Print this post Print this post

The Counter-Currents Summer Fundraiser 
Jonathan Bowden on Counter-Currents

Jonathan Bowden, “Mussolini with Bi-Planes”

579 words

Since our last update, we have received three new donations totaling $163.81 (the odd numbers are due to Euro-Dollar conversion). Thank you for your generous support!

Thanks to our matching grant, this amount will be doubled to $327.62. There is $191.19 remaining on our matching grant, which expires in 10 days. Please give now, so your gift will go farther.

This brings our grand total to $14,346.92. Our goal is $25,000.

Matching grants are a great way to give and encourage others to give as well. If you wish to offer a matching grant to help us make our goal, please contact me at [email protected].

* * *

One way to convince readers of the importance of donating to Counter-Currents is for us to collect testimonials. Here is the late Jonathan Bowden on our work:

. . . I regard initiatives like Counter-Currents as very important. Counter-Currents is, to my estimation, a sort of Right-wing university. A sort of free access Right-wing university on the Internet, a radical Right-wing university. The whole point now is that higher education has locked off the Right end of the spectrum. You can learn about conservative ideas, you can learn about liberal ideas, you can learn about socialist ideas, you can learn about Marxist ideas in the university context; you can learn about all forms of pan-religiosity and so forth. But you can’t learn about radical Right-wing ideas in the university context unless it’s adversarial, unless you’re deconstructive, unless you’re against these ideas in a prior way.

. . . Counter-Currents is one of the means by which people can educate themselves to defend themselves and their own honor and future prospects. Counter-Currents is what I personally believe the best, most educative Right-wing site that I’ve come across, and it’s used by an enormous plethora of people who want information about their own past and their own future. There’s a great wealth of material on it, and it provides this tertiary education of the mind in a radical right sensibility. I believe that this is crucial if we’re to have a future.

. . . Only when people gain the courage and the conviction to read what is on Counter-Currents, to internalize it, and to defend their own possibilities — of development, biologically and culturally — will we see a change here in America and elsewhere.

These words are from Jonathan’s lecture “Western Civilization Bites Back,” available in podcast and transcript form here.

* * *

You can make two different types of donations:

  • First, you can make is a single donation of any size.
  • Second, you can make a recurring donation of any size.

Recurring donations are particularly helpful, since they allow us better to predict and plan for the future. We have added several new levels for recurring donations. Please visit our Donations page for more information.

We can also customize the amount of a monthly donation. There are, moreover, other ways to make monthly donations besides Paypal, although it is the most convenient. For more details, contact Mike Polignano at: [email protected]

There are several ways to make one-time donations:

  • The easiest is through Paypal. For a one-time donation, just use the following button:
  • You can send check, money order, or credit card payment by mail. Just print out our donation form in Word or PDF.
  • You can make a secure credit card donation direct from our Donation page.

Please give generously!

Thank you for your readership and support.

Greg Johnson
Editor-in-Chief
Counter-Currents Publishing, Ltd.

 

Related

This entry was posted in news item and tagged , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

6 Comments

  1. Posted August 19, 2012 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    This was a much fuller and more enriching response than I anticipated. Very good!

    I am fully on board with White Nationalism’s validity to the extent it expresses a “politically realistic acknowledgement of the concrete fact of the emergence of a blended white identity.” If WNs can get out of Arkham’s Asylum and into the game I anticipate they can gain some significant victories on these terms, even within currents of society that we tend to write off as decadent, corrupt, and useless.

  2. Fourmyle of Ceres
    Posted August 18, 2012 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

    Note that this thread has been hijacked by certain Third Parties, which do not address in the slightest the topic of the thread, and advocate the practices that will further render us politically impotent. That having been said, again, this seems like an excellent opportunity to deal with forming an Open Thread at counter-currents, as well as a “What Must Be Done?” thread.

    As to Verlis, he is (quite inadvertently) making the case Covington has made on numerous occasions, that we should learn from what the Jews are doing as a matter of technics, so we can do what works, better.

    Sadly, he starts off with what Covington called the standard seminar caller manipulation: “I disagree with HW too, and I think you should also…” His analysis goes off into the weeds from there.

    That having been said, Verlis can offer us an education experience by describing what they tell them about us at temple on Saturday, they with their “more robust forms of racial identity (and racial statism….”

    Verlis in blockquote:

    Clearly more robust forms of racial identity (and racial statism) are called for.”

    A “religious” foundation for a Racial philosophy seems to work very well for them, and will work very well for us. A new, Reformed Christianity fused with the positive Masculine of the Pagan Faith can succeed at this.

    If there is one contribution the liberal experience can make to the racial project it’s surely that difference does not require hostility.

    Where is this? The subpotent geldings of the Mainline Protestant churches? It certainly works beautifully for the Jews, who get lectured every time they go to temple by the rabbi as the emphasis the uses of Jewish group cohesion and the mindset of Cultural war, the Mindset of low intensity warfare taught by the hidden Torah, the Talmud.

    Works for them, and can work for us, as well.

