Bloody Shovel 3

We will drown and nobody shall save us


This is on the news:


Who's this bitch? Nobody knew until today. Before the Internet nobody would have ever known and nobody would have bothered to check. But now we have Wikipedia, which knows everything. And apparently this bitch is Yuri Kochiyama, a  Japanese-American psycho-bitch whose father was killed by the FBI after interrogating him about Pearl Harbor. As the good daughter of a samurai, she swore vengeance against the United States.

She is notable as one of the few prominent non-black Black Nationalists. Influenced by MarxismMaoism, and the thoughts of Malcolm X, she was an advocate for many revolutionary movements, which extended to support or admiration for communist dictators and designated terrorist organizations.

In 1971, Kochiyama secretly converted to Sunni Islam, and began travelling to the Sankore mosque in Greenhaven prison, Stormville, New York, to study and worship with Imam Rasul Suleiman. (...) She also confessed her admiration towards Osama Bin Laden in 2003.

That's a quite hardcore, thorough psychotic terrorist. Kudos to her. You don't mess with a Japanese commies. While Japanese people are extremely mild and polite, Japan also has its fair share of complete wackos, including Communist wackos. Japan had a Socialist Parties which openly went to North Korea to celebrate the birthdays of Kim Il Sung, hero of the proletariat. And Japan has a Communist Party today which is not half bad. Lives off basically off the support of the teachers union. Yes, the teachers union (one of them, anyway) in Japan is batshit crazy communist. The teachers tend to look exactly like this women in the doodle.

All of this is very fun and all, but why is this completely obscure batshit crazy psycho Japanese bitch in the frontpage of Google? That's a good question. My guess is that some Asian woman working at Google put her there. She had to put her there, no matter the cost.

I'm not Asian, and I'm not American. But I know many of Asian Americans, some of them good friends. Being Asian American (I'm talking of Americans of East Asian descent here, this may or may not apply to South Asians)  is harsh. It's a pretty bad deal. You live in a country where bashing whitey is the national religion. Whitey is evil, whites are the cancer of the world. Every single bad thing that ever happened in history is whitey's fault. They teach that at school and Asians pay attention at school.

So if whitey is evil, then we Asians can shit on whitey then! Sounds fun. Let us then shit on whitey at every chance, while we do our thing, study a lot, make awesome grades, go to the best colleges and work at the best companies! We'll replace whitey at this rate and become the ruling class! After all we do everything right. We are good students, commit few crimes, work hard, and we haven't done all those bad things that whites did in the past. So we can just do our thing and let whitey pay for their crimes.

But no, sorry. It doesn't work like that. Yes, whitey is evil. And that's supposedly because whitey has done bad things. But you're not getting it. The way race works in USG was best described by Lawrence Auster:

1. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more they are praised and their sins covered up.

2. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more racist it becomes to speak the truth about their behavior.

3. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more their behavior must be blamed on white racism.” (source)

4. The worse the behavior of minorities and non-Westerners, the more the behavior must be covered up or excused, and the more racist a white is for noticing it and thinking about it.

Bashing whitey is not the point. The point is to privilege minorities. But minorities are only to be privileged in so far as they don't behave like whitey. Which is the point, of course. If minorities behaved exactly like elite whites, had the same ability and disposition, they wouldn't need preferential treatment. They'd pass the exams and that's it. But the fact is that, on average, NAMs aren't capable of behaving like elite whites, and so they need preference. Giving them preference is the supreme, the most holy behavior in progressive society. And so it follows that the bigger the preference, the more holy the act, the more holy the people giving the preference.

And so it follows that the more backward, the more barbaric the person is the better. You only need to bend the rules a bit to give preference to a relatively well behaved Mexican, say. But to legal privileges to a 70 IQ serial felon Somali, that requires huge levels of preference, huge levels of holiness! And the worst, the more barbaric the recipient, the more likely white people will have contrary reactions. So you have more white people to chastize about their racism! Win-win-win. We need barbarians, lots of them, and the more barbaric the better. That's how the holiness economy works.

Where does this put Asian Americans? Asians are very well behaved. In all indexes of civilized behavior they score higher than whites. They're better students, harder workers, commit less crimes. Yes they tend to be quite boring, but that's the whole point. Latinos find whites boring. Blacks find latinos boring. Civilization is boring. Singapore is horribly boring. But it works. Unfortunately, Western culture today isn't interested in what works. It's interested in  virtue signaling, praising bad people just to spite you. Getting ass-raped by a Somali and then publicly apologizing for his deportation.

