Hi, this channel is reserved for specific things you have learned today, not books. If you found something interesting and can copy it, post it here.

Can I dump a bunch of interesting excerpts I read before this server existed?

Please do!

i would say dont drop them all at once or else i think a lot of people would scroll past.. drop like 1 or 2 a day

That's a good idea

I'll probably find more interesting excerpts in the future, so I'll just dump what I already have to get this started up.

I have a picture to text app if you're interested

It works extremely well

👍🏻

What is the source?

I'll check it out

Or just say "Read Culture of Critique it's gud"

I've been using it for a while

@Deleted User White Identity by Jared Taylor

@CarletonJ I tried another one in the past but it sucked. I'll give this a try later.

I've been using it for over a year. I have so many things saved thanks to this app. Only needs minor editing

Okay, that's all. If amyone wants a page number or source from the bibliography, message me and I'll try my best to find it.

One of my favorite paragraphs -

*"We believe that the obvious differences between racial groups are linked to gene variants that have recently increased in frequency and had major fitness effects. Blue eyes, found only in Europeans and their near neighbors, are the result of a new version of the DNA that controls the expression of OCA2 that has undergone strong selection, at least in Europe. Dry earwax is common in China and Korea, rare in Europe, unknown in Africa: The gene variant underlying dry earwax is the product of strong recent selection. We can confidently predict that many (perhaps most) as yet unexplained racial differences are also the product of recent selection. For example, we argue that the epicanthic eyelid fold found in the populations of northern Asia is most likely the product of strong and recent selection."*

- Cochran/Harpending (The 10,000 Year Explosion)

Only a few chapters in, but so far a very interesting read

Post something you've read that interests you! This channel is for content that you have read

That’s an essay from Gregory Hood’s Waking up From the American Dream. This particular essay, as I was saying in <#393251613839589405> is a good one to turn normie-cons. It’s also a good one to draw arguments from in order to defend your positions

*"Millions have begun to feel like strangers in their own land. They recoil from a popular culture that is saturated with raw sex and trumpets hedonistic values. They see old holidays disappear and old heroes degraded. They see the art and artifacts of a glorious past removed from their museums and replaced by the depressing, the ugly, the abstract, the anti-American. They watch as books they cherished disappear from the schools they attended, to be replaced by authors and titles they never heard of. The moral code that they were raised to live by has been overthrown. The culture they grew up with is dying inside the country they grew up in."* - Patrick J. Buchanan (Death of the West)

H L Mencken was woke.

^ that couldn't be more true. I get upset at how much money we spend to help black people in America. I think we'd all be much better off if we dedicated our resources to people who have a much higher likelihood of success. We'd 1) spend less and 2) get a larger return on our (relatively small) investment. That is a win for everyone, especially tax payers. With the money we save we could spend it on so many more useful things or just pay down the $20 trillion in debt we owe

@DeusVolk what book is that from?

@Zyzz Men versus the Man: A Correspondence between Robert Rives La Monte, Socialist, and H.L. Mencken, Individualist [1910], p. 116

I was just casually looking up Mencken since he's one of the more interesting Nietzschean scholars and I had no idea he was so based. I'll have to pick up some of his works. He was more of a journalist and cultural critic so I hadn't considered looking into what he'd written until now.

*"Geographic expansion (which placed us in new environments) and cultural innovation both changed the selective pressures humans experienced. The payoff of many traits changed, and so did optimal life strategy. For example, when humans hunted big game 100,000 years ago, they relied on close-in attacks with thrusting spears. Such attacks were highly dangerous and physically taxing, so in those days, hunters had to be heavily muscled and have thick bones. That kind of body had its disadvantages-if nothing else, it required more food-but on the whole, it was the best solution in that situation. But new weapons like the atlatl (a spearthrower) and the bow effectively stored muscle-generated energy, which meant that hunters could kill big game without big biceps and robust skeletons. Once that happened, lightly built people, who were better runners and did not need as much food, became competitively superior. A heavy build was yesterday’s solution: expensive, but no longer necessary. The Bushmen of southern Africa lived as hunter-gatherers until very recently, hunting game with bows and poisoned arrows for thousands of years in that region. They are a small, tough, lean people, less than five feet tall. It seems likely that the tools made the man-the bow begat the Bushmen.*"

-10,000 Year Explosion

A young person's only problem is to grow into an adult. The rest is nonsense, and those concered with serious matters ought to focus on the problem of taking a stance vis a vis our society and civilisation as a whole, in the name of a true, radical, reconstructive revolution.

-Julius Evola *A Handbook For Right-Wing Youth*

@MrDefault Would you recommend buying that book? It's cheap.

@Jacob It is rather dense but overall it is rather great. A lot of great insight into various topics. The one he spends the most time on his talking about the mind of the antifa of his day.

Finally started reading a lil of The Poetic Edda lastnight. Actually decided to try my hand at doing 1 personal reading of 1st verse video,just to see what others think. Have been trying to upload all night with constant problems,so i dont know.. anyways really enjoying it.
And have "Why We Fight" on the stack to read next. Need to go back and start over White Identity too. Was reading e version of Culture of Critique but was getting too draining after awhile so may come back to again later.. Enjoying the Edda though for now

It finally uploaded correctly,only after 4 attempts, ugh.. but yeah it Worked!

Some good talking points

WTF...

I know we'll be discussing this, and I have a bunch more quotes saved for that discussion, but this quote taken from Why We Fight by Guillaume Faye, is just incredible.

[pg. 29] *"The worst wars are the undeclared ones. They break out quietly, like an uneasy breeze, and are the harshest, most deadly.

Europe today faces the greatest danger in her history, a danger threatening the very existence of her civilisation. For she is at war and doesn’t even know it. She may sense the danger, but refuses to see it, burying her head in the sand, like the ostrich, hoping to conjure it away.

