radical Islam, or any Islam for that matter, is an alien threat to be purged from our communities and they should never be allowed to consider themselves at home in either Europe or the Americas. The terrorist act itself was unconscionable and indefensible, managing to target one of the last remaining wholesome and noble American public festivals.

But there’s more going on here than the natural attraction two humans commonly have when circumstances bring them together. She chose Islamic extremism, married it, had its baby, and defiantly wears its hijab even after it slaughtered and maimed her own people. Why? We’ll have a better idea, perhaps, after the smoke’s cleared and more information is revealed. There are surely multiple factors that play into life choices of this magnitude. But my hunch is that Katherine Russell gave in to the natural attraction we all, especially women, have for a strong and confident man on a mission.

Much is made in New Right circles about how pity, tolerance for weakness, and ressentiment are integrally feminine. Women, especially contemporary White American women, do indeed seem to relish clapping along with degeneracy, dysfunction, and failure. Their noble and natural impulse to nurture is perverted by contemporary culture into pitying and nurturing exotic AIDS orphans, hostile immigrants, and house cats. It also finds dysfunctional expression in their superficial claims to favor humble, meek, and sensitive men whose world revolves around pleasing them.

Rescue Them from Decadence and Nihilism

Rescue Them from Decadence and Nihilism

Setting aside their inept dichotomization rather than synthesis of the sexes, setting aside their promiscuous and manipulative objectives, the Internet’s “game” subculture speaks the truth in its admonition to America’s hordes of craven, feminized, and insecure young fail males to act like they’re confident, act like they’re not fixated on getting laid, and act like they’re afraid of neither rejection nor death.

That’s all well and good, but this matrix of behaviors all come easily and naturally to a man who’s truly sublimated his will to a transcendent goal and weaponized his mind and body in service of something other than playing video games or making more money for her to spend.

In essence, chicks dig a traditional patriarch, especially a warrior. It’s not just chicks, either. Everybody craves a compelling narrative, and everybody who’s not wrapped up in a powerful and enchanting life story yearns for that. Whether they’re enjoying romance novels, celebrity magazines, or reality television, they’re escaping into lives with gravity, meaning, depth, fame, and power. They’re trying to escape the grinding and depressing banality of  this nihilistic, fragmented, and creatively exhausted modern American life.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev

Tamerlan Tsarnaev

An interesting phenomenon happened when Scott Terry spoke up in favor of patriarchy and White Southern heritage at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference. The first reflexive response of the audience was to scold and shame him. Had he shrunk back, apologized, or betrayed anxiety, guilt, or shame, they would have instinctively doubled down.

That’s often where things go downhill for budding White Advocates. The human herd’s predatory instincts are like a wolf’s, and retreating is an invitation to chase. In “game” speak, this political phenomenon is analogous to a “shit test.” They tried to shame him, but they could see in his eyes and his words that he didn’t answer to them; he was a man on a mission.

In such situations, your adversaries are trying to figure out where your metric of esteem and respect lies. Many men who are pro-White or say “racist” things are actually in their heart of hearts still beholden to this system. They’re still playing the system’s game, and can’t help but come off as hand-wringing guilt-addled losers. When you refuse to radically reorient yourself to an alternative worldview, you can only lose, because preserving our heritage and faith is against the official rules of the game. Tsarnaev’s uncle’s scolding him as a “loser” feels like a damning indictment to them. Being a “racist”, a “sexist”, or an “extremist” is certainly a loser move in this moral matrix. But Tsarnaev can’t lose, because he wasn’t playing their game. The gods of his far-off land had repossessed his blood.

The answer to their imminent threat of jihad is our own crusade, a repossession of our own blood of our own gods from our own lands. We won’t target innocent civilians in their homeland (putting us a step above our own federal government). It’s not really even about anything overtly military. It’s, as Evola calls it in Metaphysics of War, a waging of the inner war, a victory of our primal instincts and highest traditions over the sins, vices, and excesses of the Modern world. If we can initiate that process, we’ll no longer be complaining about more virile and traditional males from outside our nation running off with our women. Our enemies will instead be complaining about them being “brainwashed” with our own supposed “extremism.”