The whole holiness economy works because elite whites don't really take NAMs seriously. They're just animals, things without agency that you can use to score holiness points against others. They don't hold them morally responsible for their actions. They're not their competition anyway. It's not like they're going to take their jobs or something. They commit crimes downtown, get lowly paid jobs that crowd out poorer whites, but who cares about them? The crime waves sometimes get a bit out of hand when people start virtue signaling against the police, which wasn't part of the plan (!!). But anyway, they're no threat.

Asians though, those are a threat. A real damn threat. Those do take high paying jobs, jobs in the bureaucracy, jobs in law, in tech. All the good jobs that whites enjoy doing, Asians can do too, often better. That ain't funny. And so Asians are openly discriminated against. They get blocked out of elite colleges. They get mocked on TV, laughed about on daily life. Say something about blacks having big dicks, you get in trouble. Say something about Asians having small dicks, you get everyone laughing.

This may not be the case in the US, I don't know, but it's absolutely the case in Europe. Say something about Syrian refugees, nobody talks to you again. Say something about the Chinese taking over the retail business, and everybody gets riled up. It's an invasion! Those perfid Chinese, they have their wives working with them! Arabs do too, of course, and force the women to cover themselves and never go out by themselves. But you can't say that. Asians, though, are fair game. Something similar happens in the UK with Polish migrants. The UK has millions of Arabs, Africans and Pakitanis doing every kind of evil, of which the Rotherham rape racket is just a sliver. But you don't dare talk about them. Polish migrants, though, the horror! Too many immigrants!

Anyway, Asians in the West are between a rock and a hard place. They're supposed to be celebrated as being diverse and all that. But they're not. Nobody likes them. Europe is, well, in deep shit, likely to become a Muslim continent in a few decades. The Chinese have noticed, and they're talking within themselves. If Muslims win, the Chinese are in deep shit, they'll be targets of Muslim thugs until they lose everything they have. If Europe reacts and a white nationalist movement wins, the Chinese are in deep shit too, as Nazis don't like the Chinese a little bit either.

The same things applies to the US. The Chinese are freaking out about Trump. They know the US is in real danger of declining into the Third World. And they don't like that a bit, the US is the most popular emigration destination for rich Chinese; they're really invested in the US remaining a nice place to live in. But it won't at present trends. So Trump rises, wakes up the white population of the US, and wins the presidency. What are the Chinese to do? They're now discussing that. A faction says that the Chinese should support Trump: Chinese interests are aligned with White interests. We all want fairness and order.

Others say that won't do. Trump doesn't like China. The Trump supporters don't like Asians, period. They're foreign, and they're competition! No way that a reinvigorated White people are going to help the Asians out. So what to do?

Double down on progressivism. Go batshit crazy Tumblr Commie Islamist. Whatever, just burn it. Pull a Kochiyama and claim the leadership of the antiwhitey coalition, at any price. If white nationalism won't be nice to Asians, the best strategy is to help destroy the whole racket and try to pick up some of the pieces.

That must be what the Googler who made that Doodle is thinking. It's a hard problem, indeed. I wish we could all get along; we have much in common, and much to learn from each other. But conflict happens. Perhaps the best bet is to move to Canada, where there's so many of them that they can actually end up dominating at some level.


Leave a Reply
  • I'm beginning to look forward to your posts every single day. Great writing. Some comments however

    1. You say, "This may not be the case in the US, I don’t know". I know. This is exactly the case in America. Even more so than the U.S. Asians including Indians are potrayed as un-cool in the media. Any of your American readers will back me up on this.

    2. How would doubling down on Progressivism help the Asians? NAMs may hate whites, but they are absolutely contemptuous of East Asians and Indians. Whites have shown that they can kick ass really hard. People like that are feared and hated. But successful people who are weak like the Asians? They just get genocided. You need to think this through again.

    3. You're giving that Googler way too much credit. Not too many people are capable of that sort of cold, clear, cogent reasoning. And certainly no one in Google's PR/HR dept (who most certainly put up that image) is capable of that.

    • Thanks.

      2. The idea is that NAMs just won't be capable of genociding anyone because they're dumb and disorganized. So being nice to them hopefully gets you some room to do your thing. The Japanese are doing ok in Brazil, if not spectacular. The Chinese own Southeast Asia and would actually own it politically if not for the Anglos siding with the local Muslims.

      3. I may be better at putting thing into words, but every East Asian woman who becomes a leftist activist is making this kind of argument at some level, even if unconsciously. One doesn't choose to become a SJW expecting to lose status in the process. Now, of course people don't act thinking on their whole race all the time, but America today works on identity politics, so at some level any calculation of personal status has to take your race into account.

