Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘culture’ Category

My comments on the Hamilton thing aside; I have one very important question on the matter:

What the fuck was Mike Pence doing going to see a piece of shit musical like Hamilton anyway?

I guess it might have been a political move to show that Trump and company are not ‘waycist’. But seriously, couldn’t he have gone to see a performance of something legitimate like A Love Supreme instead?

And the whole controversy regarding Jewish and Asian Nazi’s infiltrating the NPI conference. Who cares what the 20th century media thinks about anything?

The fact that some ‘journalists’ are trying to make the NPI look like a Nazi organization, or that some talentless hack in New York made a ‘musical’ depicting America’s founding fathers as Blacks that dance to hip-hop means nothing. Nobody should care, and increasingly, nobody does.

I don’t care that the 20th century media thinks the NPI is a Nazi organization. (They think an all-White sewing circle is a potential Nazi organization). I get my news from the internet.

I don’t care that there is a production on Broadway right now that is anti-White. Nobody will remember this thing 20 years from now. Nobody remembers the degenerate crap that was being preformed in Wiemar Germany either. People remember this:

I have discovered a very helpful trick for dealing with the biased media and all the anti-White movies and TV that are put out these days:

JUST DON’T LOOK.

Seriously, it works. If you just don’t pay attention to it, it won’t frustrate you. AND (this is big), if you don’t watch it, it will eventually die.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Below I link to a video of an interesting discussion held in the lavish mansion of Jim Rogers, between himself, Marc Faber and another guy who could be considered a lightweight compared to those two. I’m not fascinated with economics like some but I want to talk about one comment I heard them make in particular.

If you go to 0.53 on the video, they talk about the EU and its economic situation. And of course, one of the issues economists always outline in 1st world countries (that are white) is that the population is falling and they need immigrants to move in and make up for the low birthrates.

Marc Farber points out that Eastern Europe will provide many workers to help with this problem, but Jim Rogers goes him one better and says that what Europe really should do is bring in Turkey, because they have a young population of 70 million who could come in and do the job instead.

As I alluded to above, you always hear arguments for immigration, but they never say that non-white countries need it. That much is simple (though it should be repeated when this subject comes up in conversation).

What I really wanted to talk about is the deeper issue of what Jim Rogers’s comments say about how we think about people, and societies.

Jim Rogers says that the Europeans probably won’t bring in Turkey because Turks aren’t white and their not Christians (“Who cares if their not Christians.“, Rogers says). Who cares indeed.

This is an example of how we view people in our modern world. They are merely tax payers, consumers, voters, producers. They are only economic units defined in wholly materialistic terms. It is a symptom of how sick our society is that we should think this opinion Rogers makes is anything other than insane.

How on earth could you fundamentally alter the ethnic, racial, cultural and religious make up of a society for economic gain? If the birthrates are below replacement level – let them be below replacement level! Who cares. How could you take a homogeneous country and make it diverse, (beleaguered by all the social and political discord that such societies are) just to see a few extra percentage points on some stupid GDP report? And what are the long term economic consequences of this 3rd world immigration? Is it really even so great in the short term?

Aside from the fact that this is GENOCIDE, it is wrong on another level as well. It is wrong to see a society as simply an economic producer. These may be economies, but what you are really talking about are NATIONS. These are societies that have developed over centuries and have in most cases, fought some pretty nasty wars just to survive and be independent.

People are not merely economic units

A nation (a people) and the political state which is erected to represent its interests, is organic. It is a living, breathing thing. People have value, in part, because they are descended from a particular ethnic group. Humans are not interchangeable. A person from a foreign group may not seem especially valuable to you. But for his fellow people he is. Norway is Norwegian and that actually means something. It gives the country its character, different from any other. If you move immigrants in and demand ‘integration‘, you begin the destruction of that unique nation.

Even the religious basis of evaluating people would be better. At least that’s based on something ethereal rather than just economic output. Whether you see people as children of God, or inheritors of a unique racial/ethnic character (the consequent of which is culture), as Yoda once said “Luminous beings are we”.

Read Full Post »

Maelstrom is a dark, subversive film which portrays our modern, cosmopolitan culture as the degenerate swamp that it really is. It is also a story of guilt and redemption.

The movie opens up with one of the most gruesome and disturbing scenes I have ever seen. Our protagonist, Bibi, is in the process of having an abortion. This scene is the most graphic depiction of abortion I have ever seen in any movie. Come to think of it, it’s the only depiction of abortion I have ever seen in a movie (we literally see the fetal tissue being sucked through the tube). Any time abortion is portrayed in this honest and realistic way it is automatically anti-abortion, regardless of the directors intent.

This scene is followed by Bibi going through the post abortion sickness. Her feminist friend is coaching her through the whole recovery and she offers Bibi advice on how to deal with it. She tells Bibi she must deny it’s reality, deny that it ever happened. Basically, pretend that it did not happen, just ignore it and go on with your (selfish) life. When Bibi asks her friend how many abortions she has had she is not even able to remember at first : “Two … no wait … Three”.

Bibi attempts to deal with the aftermath of the abortion. She eventually takes some drugs (ecstasy, I think), goes to a dance-club, and picks up a guy who she takes back to her place for some promiscuous sex. None of this, of course, is fulfilling or helpful for her.

During this confusion or “maelstrom” which Bibi is caught in, she drives aimlessly through the city one night. She accidentally hits a man and then leaves the scene of the accident. She goes through a period of deep guilt over this accident, not dissimilar to the aftermath of the abortion.

Eventually she meets and falls in love with a nice guy who is a diver. It turns out that this mans father was recently killed in a hit and run. Bibi is confronted with the guilt of not only having killed a man, but the father of the man she loves. Ultimately, she must tell him, for the guilt is eating her up inside. But if she does, she fears he will leave her.
It is important to explain just what this man means to Bibi, and what, I think, he symbolizes. If we contrast Bibi’s life with the diver’s, we find that the two lovebirds have very different backgrounds.

