Well... I've had my first foray into the alt/dissident right ethnostate sphere of Twitter. I understand the existential fear many Europeans (i.e. us whites) have with our coming demographic implosion and, with enough time and no action to halt it, extinction. That said, there is a problem with the rising European nationalist movement.
If you focus on race exclusively, you are pitting one version of identity politics against another.
And you will lose.
The West was built by a race, Europeans, but it's the values and ideals we championed that made us who we are.
Any nation, any race, can strive for those ideals.
Love. Truth. Justice. Liberty. Respect.
Do you see a skin colour anywhere in my 5 pillars of the masculine renaissance?
The problem is not immigrants.
Let me repeat that so you can all spurg out (I learned a new word!) like a Tourette's KKK clan clam bake with meth spiked in the hooch.
The problem is not immigrants.
The problem... is POLICY.
A policy and political position of 'diversity' that has at its foundation the REPLACEMENT of the native (i.e. European stock) peoples of Europe and N. America.
As the above interview proves, strict immigration policies that focus on respecting, conforming and upholding national identity and culture of the host country are what is needed. This is #MAGA and Trump's position (in my personal opinion) in a nutshell.
You want to live in The West?
Speak the language. Carry your own weight (i.e. no welfare). Don't be a criminal. Respect the laws AND culture of your new country that is NOT and NEVER WILL BE your native land. Pretty simple.
The problem we have now is our immigration policy is directed by foreign agents and traitors (i.e. Obama/Soros). Globalists and their enablers (virtue signalling leftists) DO NOT CARE about who they let into the country. This is the Ocasia (whatever her name is gift from God to conservatives) mantra. No immigration limits. No immigration standards. No immigration policy period. Open your front door America and Europe and let in whoever not only walks through, but whoever we actively recruit and support (NGO's) to push through the door to replace the native born citizens.
By all means let it be procured, that the trunk of Nebuchadnezar's tree of monarchy be great enough to bear the branches and the boughs;
that is, that the natural subjects of the crown or the state bear a sufficient proportion to the stranger subjects that they govern.
Therefore all states that are liberal of naturalization towards strangers are fit for empire. For to think that an handful of people can, with the greatest courage and policy in the world, embrace too large extent of dominion, it may hold for a time, but it will fail suddenly.
Never any state was in this point so open to receive strangers into their body as were the Romans.
I will be writing more on this late 16th, early 17th century British author in the future. Suffice it to say, Francis Bacon is a name not tossed around on many reading lists in the manosphere (that I have seen) and that is a shame. Bacon's writings are a seminal work of the later Renaissance that paved the way for the Enlightenment period at the height of European colonization (which is where this quote comes from "Of True Greatness of Kingdoms and Estates.") His greatest contribution - The Advancement Of Learning - may very well be the sole document history can point to as the beginning of the modern west as we know it today.
When I came across the passage above on immigrants, I noted my aversion to such advocacy immediately given the context of our times. Bacon advocated for the granting of citizenship "in the highest degree" - jus civitas (right of citizenship)... jus commercii, jus connubii, jus haereditatis (The all important legal rights of commerce, marriage, receiving property by will, voting, holding office).
And this not to the singular persons alone, but likewise to whole families; yea to cities, and sometimes to nations. Add to this their custom of plantation of colonies; whereby the plant was removed into the soil of other nations. And putting both constitutions [institutions; naturalization and colonization] together, you will say that it was not the Romans that spread upon the world, but it was the world that spread upon the Romans; and that was the sure way to greatness.
Was Francis Bacon a globalist? Does this plan for the crushing of national identity go back that far?
Or, is there some merit to his advocacy of naturalization of "strangers?"
To read the above is to shit your pants at how this is being implemented right now... but for who's benefit?
Not the local, native born population of western countries, no.
But if you are a GLOBALIST and want to EXPAND and SOLIDIFY your empire... the above from their perspective makes perfect sense.