We Europeans are rapidly and massively being occupied and colonised by peoples from the South and by Islam. We are subject to America’s economic, strategic, and cultural New World Order. The two march hand in hand. We are emasculated by ideologies of decline and by those of a facile optimism, we are menaced by a regression of culture and education toward primitivism and by the faint simulation of prosperity.

Europe is the sick man of the world. It’s obvious in her demographic decline, in her physiological devirilisation, and in the reigning ideology of ethnomasochism, imposed by politically correct censors and the controlled media. We are gnawed at from within and attacked from without. We are set upon by assailants, occupiers, and collaborators, who make up the majority of the political, media, and intellectual classes, whether of the Right or the Left. The people have yet to see it because their shopping carts are still full. And though everyone may secretly suspect that the war has begun, the majority denies it, because for the moment no one has the courage to fight it. For the moment. . ."*

Yeah I really liked that the first chapter started with that. A very clear articulation of nebulous problems we’re Facing.

now we need a book that tells us 'how to awaken the boomer/bugman/cat lady/garden variety leftie/cuckservative'

Lol

@Tron Just read that essay. Awesome.

@John O - Glad you liked it

Interesting

omg Democrats are the real racists!!

Are they white? Red pill then

Driving sorry it’s hard to type and drive red pill them

Don't text and drive brother, the last thing we need is to endanger ourselves on the road. We're few enough as it is and each of us are valuable

I only talk to Siri’s bitch ass while driving. However, I am in New York City so I don’t know if you would call Dash driving, it’s more like sitting here.

This

Hahaha true enough

wow

But Western men are expected to act like fools.

They have abandoned their social identities, and therefore have no social orientation in the world. Or, rather, they are oriented against orientation. The only thing they stand against is identity. Identity is everything, so essentially they’ve become the champions of nothingness.

Good, modern, civilized white men stand for nothing, so as the saying goes, they’ll fall for anything.
And they’ve been so easily manipulated.

Good, modern, civilized Western white men are so easily cowed by charges of bias and privilege that they work tirelessly to outdo each other with social displays of moral universalism — by cucking themselves in every way imaginable.

-Jack Donovan, Becoming a Barbarian

the passages that come after that are also really good

When Western men recognize that they have an advantage or someone accuses one of them of some real or imagined “privilege,” they’re expected to acknowledge it and step aside or handicap themselves in some perverse Harrison Bergeron fashion to make things more “equal” and “fair” for everyone else — as if life has ever been or ever could be fair, as if people had ever been or could be truly equal.

Good, modern, civilized Western white men are expected to be the gentlemen of the world, throwing their coats down and opening every door for everyone else, putting their own interests last.

No one — certainly no woman — respects a man who behaves like that.

No child respects a father like that.

No one respects a man who is always apologizing and backpedaling.

No one respects a man who is always asking for permission.

No one respects a man who won’t stand up for himself or fight for his own interests.

No one wants to cheer for a team that stopped playing to win.

Most people would agree that men who don’t play to win deserve to lose.

I agree completely.

Moral universalism is a philosophy for men who have surrendered. They have surrendered their land, their history, their women, their dignity and their identity. They’ve become impotent half-men who deserve to be victims and slaves.

Moral universalism is a poisonous, emasculating philosophy for any man who adopts it.

If you are not a Western white man, and you adopt this philosophy, you will also eventually lose your culture and your history and your identity and you will also deserve to be a victim and a slave. Your cappuccino-colored kin will disappear completely into that incomprehensible swarm of 9.5 billion indistinguishable cappuccino-colored drones.

They may have come for our identities first, but eventually, they’ll come for yours.

The interests and mechanisms that drive the Empire have no use for identity. Identity is an inconvenience. It’s inefficient. It’s in the way.

The forces of globalism are aligned against identity, against everything that means anything.

Together, they form an Empire of Nothing.

this really speaks to my personal motivation for belonging to the movement. Had I not read the Way of Men before learning about Identity Evropa, I might not have applied to join.

*"A serious decline of population appears in the West after Hadrian. . .. . A law of Septimus Severus speaks of a penuria hominum - a shortage of men. In Greece the depopulation had been going on for centuries. In Alexandria, which had boasted of its numbers, Bishop Dionysius calculated that the population had in his time [250 A.D.] been halved. He mourned to see “the human race diminishing and constantly wasting away.” Only the barbarians and Orientals were increasing, outside the Empire and within.(50)*

*How did Rome reduce its population? “Though branded as a crime, infanticide dourished. . . Sexual excesses may have reduced human fertility; the avoidance or deferment of marriage had a like effect.”(51) Adds Durant: “Perhaps the operation of contraceptio n, abortion and infanticide . . . had a dysgenio as well as a numerical effect. The ablest men married latest, bred least and died soonest.”(52) Christians were having children, the pagans were not: “Abortion and infanticide which were decimating pagan society, were forbidden to Christians as the equivalents to murder; in many instances Christians rescued exposed infants, baptized them, and brought them up with the aid of the community fund”(53)

Irony of ironies. Today (2002), an aging, dying Christian West is pressing the Third World and the Islamic World to accept contraception, abortion, and sterilization as the West has done... But why should they enter a suicide pact with us when they stand to inherit the earth when we are gone?*

Source: (50) Will Durant, Caesar and Christ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1944;), p. 666. (51) Ibid.
(52) Ibid.
(53) Ibid.

-Death Of The West

Genetics and Education, Jensen 1972

“Designation of the Enemy”

Near the end of this week’s reading portion of Why We Fight

“The characteristic fact of the moment is that the mediocre soul, recognizing itself as mediocre, has the audacity to assert the right of mediocrity and impose it everywhere.”

*The Myth of the Twentieth Century* , Page 22.