    I’m sure it rubs many a WN the wrong way to hear it put like this — so coked up are they on racial hostility — but thinking WNs must ask themselves (and answer honestly) how much longer they can afford to allow good racialism to be held hostage to or driven away by bad racialism (the fanatics, the nutters, the neos, the vantards, the racial utopians) .

    We’ve stepped over that.

    Rather than waste our efforts in the Oppositional Defiance of Movement Past, we have overcome their blindness. Cleverly, their hatred of “the Jews” blocked their learning anything about the most successful Race in America. Having overcome their intellectual blindness, we can learn, not from what the Jews want for us, but what they want for themselves, and how they achieve these goals…

    And how we can achieve ours.

    One quick observation: The expensive efforts and skill with which we are being “distracted” is the best compliment they can offer. As long as “White nationalism” was defined as green-toothed fools wearing satin bedsheets and pillowcases as formal attire, “White nationalism” was useful lightning rod for the self-marginalized incompetent.

    Things are different, thanks to counter-currents (metapolitics), Harold Covington (The New Polariss, the Northwest Republic as the temporal bridge for for the metapolitical), and Bob whitaker/”Horus the Avenger” on practical politics.

    Let me quote Kevin Alfred Strom:

    WE are going to win.

  3. Verlis
    Posted August 18, 2012 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

    White Nationalism is also the concrete, politically practical and realistic recognition of another reality, namely the fact that whites are being targeted for dispossession and extinction simply as whites, not as Yankees or Southerners or English or French. You may not wish to think of yourself as a generic white person, but you are being targeted for destruction merely as a generic white person, and if you are to fight back, you will join together with others who are also being attacked as white people, and White Nationalism emerges as the only adequate and realistic response to White Genocide.

    In HW’s eyes this delegitimizes WN. He writes it off as a bunch of grievances — as though shared grievances have never managed to inspire a collective response! If (non-southern) WN is “shallow” with respect to historical memory and historical common purpose the struggle to cast off the yoke of oppression (and genocide) is precisely the sort of collective experience from which legends are forged and could thus be expected to very quickly make up for that historical deficit.

    America of course has a very rich and storied history, but that history remains “shallow” from a nationalist perspective because so little of it took place with expressly racial purposes in mind. Even in the 19th century most of what benefited whites was racially incidental rather than racially intentional. That’s my reading, anyway. Men like Jared Taylor excuse this by claiming racial identity was simply assumed, and it was. But as we know assumptions are the mother of__________. As early as a century ago racialism had to struggle to impose itself, despite some of its victories like immigration restriction. Clearly more robust forms of racial identity (and racial statism) are called for.

    If there is one contribution the liberal experience can make to the racial project it’s surely that difference does not require hostility. This is demonstrated day in, day out in America and all across the west. Even if WNs are right to find such “mere tolerance” underwhelming or insufficient, horror story scenarios predicted by early WN simply have not occurred and the likelihood of their occurring is, by all appearances, waning not waxing. WNs have good reason to be angry, hostile, reactionary, vengeful, and a whole host of other negative emotions, but the reality is that not only can these feelings be surmounted, there is a great deal to gain from surmounting them. I’m sure it rubs many a WN the wrong way to hear it put like this — so coked up are they on racial hostility — but thinking WNs must ask themselves (and answer honestly) how much longer they can afford to allow good racialism to be held hostage to or driven away by bad racialism (the fanatics, the nutters, the neos, the vantards, the racial utopians) .

  4. Nathan Wyatt
    Posted August 18, 2012 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

    The whole point now is that higher education has locked off the Right end of the spectrum. You can learn about conservative ideas, you can learn about liberal ideas, you can learn about socialist ideas, you can learn about Marxist ideas in the university context; you can learn about all forms of pan-religiosity and so forth. But you can’t learn about radical Right-wing ideas in the university context unless it’s adversarial, unless you’re deconstructive, unless you’re against these ideas in a prior way.

    This is utterly correct, and it’s an effective seed to plant among relatively reflective types who have begun to open themselves and question.

    On a tangent, I’d like to raise a question here, one that likely has been dealt with. I hope it gets answered in this thread, but if not I’ll bring it up at a more relevant juncture.

    Over at Occidental Dissent (yes, I know of the difficulties with Hunter Wallace–I just think this point is worth addressing) Wallace remarks,

    [T]he “White Republic” that the White Nationalists want to create is a proposition nation created by intellectuals. It is not a real nation like Dixie or Quebec. It is a pure abstraction for alienated people that exists only in the minds of intellectuals and people on the internet. …

    … [B]ecause the “White Republic” is a proposition nation that includes “all White people,” White Nationalists themselves have no idea where the “White Republic” is to be located, and for that reason the whole project remains nothing more than a fantasy (a nationalist version of White flight) which has none of the appeal of European-style ethnonationalism. …

    … [W]e have already tried to build a nation on “whiteness,” the United States of America. The project was a failure because of ethnic and religious differences between White people and specifically because of the tendency of certain “White” groups (i.e., Yankees and Jews) to politically align themselves with blacks and Hispanics to gain an electoral advantage over Southerners in the Union.

    How much of a problem is this? To what degree does white nationalism suffer from its own intellectualized, propositional failings?