There is a modern empire spanning the globe; a globalist, deep state, new world order empire. This is why borders and nationalism to them are anachronisms. The Roman empire of old IS being stitched back together, but this time they want it to be global!
The Middle East is falling into line (with the small hiccup of Syria and Iran). Europe is subdued with stirrings amongst the natives. Britain is wholly conquered but a revolt is rising of real threat to the stability of the whole project. Libya and N. Africa are currently chaotic and ungovernable, but being broken, they can be brought under control in due time once the larger (Syria/Iran) eastern front is settled. Turkey, while difficult, can be brought low with corruption in time. Erdogan is but a tempest in a tea pot, of no real threat (or so I suspect stupid globalists are underestimating the new sultan of Islam).
Rome was one of the largest empires that ever spanned the world.
The Republican (Western) period lasted 500 years and the Imperial (Eastern Byzantine) just over a 1000. It is clear as day that this is what is driving the push for mass immigration/replacement of native state populations. Once the lands of "archaic" nation states are populated with peoples who have zero historical and cultural connection to them... Rome will be born anew, but not for you and me (i.e. European white folk).
This is what Trump has thrown a wrench into. This is why they hate Putin's intervention in Syria and his renaissance of the Tzar-like system of Russian nationalism.
Conservative, European nationalism & populism is the antithesis to Lenin's call for "dedicated revolutionaries to spread Marxist political ideas among the workers". This is the current zeitgeist that is driving European revival based on race, culture and history. The conservative movement is a movement back to the foundations of the entire western project that started in Rome. It is thus very understandable why so many are averse and frighted of immigrants in their own lands. This is well within reason and just common sense. That said, it is also now clear (to me) that it is not immigration that is the problem, but WHO that immigration is benefiting and to what GOAL it is being directed toward.
If we return to Bacon's own advice...
that is, that the natural subjects of the crown or the state bear a sufficient proportion to the stranger subjects that they govern
It is clear that the natural (i.e. indigenous, native) peoples should be a sufficient proportion (i.e. majority) to the stranger (i.e. foreign, naturalized) subjects who also thus remain the people that govern said strangers.
This is NOT what "immigration" into The West is today.
In Rome (and I am winging it now)... the sweeping granting of citizenship to immigrants and entire territories was to spread the form of government, laws and way of life of the Romans.
There was no diversity. Yes, you had an older historical culture and identity in the Roman province you resided in, but you were Roman first and foremost and aspired to become more Roman. You abided by Roman customs and embraced Roman culture. You could travel from one end of the empire to the other and have the same legal rights no matter where you were, but also the same Roman culture. Can you see now why a "culture" (i.e. feminism, LGBTP(edo)ism, anti-Europe) of "diversity" and "inclusion" are so sacred to globalists?
This, in effect, is precisely what the founding fathers of America created in 1776. A new version, fully articulated for the times, of the founding of a Roman style of nation, peoples and law (i.e. culture). Thus, there was no threat to the state of Rome or America as long as immigrants abided by Roman law and strived to be good Roman citizens (i.e. Americans).
The problem today is that globalists are forcing the immigration of complete non-natives into the new-world-empire they are creating while requiring the stranger do nothing to become a "good Roman" AND... also trying to force down the throats of the natives an entirely alien "culture" in order to "accommodate" the strangers flooding in. The Romans did not do this. Roman provinces were very much a product of their geography and the culture of the people living in them. Whether they came to Rome (immigration and citizenship) or Rome went to them (conquered by war or by alliance)... Rome was imposed on the stranger, not the stranger on Rome. In granting whole areas Roman citizenship, those people did not have to move to Rome proper to partake of the empire. I.e. Africans could become Roman and STAY in Africa. If they wanted to travel/move to Rome, they could, but they did not have to in order to enjoy the benefits of citizenship. If they did travel to Rome and become a resident there, again, they came to become Roman, not be African in Rome.
Globalists have only bare scaffolding underneath their new empire, and now they are flooding the lands they "control" with non-natives and guaranteeing them "citizenship" through welfare only.