We Wuz Persians n sheeit

Interesting quote in this book from Nikolai Bukharin, one of the leading early Bolsheviks, on the assumptions underlying the goals of leftism. He said, "Plasticity of the organism is the silent theoretical premise of our course of action. If we were to take the point of view that racial and national characteristics were so great that it would take thousands of years to change them, then, naturally, all our work would be absurd."

That's fascinating! Changing one premise shifted an entire civilization. Where'd you find this gem? :)

I'm reading the book for a class on the history of the Soviet Union, if you just search "Everyday Stalinism" on Amazon I'm sure you can find it. It does a really good job providing an understanding of all the contraditictions in the Soviet system and how those contradictions impacted the lives of Russians in the 1930s. It's a very mainstream work but I would reccomend it if you're interested in the period.

Apparently the modern left's support for nationalism and group identity in ethnicities/races it considers to be oppressed, while at the same time viewing as evil any nationalism or group identity in ethnicities/races it considers to be oppressors, is not at all new. The Bolsheviks did the same thing. Look at the first and third paragraphs especially (note: I got the book used and the highlighting is not mine).

Wow, it is really strange how similar this is to today. The central paragraph, especially the end of it, builds on the stuff mentioned in the previous picture.

@Travis - IN Interesting that these are some of the same platforms pushed by the Democrats/Neoconservatives.

Revolt Against the Modern World. Just had to post this, because I can't across the bit about crying over human dignity" being, relating to slavery and class division mere rhetoric ", something I agree with. The current economic system is much more heinous a crime than we had in ancient times, if not simply for the fact that it has totally undermined the dignity that came with labor toward a higher purpose

-paraphrase-

"Having discovered fascism’s nesting ground in patriarchal families, Adorno now identified its natural habitat: traditional culture: “It is a well-known hypothesis that susceptibility to fascism is most characteristically a middle-class phenomenon, that ‘it is in the culture’ and, hence, that those who conform the most to this culture will be the most prejudiced.”15
Edmund Burke once wrote, “I would not know how to draw up an indictment against a whole people.”16 Adorno and the Frankfurt School, however, had just done exactly that. They flatly asserted that individuals raised in families dominated by the father, who are flagwaving patriots and follow the old-time religion, are incipient fascists and potential Nazis. As a conservative Christian culture breeds fascism, those deeply immersed in such a culture must be closely watched for fascist tendencies." - Patrick J. Buchanan, *The Death of the West*

On Games and Victory,
"The fasct remains that modern man needs these degraded and desecrated forms of action as if they were some kind of drug; he needs them to elude the sense of his inner emptiness, to be aware of himself, and to find in exasperated sensations the surrogate for the true meaning of life. One of the characteristics of the Western "Dark Age" ( Kali Yuga) is a sort of Titanic restlessness that knows no limitations of and that induces an existential fever and awakens new sources of elation and of stupefaction.

Julius Evola, *Revolt Against the Modern World*

How bout those Yankees

I read this basically as, competition without a higher purpose or dedication outside one's self is the same as masturbation, filling an emptiness with a similar feeling but without true meaning

This is the conclusion of a book called Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism and the Politics of Identity by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke. Since it’s a “scholarly” work published by New York University Press, I was puzzled to see that he was treating many of the figures he addresses like Julius Ebola and Francis Parker Yockey with a good dose of objectivity. Usually any historian with a PhD will smear the subjects of their books with pejoratives and phrases like “but he was apparently crazy because he was a racist”. I got to the conclusion and now I’m thinking this guy might actually be on the level—woke, as they say.

He’s at least Molyneux-level woke. Anyway, the pages I posted are worth reading, and, for those of you that are into some of the weirder esoteric origins and trends in the greater White Identity movement, this is a good read. One of the only “scholarly” works that is moderately fair.

You guys might find this funny -

I'm currently reading the Journals of Lewis and Clark, and the party just came across an "anamale" they had never seen before but have heard the French refer to as a "Brarow" [badger], the first thing the party does is kill it and eat it. 😂

There's a story that a British ship landed on an island off of the Southern part of Africa, the island being incredibly densely populated with penguins that had never had exposure to humans. The sailors immediately start clubbing every one they see

I love our people, man.

"Whites are the only ones that care about conservationism"

>free food

You really can't eat penguins, guy

Honestly I wouldn't know about that lol

Leopard seals seem to do it well enough

Yeah, but 1) Leopard seals aren't human and 2) that part of the world isn't known for it's great wild game. It's like saying "just eat grass, cows are huge"

Do they not have much meat or something? what's physically preventing us?

You can eat them, it's just not great

I'm not saying the sailors didn't do anything with the carcasses. They turned them into oil. However, the annecdote implies that their reasons were less practical and more therapeutic

I imagine it is rather therapeutic

I believe the party killed the badger for research reasons as it would be much harder to study it while it's alive. But they ended up eating it and using its fur.

*"The cure for the aggression characteristic of anti-Semitism was therefore
believed to lie in freeing gentiles from their sexual repressions. Although Freud
himself eventually developed the idea of a death instinct to explain aggression, a
consistent theme of the Freudian critique of Western culture, as exemplified for
example by Norman O. Brown, Herbert Marcuse, and Wilhelm Reich, has been
that the liberation of sexual repressions would lead to lowered aggression and
usher in an era of universal love."*

**Jewish logic:** You cant hate anyone if you're sleeping with everyone.

What they didn't realize is that by liberating people from sexual repression created an entire class of people who despite being exposed to a hyper sexualized culture are still unable to get laid. Imagine what would be worse. An Incel in Victorian England who has never seen a girls ankles or an incel at ASU whose roommate is literally banging a girl 10 feet away from him. Which one do you think will snap first?

@Der Seeteufel - SD in the chapter our book club is currently reading, MacDonald exposed how Jewish psychoanalysts are trying to convince the general public that the "goyims'" rejection of promiscuity is actually a sickness. They continously criticize Western culture with theories based on absolutely nothing but opinions.