  • Great post! I was wondering who that was, and you managed to explain while also giving us an amazing practical application of your theory. The one option missing from your analysis is the one you've been suggesting for whites: Islam. Do Malaysians catch crap in the West? (And did you omit that on purpose?)

    • Malaysians aren't East Asian. They're related, but Southeast Asians are to East Asians what Arabs are to Europeans. Kinda similar looking but noticeably dumber. The Vietnamese being kinda like Turks in this analogy, somewhat better than Arabs but still not at a European level.

      • Aren't the Han a sizeable minority in Malaysia? Either way, converting to Islam gives you buckets of points, while still allowing a man to have kids (vs. going the Jenner route). Bashing white folks only gains you so many points if you have no independent point generating mechanism.

      • Where do the Filipinos fall?

        Tangentially, can half-white/half-Filipino people pass for white?

        • White/filipino mix might pass for Mexican, or some other variety of American Indian mix. Most of the reservation tribes guard their identities pretty jealously though.

      • The Vietnamese or at least their elites are nothing more than degenerate Chinese mestizos. A fact not usually recognized in Vietnamese or Western historiography. There have been regular waves of Chinese migration to the Red River Delta beginning with Vietnam's first monarch who was a Shu marcher lord who overthrew their previous so called kings who were likely barbarian chieftains and continued after Vietnams so-called independence during the Song. I say so called because despite Vietnam's nominal independence it was still being ruled by straight up Chinese kings for another three dynasties and four centuries, akin to the Scandinavian monarchs of the early slavs. This state of affairs continued until it was interrupted by the Ming invasion and occupation.

        Like all mestizo elites, they turned traitor, just as the Europeans would discover with their new world progeny. The mulattos and mestizos are always the nucleus of nativist rebellions and to cement their newfound position as top of the pole they always formulate an ideology of animus against their racial progenitors. Whether is the octaroon Benjamin Jealous heading the NAACP, or Vincente Fox railing against the Gabacho, or Vietnamese Communists accusing the Chinese of imperialism, it all amounts lording it over the natives beats being a half breed. The anti-Chinese animus of modern Vietnamese is entirely a 20th century effort of historical "reinterpretation" by a Vietnamese Communist Party populated primarily by the elite descendants of Chinese half breeds.

        • If Mestizo elites have been rebelling for centuries, the mestizo anti Chinese animus then goes back centuries too. It being a 20th fabrication makes no sense.

          And please, Vietnam won independence after the fall of the Tang. Get over it. Chinese irredentism is retarded. Why don't you claim Korea too?

          • You don't get it Spandrell. What makes you think I am a territorial irredentist who actually wants Vietnam? It is after all filled with degenerate mestizos.

            The issue with half breed elites is that they primarily only become a problem when they begin to exist in sufficient numbers to overwhelm the pure bloods. This happened rather quickly in Spanish America but took much longer in Vietnam and was primarily the result of the French colonial period which saw wholesale elite replacement by the Firangies.

            Regarding Vietnamese historiography, it was rewritten from the ground up in the 1960's by the Communist Party for the purpose of wartime nation building. In a fit of signaling spiraling as you are so fond of, Communist Vietnamese historians strove to outdo each in proving which foreign monarch was the most native. Same thing happened in China really in the 1950's. Earlier Republican historiography rightly saw the Manchus as destructive barbarian usurpers, new Communist historiography rewrote them to be Chinese.

            • Even if the various dynasties that ruled Vietnam since 900 AD where all Chinese kings, which I don't know but wouldn't surprise me, Vietnam was still independent, without "so-called". The fact is the Chinese court didn't rule the place, period.

              It's unfortunate that history gets rewritten everywhere to reinterpret the past in nationalist terms; but we live in the era of nationalism. What do you expect Vietnam to teach their kids in history class?

              "Merchants from Fujian came to Vietnam every few decades, staged coups and captured the throne. Then they sent tribute to China so they could make money both by trading with China and by taxing the native Vietic peasants".

              Not a very cool story. As for the whole 中華民族 crap, well yes indeed it's complete nonsense. But the Ming Dynasty sucked balls and you're gonna have to accept it some day.

  • Progressives like Asians just fine in the USA. It's true they are nowhere near as holy as blacks -- Auster is right about that. But they do still count as "diversity" especially for didactic purposes. Also, I think most progs find working with them to be a great relief after having to deal with affirmative action timebombs. Nobody likes cognitive dissonance.