Early on in the movie we get an idea of what Bibi’s family life is like. She gives an interview to some journalist and is asked about being the daughter of a famous fashion designer (or something). She expresses hostility to her father – she shows nothing but pessimism and alienation from her family. When she runs into some financial trouble with her clothing business, she goes to her yuppie brother (who is also a successful, wealthy businessman of some sort) for help. He shows no concern whatsoever for her plight. In fact he is too busy with a telephone call to pay her much mind as she sits in his posh office asking for help. There is no love or sense of obligation in Bibi’s family. They are all disconnected, cosmopolitan yuppies.

The diver, however, is almost from a different planet. He and his father both work jobs that are connected with the sea; he a diver and his father a fish monger. And you get the sense that they are from some rural area, rather than jaded city folk. He expresses a great deal of love and sense of connection with his father and their way of life. It is interesting that in both Bibi and her boyfriend’s case the apple didn’t fall far from the tree; Bibi entered the quintessentially cosmopolitan and decadent world of fashion. Her boyfriend took to the seas, a decidedly un-cosmopolitan, un-modern type of occupation. And he feels a deep sense of tradition and purpose in his and his fathers work. Bibi seems to have no similar feelings about her job, or her family. Bibi’s world is the modern cosmopolitan swamp that typifies life in those multi-racial hell holes that were once centers of Western culture we call cities. Her boyfriend’s world seems traditional and wholesome by comparison.

But why would the film-makers decide to begin the movie with Bibi having an abortion? Perhaps the abortion and the accidental hit-and-run are connected. Bibi committed two crimes and her guilt over the accident is one and the same as her guilt over the abortion. After all, when they sucked her child out of her womb, they put the remains in a cardboard box and then incinerated it in a furnace. At the end of the movie, Bibi and the fisherman use a cardboard box to hold the fathers ashes, which they scatter at sea. Or maybe the abortion is simply meant to  be a part of the degenerate culture she is trapped in; the antithesis of which she finds in this man.

This movie is extremely critical of our modern culture. As I mentioned above, just watch the first 15 minutes of this movie and try and tell me it is not automatically anti-abortion. (There is a scene during the recovery from the “procedure”, in which she and her friend are braiding each others hair and one of them is signing an old Scandinavian folk song; somehow, one of them calls to mind this beautiful Norwegian melody from the distant past that is a million miles removed from the modern swamp they are submerged in. It is heartbreaking. Her family life is non-existent and her life as a fashion designer in the big city is the stereotype of the rootless cosmopolitan lifestyle. She finds love in a simple fisherman who is far removed from the twisted world of yuppie brothers, feminists friends, promiscuous sex, and abortion clinics under which she suffers. Hopefully, in finding him, she secedes from that world.

Read Full Post »

I don’t really know any advanced level chemistry but I understand some basic things.

If you take some apple juice and pour it into a glass, and then add some orange juice and a little lemonade, you could leave it sitting on the kitchen table for as long as you like – it’s not going to explode.

If you take some type of acid, add another type of acid and then throw in some other chemical, you could also leave it sitting on the kitchen table and probably nothing would happen.

But if you have the right mix of chemicals and then expose the mix to high enough levels of heat, it will explode.

It would then be quite stupid to blame the explosion solely on the source of heat. The substance you have is basically volatile and should be handled and stored with great care.

I have the utmost confidence that the government, media and general public of Britain will attribute the riots that recently died down across England to ‘deprived circumstances’ and things like that. The fact of the matter is that the kids who participated in the looting and mayhem are basically stupid. If you want to get at the real reason why all this has happened then read the Bell Curve.

For most people, that book was about racial differences in IQ. Actually, it was about a very dark and troubling future in America based on demographic and social trends, partly the result of the way modern society is different from the old days, but largely due to leftist social policy and the corresponding pathologies it spawns.

One of the things I took away from the book was how Hernstein and Murray showed that different IQ groups (i.e. people in the 80-95 level and those in the 115-130 level) were becoming more socially and physically isolated. Whole communities, they found, had seen their 100-120 IQ kids plucked out and whisked off to the halls of academia, to be dispatched from there to a nice middle to upper middle class existence in some completely different community populated by similar people. Meanwhile, welfare and sexual liberation (the latter was not mentioned in the book as I recall) were breeding the lower rung of the intellectual gene pool to become a toxic mix in large volume.

'Sub-Prime' genetics

It is this toxic mix of stupidity, criminality, sexual promiscuity, and the general whirlwind of gutter culture that it creates, feeds off and perpetuates which explains why the young people of these communities behaved in such an anti-social and retarded way.

I have been impressed by how utterly idiotic these kids are. So impressed that it prompts me to make a bold prediction. These morons will play a role in social and political change (of whatever variety). You see, it is acceptable to allow some genius to kill himself or work away in a factory instead of creating something beautiful or useful. But you cannot allow stupid people to go to waste. They are far too useful. Since these kids are dumb and unemployable, they really wouldn’t be well suited to a modern military like Britain’s, which has too much complex equipment and requires too many skills to make use of those who inhabit the ashtray of society. So war fodder is not an option. No, this lot will be deployed domestically. Perhaps to further the interests of the elite whose social policies bred them or maybe they will be turned against that elite by some other faction.

Who ever manages to stuff their cannons with this trash, the general discussion will be about throwing money at them along with some lip service to morality. And they will continue to grow and smash stuff (or people) unless some impossible to imagine point in the future arrives, when people are so fed up that they are actually forced to examine this social phenomenon from a less naive perspective. But most likely they’ll just be cannon fodder.

Read Full Post »