They are replicating the very errors that contributed to the collapse of Rome before they even have the trunk of empire planted to support the branches and boughs of one.
In short... globalists are desperate (and stupid). The immigration crisis is a sign of collapse... for globalists, not victory of their dreams of ruling the planet.
They are importing the very people that will collapse their vaunted new-world-order by sheer weight before they had the majority of the natives IN a minority position to actually take advantage of the situation (i.e. boomers were dead and gone). They are going for a flood strategy instead of the slow trickle that would have worked better, but taken too long to see the fruits of in their lifetime.
So... is immigration a problem in The West?
The current GLOBALIST immigration policy is a complete disaster and direct threat to the very existence of western and European peoples.
That said... proper immigration policy CAN be a pillar of greatness for a nation state, but it has to be one that is strict in requirements and lawfully enforced where the native born peoples are always in a proportion (i.e. majority) to govern the foreign (and perpetual minority) stranger. See Japan.
It's a nuanced and less easy to paint into a corner stance. It is also a stance that refutes entirely identity politics at it's root and thus destroys (and offers a better alternative to) the immigration policies of the globalists and their leftist/liberal barbarians at the gates.
- immigration can be good for a nation
- it must have strict guidelines to qualify
- it will not make the native majority a minority by direct policy to do so
- all immigrants will respect and strive to become "a good Roman," leaving their home culture private at home while embracing the new in public and at work.
The "Polish" boxer in the video above that opened this discussion is just such an example of how effective this kind of immigration policy and stance can be. You can see from his responses that he is slightly uncomfortable with the questions of his status as a Polish citizen. He knows he is not Polish-Polish (i.e. race), but he also CLEARLY understands why his good native Polish friends are reacting as they are to the request to take a flood of completely unqualified immigrants into their country. Note as well that this fear of immigrants flooding Poland is a fear he also holds!!!
This is a black man who is fully Roman... that is Polish. He has made a decision to live in Poland and respect the history and culture of the majority natives and... most importantly... he aspires to be one of them, not like his backward, barbarian African brothers. He has adopted the ideals of Poland and made them his own. He has no interest in being "African," but he also won't deny or spit on his racial heritage. Ask any African American if he wants 10,000 PURE AFRICANS from the Congo, or Nigeria, or Sudan living in his small town or taking over the neighbourhood of the urban, city landscape he calls home. You will find out very quickly that, like the Izu Ugonoh, he feels he is more AMERICAN than African.
When you have this kind of immigration policy, it IS a net boon and bonus to a host nation.
The policy of we have now... is one of invasion, not immigration.
And it will collapse both The West and globalists under its stupidity.
I can't think of a better video to setup the context for this divisive discussion in The West today.
We are all God's creation.
Every one of us.
Black. White. Yellow. Brown. All of us are one when we come face-to-face with our maker on the final day.
Kevin Costner took a huge risk casting Whitney Houston in The Bodyguard in 1992. To cite this today with the globalist push for interracial breeding out of the white race in Europe I know will set off a lot of people raging that Maximus is a closet globalist.
I'm not. I'm a humanist and a realist.
There is no need to cite the studies that are now concluding the racial differences between blacks and whites. Scientific facts will never conform with political ideologies. They should also never be used to support racists and eugenic notions of superiority.
Every race IS capable of aspiring to be more than who they are and overcome whatever limitations they have been born with.
Being a Black American with national pride is quite a conundrum; I often find myself hiding my patriotism from my ethnic kinsmen like its a bag of crystal meth.
This was a message to me from a black American on Twitter. The battle for Europeans future is one of demographic survival, but we know who we are, just forgotten our roots. Blacks living in America however are currently engaged in a battle for their very soul. They are being torn apart by the Obama era of identity politics that has placed pride in skin colour instead of virtue that is attainable by all.