    Asians, being high-IQ, punch way above their numbers in the intermarriage game with the ruling class. Progs know that IQ matters even though they are loath to talk about it. Especially Asian women, of course -- the men totally get the shaft in the hookup market, though they can still do OK in the beta marriage market. This gives Asians in the USA a strategy unavailable to NAMs: intermarry with the ruling class. It seems to me they are doing just that. Just look at official Tiger Mom Amy Chua and her offspring.

    This is another reason I expect them to double down on progressivism.

  • The funny thing is the Chinese seem to love Trump - like any feminine types, they respect power and swagger. They also empathise with the "make XYZ great again trope", hence an open admiration for Mao (naturally) and the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, and co.

    It's hard not to see therein the behaviour of a deliberately naughty child, just trying to get attention in the way of a smack or a tough talking to - which is exactly what Trump will deliver...

    Remember, Trump is first and foremost a businessman - and competition is good for business.

      • Isn't fascism whatever that is, the normal human system of governance pretty much everywhere more complex than a stone age tribe? In that sense 4chan types are just regular guys

        There are a few exceptions of course mostly limited franchise states like Greece, Rome or the Early US but for most people hierarchy is normal. People just want good leaders.

      • Never been to Asia? The males are laughably effeminate. Unless you were just ROFL'ing at his minor language error.

  • Very accurate title. I think that east Asians (especially in the U.S.) are coming to the realization that being model minorities will not help them in the event of any serious racial realignment in the country. In the current order, they are useless to the diversity machine; in a future order dominated by NAMs, their lives will be hell on earth; in a future order dominated by racially aware whites, they'll be shut out of influence. I've noticed a trend, especially amongst the east Asians who attended my super pozzed, lefty, Ivy university. They've begun vociferously complaining about their "representation" in the media (in quite the same manner that NAMs have been doing for the better part of 20 years) while explicitly aligning themselves with elements of Black Lives Matter and other lesser known grievance groups. Their claim is that the black struggle is their struggle too and that accepting model minority status is implicitly accepting white racism. This is ludicrous on its face, for reasons discussed in your article. I definitely think that they've made the same calculations that you have, either consciously or unconsciously. It's: align with the low IQ horde now, let them agitate against the current order, and when things fall apart, capture what's left and reconstitute it in a manner that better suits them.

    • It's just rough being a minority. In Southeast Asia the Chinese got kicked around a lot too. In Malaysia and Indonesia they are the pinata par excellence - anytime something goes wrong, blame it on the Chinese. In Thailand and Philippines they've found their way into the elites, but only after the Chinese there pretty much adopted Thai and Filipino identities.

      Putting down the "other", I understand. Folks like JB above concluding that Chinese are "feminine" and "seem to love Trump", "just trying to get attention in the way of a smack" (whatever that means, bearing in mind that the biggest Trump supporters are paleoconservatives), well that's human nature.

      I don't understand Europe lying prostate before the refugee horde, though. Like, Sweden sending cops to protect refugee camps from retaliation after some Somali murdered a woman in Ikea. Or the dude who apologized after being ass-raped. It's strange. It's just really strange and so contrary to human (and animal) nature you can't help but try and wonder what exactly is going on.

      Status whoring is one of the few explanations that make any sense, but I gotta say in some cases, it defies common sense, I mean, you know, whatever little status you gain, cannot be worth the risk of being sodomized or mugged by some random feral? Some of the gestures being made - sodomized guy feeling sorry for his rapist - transcend rationality and verge on insanity. It's self-denial, self-abnegation; if its status whoring then its being taken to the point of destruction. The pursuit of status ultimately realized in submission, how ironic is that?

      I gotta say anonymous' conservative's r/k selection thesis makes quite a bit of sense too, except that the rabbit and wolf outlooks he cites are probably socially rather than genetically driven (though presumably genes would play an important role).

      Here is a darker explanation. It seems to me that when a person seeking to exonerate his rapist, status whoring can at best be a small part of the explanation. A more viable explanation seems to be that a strange self-hatred has taken root in the person.

      I've always thought that there is a seed of nihilism, just as there is a seed of hope, planted in all of us. Because the universe is all darkness, right? And living things, we are the light. And it is easy to give in to the darkness that surrounds us, because, in our heart of hearts, we know that, whatever we do, there is no point to it. It is all meaningless. The only meaning is the act itself. There is no higher reason, the point of the act is the act. God is either right here, right now, or not at all.