 

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

38 Comments

  1. Donar van Holland
    Posted April 30, 2013 at 6:54 am | Permalink

    Liddell’s article on Hitler could have reflected an honest though rather confused position, but his reactions to the comments exposed a disingenuous and dishonourable attitude.

    In my opinion however, actions by Jews or their Ring Wraiths always explode in their faces in the end. After Hitler, the Jews could have had easy life, just being among themselves in their own country. Whites would have remained racially unaware, happily pursuing an empty, bourgeois life. But no, in their blind hate the Jews forced multiracialism and discrimination on white countries. And these precisely are waking whites up. Like prisoners in a desegregated jail, they start to feel the call of the gods of the blood.

    Likewise, although Liddell has given in to mainstream pressure – in fact exactly because of that – AltRight can still function as a bridge to more honest positions. At least as long as they maintain the overlap in many other areas.

    My own quest has led me from Liberalism to Classical Liberalism to Ayn Rand to Geert Wilders and the counter-Jihad to Nationalism to Kevin MacDonald to the New Right. I could never have done that in one step. We need bridges to our position. AltRight and Taki Magazine do seem to fulfill this function, even while regrettably kowtowing to Jewish pressure.

    To paraphrase Lenin: The Jews will force on us the rope with which we will hang them.

  2. Abraxas
    Posted April 28, 2013 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    I just had a brilliant idea that would advance your cause rapidly. Someone else would do all the work and bear all the expense and it would exponentially increase the numbers and fervor of your supporters.

    Re-institute the draft. With no exemptions.

    That would really put the White kids –especially all those high-minded university kids–on an equal footing, cheek by jowl, 24/7 for a couple of years, with their Black and Latino and Other peers. Who knows? A few of them might wake up to the reality of their situation.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted April 28, 2013 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

      Now that women can be in combat, I think there will never be a draft, even if the nation’s survival depended upon it.

      • rhondda
        Posted April 29, 2013 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

        If it is true that certain groups ( Zionists, capitalists, etc) are hell bent on destroying white people, then making women of child bearing age be drafted would certainly be one way to do it. Since most lefty women are into delusional attitudes of grandeur, and think they are invincible, especially if they feel the power of holding or shooting a gun, I see drafting women to be a distinct possibility. After all mothers who are now in the military leave their children to fulfill their obligations. What is to stop the powers that be to insist all women leave them for the country? (to be brainwashed by government nurseries) Lefty men are not chivalrous ever and some right wing men are so mad at feminists that they don’t care about those who refuse to let go of their kids to be fodder. Hey genocide works in mysterious malevolent ways. Even though I am not a great fan of Phylis Schlafly, this was one fear she did express years ago. Being a dumb leftly at the time, I dismissed it, but now I think she may have been prescient.

      • Fourmyle of Ceres
        Posted April 29, 2013 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

        There is a possibility of a skills-based draft if need be; special translators, specialized talent only. That is ready to go. This draft need not be limited to the Armed Forces. It could focus on Americorps type organizations, offered as a “one stop shop” for bringing the new underclass, the Mexicans in America, into economically viable skills based teaching situations. Moving the new arrivals to formerly mothballed Army bases en masse is not out of the questions.

        Indeed, as the tax base collapses, one way to bridge the gap would be to draft unemployable youngsters into useful work, training them while they are paying them. A lot of veterans and the elderly, for example, could use someone to help clean up around the house, run errands like getting groceries, and help keep them organized. Tying this into a training component with some sort of licensing and certification adds value for all participants. Remember, the system is full of barely literate young people, who are virtually unemployable at a job that requires literacy. In fact, 75% of the applicants for the Armed Forces do not qualify for intellectual, physical, or moral grounds.

        Of course, a strong indoctrination component will be part of the training system. I can easily see potential paramilitary assistance squads formed under the rubric of law enforcement assistance. And you wondered where the new Red Guard Brigades would come from!