"This is the white man's country. There ain't nothing here for us." There, I believe, highlights one of the reasons why White Americans soar where Blacks drag (generally speaking, of course): Whites allow themselves to tap into the ascended, transforming consciousness of the American Dream while Blacks stubbornly stay planted on the pavement while cursing the former for daring to take to the stars.
Does this young American man of African racial ancestry sound even remotely incapable of rising above his "genetic" low IQ? His racial brick wall of inferiority to the white man?
Rising above who you are is a choice. That's it.
Every man is limited. Perhaps race & genetics deal a man more limitations than others, but that means that man will only be able to climb as high as he is limited, not that he can't or is incapable of making the climb!
That said, there appears to be clear racial limitations in terms of forming functional, law abiding and prosperous nations that are holding Africans back. I responded with as much to this young black man.
The sad reality is, as one black American I heard over Twitter say... he was GLAD his ancestors got slaved over to The West. It means he grew up in a CIVILIZED country, education, and the opportunity to make something of himself. I am saddened... truly saddened... with Africa and what is on display in their migration to Europe.
I don't want to call other human beings animals... but what else can you say? Why is Africa... in the 21ST CENTURY... still so bloody barbarian? Europeans were of the same... back 2000 years ago. We changed, we improved our lives and created law abiding nation states while we had dictators (kings) who could murder us at will by divine decree. Africa has had colonization, but once Europe LEFT... look at it? Dictator after dictator after dictator... and the VIOLENCE (S. Africa is my reference, but most others as well).
What is it? I don't want to believe it is race/genes... but something... it makes no sense to me. Even accounting for IMF/World Bank oppression it... why are the people [Africans in Africa, or blacks in America] so VIOLENT to their own kinsmen? Internet, cell phones, access to ALL of Europe's knowledge on democracy, republican government, science and... can you tell I am frustrated? I have never in my life wanted to judge others by their skin, but with what is going on in Europe with these "asylum" seekers... I just don't know, but REALITY is going to force Europeans to make a choice - survive, or be raped and replaced.
The false song of equality among the races is smashing into the brick wall of reality.
And what is becoming apparent once again to the awakening European nationalist spirit is... we are superior. Law. Science. Government. Perhaps even culture.
Europeans are the best.
But... Denzel Washington. Malcom X. Martin Luther King. Joy Villa. I won't know who the true heroes and bright lights of African history are, but it will also be curious to note how many of those stars came out of a European context and not an African one. At least for the modern age that is.
Is it genes, race, that is holding blacks back? Are Africans, in the whole, simply incapable of rising to the state and status of white Europeans as some ethnostate and race focused white nationalists (not a slur) are telling me I need to wake up to?
In every single way, apart from some genetic attributes, I - a black, American man - have more in common with you - a white, Canadian man - than I would a black man from Ghana. Biology and genes play a role in a nation, that cannot be denied, but ideals and shared experiences are what make a society of people.
Ideals and shared experiences. These know no race or gene.
If you want to talk about the superiority of the white race, you can't without referring to our experience and the ideals that our specific context created. From Zeus to Christ, Europeans had a unique experience and history that allowed us to make choices to climb a path of superiority among other races. You can't take over a whole planet if the people you encounter are better than you.
Which also brings in the judging of the merits and values of cultures that is so aghast to liberals and leftists. This is another factor driving the European nationalist zeitgeist. With the inrush of strangers to our lands, and the assault on our culture from gatekeepers, European peoples are no longer afraid to look at, and declare, that their culture and history is not only deserving of respect, that it may even be better than many others.
Immigrants are not coming to The West for the same shit conditions of dictatorship, economic hell and cultural backwardness that is their land of birth.
They are coming to The West... to enjoy the culture and lifestyle of a European nation and people... only to then live as if they never left home by refusing to BECOME European... i.e. Roman.
So, we Europeans clearly did something right. Otherwise, we would just be another shithole country with shithole living conditions and it would just be shit all around. No need to immigrate if you are just moving from one shithole to another. It's all shit.
The only conclusion many ethnostate European nationalists are telling me, nay pleading for Maximus to open his eyes to the truth, is...
On Intelligence (IQ)
I can think of no better actor than Denzel Washington to nail this point home.
Frank Lucas rose above the entire Italian mafia in the drug trade in the 60s/70s. In fact, the Italians were coming to him for supply.
Is this not impossible by low-genetic-IQ-in-Africans science?
Oh... come on Maximus! Denzel [and Frank Lucas] is the exception that proves the rule the majority (i.e. bell curve) blacks are simply incapable of rising above their low IQ (and scientific fact) nature.
Well... why don't we take a closer look at the science of IQ shall we?
Neuroplasticity is, in simple terms, the ability of your brain to change and adapt in response to experience. You can think of those neurological changes as your brain’s way of tuning itself to meet your needs.
Right off the bat, the race superiority types will spout off that IQ is fixed. Even if it can be increased by neuroplasticity, you are not going to change an 80 IQ into 180 with a neuron massage.
So does the science.
What is becoming clear in the emerging science about brain development and IQ is this - there is a genetic DNA component, but there is also a strong environmental one as well. What the links are or how to reconcile the data is unclear, but a genetic DNA limitation/superiority (i.e. race) is not 100% scientific fact as far as the future is concerned for any particular race.
Let's talk about experience and IQ brain development for a moment.
P-FIT (Parieto-Frontal Integration Theory) suggests that intelligence [i.e. IQ] is related to how efficiently information processing is shunted around the brain and how well the relevant brain areas communicate with one another.
... research showing that the parieto-frontal network is activated under conflict situations and when response selection is required.
Resolving conflicting possibilities by making the correct selection is exactly what one engages in during IQ testing.
I don't want to cite too much, so I will summarize as best I can.
Neuroplasticity is the genetic set point, not IQ. Thus it is neuroplasticity that ultimately decides IQ potential. There is zero question that environmental factors are the input that realize genetic intellectual potential. Low IQ individuals have brains that do not adapt as well/quickly to environmental conditions as high IQ individuals. There is a very critical period of brain development that sets this ability to adapt to novel phenomena (i.e. experiences). This period is in infancy when the brain is most plastic and thus capable of making new neurons in response to experience.
Genes are always constrained to the environment they are expressed in. Changing the environment changes the genes potential expression. "Intelligence is like a flower: it needs cultivating to thrive." (.ibid, p 99). An advantaged environment will be parents that place importance on a child's intellectual development. Parents in disadvantaged environments (poverty, uneducated, malnourished, etc.) are simply unable to give their children the "fertile soil" to grow IQ. As an allegory to this, the authors cite the height difference between North and South Korea (north on avg 2 to 3 inches shorter). The authors seem to be drawing a direct parallel to intelligence and IQ development.
Thus there are large environmental effects on height despite its high heritability, because individuals height can very considerably depending on environmental perturbations.
In other words, while heritability values would be similar within both North and South Korea, the mean height difference between them is entirely an environmental effect.
Or said another way...
The mean intelligence/IQ difference between whites and blacks is entirely an environmental effect.
Why am I focusing on environmental factors?
Because the racial ethnostate advocates that declare the white European race to be superior to blacks/Africans are scientifically correct!
Look at our environments.
No... not today. Look back to the past 10,000 plus years.
And no, not at the higher level of wealth, cleanliness, nutrition & education Europeans pursued and attained only in the last 1000 years or so... but why we pursued these advantageous conditions in the first place.
In Europe, you can't be a stupid, lazy ass mother f**ker 'cause you will die.
Europe is a constantly changing climate that can kill you. Europeans could never coast their way to survival. They had to solve real life and death problems each and every generation for thousands of years.
Think about it... what do you have to do to survive in Africa? Not all that much when you look at the exploding demographics of that continent.
The heat can't kill you.
Lions won't unless you are stupid.
As long as you can pick something to eat off a tree, or kill something without it killing you, you have food.
It gets hot, you lay down under the tree and smoke marijuana. "Relax mon!"
It rains... you get a little wet if you can't get indoors.
It floods... well, run I guess and get to high ground as fast as you can. (Blacks are good at running compared to whites!)
Winter in Europe?
If you have not secured:
- shelter for protection from the elements
- some means to stay warm inside that shelter
- clothing to keep you warm when you go outside
- the knowledge to keep clothing dry in order to stay warm outside
- the knowledge on how to keep food gathered/grown/slaughterd viable as nutrition through the winter months
- and enough food to actually last all winter until spring thaw...
You. Will. Die.
Death... I am suspecting... just MIGHT have a slightly exaggerated effect on gene expression of IQ in this given environment of experience.
Africans... even Mexicans & Arabs... never faced this. They still don't. The proof of this is how little money and effort they need to get to America/Europe as a "refugee."
When do the "refugee" migratory flows into Europe and Canada slow down the most?
They'll die or it's just not as comfortable/fun a trip as in spring/summer when it is... say it with me... an easier experience!!!!
Hmmmm... didn't science have something to say about the connection between experience and IQ in gene expression?
The absolutely BRUTAL environmental living conditions of the harsh geography of Europe are what gave us big brains.
Also note... China has similar geography. Every nation below the frost line of the world tends to be... less than the ones above them no? Even in Europe, who are the PIGS - Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain. The lazy white guys. Who are the most productive in Europe? Britain, France, Germany, Sweden. All cold, brutal winter environments. One might argue Eastern Europe (i.e. Russia, Ukraine, etc.) are outliers as many are below first world standards (them's fighten words for sure!) But this is also inline with environmental factors. They are not as rich, healthy or wealthy as The West.
The IQ/intelligence advantage of Europeans is 100% tied to the environment they evolved within. Change the environment, change the nature of Europe. Is this not in line with the goal of mass immigration and LGBT propaganda to children when their brains are most plastic?
This would fully explain the "exceptions that prove the rule" in black America. Denzel Washington. Joy Villa. Malcom X. Martin Luther King. Chris Rock. BB King. Whitney Houston. These are ALL black men and women who have evolved in an advantageous environment. Not as advantageous as white neighbourhoods, but better than being in Africa that's for damn sure.
We interact with our genome every moment of our lives, and we can do so very, very positively. Keeping your blood sugar low is very positive in terms of allowing the genes to express reduced inflammation, which increase the production of life-giving antioxidants. So that’s rule number one: You can change your genetic destiny. Rule number two: you can change your genetic destiny to grow new brain cells, specifically in the hippocampus
Blacks can become as smart as whites... it's just going to take a long time to catch up.
This is something white supremacists don't want to here. It's how they make themselves feel better at night for not being as smart as other Europeans in their tribe. They want to fall back on race determination because it makes them feel powerfull without having to do anything.
But those true Nazis (not a slur) are also correct. Right now, based on Europeans unique and advantageous historical geographic environment that forced us to get big brains or die in a snow bank, our DNA does make us statistically (and scientifically) more intelligent than the bell curve of most Africans (perhaps even Latinos and Arabs). No one can deny this. Africans have never had the advantage of climate and geography - the challenges of a varying environment that prompts response (and thus IQ) to the very challenge to stay alive - that Europeans have had.
What also cannot be denied is this.
Blacks that take advantage of the advantageous environment in The West NOW... do... get... smarter.
And they pass on those higher IQ genes that have changed in response to environment to their children.
Our views of the nature of the brain have changed in a similar way as our views of DNA. It used to be thought that DNA did not change—in other words, you’re stuck with what you’re born with.
This, too, has been disproven by researchers like Bruce Lipton, who have introduced an entirely new branch of biological science called epigenetics. Your DNA changes continuously based on your experiences, emotions, and environment.