Criticism seems to be an extremely effective tool against Europeans - as this book describes. It's truly extraordinary how far we will go to please people.

"The New Birth" seems pretty similar to "Taking the Red Pill"

Austria-Hungary in the late 19th century.

So basically to win we need to blame liberals and praise jews?

@Jack - PA Well they are our greatest ally

@Jack - PA no. Populists against liberal oligarchs is the way to win

I agree. And I think it’s happening

If I'm not mistaken under FDR many ethnic Mexican citizens were stripped of their citizenship and deported. So it's interesting to note that there is already a legal precedent to do this @Nemets

@Nathan_Barker Yes, article says 400k to 2 million total deported, and 60% of them were US citizens

Gives me hope 😂 @Nemets

Pizzagate 1893

The Displacement Principle

For those that do not know- this is the Today I Read channel. Members are encouraged to post articles, pages, etc., of anything they may have read or learned that day.

*"Gabbatt’s insinuation at the NPI conference. It asserted that the alt-right is somehow fatally flawed because few women participate in the movement’s public demonstrations. This contention, particularly, demonstrates the backwardness of modern gender dynamics. As a woman who has attended alt-right rallies for the purpose of online journalism, I can testify that, due to the violent nature of counter-protestors, women should not want to be at these events, and I can testify that the alt-right men present went out of their way to protect me, and quickly escorted me away when situations became unstable.

Modern political demonstrations, such as the day-long street wars in Berkeley and Charlottesville, are highly dangerous, especially to the physically weak. That antifa puts females on the front lines to be injured and humiliated is not a sign of a principled or successful movement. It is a sign of a complete absence of common sense, to say nothing of class or chivalry. The men in the alt-right simply do not see it as manly to expose their women to violence, and therefore willingly face the perils and suffer the injuries themselves. There is nothing new or novel about this, except in the inverted reality leftists have created. Western men have been risking life and limb, exploring, building, hunting and fighting while their women and children were kept safe on the homestead or within city walls, since time immemorial."*

-Bre Faucheux (A Fair Hearing)

*"Women build the nest. Men reshape the world. And men are more successful at reshaping the world because women build them a strong nest. This has been the natural balance of European society and culture for millennia and it has resulted in the greatest societies, technology, art and discovery that mankind has ever known. There are of course female outliers who are capable of taking part in conquering and building, but they are just that-outliers. And the sad truth is that many women have been made miserable because they have internalized the notion that their self-worth is determined by their ability to emulate these outliers.

The missing element in all of this is that women want to be taken care of, and men want to have a protector/provider role. Few women realize that men strive to achieve great things and become better men because of women. Men seek education credentials, obtain better jobs, work out-and even conquer new continents and build dazzling cities-primarily to lay their accomplishments at the feet of women. On a more basic level one could say it is all for sex. But the reality is that men seek knowledge and status, undertake dangerous endeavors, and sometimes face certain death for the well-being of their women, and hence their people - not just for lust, but for love."*

-Bre Faucheux (A Fair Hearing)

Bre is great. I miss her comfy podcast with Mark Collett but Iam glad she has gotten married and is starting a family

"Women build the nest. Men reshape the world." --- simple and moving! I love it.

Glad you guys liked it! 🙂

*"Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment had enacted into law, confirmed this principle: “All persons born in the United States and __not subject to any foreign power__, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”

Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said “Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.” Thus, the statute can be read as All persons born in the United States __who are not alien__, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States."*

For those saying ending birthright citizenship for illegals is unconstitutional.

Im surprised you can end it by EO tho. That was not my impression

@VinceChaos the President is betting on success at the SCOTUS.

*"Western elites are determined to ignore this evidence and to insist that absolute equality between all races is “settled science.” This has profound consequences. If all groups have identical potential but are not identical in levels of achievement, the only possible explanations are that less advanced groups suffer from bad environments, or that more successful groups oppress them and hold them back. If the groups we call races lived in equivalent circumstances, and are in fact biologically equal, all would show the same level of achievement. Separate races in the same settings should, according to this view, produce equal proportions of artists, scientists, entrepreneurs, and Nobel laureates.*

*An important corollary to these beliefs is that since all human populations are identical, they can replace each other without any loss to the groups being replaced. The replaced population is, in effect, being replaced by itself.

This orthodoxy is dangerous for any country that tries to apply it. Here are some of its real-world consequences:

1. In the United States, compared to whites, blacks and Hispanics do worse in school, and are more likely to be poor and in jail. If we accept the principle of biological equality, this can only be because blacks and Hispanics are being exploited and oppressed by whites. If we accept this proposition, it becomes the responsibility of whites to transform themselves and restructure American society so that less successful groups can achieve at the same level as whites. Furthermore, continued unequal levels of acheivement are not taken as evidence that biological equality is a flawed theory, but as proof that white racism and oppression requires even stronger counter-measures. Any orthodoxy that refuses to recognize racial differences in ability has no option but to blame and penalize whites-unjustly-for all differences in outcomes.

2. If all groups are identical, it is irrational and bigoted-certainly for whites-to use race as a basis for any kind of decision-making. Whites must never express a preference for white-majority schools or neighborhoods, or the company of other Whites. They must be equally open to friendship, dating, and*

*marriage with people of all races. Any preference for whites, by whites, is “racism“ and “discrimination.”

In the West, racial discrimination has come to be viewed as a particularly shameful moral failing. Official loathing for racial discrimination has expanded to an almost equally deep loathing for other kinds of discrimination, whether on the basis of sex, sexual orientation or even religion, disability, or appearance. Discrimination of any kind has become suspect in the West.