        Incidentally, just as in the Armed Forces, the government can force you to take all manner of vaccines and medications, and this will repeat WILL include Norplant. You can guess why.

        Of course, in the Northwest Homeland the Labor Service would deal with these issues in an entirely different manner. But that’s for any another time.

  3. rhondda
    Posted April 27, 2013 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    I do see now I have to read Metaphysics of War. I do not see it as men against women, but White Nationalists against pussy footers. Can anyone recommend a good book on game theory? I repeat not to play against men, but against those who fail to understand .
    I see at a certain website they have recruited a woman to tell everyone how it is in traditionalism.
    Isn’t that a bit of a contradiction? Are they licking her toes?

    • Posted April 27, 2013 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

      rhondda,

      I see at a certain website they have recruited a woman to tell everyone how it is in traditionalism.

      Colin even used Greg’s Facebook profile as the featured image on the post. This makes for a grand total of three posts on the site submitted with malice aforethought.

      Isn’t that a bit of a contradiction?

      I’m cool with women participating in and even leading discussions about Tradition. I’m not cool with a nagging and finger-wagging admonition to avoid unnamed crazies and operate within undefined boundaries of respectability. It’s integrally one big call to place what’s arbitrarily “respectable” before what’s “honorable”. It’s a demand for “us” to distance “ourselves” from men and women, those “naked rune yodelers” who truly believe and act on their cherished and sincerely held convictions.

      I believe women can avoid this pitfall (Savitri Devi, for one!), but I believe the paralyzing fear that “They’re all gonna laugh at you!” is one women tend to be more susceptible to.

      Alternative Right needs to think long and hard about whether it’s going to be respectable or honorable. It’s a reckoning every individual and institution must deal with sooner or later. Sooner or later, rhetoric or circumstances force the issue. If Alt.Right does finally err on the side of mainstream respectability, self-consciousness, and triangulating against those further to the Right of themselves, that will be a terrible setback for our cause, as there really does need to be a quality zine occupying that relatively broad and ecumenical “alternative right” gateway niche.

      • rhondda
        Posted April 27, 2013 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

        Ah yes paralyzing fear, mine is paranoia. What have I said which will be used against me? I love that movie Carrie, especially the Karmic ending. Having been laughed at, I realized that one can survive. As Nietzsche says ‘whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”.

      • Lew
        Posted April 27, 2013 at 11:27 pm | Permalink

        There’s doubt in your mind about where the folks who run altright stand after those essays? They’re closer to slander than expressions of principled disagreement on an issue. In terms of tone and substance, the model for disagreement between two people of good will divided on a fundamental issue would be something like Steve Sailer versus Jared Taylor on the merits of Citizenism. Time to write them off, along with A3P. It seems that nothing good ever comes from mixing with conservatives (of any strain). A lesson I learned from you, Johnson and another radical that I will not mention but that I did not want to accept for a long time.

      • Posted April 28, 2013 at 12:18 am | Permalink

        Lew,

        It seems that nothing good ever comes from mixing with conservatives (of any strain). A lesson I learned from you, Johnson and another radical that I will not mention but that I did not want to accept for a long time.

        Touché.

      • Trainspotter
        Posted April 28, 2013 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

        Lew: “Time to write them off, along with A3P.”

        With regards to Alt Right, I’d say a definite “maybe.” Liddell’s columns were ridiculous and infantile, but other Alt Right writers were not particularly hostile. And hey, at the end of the day, they hosted a discussion in which high quality commenters were allowed to pretty much rip Liddell to shreds, as he richly deserved.

        I’d call it a win, honestly. At this point, I don’t have animosity for Alt Right, and will continue reading them. We’ll just have to see how they play it going forward.

      • Lew
        Posted April 28, 2013 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

        We’ve seen how waiting and seeing turned out the with A3P. Within a roughly 12 month period, we went from learning a board member was working with RP behind the scenes, to Merlin Miller denouncing WNists, to the party itself formally disavowing explicit advocacy. These things always end the same way.

      • Trainspotter
        Posted April 28, 2013 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

        Lew, it’s entirely possible that you are correct, and I’m not making a prediction either way.