Our DNA is a program that can be modified by the changes to our environmental inputs that are both voluntary and involuntary (choose to read, stay indoors in winter when it's freezing). This may only be anecdotal evidence, but it's pretty clear that the long winters in Canada spent indoors produce some incredible musicians, modelers, painters, writers, etc, etc etc. There is nothing else to do. In Africa where it is always warm to go outside and have some fun... there is less incentive to develop intellectually. The Eden that is Africa may very well be the exact environment that reduces IQ and incentives to get smarter. That said, while Africans may have a DNA limitation, it is not absolutely 100% set.
To move on, I want to finish this discussion about racial IQ from a more patriarchal and relevant to this blog perspective.
K-selection sexual mating strategy - i.e. patriarchy - produces higher IQ offspring.
To allow an adequate evaluation of r/K theory in light of Silverman's critique, data are tabulated showing that, on average, Mongoloids > Caucasoids > Negroids in brain size and intelligence, maturational delay, sexual restraint, quiescent temperament, and social organization.
The sequence of this suite of life-history characters may parallel the order of emergence of the populations in earth history. The phased linearity is ordered by a theory of r/K reproductive strategies in which Mongoloids are more K selected than Caucasoids and especially more than Negroids.
It is suggested that behavioral differences among human races arose because the more predictable environment faced by later emerging populations selected for increased brainsize, fewer and slower maturing offspring, greater parental care per each offspring, stronger pair bonds, and increased social organization.
This post is getting long enough, but I think you can tell where I am going with this.
The African race never fully adopted/embraced K-selection mating strategy - the pair bonding of one man and one woman in marriage long term. This is a classic "racist" trope even today and why white European women are being bombarded with the interacial message of "fun" with black dudes.
While clearly a racial stereotype, it does point to a truth. Europeans have a much higher adoption of patriarchal attitudes and beliefs because of Zeus (Greek), Jupiter (Roman) and Christ for the past 2000 years. Christianity and Islam in northern Africa do have some patriarchal influence (note this is where the smarter blacks reside), but on the whole... where is the pre-historical record for a Zeus like patriarchal role model for African men?
The goddess rules supreme in Africa as much of the continent is still ruled by tribal pagan (and thus matriarchal) religions and beliefs. Meanwhile in The West, it is Christianity that has been abandoned, not paganism (although we are now returning to it in Nordic countries apparently) and BOTH blacks AND whites are being targeted with the SAME globalist, cultural propaganda to CHANGE the environment of K-selection to horny r-selection monkeys.
When African slaves were brought to America, they overwhelmingly became Christian.
They are the very heart of the baptist faith (I believe) and are famous around the world for their choirs. This change of environment and experience changed African mating strategies for a time. Starting earnestly in the 30s/40s/50s, American blacks aggressively pursued the same WASP style of life that European Americans did. The Civil Rights movement was precisely a reflection of this - a movement for recognition and respect that blacks too could be as K-selected, mongamous, educated and highly functional economic and civic contributers to America's success. This is what "equality" in race relations once meant in the past - to be on equal footing socially with whites because blacks were NOT the tribal ancestors brought over centures ago any longer.
Sadly... this also perfectly explains why degenerate programming works so much easier and faster on blacks than whites. Getting black men to slip in the D and take off is just second nature genetically. They have so short a history of adhering to the discipline of single mate K-selection strategy it is easy to simply slip back into whoring around like the goddess never left. Add to this the desire to "not be white", which is to say upword mobile and educated/successful on European cultural terms... it's a toxic mix of missed opportunities due to both genetic and culture/environmental forces.
And I am not the only one that thinks so on almost all these points. Let's go back to my black brother for a moment.
I have no problem calling Richard Spencer and David Duke my brothers (though I'd probably only tell them that just to make them uncomfortable) because they share my experience and love for the Stars and Stripes, even if they do wish to take it in an ill direction.
And, oh hell yes, I'll say the most triggering shit of all triggerdom: White people are the foundation of Western ideals and prosperity. That statement is not offensive to non-whites, contrary to popular belief, because upon that firm foundation, Chinese, Indian, Jewish, Black (etc) Americans were able to weld onto it their own beams of potential and accomplish wonders (the ones who allowed themselves to, at least). Therefore, anti-white sentiment is not only ungrateful, it's counter-intuitive to Western essence.