It would be theoretically possible for a society to accept racial discrimination while forbidding discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, etc. However, it is likely that the loathing for racial discrimination led to attacks on every other kind of discrimination. This means that traditional distinctions our ancestors took for granted and were the foundations of society-distinctions between male and female, beauty and ugliness, homosexual and heterosexual, Christian and pagan, Western and non-Western are now widely dismissed as expressions of bigotry.

3.All groups may be identical, but it is good for them to mix because this results in “diversity.” In white countries, at any rate, diversity is said to be a positive good because it is supposed to bring a wealth of new ideas, insights, and perspectives-and also to offset the theoretical oppression and subjugation of nonwhites by whites. Any largely white locale or institution is thought to be defective. In 2015, the black female CEO of Sam’s Club caused a stir when she described in an interview how displeased she had been earlier that day when she found herself sitting across from “all Caucasion males” in a meeting.3

To argue that diversity brings benefits appears to contradict the idea that groups are identical. If blacks and whites, for example, are equally smart, creative, insightful, and*

*hardworking, it is hard to understand why mixing the two groups brings special insights, but the advantages of “diversity” are a central tenet oforthodoxy. Ironically, mixing populations dilutes whatever differences were originally found in them.

4. Immigration of nonwhites inclined to high birthrates is reducing the percentage of whites in the United States. Current projections are that whites will become a minority sometime in the 2040[3]. However, because races are presumed to be equivalent, whites should have no reason to object to becoming a minority; to object is, in fact, immoral. This transformation is welcome because it will bring “diversity.”

5. The same arguments apply to Europe. There can be no moral or political objection to the arrival of millions of African and Middle-Eastern immigrants because there are no differences between groups. According to current projections, nations such as France and Britain will cease to be majority white somewhat later than the United States but, just as in the United States, this must be thought of as an improvement.*

*Many of the newcomers to Europe are Muslim and bring habits that clash with a traditionally Christian population. Orthodoxy denies that this could ever justify keeping them out. First, most Muslims are nonwhite, so a religious objection might be cover for “racism.” Second, religious discrimination itself is almost as bad as racial discrimination and is therefore not grounds for exclusion. Europe is left with no principled justification for remaining European.

The desire to remain European-or white, or Western-does not require a belief in the supermajority of Europeans or their*

*civilization, only the recognition that they are different from others. It would be hard to describe the New Guinean way of life as one of man’s great achievements, but even our rulers recognize the right of New Guineans to remain a majority in New Guinea and to preserve their own culture. Our rulers refuse to grant white people the same rights."*

**Jared Taylor (A Fair Hearing)**

Long but worth it.

Just read a brilliant argument on egalitarianism by Jared Taylor:

*"Since, despite all these efforts, whites continue to achieve at higher rates than blacks and Hispanics, there is actually a way in which academics are beginning to conclude that the races may NOT be identical. It is now common to assert that whites are uniquely malevolent and that this explains nonwhite failure. Ta-Nehisi Coates is probably the most prominent black author in America today. He writes:

'I would like to tell you that a day approaches when the people who believe themselves to be white renounce this demon religion [white supremacy] and begin to think of themselves as human. But I can see no real promise of such a day.13' "*

TL;DR Any Executive Order would only command an agency of the Executive to enforce law that already exists.

*"Alpha/Beta, Madonna/Whore -

-The best way to understand women’s mating and life strategies is through the lens of the alpha/beta dichotomy, a concept taken directly from theories in evolutionary psychology. All normal women want to have children by and investment from the most successful and most respected men in their spheres, i.e., “alpha males.” However, while all women being impregnated by alpha males is more or less feasible, all women gaining investment and commitment from these men is mathematically impossible. Therefore, the women who aren’t able to secure the commitment of an alpha male must employ a compromise strategy if they want*

*both long-term security and the highest quality genes for their brood. In other words, they must get impregnated by the alpha male, but must secure investment from a secondor third-rate man, or “beta male.” This can involve the outright deception of the beta male (paternity fraud) or, if a woman’s “alpha” children are already born, she may also have some children by the beta male to sweeten the deal. Either way, the beta male is being convinced to invest in and secure resources for someone else’s offspring.

In short, from the unconscious perspective of medium to Iow-quality women, alpha equals good genes combined with low commitment, and beta equals bad genes combined with high commitment.*

*Men have a similarly dualistic strategy, which is called the Madonna/whore dichotomy. In this context, the concept of a Whore should be an easy one to grasp. A man can never be sure a child of a promiscuous female is his, so he has a high probability of wasting his resources if he invests in her children. A normal man will, however, copulate with the “whore,” because it doesn’t cost him much to give her his seed, so long as he can avoid being bound to her.

The avoidance of false paternity is so important, biologically, that men have evolved a sense of moral disgust where promiscuous or immodest women are concerned. Lust might impel a man to bed a “loose woman,” but afterward his attitude tends to be one of disdain, and he is overcome with a desire to distance himself from her. This isn’t an accident. The instinctive revulsion felt toward sexually unprincipled women protects men from wasting their resources on children that aren’t their own.*

*The Madonna on the other hand is quite rare, at least in the wake of the sexual and feminist revolutions. A Madonna is a chaste and loyal woman who a man can be reasonably sure will bear his own biological children. Men instinctively know that their children stand a better chance if they, the men, stick around and provide resources, but they can only risk a high level of commitment for a woman of high moral character. A Madonna gives a man the opportunity to invest in his children with low risk of paternity fraud. This is a good opportunity for him because the chance of successful reproduction of his children in turn is much higher if he directly invests in them. If a man meets a woman Whom he perceives to be a genuine Madonna, he will often develop warm feelings for her and try to secure a commitment from her, since reproducing with a virtuous female typically gives his genes the greatest chance for further reproduction in the next generation.

In short, from the unconscious perspective of the average man in civilization, the Madonna equals high paternal confidence and hence high commitment, and the whore equals low paternal confidence and hence low commitment."*

**Roderick Kaine - A Fair Hearing**

-

Great read for those interested in what men and women truly desire.