      Perhaps a life of comfort bereft of striving and challenge, or conversely, too much defeat, or perhaps the passage of time and the seasons, or some other reason, leaves a portion of a civilization bereft of the fire within them, and makes it that much easier to yield to the nihilism, the torpor and death that is built into the human condition, and which we only keep at bay through continued defiance, even as we subconsciously (or consciously) recognize the futility of our defiance. It is easy for the fire to die; and perhaps it is this seed of nihilism taking root in some weaker specimens, and spreading, that explains some of the strangeness we see around us.

      Or perhaps there is maybe some undiagnosed substrain of toxoplasma gondii turning all Europe (and parts of America) into a land of Shmoos.

      • Part of it is that the Chinese were divided in clans and regional groupings, so they were easy prey to the native majority when a strongman appeared. In Malaysia though the Chinese had a good chance of taking over, if the British hadn't sent troops, and your pal Harry Lee hadn't sided with them, denying Singapore to the commies.

        The situation in Europe is weird, but there's no need to resort to mystical arguments. The Swedish government sends troops to defend a Somali camp, just as the American government sends police to protect black rioters from whites defending their property. Because the state is the state, and the job is the state is to show the people who's boss. Native whites complain about the state, about this or that law; that can't be allowed. Africans do crime but they don't complain about state power. They're much less of a threat to the people in power.

        And people apologizing for being raped; well of course there aren't many of those. They tend to be people invested in the establishment, whether part of it, or people who are trying to get into. Any complaint about state power, no matter how justified, even if a Somali raped your ass for 5 hours, will reduce your chances of joining the establishment; so of course they're sorry. I'm sorry for being raped, If I hadn't been raped I might have a cozy bureaucratic job already! Fuck! But you can't say fuck the somali, that's the kind of word bad people say, the kind of word that gets you shut out of influence. So fuck myself.

        • But how can getting a cozy bureaucratic job be worth the price of an ass raping??? At the end of the day, it's about vales, right? So basically what's driving this is that people have come to value social status above not being ass-raped. Once upon a time maintaining a virgin unraped ass was prized above preening and maybe getting a job in the Cathedral, and maybe even above survival. So... what the hell happened? Values change. Ok, fine, but what drives value changes?

          I don't see the nihilism argument as being particularly mystical. I think there are real impulses - impulses being more visceral, values suggest some higher cognition involved - driving people, and sometimes the impulse happens to be to roll over and get raped. So the question is, what drives that change of impulse? I buy the status argument, mind you - I think the starting point that everyone is looking out for number one, so whatever stupid behaviour is being driven by that, in this case, status seeking, yeah, that makes sense. But in some cases, the behaviour is so patently self-destructive, I dunno man, it seems that looking out for number one just doesn't seem sufficient as an answer. Rather than self-love, self-hatred seems to be the explanation. What is the root of self-hatred though? A desire for oblivion.

          Malaysia - well yeah, the Malaysian Communist Party, which was Chinese dominated, had a shot at it, But I think it would have ended badly. It's a pretty risky for minorities to try and dominate - like, Tutsis in Rwanda, Tamils in Sri Lanka. Well the Tutsis pulled it off eventually but at a hell of a cost. With 50/50 states the best case is Belgium where the Flemish and Walloons just won't talk to each other, the worst case is Bosnia. You just gotta have the numbers to dominate, it's just how it is.

          So Malaya 1948, I think it was maybe 52% Chinese 48% Malay, give or take. Harry saw that having the Chinese on top would not work, and his plan was to try and build in Malaysia what he eventually achieved in Singapore - a real Malaysian Malaysia, a reasonably multiracial society, not Chinese or Malay dominated. But the even that, the Malaysian Malays were having none of it - it was Malay supremacy or bust. So had the Chinese tried to take power, build a Chinese-dominated state, it would have been a bloodbath.

          Even suppose the Malayan Communist Party won, well, Indonesia was waging Konfrantasi against Malaysia, basically trying to absorb Malaysia. The Brits saw them off, but if Malaysia had gone commie, the Brits would have left, the Indonesians would have swarmed across the Strait of Malacca, the Malays on the peninsula would have supported them, and that would have been that.

          • It's not just a job; is keeping all the friends and social standing one has built over decades of life. You can't be a SJW for 25 years and then suddenly quit after a Somali rapes you in the ass. What are you gonna do afterwards? Get a job on what? On what resume? This ain't the 1950s anymore, where you can start your life again, move to some other city and find a job at some factory. You're invested in your public persona since age 10.

            Self-hatred, self-oblivion, where does that come from? From years of being told that whatever you represent (being male, being white, having the ability to notice things) is evil. Why do people buy that? Because they figure it'll pay off down the line with a nice holy progressive job, or at least status points of some form.

            Harry was played like a fool by the Tunku and the Brits and that was that. Of course a communist Malaya, even if Communist ruled, wouldn't have been a very nice place, so I can't blame him. He had this strange love for civilization, Mr. Lee. But in pure tribal terms he took a very bad decision.

            I'm no expert on the military situation back then, but are you sure the Indonesian army was any good? I don't see how a well-supplied Communist Malaysia could've kicked the Indonesians back or even take the rest of Borneo from them. I don't think a fifth column of Malays would've been that much of a factor against a motivated Maoist army. Those guys weren't joking.

            • Well, put that way, it does sound quite horrible. It sounds like 1984. You put folks in that situation, I suppose they would in fact genuinely hate themselves after a while.

              As for Harry, no, he didn't have a choice. You can say they played him for a fool but what other outcome could there have been? It was Brits or Commies; it's not like the PAP could have gone it alone. Now the Brits had the Commies beat by 1960 anyway, and its not like Lee throwing in his lot with the Commies would have made a difference. In any case his native tongue was English, not Chinese, so its not like he would have moved the needle very much with the MCP and their Chinese-speaking support base. The Brits were his natural constituency.

              Now having gone with the Brits and the Malays, it was really either accept No. 2 in Malaysia, or go it his own way. We know how that worked out. I have to disagree with you that he took a bad decision, tribal or otherwise; I think he played his cards to the very best of his ability; only in 1963-64 he may have overplayed his hand in the Federal Parliament. But Singapore would likely have gone sooner or later.

              The Indonesians were not much good but even so the Brits had to bring in bombers, carriers, Gurkhas, ANZAC troops and the lot to fight them. What would a putative communist Chinese state, facing a major Malay insurrection have done? When you look at Malaya 1960 its not the PLA you're talking about. You are talking maybe 5 million Chinese cut off from resupply, pitted against maybe 100 million Indonesians out for blood, anxious to purge Communists. It does not bear thinking about.

          • The trade-off is not status versus a guaranteed ass-raping. It is status versus a one in a million chance of an ass-raping. (Or whatever the chance is. It's very small.) These are very different.

      • In 2010, John Derbyshire asked and Jared Taylor answered:

        Q: What accounts for white ethnomasochism—the Uncle Tim phenomenon? Is it guilt? Condescension to inferiors? Or the manifestation of some racial trait peculiar to whites?

        A: I'm stumped. Even the Yanomamo and the tribes of Irian Jaya think they are hot stuff and want their people and traditions to endure forever. Only whites—and only in the last 60 or 70 years—have been seized by some form of mass insanity that requires them to believe that their mere existence is an offense to others and that the desire to live in a white society and enjoy European culture is "hate."

        There are theories about how this happened, but none is adequate. The people who discovered the continents, named the elements, applied the laws of science—built the entire modern world, for heaven’s sake—have been replaced by pod people. Just how an entire race can be denatured in only three generations is a great historical and psychological mystery.

        And, no, it's not the schemings of "the Jooz." There is something about Western man that makes him uniquely susceptible to demands made in the name of Western values by people who, themselves, have nothing but contempt for those values.

        • That after 3 generations Jared Taylor is still consumed by "mystery" tells you more about Jared Taylor than it does about Western ideology.

          There are no mysteries, you just have a bad model.

          • Come, Jared Taylor is a great man. If there are no mysteries, then why this blog?

            • My blog is trying to solve the mystery and get out of here, not for bonding about our shared cluelessness. Not that there's anything wrong with bonding, and indeed Mr. Taylor is a great man. But great men won't take us out of this hole.

        • The masochism is due to the lack of healthy sexual outlet for about 95% of the male population. Thanks fat girls! Obesity has made it so that healthy, physical sexual attraction (think 16 year old horniness) is basically out of reach for just about everyone except for 18-35 year old alphas. So sexless whites are finding new ways to arouse themselves. Power is an aphrodisiac for both men and women, moreso women, but with a near total absence of physically healthy females, men are delving into the world of submission and masochism in order to get their sexual tingles. Kneeling before feminism aggression and pedestalizing other races and submitting to them (see The Pope licking the feet of black immigrants), being cucked and generally being invaded and overrun is a submission tingle. The SJW getting raped and grovelling in apology is a prime example.

          I blame all of this on fat, white girls. Not only for their SJW voting but their utter failure to provide any healthy sexuality for their males. Cuck, masochism and submission tingles are the substitution in place for white males to feel any sexual arousal. SJW women are right alongside for whatever incoherent logical strain that puts them there. Who cares?

      • Azn:

        I think the goofiness from Western civilization is a combination between status whoring and pathological altruism.