        Liddell’s column was a nasty, cheap shot. But, as a simple matter of fact, Alt Right hosted a fairly substantive discussion of some thorny issues, in a way that few webzines would. I would say that the “radicals” came off pretty well, and probably opened a few eyes in the process. I think we weakened, however slightly, the power of the dreaded Hitler Talisman that is used to bash white identity.

        I’m hesitant to write off a venue where our ideas can get a fair hearing, because so few exist. As of today, Alt Right still meets that standard. At the same time, though, if this turns out to be merely an initial shot across the bow, followed by more overt hostility, it will be a real loss.

        However the Alt Right saga turns out, this whole episode makes it apparent that we should be doing more to support Counter-Currents. It’s that important.

      • Lew
        Posted April 29, 2013 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

        I think Hitler is a fair subject for debate. With the culture being what it is, it is true that most of the potential audience for “alternative” views are going to be utterly repulsed by Hitler. They are not going to understand the way that Hitler is handled at C-C does not mean unqualified support at C-C for German NS.

        The culture being what it is, most sympathizers are not going to understand basic issues like why you can’t limit discourse based on how the mainstream might react to an idea. It puts you on the path toward self-censorship, accepting the enemy’s frame, and, ultimately, intellectual defeat before you start because the mainstream worldview is the problem in the first place.

        This knowledge gap is usually viewed as a barrier to persuasion in rightist circles, but in the hands of skilled writers of good will, it is as much an opportunity for education as it is a problem. Contrary to popular perception, Hitler and NS have all the makings of an interesting and nuanced debate. We saw some of that in the comments under Liddell’s hit piece.

        I quit following Liddell when he concluded discussing black genocide was a clever way to draw attention to white genocide, using, in the process, language reinforcing the worst stereotypes of “alternative rightists” as evil.

        I have no idea what that guy’s malfunction is, and, quite frankly, I don’t care. If Liddell was motivated by legitimate concern about Hitler driving people away from alterative perspectives, he could have launched a sharp but respectful debate on the issue (See, again, Sailer versus Taylor on Citizenism for an example of how fundamental disagreements can be handle constructively). Instead, he wrote a hit piece that wouldn’t be out of place on the SPLCs Hate Watch blog.

        So what does all this have to do with parallels between A3P and alt right? Simple. When an individual inside an organization makes a decision that is so egregiously bad and damaging to the community on its face, it damages the credibility of the whole organization and by extension every decent person in it (ex: bringing Merlin Miller on board or publishing Liddell’s hit piece under the alt right imprimatur).

        I **do not** mean to suggest that everyone in those orgs is an enemy working against the cause of right-wing politics. That would be ridiculous. It’s not what I’m suggesting. Obviously, there are people of great talent and courage in those orgs.

        Nevertheless, the Miller/Liddell outcomes show there has to be some serious confusion about basic principles inside those organizations, or Merlin Miller would not have been put where he was and a hit piece on C-C would never have landed on the front page of a so-called traditionalist zine. There’s the common denominator.

        Those outcomes bring not so much the commitment of the good people into question but their organizational judgment — a different matter than their intellectual judgment — about who they work with and indirectly lend their credibility to.

        Repeatedly attacking to the right solely in virulent personal terms is a red flag. Criticism and vigorous dissent yes; no problem. Smears no. I think it clearly exposes who has good will and who doesn’t, and I don’t expect I will move off of this position.

      • Trainspotter
        Posted April 30, 2013 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

        Lew, many good points in your comment, and my thinking is fairly similar, though I end up in a somewhat different place. I agree that Liddell’s original essay does in fact qualify as a hit piece, and the fact that it was prominently published as an opening salvo, by a webzine that in many ways shares a common audience (and writer base) with Counter-Currents, does in fact raise questions of judgment and motive. Serious ones. It was a bad call, at the very least, and could well indicate deeper underlying problems. I wouldn’t quite put it on the same level as the A3P’s presidential nominee bashing WN, but still.