    Thanks in advance for your patience with a question stemming from Occidental Dissent.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted August 18, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

      A valid question. How, exactly, will whites save ourselves, by gaining political control of our destinies in European colonial societies that still maintain white majorities and have some hope of continuing to be white living spaces (the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand — I don’t really know enough about Spanish-speaking, white-majority European colonial societies like Argentina and Uruguay)?

      Simple nationalism will not cut it. All of these societies had only the shallowest, quasi-fictional forms of national self-consciousness to begin with, and in the US and elsewhere, national self-consciousness has been redefined in propositional terms to deal with the influx of increasingly heterogeneous ethnic and racial stocks.

      Compact European regional and national identities are very powerful in Europe, but they are increasingly meaningless in Euro-Colonial societies where European national stocks are increasingly blended. At one meeting, I asked 42 people if they were of unblended European ancestry, and two raised their hands: but they were not from America. All the Americans present had blended European ancestry.

      So what are we left with as a principle of unity, if American nationalism is merely propositional and petty European nationalisms mean nothing here? Another way of putting it is: if we were to define American nationalism so it is not propositional and not inimical to the long-term survival of our race, what other option is there but to define it in terms of generic whiteness, i.e., a blended European humanity?

      This blended European humanity need not, moreover, be seen merely a recent product of migration and mixing. It can be seen as a return to the primal unity of our race before it was split up into different subraces, languages, nations, and religions. Even today, Europeans are more closely related to each other than randomly selected members of other races. The genetic distance between different Europeans is what one would find in extended families in other races.

      I don’t think that the creation of a blended European humanity should be an imperative in European colonial societies. But I think that we should recognize that it is a process that is already well-underway and that it does have advantages. Besides, the different European regional, national, and subracial identities still have homelands in Europe where they can be preserved.

      See Ted Sallis, http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/05/pan-european-preservationism/

      So, the answer to the charge that White Nationalism is merely abstract is: no, it is an eminently concrete, practical, politically realistic acknowledgement of the concrete fact of the emergence of a blended white identity.

      White Nationalism is also the concrete, politically practical and realistic recognition of another reality, namely the fact that whites are being targeted for dispossession and extinction simply as whites, not as Yankees or Southerners or English or French. You may not wish to think of yourself as a generic white person, but you are being targeted for destruction merely as a generic white person, and if you are to fight back, you will join together with others who are also being attacked as white people, and White Nationalism emerges as the only adequate and realistic response to White Genocide.

      As for questions of where White Republics might be established: the answer is wherever we can get away with it. Ideally, everywhere.

      Hunter Wallace, of course, is more interested in Southern Nationalism than White Nationalism. I wish Southern Nationalists the best, but I think that there are certain facts on the ground that they need to take into account. First, the South is full of Yankees, Westerners, and immigrants from Europe and European colonial societies. Second, the number of people with unmixed Southern ancestry is decreasing with every generation. So even in the South, I think that White Nationalism rather than Southern Nationalism ultimately has the greater power to unify and represent the interests of whites. The temptation, however, is to go with Southern Nationalism because although its appeal is limited, it has a rich history and an existing infrastructure. The problem is that it has an ever-diminishing future.

      Another sticking point is Negro slavery in the South: it was an evil institution that never should have been started and should never have been allowed to continue. It was born, moreover, of the same base and traitorous capitalist motives that encourage unchecked non-white immigration today. Frankly, although the antebellum South was an appealing simulacrum of European aristocratic society and manners, in fact the Southern system was hardly more “aristocratic” than the North. Southern Negro slavery was just Yankee capitalism, in all of its exploitativeness and indifference to the common good, accommodated to the climate and endemic diseases of the South.

      And Southern capitalists were no more wedded to the superficial manners and lifestyle of the genuine English aristocracy as their Northern cousins and contemporary Country Club descendants. Southern plantations may have looked more like English aristocratic country houses than Northern factories did, but they were equally capitalist enterprises, and in both North and South the ideas of “stately” and “gracious” living were largely the same.

      There is a big difference between an English aristocratic estate and a plantation. Genuine feudalism entails a host of mutual moral obligations between lords and peasants. Chattel slavery and wage slavery abolished those moral obligations. The Southern “aristocracy” was, in short, nothing more than a capitalist oligarchy with a veneer of European aristocratic tastes and manners — just like the Yankee oligarchy.

      It would be an interesting question to compare the conduct of the war between North and South in terms of European aristocratic ideas of chivalry, gallantry, and what Schmitt calls “bracketed warfare.” My impression is that the South was much more chivalrous in its conduct of the war, which was a significant disadvantage and ultimately inappropriate to the kind of war it really was. The South fought a limited “war between the states,” whereas the North fought an unlimited “Civil War” against rebels and usurpers. All things being equal, the side that fights with the fewest self-imposed limits will win.

      See my remarks on Schmitt on different forms of warfare: http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07/the-political-soldier-carl-schmitts-theory-of-the-partisan/

  5. rhondda
    Posted August 18, 2012 at 6:33 am | Permalink

    A university? Yes indeed.

One Trackback

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    The World in Flames

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    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

    Reuben

    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance