Saturday Audience Participation
The Saturday Guest Post has been postponed until later this week. I received a personal e-mail from someone I consider a "race realist" luminary and I'm waiting for confirmation that I may post his e-mail. Feel free to guess who it is in the comments.
With the release of Obama's actual birth certificate (assuming it's real), Donald Trump has gleefully deemed himself the primary cause. While Trump's self-aggrandizement and assuredness know no bounds, we probably should give him most of the credit for finally getting this issue resolved. So if we do consider this a victory for Trump, one notes how a primarily online movement, which the mainstream deigned to cover and only dishonestly, got a big-time mouthpiece and actually made a real world impact - from the President of the United States no less. For those toiling away online, commenting, writing, and arguing about politics, this should encourage us.
So today's questions: What do you think, in general, of the reactionary/anti-PC blogosphere (loosely defined as my blogroll and sites one degree away)? What do you consider are its strengths and its weaknesses? Does it need a mainstream head? If so, should this come from an apolitical source (I think so as to avoid the partisan attacks, though Jimmy the Greek and James Watson might argue otherwise)? Are there too many differing opinions or too much consensus? Is it too pessimistic, masculine, or unpalatable to a wide audience? Is it shrinking or gaining a niche mainstream presence by arising sporadically in news stories like this one? How can the reactionary/anti-PC blogosphere improve?
22 comments:
Auster...
The reactionary and far-right and religious traditional conservative blogosphere is going on fine. It would be a treat to have just 10 or so major forums where we could combine all of our views but maybe it is better that we are scattered for now since that way we don't become an easy target for liberals and leftists in general. I dislike the pessimistic view of some bloggers and their nihilism. There is also little going on how to fix society (a big coherent plan of sorts) but there is a lot of philosophical debate which points out the problems with some solutions which is just as good.
Some of us are zionists, some of us aren't.
Since there's no central command there'll be a thousand flowers that bloom, many of which cross-pollinate.
The blogosphere is where it's at for those who think about things. The mainstream media is for those who are lethargic and get their opinions spoon-fed to them.
A guy like Trump gets my respect as it would have been so much easier for him to just avoid uncomfortable issues in public.
The blogosphere is raising awareness, slowly but surely. I'm sure the government will try to regulate it at some point as it works to undercut it's manipulation of the populace.
I don't know how you can say that this issue is resolved. This document is obviously a fake. Before anyone comes up with some stupid comments, I opened it myself in Inkscape the morning after it was released and could see the different layers. Facts are facts: this is not a copy of an original birth certificate. It is a forgery.
If you do not have Adobe Illustrator, you can open the pdf of the birth certificate in Inkscape (a freely downloadable, open-source alternative to Adobe Illustrator) and you can see it for yourself.
Here are the steps to follow:
- Download the document from the White House website
- In Inkscape, choose "Import file" to import the pdf document
- Right-click on the image; you get a drop-down menu;
- Choose enter group g2993
-Right-click again, this time choose enter group g2999
- Right-click again, choose ungroup
The group numbers might be different on another machine, but it should be the same chain of commands.
You should now be able to move the different layers (one with the signature of the state registrar, one with the date “Apr 25 2011″, another with the superimposed part (for lack of a better word) of the birth certificate, and finally the “background”).
You can then draw your own conclusions regarding the document (assuming you have a minimal amount of experience with scanning documents).
Now, I read that they may have recently issued a "flattened out" version of the pdf where the layers are merged into one, but I can assure you that this was not the case the day the document was released (and many other bloggers have commented on this). The point is that you can even see this with Inkscape, so there is no need to have Adobe Illustrator installed on your machine to see for yourself why some people know with 100% certainty that the new document released by the White House is (again) a forgery.
Some of us are zionists, some of us aren't.
Zionism has absolutely nothing to do with American immigration policy, so I'm baffled why Israel should be a major concern of the reactionary sphere, especially considering how we have invested almost NO resources into protecting Israel.
Zionism and Israel are foreign policy issues that are no more relevant to a reactionary movement than our defense treaty with Taiwan is.
So if we do consider this a victory for Trump, one notes how a primarily online movement,
Actually, the incident discredited online movements because it turned out the rumors of Obama not being born in America were bogus.
What do you think, in general, of the reactionary/anti-PC blogosphere
1) Being "against everything" and applauding yourselves for knowing something that every white person in history up till 1945 knew was true (races have important racial differences in terms of psychological traits) is not going to attract mainstream Republicans.
Try giving people outside of the small, self congratulatory reactosphere POSITIVE reasons for how integrating HBD into public policy would be beneficial to the public instead of pounding your chest about how intellectually heroic you are.
2) Stop intellectual masturbating over philosophy and be less egocentric.
Nobody cares about endless blog flame wars about "what the exact definition of reactionary is", quoting Nietzsche, obscure Roman Catholic nationalist philosophers from 50-150 years ago.
Focus on things ordinary, intelligent, Republicans would be interested in like whether height makes a difference in acting ability, the psychological traits of successful businessmen, etc.
These are the subjects intelligent Republicans are interested in, not whether you were fired from National Review 80 years ago.
Actually, the incident discredited online movements because it turned out the rumors of Obama not being born in America were bogus.
Again, I don't see how the recently released document shows that "the rumors of Obama not being born in America were bogus". If anything, I would say that, since it is clearly a forgery (see my posts above), it would add credence to these rumors.
The luminary? Guessing Jared Taylor.
How can the reactionary/anti-PC blogosphere improve?
There are a number of fine reactionary/HBD blogs around, and yours is one of them. You (collectively) lay out the case for what is happening to the West. I would suspect that hits to HBD sites continue to rise. It is incumbent on us all to not just voice our opinions in these echo chambers, but introduce these ideas into other (non-HBD) blogs as well when opportunities arise.
The biggest thing (unfortunately) that will drive up readership/influence is real world experience with NAMS, which means their encroachment into previously brainwashed whites' territory has already happened. Still, there will be a tipping point when all the MSM covering up of NAM dysfunction simply cannot hide the truth about group differences. Whether there'll be enough of us numbers-wise to do anything about demographic replacement by the time they wake up is another question.
There are such strongly built-in negatives associated with voicing anti-PC/anti-multiculturalism that many people simply won't do it. All they've heard in school and through the media is the promotion of equality and that noticing any group differences is evil (which in itself causes some cognitive dissonance). Still, the number of true believers in absolute group equality and no heritable meaningful differences is quite small.
Obviously, most liberal whites merely give lip service to those concepts, as where they choose to live, send their kids to school speaks volumes about their true beliefs.
No, I'd say far more people are race realists than would admit it. They just need to know that it is okay to believe what they already believe, and that they are far from alone out there. Hopefully they find their way to these blogs.
Anyway, I think you HBD bloggers' content is great. The problem is lack of exposure.
@John D:
That actually may make our situation worse. See http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Belief_in_belief
Belief in belief acompanied by regular belief can be done away by evidence. Just Belief in belief is free floating and much more firmly entrenched.
The idea that NAM dysfunction is the result of environmental factors ameliorable by wealth redistribution or eliminating "White racism" or ensuring "social justice"
has long since morfed into a dragon in the garage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frI5y6tNsZg).
I disagree for now with the notion of needing an anti-PC blogosphere spokesperson in the mainstream because a mass audience would require an egalitarian sanitation and simplification prior to promulgating said ideas.
Moreover, many atheists advocate religion for the great majority, which would lead to further distrust among any potential mass audience. I suggest that being honest, but not stupidly honest would help people ease into said philosophies.
The line between "honest enough" and "somewhat dishonest" is a fine one, too dishonest will foster distrust (cf. Fox News) while being too honest would put people off.
A potential weakness for said blogosphere is its honesty, and the exposing of noble lies and polite fictions would make many people uncomfortable. Yet, honesty is also a strength, because science-backed facts carry more weight than appealing to emotion. Some even think it is improper to intellectualize races' history and remind people that emotionalism is more appropriate.
"It would be a treat to have just 10 or so major forums where we could combine all of our views but maybe it is better that we are scattered for now since that way we don't become an easy target for liberals and leftists in general."
America has freedom of speech in the Constitution for this very reason! Give those opponents enough rope, and they might hang themselves. Communist, anarchists, etc., literature has been soundly refuted, and book stores even carry Marx's "Communist Manifesto" and Hitler's, "Mein Kampf". Ban something, and people will think of it as delicious forbidden fruit that must be excellent if the government is keeping it from the people.
There are certain black people who will always believe that whites are "devils", many try to make whites feel guilty (even the working class ones who are descended from victims themselves) for passing down economic, social, and cultural capital and its attendant institutional power. Yet, whites with said power abolished slavery, Jim Crow, and signed Affirmative Action laws (in addition to other whites opposing them).
A psychological study done found that most people who stared at a white square with a dot in the middle reported seeing the dot, ignoring the 99.5% of white around it. This shows that people mostly see the negative even if the positive vastly outnumbers it, and blacks and liberals, rather than focusing on whites' collective negatives, need to view our positives, such as disease resistant crops that saved billions of lives, most of whom weren't even white.
@ TUJ
I pretty much agree with the gist of what you say - I would add that it would be nice to see wild conspiratorial thinking reined in.
I know that it's psychologically tempting to adopt 'privileged' types of 'knowledge' where they are positioned as iconoclasts with the vision to see through the mainstream propaganda - while the rest are cast as ignorant dupes.
This means that the HBD/reactionaries need to seriously review their epistemological grounding.
The frustrating thing I see with all these sites is that they amount to little more than online debating societies. They are filled to overflowing with the latest egregious examples of progressive insanity, of which there are legion, along with analysis from some very bright people (much smarter than I am) as to why it is wrong. However, there is no attempt made to formulate an effective strategy or tactics to deal with it.
Now please don't tell me that we should all just engage in voting, school boards, etc., etc., because that is ultimately feckless. That is how we got into this mess in the first place over the decades, while creeping and now accelerating leftist control co-opted every organization in society from the smallest to the largest. Also, do you think progressives will just cease what they're doing in the meantime? If we simply go along with business-as-usual, we will lose, absolutely no doubt about it.
But maybe I should ask, just where do the rest of you think we stand? Are we seeing progressives pound the final nail into the coffin of this Republic? In the final analysis, the lack of a general realization and consensus about just how precarious is our position, is the most frustrating thing of all.
From a pragmatic perspective, the reactionary blogosphere's biggest weakness is its emphasis on race. A blog that discussed the problems with leftism/multiculturalism/collectivism
while eschewing race altogether would make for a more convincing read to the vast majority of people. A significant minority will swallow the red pill, but fewer will swallow the black pill.
Not that I don't appreciate your candor.
Needs more girls.
Also: Jared Taylor? fingers crossed
PS keep getting crazy-ass blogger errors when I comment
quote:
"How can the reactionary/anti-PC blogosphere improve?"
I think the anti-PC blogosphere needs to attract more female followers. Don't get me wrong folks, I'm not saying we should act like the freaks from the "Dear Women" video. Perhaps we should take one of the points from game theory, which states a man should not make a woman his priority but instead an option.
How do we translate this into our political movement?....simple.
Our side should make it clear to women that they must make a choice: it's either us or them. The "them" in this case is the Liberal establishment.
And if a woman chooses "them" then we should say who cares. We're living a hot and sexy life. We are part of the in-group. We're having a fun party and the other side is going to be the losing side.
The formula for changing a society's ideology is simple, talk to the young people and wait for all the old people to die off. Once the young grow up to become adults your job is done.
You can spend the rest of your life talking to a bunch of 40 year olds and it will never make a difference. Deliver your message to a bunch of 14 year olds and you will ultimately change the direction of society.
Of course you may have to wait about 20 years for this to happen but then again I never said the job was for the impulsive minded who is seeking instant gratification.
*grin*
E
"Zionism has absolutely nothing to do with American immigration policy, so I'm baffled why Israel should be a major concern of the reactionary sphere, especially considering how we have invested almost NO resources into protecting Israel."
We spend quite a few resources protecting Israel, which earns us the ire of the whole Islamic world. Not that the Islamic world has much to offer us besides oil, or that there isn't a huge amount of antisemitism in the reactionary world (due in part to the strong involvement of Jews with the left and the interventionist right). I'd actually be a big supporter of these guys if I weren't afraid of winding up in an oven. I'm in favor of decreased immigration and isolationism. Shoot, I can't even say a majority white America displeases me--I grew up in NYC during the 80s, and let me tell you I was quite fond of Giuliani. But if Kevin MacDonald and David Duke take over...
"The point is that you can even see this with Inkscape, so there is no need to have Adobe Illustrator installed on your machine to see for yourself why some people know with 100% certainty that the new document released by the White House is (again) a forgery."
The fact that he kept it a secret for 2 years is in itself proof positive that this is a forgery.
Until a stellar group of scientists (not just a Murray standing alone) appear on (horror of horrors) television on shows that reach the masses (esp. women) the likely effect of rational discourse of HBD will remain confined to the internet and as long as it does so, public policy will not have a chance of being shaped by rational discussion.
You need voters, man, and the only way to get them is to get out into the public what science knows, what data show. This would undress the liberal loonies and reveal them as the science "creationists" they actually are. They've gotten away with this notion that "they" are the enlightened, educated one for far too long.
The Murrays and Watsons and Summers have been left standing alone when the idiots started their shouting. There should have been groups of scientists calling news conferences to defend not only those men's right to say what they did but also to have defended the data that supported what they said. Alas, there were no such news conferences.
There really is no chance of HBD hitting the mainstream because there is no public, institutional space that would allow such ideas to gather and have a say on public policy. The internet just represents people's private thoughts. Unless these ideas manifest in the public space, they will have very little mainstream traction.
That said, I'd say the most important idea introduced in the hbd sphere is the hypocrisy of progressivism. HBD'ers are right when they point to progressives who self-segregate into homogeneous enclaves while lecturing everyone else about racism. The key point made is that progressives seek diversity on their own terms so they can play a game of status-seeking and social-climbing among themselves while the cost of their policies are born by others.
Make public this aspect of what progressives are doing. Bring out statistical evidence showing how segregated progressives really are and how their lack of personal diversity in their lives reveals the lies behind their movement.
Everyone right-winger should ask a leftist what is their zip-code and what percentage black and hispanic is the school that their children attend.
More trolling of mainstream websites to bring in new readers.
Post a Comment