        But consider this (if you’ll allow me a digression): My memory of the particulars is rather hazy, but back in the late 80’s or 90’s, I watched a series on the Bible. I believe it was on PBS, but in any event, I remember very little it, save one thing that hit me like a ton of bricks. I remember a professor who was discussing Darwin’s theory of evolution, and the debates that soon ensued between creationism and evolution. He then said something to the effect of, “That’s what killed the Bible, making it debatable.”

        That stuck with me, and of course the professor was right, and it applies directly to our situation. The Jews and other anti-whites have created this pantheon of secular saints, as well as demons. Hitler is chief demon in their anti-white universe, a talisman that is used to bash us over the head. The sainthood or demonic nature of their icons must never be challenged or debated, for the enemy knows quite well that to debate such things is to kill them, to deny them their talismanic power. This is why the anti-whites must stifle meaningful debate.

        So I agree with you that the Liddell hit piece is problematic. But on the other hand, despite the problems, ultimately some useful discussion emerged. I don’t know where it will go from here, but just to debate these things is a victory, and Alt Right has shown some degree of courage in hosting such a thing.

        So, am I thrilled with what happened? Not really. There will be sore feelings to a degree, at least for a time, and it’s hard to say how that might harm potential projects, strangling them in the cradle. I also don’t like “firing” on those that are ideologically close to me, and it probably increases the burnout factor. Just as a boxer only has so many fights in him, that’s probably true of the activist too. Let’s hope the players are made of stern stuff.

        But, objectively, it was a win. Too many such “wins” and we will likely be undone, but a win nonetheless.

      • Lew
        Posted May 1, 2013 at 2:25 am | Permalink

        I looked over at their latest missive. The most recent contributor adopted a neutral tone, but his essay was filled with a lot of half-assed conjecture and weasel wording: maybe Parrott meant this, and it could be Johnson meant that, and if so, has he accepted marginalization?; two possible alternatives might be this…or that. Those aren’t exact quotes. They’re representative of the general style of the essay; however, all in all, another poorly reasoned piece, though eloquently written. Roman Bernard is the only one that makes any real sense on this topic.

        Moving on to another, separate matter from the alternative right web site, I think the dispute throws light on the general problem of trolling in venues where eyeballs that might be sympathetic to WNist ideas are on the page.

        I’ve recently spent a lot of time pouring over anti-WNist comments across the “dark enlightenment” sector of the Internet and other places. It’s given me a real feel for the most common trolling themes and tropes, the main one being, I’m convinced, the divide and rule theme, mixed with variations on WNists are losers and it only exists on the Internet (as if it could exist anywhere else given the persecution).

        What I think is happening is that trolls are instigating doubt and divisiveness based on the “niche” interests of the audience at a given site. Anything to cause division and in-fighting:

        – Christian versus pagan / secular

        – Homosexuality

        – Class differences

        – Europe versus America

        – Regional

        – Political ideologies

        – Tactics and strategy

        – White sub-ethnicity

        – Hand- wringing over the Jewish question

        – Innuendo and attacks on the character of various noteworthy people.

        The idea seems to be to inexorably grind down the community by sowing as much doubt, divided opinion, mistrust and personal quarreling as possible.

        In particular, an area to keep an eye on IMO is trolls attempting to exploit the legitimate intellectual differences between people who emphasize traditionalism and those with more of political-nationalist or biology emphasis.

        The more I think on it, the more I appreciate the subtly and brilliance of Jared Taylor’s long-standing approach to all this divisiveness and infighting in the sub-culture. He pursues his work, and pretty much ignores all the nasty criticism that comes his way. When he responds to it at all, as far as I know, he’ll say something to the effect of “if you don’t like what I’m doing start your own deal; do it your way.” Also, Taylor doesn’t hector and hound other activists about what they do, intruding with unsolicited advice on how he thinks they should handle their projects.

        Can anyone imagine American Renaissance.com launching a full-on blast at Greg Johnson or KMD, complete with innuendo, snark, distortions and puerile statements? I almost never look at Amren, and I’m willing to bet the number of vicious attacks Taylor has launched on other nationalists in 20 years is zero.

        The obvious takeaway about Taylor: judgment, consistency, good will, all of which, in turn, suggest consistent and clear principles. By way of comparison between Taylor and some of these other folks, rational people can draw their own conclusions.

        Reasonable people can disagree of course. Anyway, I’m done on this topic for now. Good comments as always TS. I agree with your points too.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted May 1, 2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

          There is a lesson here for me.

          I want to thank you and Trainspotter for your comments. You have cooler heads than me.

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted April 28, 2013 at 12:22 am | Permalink

      The development of True Adult Individuation requires you accept that you come into this world alone, and you leave this world alone. What the Mind sees as obstacles, the Spirit sees as opportunities, and your duty is not to those who will throw you away for the slightest temporary advantage, but to the immortal Purpose which was chosen for you, and which you have been trained for, before God laid the foundations of the Heavens and the Earth.

      The Adversary is a master of divide and conquer, and holds his bootlicks in the lowest of contempt – well-deserved contempt, I might add. Dante understood human nature far more than many give him credit for, and he reserved the worst of Hells for traitors.

      I use that strong term in the sense that someone betrays his unique Purpose on the Earth for the approval of those who actively seek to destroy that Purpose.

      Having dealt with such people in the past, let me assure you of a wonderful irony:

      Our Adversary does not “like” anyone, especially his servants. He has nothing but respect, big-time capital “R” Respect, for those who see him as he is, and declare no quarter to the end.

      If my language seems a bit harsh, it’s because I am fully aware that they never liked us, anyway, and were simply looking, always looking, for any excuse to destroy us, by any means necessary.

      The “Carrie” metaphor is most apt, and I can easily see Jonathan Bowden smiling upon you for that one. “Wish I’d had thought of that one myself,” he would say.

      • Stronza
        Posted April 30, 2013 at 11:13 am | Permalink

        He [our Adversary] has nothing but respect, big-time capital “R” Respect, for those who see him as he is, and declare no quarter to the end.

        And how does this Respect show itself? Is it maybe just in the Adversary’s mind?

      • Fourmyle of Ceres
        Posted April 30, 2013 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

        Stronza:

        How does the Adversary show Respect to us?

        Good question.

        He has two primary methods of destroying us, distract and attack.

        Distract?

        Directly, look at those who were shown IN THE NATIONAL MEDIA as historically self-identified White nationalists. Is it the satin bedsheets and pillowcases used as formal attires? Is the the ununiform “uniforms” of the NSDAP, alive with mismatched colors, and worn by morbidly obese fools?

        Indirectly, look at those who had substantial matters of discuss, and see how they were constructively silenced. Whether is it Revilo Oliver, slowly going mad as none of the meetings he did for the Birchers came to fruition, or Harold Covington’s Northwest Republic, Counter-Currents, John deNugent and Bob Whitaker/Horus the Avenger, who can not make the hit lists of the SPLC, et. al., for fear someone might pay attention to something that might strike a chord within their minds, their hearts, their spirits?

        Attack?

        Ask anyone who lost their employment through whispering campaigns, whispers that were as intangible as the wind, and as powerful as a hurricane.

        Note how they allow the safe, Controlled Opposition, to ramble on all day, knowing their credibility, such as it as, was destroyed years ago when, for example, they mocked Christianity, and referred to Jesus as a “dead Jew on a stick.”

        The best way to deal with them is to, in the immortal words of Jonathan Bowden, just “step over them.” The best way to do that is to live a simpler, better life that reduces their influence and control over you, and send money to counter-currents today.

        Now would be fine.

  4. Shotgun
    Posted April 26, 2013 at 9:32 pm | Permalink

    This is an excellent article, except for the mention of that Scott Terry guy.

    My problem with him is, he’s so manly, rugged, and good-looking, that he makes it very difficult for the rest of us poor WN schmucks to get by. I mean, that smirk of his, those sultry flannel shirts…how are we supposed to compete?

    Please Counter-Currents…for the sake of WN men everywhere, get rid of Terry!

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted April 27, 2013 at 1:08 am | Permalink

      OK Scott, you’re outta here.