@CarletonJ Very enlightening. This explains almost all of today's problems when it comes to relationships.

@Axel if you want to read more from Roderick Kaine's work, check out his book Smart and SeXy.

https://arktos.com/product/smart-and-sexy/

^^^It might still be on kindle unlimited. It was when I read it

@CarletonJ I'll check it out. Thanks 📖

*"There is something I want to share with other whites, and it is something hard to describe. It is to, in a moment, “feel” the past. How can I convey this? How can I show this? Around 7700 BC, white skin had, as biologists say, “reached fixation” in modern-day Sweden. That means it had become a standard, expected trait throughout the population. Some time around 3500 BC, white skin reached fixation in the rest of Europe.1

I don’t say this because white skin is super-important (although melanin is a hormone and its absence will have causal effects on behavior), but just to give an idea of how quickly a genetically-based trait can spread. Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran, in their book The 10, 000 Year Explosion, explain “introgression,” the process whereby the genes of a different population can enter another population, and then those genes get selected upon, the result being that a trait can spread through a population far faster than you would expect from traditional natural selection.2

For example, a mutation that increases fitness by 10 percent (makes a person 10 percent more likely to successfully procreate than the average for the population), if it came into existence in a*

*single person, would come to dominate a population of 149,000 people in about 125 generations. If each generation is 25 years, this would mean that in 3,125 years, one advantageous trait that happened to appear in one person would become a standard, expected feature (or reach fixation) in the entire population. And that’s assuming the mutation only happens in one place. If the mutation for light skin or ability to drink milk into adulthood independently crops up in 10 places, and has a 10 percent reproductive advantage, then it would reach fixation in a population of 1.49 million in 3,125 years. If it independently appears 100 times, it could transform a population of 14.9 million in the same amount of time.

The important takeaway is that evolution happens fast-or at least the “small” things-such as the range of cognitive differences between what are considered functional humans-happen fast."*

**Ryan Faulk - A Fair Hearing**

There is so much more to add to this... But to avoid spam - evolution happens fast.

And small genetic variations have major consequences

Thank you for these excerpts and suggestions, many of which I've been planning to read. What's the plan with the book club? Discuss weekly? End of month?

@Mick Good question! I am talking the schedule over with my team at the moment, we will post a schedule which should answer all your questions by no later than 8ET tonight. Thanks!

Alt Hype is a good boy, he's just a bit sad right now.

Althype dindu nuffin!

*"The time is short! The challenge is huge, yet it is from our enemies' folly that wisdom is born, from this will that life is passed on, and from this despair that hope rises: for only at the very epicentre of danger does that which saves continue to grow - provided one knows, believes and wants it."*

Guillaume Faye - Why We Fight

-

Have a good day!

Heart of Europe by Peter Wilson

Some things never change.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-addressing-mass-migration-southern-border-united-states/

Give this a read chaps

@Nemets which book is that? Is that e Michael jones?

@Myndrian Heart of Europe by Peter Wilson

Awesome thanks

FIRST WORLDISM-

*-As I use the term, First Worldism refers to the idea that Western social systems and standards are not the product of mere policies or ideas, but are by-products of high averages of certain inherited traits in Western populations. Due to the above-described process, the “first world” as you know it is entirely a function of the genetic changes that created a New European, who, without any outside help, destroyed serfdom and created the modern world-modern government, modern conceptions of human rights, modern manufacturing and technology, and the generalized economy we are all familiar with.

Other peoples-the Oriental Caucasians, Indians, East Asians-only broke out of serfdom and the medieval economy when the Europeans either did it for them, or, as in the case of Japan, when they witnessed Europe and rapidly emulated the final outcomes of the agricultural and industrial revolution.*

*And when you can “see” this, it’s an amazing feeling that I don’t know how to convey with words. In an instant, to see people, hardly removed from the stone age, with burlap clothes, farming in a way not dissimilar from how farming was done by our prehistoric ancestors, with modest changes in their clothing-and to see that every piece of “technology” in this world is understandable within perhaps 10 minutes of explanation. To see a world in which all of the existing technology could, in perhaps a week or so, be understood by a single person.

To see the “elite” of 1250 being like “chavs” or “trailer trash” or “traq soot” slavs that you know today, and the lower classes being so casually crude, so casually violent in a way that you at first think isn’t real, like they’re joking. To see a mob take out sticks and improvised metal weapons and, with enjoyment, butcher a man to death. Not just the odd sociopath, but half the males in the village, with the females egging on the brutalization. To see them go about their daily lives, and then when they catch a criminal, mutilate him, or, just for the fun of it, burn a bunch of cats alive (3. common practice in Western Europe until a few hundred years ago), and then go back to weeding their wheat fields.

Then in 1500, to see those chavs and “trailer trash,” once the elite, now just the average person, and the elite like the average white guys of today, with what we think of as normal levels of aggression and abstract thinking. Then in 1750, to see white people who are like today, with the*

*elite being of similar demeanor and intellectual leanings of doctors and corporate managers of today.

And to see all of this represented as what is able to be produced: to see that iron forged by hand into new shapes and molds, and then into the parts of a primitive steam engine, and then hand-building a steam engine with a better design, the blacksmith changing in character over the centuries from someone unrecognizably brutish and prone to fights to someone like you and me as the complexity of what he makes increases. And then the smithy turns into an iron workshop, and then that building gets bigger and the blast furnaces grow larger, requiring steam engines and five-man crews to move them.

It’s like I can feel this material creation, as if crafting and screwing and gluing the wood and iron and cloth together myself, and in some weird way, this wood, iron and cloth and straw and burlap are themselves, somehow, an extension of those peoples’ own biology, like a bee hive.