        A lotta people on the alt-right (or whatever) think it's just one or the other. It's probably both. It's a lot easier to status whore if you really do feel those morals in a deep way.

        I wouldn't pay much attention to Anonymous Conservative.

      • "I mean, you know, whatever little status you gain, cannot be worth the risk of being sodomized or mugged by some random feral? Some of the gestures being made – sodomized guy feeling sorry for his rapist – transcend rationality and verge on insanity. It’s self-denial, self-abnegation; if its status whoring then its being taken to the point of destruction. The pursuit of status ultimately realized in submission, how ironic is that?"

        (Some) Westerners have a (SJW) martyr complex.

      • Status whoring is one of the few explanations that make any sense, but I gotta say in some cases, it defies common sense, I mean, you know, whatever little status you gain, cannot be worth the risk of being sodomized or mugged by some random feral? Some of the gestures being made – sodomized guy feeling sorry for his rapist – transcend rationality and verge on insanity. It’s self-denial, self-abnegation; if its status whoring then its being taken to the point of destruction.
        Suicide bombers and suicide pacts are taking it past the point of destruction, and the explanation is status in the eyes of your peers. The point here is that it takes a very strong character* to do something that results in immediate and drastic loss of status, which would be the result if e.g. a young man announced that he would blow himself up and then went back on it. He might be having second thoughts, but the prospect of going back to his peers in one piece and becoming an unperson forever is more unendurable than quick death by detonation (and there's the half-believed promise of paradise too).

        * Now that I think of it, isn't "strong character" basically the same as having a particular relationship to a particular sort of virtual peer group? It might be God or posterity or your ancestors, it doesn't matter much which and probably doesn't necessarily need to be clearly perceived or articulated. The gain in status from these inward relationships sometimes trumps the loss in status from outward relationships. Shame can work off this basis too.

        • Either backing up on a commitment actually results in immediate and drastic loss of status; but for some reason one doesn't care. Most likely because you have some alternative refuge to start again, or know the way to find one easily. Or either it doesn't actually result in immediate and drastic loss of status; for some reason people forgive you and you can keep doing your thing. It could be that you're very smart and has seen their bluff (they actually won't ostracize you). Or perhaps you have ways to fight back, using your status with other peers or something.

          I'd say "strong character" depends on that.

          • That's circumstances, not character. You might say there's no such thing as character, but that's playing with definitions of a similar sophomoric sort as naive skepticism. I think you're simplifying too much, though you'd probably say I'm being romantic. Well. Consider a simpler example: isn't it conceivable and not hugely infrequent for the potential loss, should an action be taken, of one's status in the eyes of a few or even just one particular other person to outweigh material and/or status gains in the eyes of many other persons? It depends on who one identifies with in which areas.

            • That's what I called "alternative refuge". I don't think you're being romantic if you mean that strong characters just have good relations with their mothers so they can escape form a commitment to blow themselves up.

              As a more general model: Consequences are never completely certain; and social consequences are especially hard to read. Say we define "character" as a certain innate bias for reading social consequences differently.

              A strong character believes he can get away with anything. This bias reinforces itself, because a large part of getting away with things is just making people believe that you can get away with things, manipulating in advance their potential social agreement. The same applies to "game" (fake it till you make it). Repeated experience with getting away with things naturally makes strong characters ever more strongly believe they can get away with things.

              A weak character believes he can't get away with anything, and must always obey the social consensus, which leads people to coordinate to take advantage of his weakness, reinforcing the belief that he can't get away with things.

  • Vietnamese in eastern Europe are seen neutrally despite their cutthroat business practices. Gypsies are vilified everywhere.

    Affirmative action is unconstitutional.

    How does this fit with Austerian model?

    • Auster wasn't describing Eastern Europe, of course. It was describing progressivism. Eastern Europe is not full progressive as its been showing these few months.

      • Interestingly though, you can't really find anyone standing up for gypsies.

        Reddit is a relatively progged place, but no one there has yet managed to make Europeans discussing gypsies make excuses for them, or pretend there is no problem, the same ways Yanks talk about their chocolates.

        • You absolutely can find people standing up for gypsies: American SJWs living in white enclaves with no actual knowledge of them whatsoever.

          Not that long ago on a SJW forum I browse occasionally, there was a rather strong condemnation by multiple people of one person who'd used the term "gypped" to refer to being cheated.

  • Very interesting discussion. Excellent points about holiness spirals and signaling. The relative moral status of the racial groups spot-on. Confusion seems to arise when attempting to fully blueprint the mechanisms involved, that got us from point A to B and C.