  5. Alice Teller
    Posted April 26, 2013 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

    How many times have you read “the (fill in the blank) system is broken”? All around us we face the evidence that life was better for nearly everyone when the country was run by white men. The encouraging thing is that even the elite can no longer keep the lid on the news so they fall back on hate phrases like ‘move back to the fifties’.

    Women are drawn to strong, protective men, but have been brainwashed by decades of TV in which women are expected to express horror if a husband shows concern for her or her safety while she is carrying his child. No real woman has ever experienced that horror.

    We face a dangerous and uncertain future – perhaps we will find the silver lining in time.

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted April 26, 2013 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

      Alice Teller in blockquote:

      We face a dangerous and uncertain future – perhaps we will find the silver lining in time.

      Good point, one that addresses the “why” of counter-currents.

      The “silver lining” is this: we, pretty much alone in the Racially Conscious Community, realize that what is not sustainable will not – CAN NOT – be sustained. The present social system has run is course, and this failure is masked by horrific levels of debt – all to mask the decline in real income, and that real productivity – is a mirror of the culture in which we find ourself, which is also collapsing.

      The “silver lining” is this: we have the opportunity to transcend the dangerously narrow provincialism of the current cultural moment – the contemporary “United States of America,” if you will – and restore, on Higher Ground, the foundational principles, the true foundational principles, of America. This, of course, is best developed in the Analytical Framework of the Northwest Republic.

      The “silver lining” is this – we have the opportunity to become truly Adult in our dealing with the world around us, transforming ourselves into the Living Foundation of the new nation, the racial homeland, which will become the country that we deserve.

      We simply must let go of what does not work, and replace it one thought at a time, one act at a time, one habit at a time, one character t a time, and one destiny at a time.

      After all, look at the Collapse that is taking place all around you. You can not define ONE social indicator that is positive, and growing. There’s a reason for that.

      As Harold Covington said, “If this was a White country, this wouldn’t be happening.”

  6. Fourmyle of Ceres
    Posted April 25, 2013 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

    Matt Parrott in blockquote:

    Setting aside their inept dichotomization rather than synthesis of the sexes, setting aside their promiscuous and manipulative objectives…

    After that is gone, what’s left?

    We at The-Spearhead.com have been dealing with these issues for some time. As well, as always, there is the profound wisdom of Father Himself, Tom Leykis.

    The answer to their imminent threat of jihad is our own crusade, a repossession of our own blood of our own gods from our own lands.

    Just so. Best of all, focus on what works for us, and the appropriate women will flow to us like water. All of these rest can be left behind, where they belong.

    Recovery will be under way, well under way, when we recapture the Mindset of the Warrior Caste, which Evola would certainly support with the greatest of enthusiasm.

  7. Junghans
    Posted April 25, 2013 at 11:41 pm | Permalink

    White people, unfortunately, capriciously wreck their lives all the time. Many of our people are quite good at it, and in fact, we are usually our own worst enemies. Go to virtually any public place in America, (the land of state sponsored dysgenics), and observe the number of White females who have bred down. The degenerate miasma of race mixing, fanned by the media Jews, is spreading like a plague. An overall clueless, self-centered, generally hedonistic mindset, coupled with a lifetime of liberal inculcation and race denial has laid White America low.

    Mister Lister, although rather extreme and somewhat nihilistic, makes some telling points about vainglorious and deluded, willfully ignorant, make-believe America in Matt’s other recent posting. The fact is, that the vast majority of the White, English speaking world has been drinking from ideologically poisoned wells for way too long, and the rot of self-destruction blatently shows. Pogo famously said it very well, (We have met the enemy and he is us).

  8. Posted April 25, 2013 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

    Matt, I love the Kipling quote, it was perfectly used here.

  9. Posted April 25, 2013 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

    Yes we women love strong aggressive men. But I am pretty sure that eventually she would have left this guy because in the end she is a White woman and we don’t do well with controlling dickheads.

    I was that way at 19 with my 21 year old husband. What he said was law and I went by his influence for my choices in food, clothes and music and even stopped wearing makeup. But he was also a physically abusive asshole and so after a decade of it I quit putting up with it and finding it attractive.