And I know the people in each phase of genetic development. I can hear an old hag cursing in some indecipherable precursor to modern English; a dashing young blond-haired man who doesn’t look like the criminal sort at all, who then robs you, and later rapes a woman. To see someone who looks like the blond Aryan warrior Link from The Legend of Zelda, but then acts like an African. Women who smile courteously at you, but then stuff their bags full of produce and sneak out; who mock the boys who can’t fight and are attracted to only the most physical and dominating men. People who are European in appearance, but then behave like... well... do I need to say it? As if an alien race entered their bodies. But no, that’s them! That’s who the Romans called Barbarians. The modern world as we know it came from this genetic change in Western Europe. The change was most concentrated in England, which is where the “first world” started to come into existence.*

*This is why First Worldism means not mere “white nationalism,” but the whole mentality and state of being of the European who evolved, and evolved in, in this setting. Objectively-speaking, free speech, private property, and consistent law free from clannish sentimentalism does not exist where modern Europeans are not the deciding majority of an area’s demographic makeup.

If anyone should have racial pride, it is Europeans, the more northern and western the more so. And all of the old fables-the world of forms wherein empty heads murmur about oppression and hierarchy and domination, or jackasses imagine that their Northwest-European ideas of individualism and free markets are some universal truth-are revealed for what they really are: petulant nothingness. Just as those idiots who say Detroit is crap because of Democrats, when the obvious difference between Copenhagen and Detroit is the same as the difference between Copenhagen and Haiti, or Copenhagen and Eastside Los Angeles.

These people-libertarians, liberals, “cuckservatives”--burn so hot and so fiercely over the mere superstructure of our civilization, and not only deny the genetic base, but treat the people who understand the clear primacy of the genetic base as somehow sick or wrong-headed. And when you understand what this thing is we call “modern civilization,” the totally new and revolutionary conception of property, of law, and of life itself that preceded it, the hidebound, primitive economies it replaced, and the genetic changes in Europe from which it came-then you have a visceral understanding, in an instant, of how this, our genetic inheritance, is absolutely it.

This is the one thing that needs preserving above anything else.*

**FIRST WORLDISM BY RYAN FAULK**

*At ten o’clock in the morning a large band of Indians rode up to the fort, stopping in front of its main gate. Estimates of the number of warriors vary from one hundred to six hundred, but the smaller number is probably more accurate. There were women, too, mounted like the men. The riders carried a white flag, which might have reassured more naive settlers. The Parkers were too new to the western frontier to know exactly who this painted-for-war group was-seventeen-year-old Rachel Parker Plummet guessed incorrectly, and perhaps wishfully, that they were “Tawakonis, Caddoes, Keechis, Wacos,” and other sedentary bands of central Texas - but they had encountered Indians before and knew immediately that they had made a disastrous error in leaving themselves so exposed. Had they fully understood whom they were confronting - mostly Comanches, but also some Kiowas, their frequent running mates - they might have anticipated the horrors that were about to descend on them. As it was, there was nothing to do but play along with the idea of a parlay, so forty-eight-year-old Benjamin Parker, one of the six men in the fort, walked out to meet the warriors.

What happened next is one of the most famous events in the history of the American frontier, in part because it came to be regarded by historians as the start of the longest and most brutal of all the wars between Americans and a single Indian tribe. Most of the wars against Native Americans in the East, South, and Midwest had lasted only a few years. Hostile tribes made trouble for a while but were soon tracked to their Villages where their lodgings and crops were burned, the inhabitants exterminated or forced to surrender. Lengthy “wars” against the Shawnees, for example, were really just a series of Indian defeats strung out over many years (and complicated by British-French alliances). Wars against the northern Plains Indians such as the Sioux started much later, and did not last nearly as long.*

*When Benjamin Parker reached the assembled Indians, alone, on foot and unarmed, they told him they wanted a cow to slaughter and also directions to a water hole. He told them they could not have the cow, but offered other food. He returned to the fort through the open gate, told his thirty-two-year-old brother, Silas, what the Indians had said, remarked on the absurdity of their request for directions to water when their horses were still dripping wet, then gathered up a few staples and bravely went back out, even though Silas warned him not to. Meanwhile, seventy-eight-year-old family patriarch John Parker, his elderly wife, Sallie, and Rachel Plummer’s sister Sarah Parker Nixon were Heeing out the back exit, a low doorway - too low for a horse to pass through - that led to the spring. Another Parker in-law, G. E. Dwight, did the same with his family, prompting Silas to say, scornfully “Good Lord, Dwight, you are not going to run? Stand and fight like a man, and if we have to die we will sell our lives as dearly as we can.” This was bad advice. Dwight ignored it. In spite of his bravado, Silas had left his shot pouch back in his cabin. He then made another mistake, failing to tell his niece Rachel to join the others and run away with her fourteen-month-old son, James Pratt Plummet. “Do you stand here,” he said to her instead, “and watch the Indians’ motions while until I run into the house for my shot pouch.”*

*But events were moving much faster than Silas Parker had expected. As Rachel watched in horror, the Indians surrounded her uncle Benjamin and impaled him on their lances. He was clubbed, shot with arrows at extremely close range, and then, probably still alive, scalped. This all happened very quickly. Leaving Benjamin, the Indians turned and charged the fort. Rachel was already running with her son in her arms toward the back door. She was quickly caught. In her own detailed account “a large sulky Indian picked up a hoe and knocked me down.”1! She fainted, and when she came to was being dragged by her long red hair, bleeding profusely from her head wound. “I made several unsuccessful attempts to raise my feet before I could do it,” she wrote. She was taken to the main body of Indians, where she saw her uncle’s mutilated face and body up close. She saw her son in the arms of an Indian on horseback. Two Comanche women began to beat her with a Whip. “I supposed,” Rachel recalled, “that it was to make me quit crying.”*