Ideals my friends.
Perhaps blacks do have a lower bell curve IQ. Perhaps this means they have to work HARDER to get where they want to be.
But it does NOT mean they have no right to be in America, or even Europe for that matter.
The problem is not race, immigration or IQ... we have a satanic, globalist control problem.
We need to take back our countries from those who want everyone to their slaves, no matter what country you live in or what race you come from.
My experience with the hard core alt/dissident right was one I am glad I had. It showed me that focusing on identity politics will fail just as spectacularly as it is on the left.
That said... we can still assert race is real.
That racial differences are real.
That "diversity" does NOT make us stronger.
That common sense tells everyone we are happiest amongst our own.
And thus... Europeans, in America or our native land, deserve and have the right to be the majority in our own nation states that we built with the blood and sacrifice of our ancestors.
But if we happen to share a country together with strangers in the minority, we should not be divided against ourselves based on stupid shit as skin colour and religious creed.
We need to unite to fight the war against the real enemy - globalists, satanists and pedophiles the world over.
If you happen to be black and want to fight by my side... I got no problem with that at all.
Anyone that does... can take it up with The General.
Strength & Honor
Postscript: I want to include hear more words from my black American brother who corresponded with me. He speaks to what I believe is the true spirit of masculine and patriarchal renaissance that I am trying to spark in western men.
It's not your race that defines you.
It's what you believe and strive to become.
You said something I thought was quite profound, at least in the way I interpreted it (so correct me if I got it wrong). You said that if White Europeans were bred out of the gene pool but the European ETHOS remained with the population, you’d be content. Wow. Liberals and conservatives would both piss blood if they heard that, which actually serves as the sign of a perfectly rational thought. With growing anti-white sentiment, however, I worry that many people are also refusing to allow the ethos to nest itself within them, believing it to only pertain to Caucasians. Therefore, should the white populace disappear, they allow at least part of the ethos to fade, as well.
The Founding Fathers of the United States were shameless slaveowners and there's a non-zero percent chance that they owned one of my direct ancestors. That is true. However, I also recognize what else the Fathers were. They were the architects of the world's first transcendental nation; a country not based on a foundation of soil, brick, and metal, but rather of dreams, pursuits, and actualization. A land built on ETHOS.
One of my favorite poems is "I, too, Sing America" by Langston Hughes (link at the bottom). What is essentially said is that even though he is a black man in the 1920s United States, among a populace that rejects him, he still sees the dream, the promise, the magnificence of America, and WILL NOT allow himself to be denied it. THIS is what the attitude of a Black American should be, not misguided anger and self-pity.
The ethos sings a Song to everyone, and all men are brothers in the orchestra of the Music. Parallel to Plato's Form of the Good and Aristotle's "Golden Mean", African codes of virtue culminated into what the Egyptians coined as the Code of Ma'at. All know the Absolute.
That last part maybe highlights the primary flaw of Globalism. Globalism attempts to artificially manifest an already naturally existing phenomena: the interconnectedness of all things. The European Union isn’t entirely necessary because Brits, Germans, French, and Spaniards are connected regardless of whether or not they wish to recognize the fact. A hardlined Alt-Right leader in Virginia is bonded to an Dominican woman in East Harlem, regardless of whether or not he recognizes it. Integration and One World isn't something that's signed into law and forced onto society by coked-out bureaucrats, it's something that is awoken to when the masses are ready (they ain't).
You were right, by the way, when you said that your most recent post, centered on Plato's Republic, was what made me reach out to you. I grow very weary of pursuing material things such as money, which is costing the true currency that is my youth. At the age of 23, I'm wise enough to know that my reality is so much more than what it seems, yet I'm too ignorant to quite understand how. I would like to pursue women, right now, but the pursuit of my own soul seems more urgent.