    Keep that in mind, men reading this, we White women love strong men but if you take it too far you will probably meet up with a rolling pin or frying pan, or the modern equivalent, a divorce lawyer.

    So don’t use this silly young girl as another excuse to be a control freak.

    • Posted April 25, 2013 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

      April,

      […] if you take it too far you will probably meet up with a rolling pin or frying pan, or the modern equivalent, a divorce lawyer.

      More importantly, you’ll be dishonorable.

      • Posted April 26, 2013 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

        Not really. Even within the WN community, they are still allowed to bad mouth and rumor monger about any women who don’t stay in the kitchen with their mouths shut. They attack these women in ways they would never attack another man, demeaning them over their physical appearance or their supposed sexual history. Just my perspective.

      • Posted April 26, 2013 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

        April,

        Perhaps we travel in different circles, but I’ve seen it very rarely, and I consider myself relatively well-traveled in movement circles. I certainly wouldn’t work with someone who behaved in such an ignoble manner.

        I think the tighter coupling of racialism with Traditionalism among younger WNs may account for some of the parallax. I’m an evolutionary Darwinist, but I think the Social Darwinism which is more prominent in your generation of activists invites that sort of vulgar threatening and posturing.

    • Sandy
      Posted April 26, 2013 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

      April, You must have been the inspiration of “The Scottish Housewife.” Or why I am still a bachelor.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceqU9IPDEnU

  10. Jaego
    Posted April 25, 2013 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    Yes, Women love this – exactly what I was saying last time about Christian Marriage. Traditional Christian Marriage can have the same dynamic – minus the brutality hopefully. Jack Mormons prove Game Theory – better five minutes or sharing him with five wives than a lifetime with a Beta.

    The real mystery is why you don’t want this for us, except the watered down Steward concept. Woman wants to be a Queen and that requires a King.

  11. rhondda
    Posted April 25, 2013 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    I do agree with you Matt. The only thing left out is that the left’s propaganda has worked on the male psyche too such as having lots of sex and making piles of money. I blame Ayn Rand. That’s a Jewish seductress for you. Not a Holy Mission.

    • Posted April 25, 2013 at 9:07 am | Permalink

      rhondda,

      Female decadence in our society is innately more interesting and obvious, but certainly not more acute.

      • rhondda
        Posted April 25, 2013 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

        Very true. I think Evola called it exhibitionism. I will add with acute internal stupidity. Act like one, get treated like one. Don’t come whining to me.

  12. Bobby
    Posted April 25, 2013 at 1:33 am | Permalink

    It’s interesting that I was thinking on the same lines as the author of this article, after having read about this formerly typical wholesome looking freshfaced American girl and her fate. This woman, like many still do, obviously wanted a relationship where the man and woman carry out their traditional roles. But this ideal has been destroyed in the minds of countless young women today, especially those growing up in the Western World. All of the false values,(we all know what they are) that are now considered to be the norm in the U.S. and that have been deviously pushed upon two generations of American woman, have come home to roost. The insanity of the left, has had its full effect.

    In another day and age, not that long ago in the United States, Katherine would have been happy with a strong solid white male, probably with a Christian background, raised a family and lived more or less happily ever after. So much more could be said about this whole issue, but it touches profoundly on many of the topics discussed on the Counter-Currents site.

    • William
      Posted April 30, 2013 at 9:39 am | Permalink

      Can I just add that I find her repulsive. Her imbecilic marriage is a repudiation of western people’s and the millions that died keeping the African and Arab scourge out of Europe. We should always welcome back those that have dated inter racially in their youth and offer love to all White people that come to us but this woman deserves our contempt and to be mocked. There is always a proportion of feeble minded, those seeking attention through acts of rebellion or those who unable to cope with the abolition of Western values collapse into another. She reminds me of Samantha Laithwaite, an English twit so hard up for a man who married a Jihadi Black that plotted subway bombings.

    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    Axe

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance

    Standardbearers

    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above