    Let me throw some slightly disconnected hints out: These are snapshots of what might be called early sightings of the ur-mechanism of late-Capitalist race dysphoria:

    1. Christianity (self-abnegation). 2. Christian Martyrs-Catholicism. Cults of suffering. 3. "for many a time I have been half in love with easeful death". (paraphrase) 4. i.e.- Romanticism-Orientalism-Avant-Garde (e.g. Cubism). 5. Calvinism-Puritanism-Massachusetts Elite- Abolitionism 6. Freud: Death Instinct. Death and Eros. Discontents. Hints of a Way Out 6. 1920s: African Exoticism- Noble savages; Jazz. 7.1930s Progressive Movement and Black Causes/Inspirations 7. 1940s/1950s/1960s: Beats/Negro Cultural Gods/Drugs/Mistrust of consumerism;Communes;Nature worship. 8. "Future Shock"; Earth Day; Radical Feminism; Cultural Complexities through Technology.

    All these things point to a long-standing fear of the Fallen, Post-Paradise White civilization; they all betray cultural loss of confidence, alienation and claustrophobia; the strains of masochism run through much of it. If the urge that gave rise to all these things can be isolated, you will have your mechanism. It can only be understood as a counterbalance to technological will-to-power, which even today is still functioning as the principal counterbalance.

    • It seems to have started with Christianity. It's not a genetic thing, doesn't seem like the Goths ever had this problem? But then the Romans were entirely cosmopolitan - African emperors and all?

      • It should be noted the Roman "Africa" was a province south of Italy made from the coquest of Carthage and is right next to Sicily. The "African Emperor" Septimius Severus, had a mother of Roman Noble ancestry and a father of unknown background.

  • Very nice post.

    I've run afoul of at least one Asian SJW, and they are indeed a lot more crazy and fanatical about their silly nonsense than whites. Hell, they make whites look downright *cynical*.

    But what's more interesting is, they seem to direct about 90% of their hostility against white leftists. It's getting to the point now where whenever I read something about "the rainbow coalition" coming unglued, it's because of an Asian who started it. I don't think Suey Park was anomalous at all; I think she was a slightly, only slightly more intense version of how Asian SJWs behave. They don't really care about racist rednecks, at least they don't show it. Instead of complaining about those guys, what they do is, they mostly absorb all of the white-authored SJW literature -- the more theoretically abstruse the better -- pay careful attention to what it says, and then hold whites to the most extreme form of those standards that the literature claims to have. Frankly, I think this is an interesting strategy -- not nearly as dumb as it seems. It allows them to play the role of the wizened yet oppressed people-of-color who have magically infiltrated the oppressive system and will bravely (and constantly) hold those privileged people up to the standards they claim to have. The thinking seems to be, "If I play the victim in every possible way that I'm allowed, while simultaneously calling white leftists hypocrites, then I'll be able to claw my way to the top." And I think it may work for some of 'em, honestly.

  • You assume that the coming European conflict will happen along national/ethnic front lines. It might as well happen along religious front lines. In the latter case, the sinoids can freely choose a side in the conflict and do fine. It seems like an obvious strategy for them. Join or oppose Islam and stress how good or bad, respectively, it is. Do your utmost to turn a potentially ethnic conflict into a religious conflict.

    While nationalism might rise in some European countries, I think it is almost impossible in Germany. Germany had so many European immigrants that there are very few German citizens left who wouldn't be scared if somebody started counting grandfathers to determine whether some is really a German or not. What might rise is regionalism (for lack of a better word) or racism. "Germany for the Germans" is no longer a viable rallying cry, but "Europe for Europeans" might work.

    • Right now the rising far-right is some vague mix of nationalism and racism. So French for the French and white people who could pass as French, Germany for Germans and those who kinda look like Germans. At any rate the Chinese won't fit in any category, and if shit hits the fan, the teenage male shock troops will very likely start bullying Chinese just for the fun of it.

      If the fight is purely Islam vs. Non-Islam, the anti-Islam party might accept the help of the Chinese, which would likely be willing to give it; but as the anti-Islam starts winning, it will start to feel the need to define itself in positive terms, and the only available Schelling points are localist or racial.

  • "Pull a Kochiyama and claim the leadership of the antiwhitey coalition, at any price"

    I would LOVE it if they tried that.

    The number one reason anti-white forces have gotten as far as they have in North America and Europe so far is gradualism. The number one thing white nationalists complain about is "how do we wake people up". Asians kicking into aggravation mode would definitely alter the dynamic.

  • 5 pingbacks