*Meanwhile the Indians attacked the men who had remained in the fort, killing Silas and his relatives Samuel and Robert Frost. All three were scalped. Next, the warriors turned to a task especially suited to mounted, raiding Plains Indians: running down fleeing, screaming victims. Elder John Parker, his Wife, Sallie, and her daughter Elizabeth Kellogg, a young widow, had managed to travel three-quarters of a mile when the Indians overtook them. All three were surrounded and stripped of all of their clothing. One can only imagine their horror as they cowered stark naked before their tormentors on the open plain. The Indians then went to work on them, attacking the old man with tomahawks, and forcing Granny Parker, who kept trying to look away, to watch what they did to him. They scalped him, cut off his genitals, and killed him, in what order no one will ever know. Then they turned their attentions to Granny, pinning her to the ground with their lances, raping her, driving a knife deep into one of her breasts, and leaving her for dead. They threw Elizabeth Kellogg on a horse and took her away.
In all the confusion, Silas Parker’s wife, Lucy, and her four children had also run out the back gate of the fort in the direction of the cornfields . The Indians caught them, too, forced Lucy to surrender two of her children, then dragged her, the two remaining children, and one of the men (L. D. Nixon) back to the fort, where they were somehow rescued by three men from the cornfields who had arrived with rifles. The two children who remained in captivity were soon to become household names on the western frontier: Silas and Lucy Parker’s blue-eyed, nine-year-old daughter, Cynthia Ann, and her seven-year-old brother, John Richard.*

*Thus ended the main battle. It had taken barely half an hour and had left five men dead: Benjamin Parker, Silas Parker, Samuel and Robert Frost, and Elder John Parker. Two women were wounded, Cynthia Ann’s mother, Lucy, and Granny Parker, who had miraculously survived. The raiders had taken two women and three children captive: Rachel Parker Plummet and her toddler son (the first child born at Parker’s Fort), Elizabeth Kellogg, and the two young Parker children. Before they left, the Indians killed a number of cattle, looted the place, and set fire to some of the houses. They broke bottles, slashed open the thick mattresses, threw the feathers in the air, and carried out “a great number of my father’s books and medicines,” in Rachel’s description. She described what happened to some of the looters:

Among [my father’s medicines] was a bottle of pulverized arsenic, which the Indians mistook for a kind of white paint, with which they painted their faces and bodies all over, dissolving it in their saliva. The bottle was brought to me to tell them what it was. I told them I did not know though I knew because the bottle was labeled.

Four of the Indians painted their faces with the arsenic. According to Rachel, all of them died, presumably in horrible agony.*

**Empire Of The Summer Moon by S C Gwynne**

Tis the season where normies will bash Whites for conquering the savage. Make sure to remind them that these people were literal barbarians with the good ol tale of the Fort Parker massacre.

*ON ESCAPISM
The world, as it presents itself to us, is empty and cold.
Its communities have been dissolved; what remains are individuals rushing madly to and fro in the service of the
global economy.
It may not be surprising, therefore, that many of us escape into another, much more pleasant world — that of computer and video games.

There one finds that which no longer exists in the real world — a community to belong to, solidarity, great heroic deeds, authentic chivalry, and true love.
In fact, video games are, for many of us, the last possibility to somehow perform heroic deeds, experience epic battles,
achieve victory in combat, and overcome defeat.
This is why many of us choose this path, and some even forget their real lives in favour of it. They don’t want to go back into the cold, senseless world that you've created, into which you’ve forced them.

You’ve nothing but disdain for their behaviour, and want to force them back into your reality. But they are fleeing from you.*

*We, however, understand our brothers and sisters.
We know why they run, why they don’t want to have anything more to do with this world, with your world.

So we say to you:
Come to us, brothers and sisters! In this life there are still battles to fight and struggles to win. We need your desire for action and your passion in order to defeat our parents.
Let’s end their reign of terror together. Let’s join each other in entering into a new era. Let’s build a new world
together. A world in which no one needs to run anymore.

A world in which there will be genuine values and true friendship. A world of community and solidarity. Come to
us, brothers and sisters. Join us in the struggle against the ’68ers. Defend yourself with all your strength. Join us
to reclaim our inheritance, our country, and our identity.

Come back, brothers and sisters! For we all belong together.
We are all generation identity.*

**Chapter 30 - Generation Identity by Markus Willinger**

Better than Chaplin's speech in the "Great Dictator" by many orders of magnitude.

Agreed!

https://www.amren.com/features/2017/01/young-black-man-became-race-realist/

I’ve thought of this as well. Nice to see these thoughts in print

What book is this?

Pretty sure it's from Rules for Radicals.

No. Definitely not. Don't think it's Taylor (White Identity, the next book). Maybe u just haven't gotten to this part...

@Jacob @Nemets wutchyall readin'?

@Mick Medieval Russia 980-1584

@Mick The White Nationalist Manifesto

https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/12/against-escapism/

- C.S. Lewis, *Mere Christianity*

Only a real progressive is willing to acknowledge when it’s time to turn around and retrace our steps

Russian courtship

@Nemets What made you pick up this book in particular? I'm trying to dig into European history on the whole but it's hard to know what's worth reading and what's not.

if it's 600+ pages and the 1 star reviews on amazon aren't about formatting errors or freudianism it's usually at least half decent @Mick

@Nemets Yikes. Guess so. What do you think of the book so far?

How is it written? Is it tough to read, meaning, maybe a little dry?

I'm enjoying it, but it is pretty academic

Ok with academic, that can be written in a way to keep you reading imo.

I'm very inexperienced with Russia, does it get into what it means to be Russian wrt ethnicity?

I'm only 7% into it so far - but a lot of it is past the arrival of ryurik

I don't know if ethnic conflict was later, obviously soviet era

was a big deal

oh, ok.

I've always been curious about the history of the various groups that fell under Russian influence

how those groups formed, how they interacted with Russian influence and power, etc.

Ryurik?